On Belkar "causing the death of" Vaarsuvius [Archive]

Alagaesian

2010-08-16, 08:35 PM

We all know that Belkar is going to die in a few in-comic weeks. I have no idea whether he will be killed off permanently. But, I am curious as to whether Belkar's first prophecy, which predicted him 'causing the death of' Miko, Roy, Windstriker, and the Oracle, will also extend to V.

Think about it: Vaarsuvius made a deal with the IFCC. By the laws of drama, he has to eventually repay his debt or the entire 'deal with the devil' thing is going to feel cheap. What better way to kill V off than have Belkar cause it as a comic re-fulfillment of that prophecy?

There are a ton of ways for this to happen. Perhaps Belkar gets the job of defending the spellcasters and we see a more-fatal repeat of comic 107. Maybe he gets killed in combat and that somehow gets V in a situation that he can't get out of. Or, possibly, Belkar kills Vaar outright. And, after his death, V may or may not come back. Who knows?

My personal theory is that, in one of the final battles of the comic, perhaps in Kraagor's dungeon or while fighting Xykon, Vaarsuvius dies due to said refusal to protect the casters. When the Order realizes that they've obviously bitten off more than they can chew, they leave Belkar for dead for his deeds. Down in the Lower Planes, V and Belkar end up being tortured next to each other. After putting their differences aside, they help each other escape their punishments. Belkar, now freed, can go on a massive killing spree that destroys so many devils, daemons, and demons that the IFCC would never be able to gather enough forces to storm the Upper Planes. V gets raised shortly thereafter. Upon hearing what happened down their, the Order decides to raise Belkar, since maybe he's learned a life lesson...but he refuses to be raised, as he's having too much fun killing various nefarious beings.

Kish

2010-08-16, 08:38 PM

But, I am curious as to whether Belkar's first prophecy, which predicted him 'causing the death of' Miko, Roy, Windstriker, and the Oracle, will also extend to V.
Belkar's first prophecy predicted him causing the death of the Oracle. That's it. Not the others. The Oracle made up explanations for how Belkar could be said to have caused the deaths of the others in order to mess with Belkar, but he openly said he didn't believe those explanations himself.

Bongos

2010-08-16, 08:47 PM

Something tells me V will be around quite a bit longer than poor ol' Belkar.

Nilan8888

2010-08-16, 09:04 PM

Zevox

2010-08-16, 09:05 PM

137beth

2010-08-16, 09:07 PM

We all know that Belkar is going to die in a few in-comic weeks.

The oracle said "before the end of the year". Since we don't know how much in-comic time has passed, we really DON'T know how long it will be. There have just been a huge number of threads about Belkar's death, but unless The Giant has said anything about it, its really all speculation:smallsmile:

Kish

2010-08-16, 09:10 PM

The oracle said "before the end of the year". Since we don't know how much in-comic time has passed,
...except that Roy recently said that there were seven weeks left on the Oracle's prophecy, but don't let that stop you.

Poppy Appletree

2010-08-16, 09:13 PM

The oracle said "before the end of the year". Since we don't know how much in-comic time has passed, we really DON'T know how long it will be. There have just been a huge number of threads about Belkar's death, but unless The Giant has said anything about it, its really all speculation:smallsmile:

I think you missed something. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0666.html)

Edit: Ah crud, Swordsaged. :smallsigh:

Zeful

2010-08-16, 09:15 PM

However it would still be a nice touch if V dies within the comic as a result of something tied to Belkar.

Not really. It would be more jerking around the people that think Belkar is too awesome to die and stay dead.

Nilan8888

2010-08-16, 10:14 PM

Not really. It would be more jerking around the people that think Belkar is too awesome to die and stay dead.

I didn't say Belkar would be alive when it happened. Or undead, btw.

Nimrod's Son

2010-08-16, 10:17 PM

Belkar, now freed, can go on a massive killing spree that destroys so many devils, daemons, and demons that the IFCC would never be able to gather enough forces to storm the Upper Planes.
What on Earth makes you think Belkar is powerful enough to do that?

The Oracle made up explanations for how Belkar could be said to have caused the deaths of the others in order to mess with Belkar, but he openly said he didn't believe those explanations himself.
He may not have believed his own explanations, but presumably he was still going to say something about V before Belkar cut him off. It'll be interesting to see if Vaarsuvius does have a death scene that can be traced back to Belkar in some roundabout way.

...except that Roy recently said that there were seven weeks left on the Oracle's prophecy, but don't let that stop you.
...And Rich has recently posted that roughly two weeks have passed since that strip, so we're now at a maximum of five.

Mystic Muse

2010-08-16, 10:53 PM

My personal theory is that, in one of the final battles of the comic, perhaps in Kraagor's dungeon or while fighting Xykon, Vaarsuvius dies due to said refusal to protect the casters. When the Order realizes that they've obviously bitten off more than they can chew, they leave Belkar for dead for his deeds. Down in the Lower Planes, V and Belkar end up being tortured next to each other. After putting their differences aside, they help each other escape their punishments. Belkar, now freed, can go on a massive killing spree that destroys so many devils, daemons, and demons that the IFCC would never be able to gather enough forces to storm the Upper Planes. V gets raised shortly thereafter. Upon hearing what happened down their, the Order decides to raise Belkar, since maybe he's learned a life lesson...but he refuses to be raised, as he's having too much fun killing various nefarious beings.

1. It doesn't sound to me like Belkar has learned a life lesson.
2. Belkar has no way to get that kind of power.

Whyareall

2010-08-16, 11:27 PM

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0567.html

"And as for the elf-" --The Oracle, Panel 19

Porthos

2010-08-16, 11:34 PM

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0567.html

"And as for the elf-" --The Oracle, Panel 19

"... he is about to suffer a life changing event. And in a very real sense the old Vaarsuvius will cease to exist and be replaced by Darth Varr.

So you see, from a certain point of view.... (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FromACertainPointOfView?from=Main.JediTruth)"

:smalltongue:

As for why Belkar is responsible for that? I'm sure that The Oracle could have thought of something. :smallwink:

Probably the same "logic chain" that lead The Oracle saying that Belkar caused Miko to flip out. After all, if Miko didn't flip out, the forces of Azure City would have probably won in the throne room. And if the forces of Azure city had won, the party would have never split in the first place. Which means that Vaarsuvius never would have become Darth Varr.

So, obviously, Belkar is responsbile for that as well. :smallbiggrin:

Also it does make sense in the "ever increasing ridiculous answer" thing that The Oracle had. What better way to resolve the ridiculousness but by claiming that Belkar caused the death of someone who didn't even die? :smallamused:

John Cribati

2010-08-16, 11:43 PM

As for why Belkar is responsible for that? I'm sure that The Oracle could have thought of something. :smallwink:

V lists his/her rivalry with Belkar as one of the reasons that s/he feels that his/her arcane power has been wasted. Thus, Belkar was in a roundabout way, one of the reasons that Vaarsuvius took the deal. And the deal lead to Vaarsuvius re-thinking his/her way of life, metaphorically killing the old V and replacing it with a newer one.

Porthos

2010-08-16, 11:49 PM

Souhiro

2010-08-17, 01:41 AM

Remember that the Belkster said "Do I get to cause the death...".

An error repairing a car, which results in a fatal crash, can be atributed as a cause of death, but is hard to see it as a kill. The same applies for a medic negligence in diagnosis, or the security boss of Chernobyl or Harrysburg, or forget to close the gas, and light a cigar.

BUT

The Oracle's explanations don't seem to be convincing at all; and following the same logic, Durkon would be guilty of the death of every azurite who fell in the battle, since he has healing powers -yeah, not unlimited, but power- and choose to not use it on each wounded soldier.
Giving a better example: If Durkon has 7 Cure -anytype- wounds, and there are 8 dying soldiers, Oracle's logic assumes that he is guilty of the death of the 8th soldier, because he didn't choose him, altough he saved seven lives.

I think that Belkster only caused and will have caused the death of the Oracle. and Oracle was just taunting him, in order to have himself killed and the work done. He MUST make sure that it's predictions really happens, or something nasty would happen. Something SO nasty that he don't mind to be annihilated an raised. Remember that the Spell description said that returning is an ordeal, so story-wise, death can be cheap, but the pain is still there!

PD: Sorry for my awful grammar, I'm and evil spaniard from the vile Spain

Porthos

2010-08-17, 01:44 AM

The Oracle's explanations don't seem to be convincing at all

That is rather the whole point of the strip. :smallsmile:

Unfortunately a lot of people tend to overlook that small detail. :smallwink:

factotum

2010-08-17, 01:59 AM

Remember that the Belkster said "Do I get to cause the death...".

And as already pointed out, he went on to say "ANY of the following". Not ALL of the following, ANY of them--which means him causing the death of any one of them fulfils the prophecy. He's already done that by killing the Oracle, so there is no prophecy now saying he has to cause the death of any of the others.

Feral Warpwolf

2010-08-17, 03:47 AM

And no Prophecy saying he'll not do any additional kills in the (near) future...

:smallwink:

Turkish Delight

2010-08-17, 05:40 AM

Belkar's first prophecy predicted him causing the death of the Oracle. That's it. Not the others. The Oracle made up explanations for how Belkar could be said to have caused the deaths of the others in order to mess with Belkar, but he openly said he didn't believe those explanations himself.

True, but abandon real world logic and think using plot logic here. All the original explanations were absurd, but the Oracle was interrupted by Belkar in the midst of saying 'As for the elf...' or some such.

If this were the real world, it would be a wise bet to say that the explanation for how Belkar will be responsible for V's death would be equally absurd and meaningless. If this were the real world, that little dangling, unstated ending to a long line of preposterous claims of Belkar's involvement in people's deaths would not be worthy of much note, especially as Belkar has already fulfilled the prophecy blatantly on one count (which was all that was needed) and killed the Oracle. The odds that what the Oracle would have said had he not been interrupted and then stabbed would have had any worth would be very low, if this weren't a work of fiction.

But it is a work of fiction, and one written by an author who has shown a deep love for laying the foreshadowing and Chekhov's guns on really thick. In this case, real world logic and plot logic reach exactly the opposite conclusions: the probability that what the Oracle would have said if he had lived had value and substance to it increases exponentially for it having never been heard, while the list of absurd statements used prior does not diminish the possibility of that last statement's worth, but rather enhances the potential for dramatic irony when that last thing he was going to say was, in fact, something everyone would have really wanted to hear.

And best of all, being the Oracle, he must have known that the important spoiler he was about to hand out would be interrupted and therefore didn't worry about getting out the first part of it, to sow food for thought later. I suspect he likes screwing with his client's heads.

This doesn't mean it has to mean something. It could very well just be a red herring, a case of people jumping at their own foreshadows (ugh! horrible pun, sorry). But in suggesting it probably doesn't mean anything, you're arguing against the possibility from the wrong angle, trying to apply perfectly sound logic for the real world to a comic strip that runs on Rule of Drama.

137beth

2010-08-17, 09:08 AM

...except that Roy recently said that there were seven weeks left on the Oracle's prophecy, but don't let that stop you.

Except that the thread author said "in a FEW", I am assuming that 7 is more than a few.

Bongos

2010-08-17, 09:42 AM

Belkar will die, V will live and the Oracle will keep getting raised and resurrected.

hamishspence

2010-08-17, 09:59 AM

...And Rich has recently posted that roughly two weeks have passed since that strip, so we're now at a maximum of five.

Yup- this was the post:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8569129&postcount=19

the question is- how much time has passed between Redcloak's speech, and Roy and Belkar's being sentenced to the arenas?

Nilan8888

2010-08-17, 10:45 AM

From the Giant's post, it sounds like he's sort of "backloading" it -- that is, lumping all two weeks in prior to the break in narrative to Team Evil.

Therefore we have Roy's comment -> travel to sandsedge -> week in the desert

*Comics end*

A few days spent traveling to and searching through the cities of the southern continent

*Team Evil Comics begin*

Therefore the cut from Team Evil back to OOTS (minus the one-frame reference to O-Chul and Lien) is essentially "real-time" in comics: the Team Evil comics all happen more or less on the same evening and day as the following OOTS comics. Or if there is a break it's only a matter of hours.

Since we've returned to OOTS, a minimum of 8 or so hours have passed, assuming V, Elan and Haley get picked up in the morning and the inn brawl happens that afternoon. However that gets a bit confusing since it's possible that everything in the Inn could have happened on the following day.

So, assuming we're on the same "longitude" as Azure city, which we're probably not, then we're probably at minimum on the following evening from RedCloak's speech. Maximum, the evening after that.

BadAndyMk3

2010-08-17, 11:12 AM

It woudl be neat if Belkar DID end up killing V.
Yes, I believe the the prophecy was fullfilled when the Belkster stabbed the Oracle, but that doesn't mean he's precluded from killing V as well.

Gandariel

2010-08-17, 11:40 AM

This. It's hard to believe it needs to be repeated as often as it does, but Belkar's prophecy was that he would cause the death of at least one of those listed. He did - he killed the Oracle. That's it, prophecy fulfilled. It is possible he will cause the deaths of more of the individuals he listed (aside from Miko and Windstriker, for obvious reasons), but the prophecy no longer applies even if he does. The Oracle's laundry list just before he did that was complete BS, a vain attempt on his part to prevent Belkar from killing him by convincing him his prophecy had come true. He admits as much in the second to last panel of that strip.

Zevox

The Oracle could have simply said "it hasn't come true yet"
then probably Belkar would have killed him anyway, prophecy fullfilled.
if the oracle said so, he really meant it. actually in some way belkar DID cause the death of them... and so there should have been an explaination of why belkar caused V's death too

Kish

2010-08-17, 11:50 AM

if the oracle said so, he really meant it.
This assertion would seem to hit a Catch 22, considering one of the things the Oracle said was that he didn't really mean what he'd said about Belkar killing Roy and so on.

Zevox

2010-08-17, 12:29 PM

The Oracle could have simply said "it hasn't come true yet"
then probably Belkar would have killed him anyway, prophecy fullfilled.
...which is why he didn't. Even knowing he'd fail, he'd still rather at least attempt to avoid death instead of just give up. Being stabbed kind of hurts, you know.

if the oracle said so, he really meant it.
Kish is absolutely correct on just how ridiculous this assertion is.

actually in some way belkar DID cause the death of them...
You must be joking. Even if some people actually bought the Oracle's excuse with Roy, nobody believed his excuses with Miko and Windstriker. Especially Windstriker's, which required that he redefine the word "death" for crying out loud.

Zevox

Gift Jeraff

2010-08-17, 12:32 PM

V lists his/her rivalry with Belkar as one of the reasons that s/he feels that his/her arcane power has been wasted. Thus, Belkar was in a roundabout way, one of the reasons that Vaarsuvius took the deal. And the deal lead to Vaarsuvius re-thinking his/her way of life, metaphorically killing the old V and replacing it with a newer one.
Let's stretch it even further--the rivalry started as a result of Belkar's actions: Had Belkar not taunted Miko into chasing him across the palace causing the Order to rally against her, had he not gotten drunk on New Year's and kissed V, and had he not acted in such a simple way that would cause V to presume he has a proto-brain, then V's pranks would never have taken place. As often. Furthermore, had he helped the grand larcenist in assassinating Hinjo, the whole Kubota subplot that caused V to separate from Elan and Durkon (and allowed V to interact with Qarr; without Qarr the IFCC would have to just appear and thus V would be more suspicious of the deal) would have never happened.

Now, as much as I love the idea that Belkar was very indirectly the cause of the metaphorical death of V, wouldn't Rich cover that in the DStP commentary?

Porthos

2010-08-17, 12:40 PM

Now, as much as I love the idea that Belkar was very indirectly the cause of the metaphorical death of V, wouldn't Rich cover that in the DStP commentary?

He wouldn't cover it if he thought the "as for the elf" part was just a throw away gag unworthy of commentary. Especially since he already talked about the parody aspect of the prophecy in general. There were lots of things in DStP that weren't covered by commentary that one might have thought Rich would talk about.

Ancalagon

2010-08-17, 03:55 PM

which predicted him 'causing the death of' Miko, Roy, Windstriker, and the Oracle, will also extend to V.

It was: 'causing the death of' Miko, Roy, Windstriker, or the Oracle.

So the prophecy is already fulfilled. No matter if Belkar will cause the death of Vaasuvius. If he does not, the prophecy is not touched and if he does, it might not touch it as well.
It MIGHT then count as a prophecy that could have been fulfilled in more than one way but given that it already is fulfilled I doubt speculating makes a lot of sense.

Also, the prophecy did not make him kill someone (well, indirectly, it did but... you know, it did not force him to do something to make it true).

John Cribati

2010-08-17, 04:06 PM

Gandariel

2010-08-17, 04:28 PM

You must be joking. Even if some people actually bought the Oracle's excuse with Roy, nobody believed his excuses with Miko and Windstriker. Especially Windstriker's, which required that he redefine the word "death" for crying out loud.

Zevox

I DO think that his theories made sense.
they're Theories on why should Belkar POSSIBLY SOMEHOW have CAUSED the death of them

if they were theories on why belkar actually killed them, sure they would have no sense.... but yes, they can possibly make sense in this way, and so there CAN be a possible reason for which belkar could cause V's death

137beth

2010-08-17, 04:52 PM

I DO think that his theories made sense.
they're Theories on why should Belkar POSSIBLY SOMEHOW have CAUSED the death of them

if they were theories on why belkar actually killed them, sure they would have no sense.... but yes, they can possibly make sense in this way, and so there CAN be a possible reason for which belkar could cause V's death

The Oracle said HE didn't even buy his OWN stories! How the <censor bypass> could they possibly have been legitimate?!?

John Cribati

2010-08-17, 04:53 PM

Even if some people actually bought the Oracle's excuse with Roy

There wasn't much to "buy" in that one, IMHO.

Belkar makes bet with other guy (-->) Belkar offers Roy Ring of Jumping --> Roy accepts Ring of Jumping --> Roy jumps onto zombie dragon--> Roy slices off dragon head --> Xykon Meteor Swarms the zombie dragon--> Roy falls --> Roy dies.

Of course, you could just say that Roy wouldn't have died if any of the events didn't happen. Well, true, but they all worked together to cause Roy's death.

Zeful

2010-08-17, 05:03 PM

The Oracle said HE didn't even buy his OWN stories! How the <censor bypass> could they possibly have been legitimate?!?

Semantics: Belkar asked if he "caused the death of" rather than "Kill" with the former, giving Roy the Ring of Jumping counts, though indirectly. Quite frankly I would have simply ended it there and made Belkar's repeated attempts to kill his teammates as a recurring joke at his expense.

Zevox

2010-08-17, 05:31 PM

The Oracle said HE didn't even buy his OWN stories! How the <censor bypass> could they possibly have been legitimate?!?
This. It's really facepalm-worthy that anyone defend those explanations as anything but BS when the Oracle himself admitted that's what they were.

Zevox

Nimrod's Son

2010-08-17, 11:33 PM

This. It's really facepalm-worthy that anyone defend those explanations as anything but BS when the Oracle himself admitted that's what they were.

Zevox
But what people are saying is that just because the Oracle thinks all those stories were BS, doesn't mean that there isn't a similar BS story about V's death too. It's possible, even, that it's a bit more plausible than the others but the Oracle left it till last because it hadn't happened yet.

Belkar won't directly kill V; I think practically everyone accepts that. But there is still the possibility of V dying in such a way that an argument, however flimsy, may be made for Belkar being responsible. Belkar doesn't even still need to be alive for this to be the case; it could happen through a chain of events he started long before.

Zevox

2010-08-18, 01:09 AM

But what people are saying is that just because the Oracle thinks all those stories were BS, doesn't mean that there isn't a similar BS story about V's death too. It's possible, even, that it's a bit more plausible than the others but the Oracle left it till last because it hadn't happened yet.

Belkar won't directly kill V; I think practically everyone accepts that. But there is still the possibility of V dying in such a way that an argument, however flimsy, may be made for Belkar being responsible. Belkar doesn't even still need to be alive for this to be the case; it could happen through a chain of events he started long before.
Not quite the way I'd put it - rather, I'd say that it's not unlikely that the Oracle's trailed-off comment on V foreshadows V dying, although not even necessarily in a way that can by any actual logic be linked back to Belkar, given the Oracle's explanations for the others included one where he had to redefine the word death to make even a laughably flimsy argument. But in essence true, and something I myself have pointed out elsewhere on multiple occasions.

But that's not what the statements I've been responding to have been saying. Gandriel has actually been claiming that the Oracle's explanations for Roy, Miko, and Windstriker make sense, which is ludicrous.

Zevox

Bongos

2010-08-18, 02:22 AM

Well the whole scene is Belkar complaining his prediction did not come true. The Oracle says it did and fails to convince Belkar. The V one doesn't even get passed the first sentence before Belkar's BS detector goes off, because Belkar knows he hasn't killed V. I don't see it as foreshadowing at all, it's BS and Belkar knows it and he deduces killing the Oracle is the answer to his question.

Seriously I don't see the foreshadowing, it's a joke.

Ancalagon

2010-08-18, 02:35 AM

Seriously I don't see the foreshadowing, it's a joke.

A joke and a teaser. It's keeping us discussing what it might be that causes the death of Vaarsuvius und what Belkar's involvement might be. We also can discuss if Vaarsuvius is going to die in the story (imo it's likely) or if the oracle's story would have even flimsier than the previous ones.

Gandariel

2010-08-18, 07:00 AM

But that's not what the statements I've been responding to have been saying. Gandriel has actually been claiming that the Oracle's explanations for Roy, Miko, and Windstriker make sense, which is ludicrous.

Zevox

No.
I said, there IS a possible logical chain (ridiculous and flimsy as it is) that connects belkar to their death.
This is quite stupid, i admit, because with this kind of logical chains you could say durkon caused the death of countless soldiers, etc.
But Belkar's question was about causing the death, despite how directly or indirectly..

also a butterfly flapping her tiny wings somewhere caused the death of roy.

Shale

2010-08-18, 07:50 AM

Whatever the Oracle was going to say about Vaarsuvius, it has to be a chain of logic more tenuous than "you made it impossible for Windstriker to be summoned to the prime material plane, and that's like death."

So I feel safe saying that the "theory", whatever it is, doesn't involve V dying in any non-metaphorical way.

Zevox

2010-08-18, 10:40 AM

No.
I direct you back to your own last two posts on the matter:

if the oracle said so, he really meant it. actually in some way belkar DID cause the death of them...

I DO think that his theories made sense.
Those are precisely "claiming that the Oracle's explanations for Roy, Miko, and Windstriker make sense," even using the exact words "made sense" in the second quote.

I said, there IS a possible logical chain (ridiculous and flimsy as it is) that connects belkar to their death.
Except they're not logical, which is why they're ridiculous and flimsy. That seems to be something your missing. The Oracle's excuses are indefensible precisely because they illogically ascribe the cause of death of someone to events which were incidental to it at best. Thus, they make no sense.

Zevox

Gandariel

2010-08-18, 01:57 PM

Except they're not logical, which is why they're ridiculous and flimsy. That seems to be something your missing. The Oracle's excuses are indefensible precisely because they illogically ascribe the cause of death of someone to events which were incidental to it at best. Thus, they make no sense.
Zevox

the oracle may answer your questions in a tricky or incomplete way.
Which is why the oracle's answers are often useless and strange (e.g. where's Xykon? in his throne room)

I'm trying to say that, since with a logical chain you can also say that a tiny butterfly flapping its tiny wings somewhere caused Roy's death, there is no point at all in Belkar asking that question

Nevertheless, it would have been interesting to listen the Oracle's words about Vaarsuvius and how, incidentally, indirectly, Belkar would be involved in it.

(And btw come on! Don't be so cruel with the poor guy tring to defend a vague, inconsistent and improbable idea!)

Zevox

2010-08-18, 02:16 PM

the oracle may answer your questions in a tricky or incomplete way.
Which is why the oracle's answers are often useless and strange (e.g. where's Xykon? in his throne room)
That isn't a tricky or incomplete answer; it's just a snarky, useless one, used as a joke.

I'm trying to say that, since with a logical chain you can also say that a tiny butterfly flapping its tiny wings somewhere caused Roy's death,
And what I am saying is no, you cannot say that, because such claims are not logical, which is precisely why they produce flimsy, ridiculous arguments.

(And btw come on! Don't be so cruel with the poor guy tring to defend a vague, inconsistent and improbable idea!)
You could just, you know, stop trying to defend the illogical idea as though it were, in fact, logical.

Zevox

Gandariel

2010-08-18, 05:44 PM

Guess i should just have said "i'm really curious to know what ridiculous, illogical and flimsy argument the oracle would have said about Belkar causing V's death, maybe it would have been interesting"

ferrodoxin

2010-09-10, 09:48 AM

Yes, The Oracle would never give unsatisfyingly incomplete answers to badly worded questions(!). Those stories were ridiculous? Yes. Did they have elements of truth in them, yes again. The Oracle didn't just make them up, he has seen those things happen. He knew Belkar's relation to Miko and Roy somehow, and Belkar asked him to look into the future for it. We know(at least I think) his only supernatural power is looking into the future. Since Belkar asked him to look into the future for "causing deaths" and he looked into the future and saw those events, I'm gonna go ahead and assume they are part of the prophecy. The fact that he used his client's bad wording to fool around with him, doesn't change the truth in those events. I don't think he made Belkar kill him in order to fulfill the prophecy, he made him do it to have the awesome "lickmyorangeballs" moment. So we know that Belkar plays at least some part in V's death, however lame and seemingly unrelated it might be. Don't forget IFCC has some "purposes" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0667.html) for V. With that in hand, and The Oracle's short comment, I believe we will see V's death before the comic ends. And Belkar might as well have some part to play in it,

NerfTW

2010-09-10, 10:00 AM

No. Each death got more and more ridiculous and metaphorical. Notice that the one right before V, Windstriker, was if you assume being on a seperate plane of existence as death. V's "death" was referring to the massive change in outlook caused by the soul splice. He didn't say it because it hadn't happened yet.

It also follows from Roy's death nicely, being that if Belkar could be held in some way responsible for Roy dying, then he could be held responsible for the ensuing events causing the party to be split and V needing epic level magic.

The Belkar causing the death of prophecy is done. The specific death being the Oracle, the rest being more and more tenuously connected, both in cause and in being considered "death".

Raging Gene Ray

2010-09-10, 12:52 PM

Bedinsis

2010-09-10, 03:14 PM

...except that Roy recently said that there were seven weeks left on the Oracle's prophecy, but don't let that stop you.

It's entirely possible that it's seven weeks and a few months left. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0302.html)

Gandariel

2010-09-10, 03:14 PM

ferrodoxin

2010-09-11, 05:36 AM

"As for the elf....the stress of dealing with you has shaved exactly 16 years off of V's considerably long lifespan."

Makes as much sense as anything else and V doesn't even have to die in the comic.
Entirely possible. What I'm honestly expecting is a joke about it. But maybe, just maybe, it could be something cool. Like another lame-ass prophecy that was thought complete. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0021.html)

137beth

2010-09-11, 11:02 AM

Semantics: Belkar asked if he "caused the death of" rather than "Kill" with the former, giving Roy the Ring of Jumping counts, though indirectly. Quite frankly I would have simply ended it there and made Belkar's repeated attempts to kill his teammates as a recurring joke at his expense.
But the Oracle also said that if Belkar DIDN'T make the bet/give Roy the ring, Xykon still would have killed Roy.

Zeful

2010-09-11, 11:52 AM

But the Oracle also said that if Belkar DIDN'T make the bet/give Roy the ring, Xykon still would have killed Roy.

And? He did make the bet and give Roy the ring, making himself a factor in Roy's death. What could have been is irrelevant.

137beth

2010-09-11, 03:17 PM

And? He did make the bet and give Roy the ring, making himself a factor in Roy's death. What could have been is irrelevant.

No, its not. The outcome would have been the same regardless of Belkar giving him the ring, so Belkar's actions are irrelevant because they had virtually no effect on the outcome.

John Cribati

2010-09-11, 03:36 PM

No, its not. The outcome would have been the same regardless of Belkar giving him the ring, so Belkar's actions are irrelevant because they had virtually no effect on the outcome.

Roy died taking falling damage, instead of say, Meteor Swarm damage. Two different effects, same outcome.

Zeful

2010-09-11, 11:15 PM

No, its not. The outcome would have been the same regardless of Belkar giving him the ring, so Belkar's actions are irrelevant because they had virtually no effect on the outcome.

Too bad that's not how causality works. That if by not acting Roy still would have died is irrelevant because that's not what happened. Belkar gave Roy the ring, influencing the order of events that directly lead to Roy's death, thus Belkar (indirectly) caused the death of Roy, legitimatly fulfilling the orcales prophecy that, yes, Belkar will cause the death of one of: Miko, Roy, The Oracle, Windstriker, or Vaarsuvius.

You may not like it, but that's how causality works, deal with it.

ferrodoxin

2010-09-12, 04:59 AM

Belkar gave Roy the ring, betting that he was stupid enough to take it. Belkar associated with Miko willingly, hoping that she would lose her paladin powers. As for redefining death I have a question (I'm not confident in my D&D knowledge), does Windstriker not return to the Celestial Realm if it is injured, the same way a demon is banished? The Oracle may have had to redefine "death" but was there any other way that Belkar could actually "kill" Windstriker?. Belkar did not kill Miko or Roy but he screwed with them paying no heed to their safety. And they ended up dead. Not exactly a case for manslaugther, but if you were a family member of Miko's you would blame Belkar for twisting Miko's reasoning (what little of it she has anyway).

137beth

2010-09-12, 07:19 AM

Kaeso

2010-09-12, 07:22 AM

Too bad that's not how causality works. That if by not acting Roy still would have died is irrelevant because that's not what happened. Belkar gave Roy the ring, influencing the order of events that directly lead to Roy's death, thus Belkar (indirectly) caused the death of Roy, legitimatly fulfilling the orcales prophecy that, yes, Belkar will cause the death of one of: Miko, Roy, The Oracle, Windstriker, or Vaarsuvius.

You may not like it, but that's how causality works, deal with it.

This man is correct. In legal terms one could refer to Belkar's actions as the 'conditio sine qua non' (condition without which not). Belkar's actions may not have directly killed Roy or Miko but without his actions their deaths wouldn't have happened (or at least not in the same way). Legally the person who caused the conditio sine qua non isn't (always) punishable, but that doesn't change the fact that he was an important factor in the causal chain.

It is still irrelevant that Belkar gave him the ring, because it didn't effect the outcome. Deal with it.

As i said above, it wouldn't have happened if it weren't for Belkar's actions, no matter how irrelevant they may seem at first glance.

John Cribati

2010-09-12, 07:25 AM

It is still irrelevant that Belkar gave him the ring, because it didn't effect the outcome. Deal with it.

If Belkar didn't give Roy the ring, Roy would have died by Meteor Swarm to the face or something.

Because Belkar gave Roy the ring, Roy died by taking falling damage.

I call that affecting the outcome.

137beth

2010-09-12, 09:16 AM

What damage type Roy takes is not the outcome, it is a means to the outcome (specifically, Roy dying). He would die all the same from fire damage as he would for falling damage.

Zevox

2010-09-12, 10:38 AM

...okay, if you guys won't take the Oracle's word that that was not the resolution of the prophecy, how about the Giant's?

[Talks about how he deliberately set up the thing with Roy so people would interpret it as a possible fulfillment of Belkar's prophecy.]

Belkar's entire prophecy was, ultimately, my send-up of misleading prophecies in fantasy fiction and how they are often explained after the fact in incredibly unsatisfying ways. In the end, though, the prophecy was straightforward.
Emphasis added. That whole sequence was the Giant poking fun at those sorts of roundabout-fulfillment, unsatisfying prophecies, then doing the opposite and making the actual conclusion direct and satisfying. Thus no, the whole Roy/Miko/Windstriker nonsense was not the fulfillment of Belkar's prophecy.

Zevox

Ancalagon

2010-09-12, 10:51 AM

You remind me of someone or something... one moment, here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Quixote

Leave the windmills alone, I say. ;)

Zeful

2010-09-12, 01:32 PM

It is still irrelevant that Belkar gave him the ring, because it didn't effect the outcome. Deal with it.

Actually it is relevant that Belkar gave Roy the Ring, because without it he wouldn't have made it to the dragon in the first place. So yeah Belkar was still a cause of Roy's death.

...okay, if you guys won't take the Oracle's word that that was not the resolution of the prophecy, how about the Giant's?

Emphasis added. That whole sequence was the Giant poking fun at those sorts of roundabout-fulfillment, unsatisfying prophecies, then doing the opposite and making the actual conclusion direct and satisfying. Thus no, the whole Roy/Miko/Windstriker nonsense was not the fulfillment of Belkar's prophecy.

Zevox

And that's the giant's prerogative. I only said that if I was writing it I would have ended it with Roy's death and then made a running joke of Belkar trying to kill important people only to fail.

137beth

2010-09-12, 01:35 PM

Actually it is relevant that Belkar gave Roy the Ring, because without it he wouldn't have made it to the dragon in the first place. So yeah Belkar was still a cause of Roy's death.

And as the Oracle said, Xykon would have been able to kill Roy anyways. If you don't believe the Oracle, I direct you to Zevox's post above.

Yora

2010-09-12, 01:39 PM

It's an oracle making a prophecy. I can't remember a single story in which a prohpecy helped anyone to predict what was going to happen.
Except that you always know it won't turn out that way the prophecy suggests.

Zeful

2010-09-12, 01:43 PM

And as the Oracle said, Xykon would have been able to kill Roy anyways. If you don't believe the Oracle, I direct you to Zevox's post above.

Causality is the study of Cause and Effect. When looking at the causes of something, things in the list of "could have been" have exactly zero meaning because they are not the cause of what you are studying. That Roy would have died anyway? Not important, at all, ever. That Roy died in this manner because of Belkar's actions? Actually important.

That is why it is a legitimate fulfillment of the Oracle's prophecy. If you want to prove that sentence wrong, prove that Belkar's had no effect on the outcome of Roy's death as portrayed in this comic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0443.html), if you can't concede defeat.

137beth

2010-09-12, 01:46 PM

That is why it is a legitimate fulfillment of the Oracle's prophecy. If you want to prove that sentence wrong, prove that Belkar's had no effect on the outcome of Roy's death as portrayed in this comic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0443.html), if you can't concede defeat.

" Originally Posted by Don't Split the Party, commentary to part 4
[Talks about how he deliberately set up the thing with Roy so people would interpret it as a possible fulfillment of Belkar's prophecy.]

Belkar's entire prophecy was, ultimately, my send-up of misleading prophecies in fantasy fiction and how they are often explained after the fact in incredibly unsatisfying ways. In the end, though, the prophecy was straightforward."

I can't imagine why you are suspecting Rich's commentary to be wrong.

Zeful

2010-09-12, 01:49 PM

" Originally Posted by Don't Split the Party, commentary to part 4
[Talks about how he deliberately set up the thing with Roy so people would interpret it as a possible fulfillment of Belkar's prophecy.]

Belkar's entire prophecy was, ultimately, my send-up of misleading prophecies in fantasy fiction and how they are often explained after the fact in incredibly unsatisfying ways. In the end, though, the prophecy was straightforward."

I can't imagine why you are suspecting Rich's commentary to be wrong.

I'm not, please do not misrepresent my arguments. Go back and read all of my posts. Then try to argue against my actual points.

137beth

2010-09-12, 02:51 PM

I did. The point you are trying to make is that Belkar DID cause the death of Roy. The Giant specifically said that Belkar did NOT cause the death of Roy, thus defeating your argument.

Zeful

2010-09-12, 03:19 PM

I did. The point you are trying to make is that Belkar DID cause the death of Roy. The Giant specifically said that Belkar did NOT cause the death of Roy, thus defeating your argument.

I'm taking it English isn't for first language because nothing in the except quoted means what you says it does.

The Giant wished for a straightforward resolution to Belkar's prophecy, that is all. The most straightforward resolution is to use the colloquial meaning of "cause the death of" rather than it's literal reading. Thus the prophecy becomes "Will I [kill] any of the following?" This does not change that Belkar was a factor in Roy's death, nor does it change that due to Belkar's poor wording, Roy's death qualifies for the letter of his prophecy.

137beth

2010-09-12, 04:36 PM

Interpret it however you want. Either way:

Causality is the study of Cause and Effect. When looking at the causes of something, things in the list of "could have been" have exactly zero meaning because they are not the cause of what you are studying. That Roy would have died anyway? Not important, at all, ever. That Roy died in this manner because of Belkar's actions? Actually important.

That is why it is a legitimate fulfillment of the Oracle's prophecy. If you want to prove that sentence wrong, prove that Belkar's had no effect on the outcome of Roy's death as portrayed in this comic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0443.html), if you can't concede defeat.

The Oracle specifically said that Xykon would have killed Roy either way. If Belkar had died in the first strip of the series, Xykon still it wouldn't have any any effect. Belkar was certainly there when Roy died, but someone who is present at a murder but does nothing that effects it is an innocent bystander.
That is NOT a fulfillment of the Oracle's prophecy, as stated by the oracle himself.

Unless, of course, you consider being a bystander but not doing anything to be taking a part in the murder. The oracle doesn't view it that way (he said he wasn't buying any of those stories), but it is perfectly plausible that you could view "not doing anything" as taking part in Roy's death.

Kish

2010-09-12, 04:48 PM

It's an oracle making a prophecy. I can't remember a single story in which a prohpecy helped anyone to predict what was going to happen.

You mean, other than Haley getting her ability to speak back, the sorcerer who killed Fyron being Xykon, Xykon's currently heading for Girard's Gate, Belkar causing the death of the Oracle by stabbing him with his daggers, and Vaarsuvius being the one who killed the young black dragon?

Well, I'm sure your knowledge of prophecies in non-OotS stories is encyclopedic in any event.

Zeful

2010-09-12, 05:32 PM

The Oracle specifically said that Xykon would have killed Roy either way.Not relevant.
If Belkar had died in the first strip of the series, Xykon still it wouldn't have any any effect.Not relevant.
Belkar was certainly there when Roy died, but someone who is present at a murder but does nothing that effects it is an innocent bystander.Not my point.

That is NOT a fulfillment of the Oracle's prophecy, as stated by the oracle himself.No it's not the fulfillment of the prophecy The Oracle gave, but it does fulfill the question Belkar asked. These are two separate things.

Unless, of course, you consider being a bystander but not doing anything to be taking a part in the murder. The oracle doesn't view it that way (he said he wasn't buying any of those stories), but it is perfectly plausible that you could view "not doing anything" as taking part in Roy's death.Belkar provided the means for Roy to get to the dragon, that doesn't qualify as "not doing anything".

Shale

2010-09-12, 06:01 PM

So, quick question.

The oracle said that if Roy were to engage Xykon in close combat on the ground, he'd die anyway. How, without the Ring of Jumping, does Roy get Xykon to fight him anywhere?

Kish

2010-09-12, 09:46 PM

So, quick question.

The oracle said that if Roy were to engage Xykon in close combat on the ground, he'd die anyway. How, without the Ring of Jumping, does Roy get Xykon to fight him anywhere?
He shouts at Xykon, "Flying away? How like a sorcerer! You know you can't beat me, because you're not a real spellcaster!"

(Is this a silly suggestion that hinges on Roy having knowledge he doesn't have? Of course.)

137beth

2010-09-15, 07:19 AM

[QUOTE=Zeful;9343655]Not relevant. Not relevant.

It IS relevant:| You can't just keep denying it:|

Ancalagon

2010-09-15, 08:58 AM

The oracle said that if Roy were to engage Xykon in close combat on the ground, he'd die anyway. How, without the Ring of Jumping, does Roy get Xykon to fight him anywhere?

Hum... there's like a few thousand ways to arrange that. And this does not even include "The plot calls for this fight, so there will be a reason for it to happen".

Zeful

2010-09-15, 10:21 AM

Not relevant. Not relevant.

It IS relevant:| You can't just keep denying it:|

Given that those hypothetical scenarios have a grand total of Zero impact on how things went down, the are not relevant to the discussion at hand, they never will be. There's nothing to deny.

Dr.Epic

2010-09-15, 12:16 PM

Think about it: Vaarsuvius made a deal with the IFCC. By the laws of drama, he has to eventually repay his debt or the entire 'deal with the devil' thing is going to feel cheap. What better way to kill V off than have Belkar cause it as a comic re-fulfillment of that prophecy?

V's debt is going to be repaid by his/her soul spending a period of time with each fiend. How does this draw the conclusion that Belkar will be responsible for V's death?:smallconfused:

Alagaesian

2010-09-15, 10:16 PM

V's debt is going to be repaid by his/her soul spending a period of time with each fiend. How does this draw the conclusion that Belkar will be responsible for V's death?:smallconfused:
In order for V's soul to leave his body, he has to be dead. One of the only other references to V's death is involved in Belkar's question for the Oracle. Plus, out of the five possible victims that his question included, Belkar has been semi-involved with the deaths of four of them. To me, that is an invitation to eventually include the fifth.

Therefore, I think that Belkar's prophecy is foreshadowing that Belkar will, in some way, cause Vaarsuvius's death. In a logical world, this would probably not happen. But this is a story, so the rule of cool/drama/funny takes precedence. I personally think it would be an interesting twist if Belkar caused Vaar's death. So, I believe it will happen.

And, no, I don't think that the Oracle would tell Belkar about this Vaarsuvius portion of the prophecy at any time. What would he get out of it? He obviously predicted himself dying, and probably knows how bad things turn when you try to fight fate. He set everything up so that he would die on his own turns, getting revenge on Belkar by toying with him and then activating the Mark of Justice. The only thing the Oracle lost, overall, was the XP from being raised.

factotum

2010-09-16, 01:43 AM

In order for V's soul to leave his body, he has to be dead.

And what makes you think that his soul has to be outside his body for the fiends to take control of it? Their contract with him never specified that he had to be dead before their period of control arrived, after all!

137beth

2010-09-16, 06:36 PM

Given that those hypothetical scenarios have a grand total of Zero impact on how things went down, the are not relevant to the discussion at hand, they never will be. There's nothing to deny.
Hmm, perhaps the issue is that you are a bit confused as to what the word "cause" means. To "cause" something, you need to AFFECT it.

Given that Belkar's actions had a grand total of zero impact on the outcome, he did not cause Varsuvius's death in any way shape or form.

You also still havn't manged to explain Rich Burlew's quote:
"Belkar's entire prophecy was, ultimately, my send-up of misleading prophecies in fantasy fiction and how they are often explained after the fact in incredibly unsatisfying ways. In the end, though, the prophecy was straightforward."

You mean, other than Haley getting her ability to speak back, the sorcerer who killed Fyron being Xykon, Xykon's currently heading for Girard's Gate, Belkar causing the death of the Oracle by stabbing him with his daggers, and [b]Vaarsuvius being the one who killed the young black dragon?

Well, I'm sure your knowledge of prophecies in non-OotS stories is encyclopedic in any event.
Xykon's heading for Girard's Gate: That HURT the OOTS, because they thought he would attack Girard's gate before Azure City. Granted it also helped them after Soon's gate was destroyed, because they knew where he would go next.
Belkar causing the death of the oracle: Who did that help? It helped the oracle, but I think he was referring to the fact that the person the prophecy is made to is usually hurt by it. The oracle was giving that prediction to Belkar, not himself, and it did not help Belkar.
Vaarsuvius being the one who killed the young black dragon: Huh?!? this did not help Varsuvius, as he/she lost his/her wife/husband, and had to mingle with fieds. Nor did it help the black dragon, as it resulted in the black dragon and its entire family being annihilated. And, for that matter, it didn't help the oracle/Tiamat, because of the dragon massacre.

Zeful

2010-09-16, 06:50 PM

Hmm, perhaps the issue is that you are a bit confused as to what the word "cause" means. To "cause" something, you need to AFFECT it.

Given that Belkar's actions had a grand total of zero impact on the outcome, he did not cause Varsuvius's death in any way shape or form.Since V isn't dead, that much is obvious. Since that's not what I'm arguing to begin with, I fail to see how this affects my argument.

You also still havn't manged to explain Rich Burlew's quote:
"Belkar's entire prophecy was, ultimately, my send-up of misleading prophecies in fantasy fiction and how they are often explained after the fact in incredibly unsatisfying ways. In the end, though, the prophecy was straightforward."Yes I did.

Kish

2010-09-16, 06:58 PM

[...]
"Help predict what's going to happen" is not the same as, "Generically help someone be better off."

Yora is claiming that we can ignore the Oracle's predictions of Belkar's death because it's "just" a prophecy. The Oracle's prophecies have always been true and almost always been very straightforward. If anything, taking the "assume any possible loopholes will be exploited" approach is why Roy didn't get "Azure City" as an answer to the question he asked in strip #331

2-HeadedGiraffe

2010-10-14, 04:59 PM

I have to agree that Belkar definitely contributed to Roy's death. In a technical sense, I believe this would have fulfilled the Oracle's prophecy. It doesn't make a difference that the death would have occurred either way. Belkar's actions directly lead to the way it did happen.

The Oracle and Mr. Burlew have both stated that this is not the fulfillment of the prophecy. What Belkar did to the Oracle was. Fair enough, but I argue that Roy's death would still have fulfilled the prophecy, though admittedly in a far less satisfying way.

So what I'm saying is that yes, Roy's death could have been the fulfillment of the prophecy. Events that didn't actually occur - in this case, other hypothetical ways in which Roy would have died - are not the point. Belkar helped cause the event which actually did occur. However, whether this works isn't particularly important since there's a better explanation for the prophecy, anyway.

137beth

2010-10-14, 06:43 PM

It doesn't make a difference that the death would have occurred either way. Belkar's actions directly lead to the way it did happen.
Using this logic: Miko died, and it doesn't make a difference that she would have died without Belkar there. But because Belkar affected events that led up to her death (specifically, he was in the war that caused her death), he caused the death of Miko. The fact that his efforts in the war had nothing to do with the result (Miko dying) is irrelevant by 2-HeadedGiraffe logic.
In fact, you could use the same argument to say that Belkar caused the death of every creature that died in the battle for Azure city.

Events that didn't actually occur are not the point.
The point is "did Belkar affect the outcome?"
Belkar had virtually no effect on the outcome.

The Oracle and Mr. Burlew have both stated that this is not the fulfillment of the prophecy.
So why is this continuing?

Cavelcade

2010-10-14, 06:59 PM

Actually it is relevant that Belkar gave Roy the Ring, because without it he wouldn't have made it to the dragon in the first place. So yeah Belkar was still a cause of Roy's death..

Here I have to disagree with you. Rather than being a cause of Roy's death, Belkar giving him the ring was a contributing factor in the series of events which lead to him going splat. Certainly the manner of the outcome would have differed without it, however, it is not this ring of jumping which is the root cause of Roy's death, but, well Roy himself being bull-headed.

I'm guessing that's what the Oracle (and Rich) feel is the difference between the 'alternatives' the Oracle offered and the actual truth of the prophecy.

2-HeadedGiraffe

2010-10-14, 08:59 PM

Rather than being a cause of Roy's death, Belkar giving him the ring was a contributing factor in the series of events which lead to him going splat. Certainly the manner of the outcome would have differed without it, however, it is not this ring of jumping which is the root cause of Roy's death, but, well Roy himself being bull-headed.

I think a "contributing factor" and a "cause" are more or less the same thing. Belkar doesn't ask whether he'd be the only cause or even the most important cause. Roy's attitude is more important, yes, but Belkar is certainly a very important enabler of that event. Roy wouldn't have been able to do what he did without Belkar.

I must repeat, however, that I agree and understand that the Oracle's death is a much more satisfying interpretation. I just think it's important to realize that Belkar was an important factor in Roy "going splat."

Zevox

2010-10-14, 09:28 PM

I just think it's important to realize that Belkar was an important factor in Roy "going splat."
Except that he wasn't. He contributed to the circumstances in which it occurred, nothing more. By any logic in which Belkar can be said to have "caused" Roy's death, you can make a much better case for the cause of his death being Lord Shojo - after all, it was his decision to bring the Order to Azure City and enlist them in the fight over the Gates that caused Roy to be present for Xykon's attack, which was a much more important factor in his death than Belkar giving him that ring. Lacking that, he might well have gone his whole life without knowing Xykon had been restored from his defeat at Dorukon's gate, which would make it pretty impossible for him to get killed by him.

That kind of roundabout logic for assigning a "cause" to Roy's death is so unsatisfying precisely because it's so ridiculous and illogical that you can use to make arguments like that.

The fact is that the cause of Roy's death was that he tried to fight Xykon 1-on-1. You can say Roy caused it because of that decision or because of his decision not to back down when Xykon gave him the chance, and you can say Xykon caused it by actually doing the deed. All of those would be correct. But claiming Belkar was a cause of Roy's death is just plain wrong, unless you're willing to accept ridiculous logic which also assigns pretty much anyone who contributed to any minor facet of the circumstances under which Roy died as a "cause" of that death, which would include Shojo, Miko, Nale, and who knows how many others.

Zevox

Gandariel

2010-10-15, 08:01 AM

Except that he wasn't. He contributed to the circumstances in which it occurred, nothing more. By any logic in which Belkar can be said to have "caused" Roy's death, you can make a much better case for the cause of his death being Lord Shojo - after all, it was his decision to bring the Order to Azure City and enlist them in the fight over the Gates that caused Roy to be present for Xykon's attack, which was a much more important factor in his death than Belkar giving him that ring. Lacking that, he might well have gone his whole life without knowing Xykon had been restored from his defeat at Dorukon's gate, which would make it pretty impossible for him to get killed by him.

That kind of roundabout logic for assigning a "cause" to Roy's death is so unsatisfying precisely because it's so ridiculous and illogical that you can use to make arguments like that.

The fact is that the cause of Roy's death was that he tried to fight Xykon 1-on-1. You can say Roy caused it because of that decision or because of his decision not to back down when Xykon gave him the chance, and you can say Xykon caused it by actually doing the deed. All of those would be correct. But claiming Belkar was a cause of Roy's death is just plain wrong, unless you're willing to accept ridiculous logic which also assigns pretty much anyone who contributed to any minor facet of the circumstances under which Roy died as a "cause" of that death, which would include Shojo, Miko, Nale, and who knows how many others.

Zevox

i don't know why i'm even answering again, but it's the WHOLE point of the prediction things...

so, simply:

if the Oracle allows prophecies to be fullfilled in an indirect and convoluted way (e.g. Belkar giving Roy the ring), THEN Belkar may also be causing the death of V (even if in a veeery indirect way)

And stop saying "the oracle was lying and just trying to stay alive", because he could have simply said: Belkar, you will fullfill your prophecy tomorrow!
belkar leaves happy, everyone is ok.

Kish

2010-10-15, 08:35 AM

And stop saying "the oracle was lying and just trying to stay alive", because he could have simply said: Belkar, you will fullfill your prophecy tomorrow!
belkar leaves happy, everyone is ok.
I would venture that far more likely is:

"Belkar, you will fullfill your prophecy tomorrow!"
Belkar stabs the Oracle anyway, which was inevitable from the moment Belkar returned to the Sunken Valley without Roy there to restrain him.

That said, I don't think the Oracle was seriously trying to stay alive--he knew it wouldn't work. I think he was trying to annoy Belkar. You cannot (or rather, you manifestly can but it doesn't work) ignore the fact that the Oracle explicitly said he wasn't buying ideas like "you killed Roy by giving him the ring" himself.

Zevox

2010-10-15, 11:47 AM

i don't know why i'm even answering again, but it's the WHOLE point of the prediction things...

so, simply:

if the Oracle allows prophecies to be fullfilled in an indirect and convoluted way (e.g. Belkar giving Roy the ring), THEN Belkar may also be causing the death of V (even if in a veeery indirect way)
But he plainly does not, since Belkar's prophecy was not fulfilled in that way, by the words of both the Oracle and the Giant.

And stop saying "the oracle was lying and just trying to stay alive", because he could have simply said: Belkar, you will fullfill your prophecy tomorrow!
belkar leaves happy, everyone is ok.
No he couldn't have, because Belkar's prophecy was going to be fulfilled by him killing the Oracle there. The Oracle knew that. Thus he knew that any attempt of his to stop it would fail, whether that be trying to convince Belkar that his prophecy was already fulfilled or trying to convince him it would be yet. He tried anyway because, as he said, "worth a shot" - he doesn't want to die, so may as well make an effort to avoid it, however futile.

Really, your ability to ignore the Oracle's own words on this matter is staggering.

Zevox

2-HeadedGiraffe

2010-10-15, 04:45 PM

By any logic in which Belkar can be said to have "caused" Roy's death, you can make a much better case for the cause of his death being Lord Shojo

I can agree with this point. If we accept Belkar as a cause, we also have to accept many other individuals and circumstances as cause. I don't deny that. This is why I'll say that Belkar was a cause, rather then the cause.

If Belkar hadn't stabbed the Oracle, Roy's death would have fulfilled the prophecy. It would have been "indirect and convoluted" (to quote Gandariel), but it would have worked. Fortunately, we got the much better fulfillment.

Zevox

2010-10-15, 11:18 PM

I can agree with this point. If we accept Belkar as a cause, we also have to accept many other individuals and circumstances as cause. I don't deny that. This is why I'll say that Belkar was a cause, rather then the cause.
Except that, as I noted last time I responded to you, it was not even "a" cause. Belkar's action contributed only to the specific circumstances under which his death occurred. It was not in any way a relevant, important factor in it, but rather completely incidental. The fact that Roy confronted Xykon specifically while on that zombie Dragon was not important, and that was the only effect Belkar's action caused.

If Belkar hadn't stabbed the Oracle, Roy's death would have fulfilled the prophecy.
Not, it would not have.

Zevox

Gandariel

2010-10-16, 06:41 AM

Not, it would not have.

Zevox

that's not actually what we call a "constructive answer"...

what we're trying to tell you is that Belkar DID contribute to the creation of the circumstances that led to Roy's Death.

In other words:
Roy was killed by the fall from the dragon.
what were the causes of that?
- Xykon's Meteor Swarm
- the conformation of the Southern Lands
- the thing with Celia's Amulet
- the fact that he was very high at the moment.
- [...]
let's analize all these causes, particularly the last one.
why was he so high?
- because he wanted to reach Xykon
- because he didn't judge well enough wether he could do it or no
- [...]
- BECAUSE BELKAR GAVE HIM THE RING, ENABLING HIM TO GET TO THE DRAGON.

is there something you disagree with here?

137beth

2010-10-16, 06:51 AM

that's not actually what we call a "constructive answer"...

It is completely constructive. In fact, you could use the same logic to say that
1. Shojo caused Roy's death
2. The guy who made the bet with Belkar caused Roy's death
3. Belkar caused Miko's death (he affected the lead to Miko's death)
4. In fact, Belkar caused the death of everyone who died in AC.

You have also completely failed to explain The Giant's quote, which specifically says that Belkar did NOT cause the death of Roy.

Zevox

2010-10-16, 09:46 AM

that's not actually what we call a "constructive answer"...
That's because you ignored the entire rest of my post, which explained that line.

what we're trying to tell you is that Belkar DID contribute to the creation of the circumstances that led to Roy's Death.
And only the specific circumstances. Specific circumstances which were not actually relevant to real cause of Roy's death.

In other words:
Roy was killed by the fall from the dragon.
what were the causes of that?
[snip]
- the fact that he was very high at the moment.
- [...]
let's analize all these causes, particularly the last one.
why was he so high?
[snip]
is there something you disagree with here?
Yes - with your contention that "the fact that he was very high at the moment" mattered at all. Yes, that is why he was killed specifically by the fall, but that was irrelevant. Had he not been, Xykon would simply have killed him more directly. It was his decision to confront Xykon one-on-one and not back down that killed him - along with, of course, Xykon's decision to kill him. The circumstances beyond those do not matter, as in those circumstances Roy was going to die regardless of all else. This makes Belkar's actions completely incidental to Roy's death, which makes asserting that they are "a cause" of that death ridiculous.

Zevox

Shale

2010-10-16, 09:51 AM

I like how nobody's actually reading the comic in question.

"If Roy had found a way to duel Xykon on solid ground, he probably would've died anyway."

"If" and "probably" doesn't quite translate to "Roy definitely would have fought Xykon no matter what, and he definitely would have died as a result."

(I know I've pointed this out before, but it annoys me when people debate the facts that exist in their head instead of what's actually there.)

Zevox

2010-10-16, 10:57 AM

"If" and "probably" doesn't quite translate to "Roy definitely would have fought Xykon no matter what, and he definitely would have died as a result."
The "if" and "probably" are there because it didn't actually happen that way, and the Oracle can only see events that actually happen. As it is, given what we know about Xykon's power vs Roy's, there's no chance Roy would survive once Xykon decides to just kill him, and given Roy's determination to confront and destroy Xykon, that would surely happen just as it did in the actual events.

Zevox

Shale

2010-10-16, 11:04 AM

The order was pretty determined to confront and destroy Xykon, and how'd that work out for them, vis-a-vis getting in the same room?

137beth

2010-10-16, 04:39 PM

I like how nobody's actually reading the comic in question.

I like how people are mindlessly repeating themselves without actually reading responses written by anyone other than themselves.

(I know I've pointed this out before, but it annoys me when people debate the facts that exist in their head instead of what's actually there.)
I know I've pointed this out before, but The Giant said that Belkar did NOT kill Roy, and you have managed to ignore it entirely.

@Zevox:
Actually, I don't see much reason for us to continue this discussion. Rich Burlew already settled it, and the only people who continue to say "belkar killed roy" will continue to do so no matter what, without even considering responding to our arguments.

Shale

2010-10-16, 09:50 PM

I like how people are mindlessly repeating themselves without actually reading responses written by anyone other than themselves.

Wow, and here I thought I WAS reading responses that took it as gospel truth that Roy was fated to die in combat with Xykon during the battle of Azure City no matter what. I must be halluci-

circumstances beyond those do not matter, as in those circumstances Roy was going to die regardless of all else. This makes Belkar's actions completely incidental to Roy's death, which makes asserting that they are "a cause" of that death ridiculous.

Oh, well mayb--

Belkar had virtually no effect on the outcome.

Hm.

Also, of course he didn't "kill" Roy. You might as well say that if I give my friend a ride to the subway and then he gets hit by a train, I killed him - even if he might have lived if he'd walked there, arrived later and not been near the tracks at the exact moment that somebody ran by without looking where they were going. But it still contributed to his death.

To say Belkar had no effect on whether or not Roy died, you have to assume that the Order would have been able to reach and engage Xykon once he started his attack on the castle (and not during the ghost-martyrs' stand in the throne room, for that matter, because that matchup is nowhere near a fait accompli). Last I checked they already tried that and it didn't work too well. Would things be different with Roy alive instead of splatted? Sure. But to guarantee it would happen? Laughable.

137beth

2010-10-17, 09:37 AM

Also, of course he didn't "kill" Roy. You might as well say that if I give my friend a ride to the subway and then he gets hit by a train, I killed him - even if he might have lived if he'd walked there, arrived later and not been near the tracks at the exact moment that somebody ran by without looking where they were going. But it still contributed to his death.

This shows that you are, in fact, thinking, which is more than can be said about some people in this thread. Anyways, Belkar contributed to causing the circumstances that caused Roy to engage Xykon. The question he asked the oracle was not "will I get to contribute part of the cause of any of the following...", it was, "will I get to cause..."
This could be interpreted as "I must be the primary cause of Roy/other's death". Though he did contribute to the specific circumstance in which Roy died, he was not in any way the primary cause.
As for whether or not he would die if he fought Xykon on the ground (outside the throneroom), Xykon is an epic level sorcerer, nowhere near the range of even the entire OOTS. Now, if they were in the throneroom, that would be a totally different story. The OOTS could have stopped Miko from destroying the gate long enough for Xykon and RC to die.

Now, as you seem to be quite a sensible person, would you care to explain the Giant's statement that Roy's death was NOT a fulfillment of the oracle's prophecy? Or the fact that the oracle ended with "yea, I wasn't really buying those stories either"?

Interestingly enough, you could also say using your logic that Belkar contributed to saving Varsuvius' life, as Roy being on the dragon enabled him to let the zombie's head fall on the death knight.

Shale

2010-10-17, 12:33 PM

Kish

2010-10-17, 02:18 PM

Regardless of exactly how he phrased it, Belkar pretty clearly asked the Oracle his question because he wanted to kill Roy, Miko, Windstriker, Vaarsuvius or the Oracle himself. Any "fulfillment" of the prophecy that didn't feature murder by psychotic knife-wielding halfling would go directly against the spirit of the question, and thus fall into the old "convoluted and unsatisfying prophecy" cliche that the Giant was poking fun at - and which, apparently, the Oracle doesn't buy into either. After all, his prophecies have all come true in a pretty straightforward, if mostly unhelpful, fashion.

TLDR: Just because Belkar helped cause Roy's death doesn't mean that counts as a fulfillment of the prophecy, because it's clearly not the question Belkar was asking, and the Oracle knew that when he answered.
While I agree that the one and only fulfillment of the prophecy was Belkar stabbing the Oracle, I can't sign off on this argument. Vaarsuvius clearly meant "How will I become omnipotent?" The answer s/he got addressed the question s/he had asked, not the question s/he really wanted the Oracle to answer.

Shale

2010-10-17, 04:05 PM

Omnipotent? I just read it as attaining the highest arcane power possible, and triple epic is, if not there, then close enough for government work. V certainly never complained that the power wasn't as ultimate as it should have been, only that s/he didn't have the wisdom to use it properly.

Kish

2010-10-17, 04:14 PM

Y'want to explain how "in his throne room" answered the spirit of Roy's first question then? :smalltongue:

Shale

2010-10-17, 04:20 PM

Apparently being hung out his window by his ankles drastically altered the Oracle's outlook on questions and answers. Hell, look at how hard he tried to not answer the specific wording of Roy's question the second time around, because that wouldn't be as helpful.

PopcornMage

2010-10-17, 04:39 PM

It's possible the Oracle shades the answers depending on what outcome he wants. Maybe he gave a flippant non-answer to Roy because he was afraid of what would happen because of it.

137beth

2010-10-17, 05:16 PM

Regardless of exactly how he phrased it, Belkar pretty clearly asked the Oracle his question because he wanted to kill Roy, Miko, Windstriker, Vaarsuvius or the Oracle himself. Any "fulfillment" of the prophecy that didn't feature murder by psychotic knife-wielding halfling would go directly against the spirit of the question, and thus fall into the old "convoluted and unsatisfying prophecy" cliche that the Giant was poking fun at - and which, apparently, the Oracle doesn't buy into either. After all, his prophecies have all come true in a pretty straightforward, if mostly unhelpful, fashion.

TLDR: Just because Belkar helped cause Roy's death doesn't mean that counts as a fulfillment of the prophecy, because it's clearly not the question Belkar was asking, and the Oracle knew that when he answered.

Yes. Glad we agree.

Kish: The oracle doesn't like humans. Of course "in his throneroom" answered the question, just not what Roy wanted:smallsmile:

About Roy's most recent question about gates: I'd expect that would only be because the oracle doesn't want Xykon to rule the universe. He's not interested in helping Varsuvius attain more power, but he doesn't want to be ruled by a HUMAN lich sorcerer.

John Cribati

2010-10-17, 05:20 PM

Alright, hear me out here. Let's say (as The Giant himself said) that the Belkar's prophecy was about him killing the oracle. Fine. That doesn't change the fact that Belkar made a contribution, however small, to the circumstances that caused Roy's death.

"But the oracle said that Roy would have died anyway"

If he had Xykon had fought on solid ground, probably. But that is something that could have happened, not something that did. So it is irrelevant.

Point is, in the canon timeline, Roy died because he was on a dragon that exploded; the other occupant of the dragon, who caused the explosion, flew away. If Roy did not get on the dragon, he wouldn't have fallen off. If Belkar did not give Roy the ring, Roy could not have gotten on. That's pretty much all there is to it.

Kondziu

2010-10-17, 05:54 PM

Point is
But point to what? I mean - so what that "Belkar made a contribution, however small, to the circumstances that caused Roy's death"? What's the point of this point? Roy wouldn't be there if his mother didn't give him birth.

By the logic of some, that would mean she caused Roy's death.
Just because it's hard to pinpoint what's wrong with that logic doesn't mean it's true.

Roy died because he was a dragon that exploded

That.

John Cribati

2010-10-17, 06:01 PM

But point to what? I mean - so what that "Belkar made a contribution, however small, to the circumstances that caused Roy's death"? What's the point of this point?

That Belkar was a contributing factor in Roy's death? Y'know, what everyone is currently arguing about?

By the logic of some, that would mean she caused Roy's death.
Just because it's hard to pinpoint what's wrong with that logic doesn't mean it's true.

[buggering around]Well he couldn't have died if he never was alive to begin with... [/buggering around]

That.

Oh, dear... What one missing word can do.

GreatWyrmGold

2010-10-17, 06:06 PM

However it would still be a nice touch if V dies within the comic as a result of something tied to Belkar.

Especially because just before the Oracle was turned into a temporary dagger-holder, he said, "And as for the elf..."

Kondziu

2010-10-17, 06:07 PM

That Belkar was a contributing factor in Roy's death? Y'know, what everyone is currently arguing about?
I admit that I did not read the whole thread, but I got the impression that it was "contributing factor = cause" that was being argued about.

Oh, dear... What one missing word can do.
Yeah :smallwink:

PopcornMage

2010-10-17, 06:08 PM

By the logic of some, that would mean she caused Roy's death.
Just because it's hard to pinpoint what's wrong with that logic doesn't mean it's true.

There's actually some quote where a person is talking about how motherhood always results in another death, and so it's really not that joyful.

Anonymous Man

2010-10-17, 07:11 PM

I was too lazy to read through this whole thread, so please forgive me if someone has said this already.

This is a world where resurrection is possible, where a main character has already died and been resurrected. The most probably way for this to happen is for V to be resurrected. Obvious.

Gandariel

2010-10-18, 10:12 AM

But point to what? I mean - so what that "Belkar made a contribution, however small, to the circumstances that caused Roy's death"? What's the point of this point?

The point of this point is, if we accept the fact that Belkar made a contribution, however small, to the circumstances that caused Roy's death, Belkar Will make (or has already made) a contribution, however small, to the circumstances that will cause V's death!

which is the friggin'point of the entire thread