Who Wants Belkar to Die?

[Gd8908]

I, personally, don't want Belkar to die, which I will explain in three succinct reasons:-
1. He's funny
2. It would disrupt the order of the strip
3. He's funny
What I mean when I say the order of the strip is that, essentially, the whole Order of the Stick gravitates around one word: DYSFUNCTIONAL. In the Order: Roy is sarcastic and dismissive; Haley is a greedy liar; Elan has the IQ score of a spoon; V is a know-it-all with mild temper issues; Durkon has a bit of a closed mind to other religions; and Belkar is an obnoxious evil jerk. Hell, even the only serious member of Team Evil is Redcloak. Sure, some have had character growth (or at least faked it) but their basic personalities stay the same. And this dysfunctional behaviour is what drives the strip's humor, drama, and even the plot. So, just taking one psychotic halfling out of this delicate balance will damage the quality, and might destroy the whole thing altogether.
(And I did mention he's funny, right?)

[mucat]

Rich deserves more confidence than that.

If/when Belkar dies, it will be in a way that makes the story better. We might look at the strip right now and say "it wouldn't work without Belkar." But if history is any guide, we'll look back eventually and say "it wouldn't have worked without Belkar's death."

[Welf]

I wouldn't want him to die before the finale of the comic (which now should be closer than the beginning, btw). Then it's okay.

And even if he dies earlier, I believe Rich would find a suitable way of replacing him.

[Shpadoinkle]

I want him to die so people will stop making threads like this.

[Dark Faun]

Just a note: not everyone finds Belkar funny.

[suszterpatt]

I've read a theory somewhere about Belkar hanging out with the IFCC, possibly involving hilarious genocidal underworld shenanigans and an eventual reunion with V when the IFCC come to collect their debt.

I'm quite fond of the idea, since it would let Belkar to continue to be a member of the comic after fulfilling his prophecy (hell, dying didn't stop Roy from starring in the comic between his death and resurrection).

[Lord Thurlvin]

What I mean when I say the order of the strip is that, essentially, the whole Order of the Stick gravitates around one word: DYSFUNCTIONAL. In the Order: Roy is sarcastic and dismissive; Haley is a greedy liar; Elan has the IQ score of a spoon; V is a know-it-all with mild temper issues; Durkon has a bit of a closed mind to other religions; and Belkar is an obnoxious evil jerk. Hell, even the only serious member of Team Evil is Redcloak. Sure, some have had character growth (or at least faked it) but their basic personalities stay the same. And this dysfunctional behaviour is what drives the strip's humor, drama, and even the plot. So, just taking one psychotic halfling out of this delicate balance will damage the quality, and might destroy the whole thing altogether.
(And I did mention he's funny, right?)

I don't believe the loss of Belkar (if he does indeed die before the finale) will have as extreme of an effect as you seem to think. I am confident that Rich Burlew will make it work, and I would like to point out that major characters (though not PCs) have died before. None of those deaths "destroyed" the story.
On whether or not I want Belkar to die, I have this to say:
While I still find his antics funny, he is a murderous little jerk. Dysfunction or no dysfunction, his behavior occasionally makes me wonder why the rest of the Order still associates with him. Would you want someone on your side who seriously contemplated murdering you for your possessions or betraying you? I'm neither a hater or a fan of Belkar. His death will be a consequence of his behavior.

[RebelRogue]

I love Belkar! I find him hilarious, and I'm pretty sure the Giant does too - otherwise he wouldn't have made all those jokes using the psychopathic halfling as a catalyst. However, Rich has spent a lot of effort setting up Belkar's death, clarifying that it is really going to happen, permanently! So I am certain it must be crucial to the plot in a major way! I trust Rich, that it will all somehow make sense and awesome to boot, even if it means no Belkar!

[Lhurgyof]

When/where did he say Belkar would die? o.o

[BridgeCity]

I'd like him to die. His jokes and generl humour were sort of funny a long time ago, but now they are predictable and bland.

I have no problem with him being the evil member of the party, this isn't an 'anti Belkar because of his actions' stance. I just find that his character concept is tired and has stopped being funny.

[TigerHunter]

When/where did he say Belkar would die? o.o
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0572.html

[Querzis]

I want Belkar to die. Why? Because it makes absolutely no sense to let him live. Back when the strip started the rest of the Order didnt know Belkar was evil. When the strip advanced they realized he was evil but thought they could control him. But when Roy died, it became obvious they coudnt. The only reason Roy didnt kill Belkar when he resurected is because Belkar got only a few weeks to live now anyway.

As Lord Thurlvin said, if it wasnt for the fact that Belkar is faking character development right now and will die soon enough anyway, I would hate the rest of the Order just for letting that little psychopath live. They are the good guys, Belkar assassinate random gnomes just because he think he can get away with it. Belkar is worse then most creatures the order killed without feeling guilty about it. Belkar is worse then that entire tribe of ogre they destroyed. He deserve to die and the idea that the rest of the Order would let the little bastard live just make me cringe. Thats not being dysfonctional, thats just going against everything your alignement means, good guys cant freaking let a guy like Belkar alive.

Belkar would make a great villain. He is badass and I do find him funny sometimes. But as a protagonist? I absolutely hate the little freak. Hes making the rest of the Order look bad just by being alive.

[mucat]

Belkar would make a great villain. He is badass and I do find him funny sometimes. But as a protagonist? I absolutely hate the little freak. Hes making the rest of the Order look bad just by being alive.

This is my biggest problem with Belkar. I do think he's funny, but his presence makes the rest of the Order look like moral lightweights because they never put a stop to him. It's like the D&D player who insists that he should be able to play an overtly evil character in a non-evil party because "no one should be able to restrict the kind of character I play." Problem is, he's then restricting everyone else to one of two types of characters: idiots who don't notice his crimes, or hypocritical cowards who notice but don't do anything about it.

Haley earned the Order some slack by (belatedly) booting Belkar from the party ofter the Oracle, even if she then forgot she'd done it. And Belkar's fake character development helps, because he's stopped blatantly murdering people in front of the rest of the team. But the Order would be much more convincing as heroes without Belkar.

[Dark Faun]

That's one of the main reasons I want Belkar to leave the comic for good. I just can't take the rest of the party seriously as heroes when they let Belkar get away with absolutely everything he does. It doesn't help that Roy chose to protect Belkar from Miko, or that the deva agreed with Roy that slitting Belkar's throat while he slept was a bad thing to do.

That Belkar was hired to track Xykon and Roy kept him around when he proved incapable to track in addition to being remorselessly evil was particularly egregious.

For a more personal reason I want him gone, Miko and Vaarsuvius are my favorite characters. They suffered the consequences of their behavior; Miko was humiliated and her whole world crumbled before her while Vaarsuvius almost lost his mind, probably lost his soul and most certainly lost his family. Meanwhile Belkar was sick for a few weeks.

[Mystic Muse]

I want him to die so people will stop making threads like this.

Agreed.

We all have differences of opinion when it comes to Belkar. Some people think he's funny, others don't.

Regardless of what Rich is going to do, I know he's going to pull it off well and I'm going to keep reading.

[BridgeCity]

This is my biggest problem with Belkar . . .


That's one of the main reasons I want Belkar to leave the comic for good . . .

I completely agree with all the point made in those two posts.

Although Mucat, even Belkar's fake development shouldn't be helping, as Roy has outright stated that he doesn't believe it, and think's Belkar is just up to something.

So yeah, they are just bad people/bad heroes for keeping him around.

[mucat]

That's one of the main reasons I want Belkar to leave the comic for good. I just can't take the rest of the party seriously as heroes when they let Belkar get away with absolutely everything he does. It doesn't help that Roy chose to protect Belkar from Miko, or that the deva agreed with Roy that slitting Belkar's throat while he slept was a bad thing to do.

You know, Roy protecting Belkar from Miko is one of the few really dissonant notes in Rich's work, for me. Not because of what actually happened -- hell, Roy was justified in stopping an extrajudicial execution and turning Belkar over for trial -- but because of the whole "he's a member of my team and you're not" bit.

Rich seemed to be portraying Roy's team loyalty as a sign that Roy had grown up and become worthy of his role as leader of the Order, after earlier failures like abandoning Elan. And a large fraction of the Playground, a community which I respect and admire, seemed to agree.

This disturbed the hell out of me.

In real life, it's not unusual at all for someone to minimize or cover up a crime, because the person who committed it is part of the same sports team / fraternity / military or police unit / professional association / and so on ad nauseam. This is not a sign of maturity, or a courageous act of loyalty. It's a mark that the justifier is so childishly self-involved that they resolve disputes by asking "who is closer to me?" rather than "who is right?"

Saying "you can't kill this man without a trial" is an admirably principled stand for a Lawful Good character. Saying "I'll side with him over you because he's one of my own" is contemptible.

[BridgeCity]

You know, Roy protecting Belkar from Miko is one of the few really dissonant notes in Rich's work, for me. Not because of what actually happened -- hell, Roy was justified in stopping an extrajudicial execution and turning Belkar over for trial -- but because of the whole "he's a member of my team and you're not" bit.

Rich seemed to be portraying Roy's team loyalty as a sign that Roy had grown up and become worthy of his role as leader of the Order, after earlier failures like abandoning Elan. And a large fraction of the Playground, a community which I respect and admire, seemed to agree.

This disturbed the hell out of me.

In real life, it's not unusual at all for someone to minimize or cover up a crime, because the person who committed it is part of the same sports team / fraternity / military or police unit / professional association / and so on ad nauseam. This is not a sign of maturity, or a courageous act of loyalty. It's a mark that the justifier is so childishly self-involved that they resolve disputes by asking "who is closer to me?" rather than "who is right?"

Saying "you can't kill this man without a trial" is an admirably principled stand for a Lawful Good character. Saying "I'll side with him over you because he's one of my own" is contemptible.

That's a really good point. I've always thought less of Roy for doing that, but you word it nicely.

Though I admit to sometimes finding the 'side with my crew over you anyday' stance to be good, the person stating this is never siding with something as vile as Belkar.

[Dark Faun]

I agree. Roy also seemed hellbent on Belkar suffering the littlest punishment when he argued legal semantics with Hinjo.

I lost all respect for Roy when he protected Belkar for the reasons you outlined (while the deva's reluctance to agree his execution's necessary made me lose any hope for the justice system of Rich Burlew's world).

Not that I respect the other party members much. All those who call themselves Good either turn a blind eye to or protect Belkar. Haley, who considers herself Goodish at best, is the only one who took action, whereas Vaarsuvius doesn't call himself Good. Or anything else for that matter, he's out for himself, his family and his friends; he probably doesn't even care about the alignment system to begin with. But even then I hate his inaction towards Belkar, however less hypocritical his is.

In short, Belkar makes his teammates lesser heroes and I can't wait to see him gone. Except that I'm very pessimistic and I expect the comic to follow his feats in the underworld after he dies, where he'll somehow end up saving Vaarsuvius's soul. The very possibility makes my skin crawl.


Saying "you can't kill this man without a trial" is an admirably principled stand for a Lawful Good character. Saying "I'll side with him over you because he's one of my own" is contemptible.
"I'll side with him over you because he's one of my own and I think you're a bitch" to be more specific.

[KillItWithFire]

At this point I'm willing to see Roy's protection of Belkar as (somewhat misplaced) loyalty. He did not know that he was hiring a psychopathic killer who could not track initially but he IS part of the team now and it would feel wrong A. to make him someone else's problem or B. to outright murder him. Belkar has already proven himself to be the groups second-most powerful martial fighter, if not the first. Keep in mind that the order are all high level characters, they are NOT easily replaceable, any of them. (Even Elan) Get rid of the Belkster and you cripple the teams martial fire power. If for no other reason, keep his skill set at least until you finish the quest.

[Edhelras]

I think Belkar is comedy gold. The comic would simply not be that funny without him. So for that reason, I don't look forward to the day he dies.
BTW, even though he's supposed to die, who says he cannot be resurrected? I have a hard time believing that his companions wouldn't ressurrect him, despite their loathing.

One a side note, I just re-read the last strips. In this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0736.html), the gladiator instructor mentions that one of the new recruits will defend the weaker gladiator who is bereft of his bread, "possibly giving him your own bread". Then in this strip, Roy is in fact the one who gives his own bread to one of the weaker gladiators (the one later known as Geoff).
Now the implication is that the one giving his bread is also the one who will kill the bread thief. So maybe actually Roy will be the one killing Belkar, in the arena?

[Antacid]

I think it's highly unlikely that Belkar dying will mean him leaving the comic. What I'm expecting is for Rich to use the opportunity like he did with Roy, to give his whacky version of the D&D afterlife, but for Evil characters. Probably leading up to some kind of involvement with the fiends' plotline.

Remember, we have word of God that Belkar isn't just evil, his evil is measured in kilonazis, and the archfiends have been watching him along with the rest of the OotS. The idea of him making enough of an impression in the Abyss to become involved with that plotline isn't much of a stretch.

[LordShotGun]

Who says hes gonna be gone when he dies? Undead any one? No pulse, no breathing, but still moving around.

[Antacid]

Who says hes gonna be gone when he dies? Undead any one? No pulse, no breathing, but still moving around.He wouldn't really be Belkar then, though.

[Evil DM Mark3]

When it comes to character death, I always hold up the death of Spock as how to do it right. People said that you could never kill off Spock, that it would be a betrayal etc, etc. Yet, because the death is in keeping with the character and was in the right place no one questioned it. If Rich can do the same for Belkar then no one will be able to complain.

Belkar is going to die. It WILL happen. The only question now is "will it be done well?"

[Grogmir]

:belkar: You'll miss me when i'm gone.

Belkar rules - why? - 'Cause some of us have to be funny for a living you know!' And he's the funniest thing in this comic. Although V post transformation is running close.

[abc123]

Who says hes gonna be gone when he dies? Undead any one? No pulse, no breathing, but still moving around.

Belkar has been dead in side for years his black hart wouldn't recognize death if it stabbed him in the face

[Killer Angel]

Belkar is going to die. It WILL happen. The only question now is "will it be done well?"

Short answer: yes

Long answer: yes, we can trust Rich on this thing.

[Souhiro]

Belkar has a part of the story. He has the violent temper, and is the focus... the source or the receiver of many jokes.

Who will do his jokes when he won't be there? Durkon? most of his jokes are just running gags. Haley? Since the Pictogram thing, she's less a "Child of Greed" and more a "Elan's girlfriend" (She took A Level in Badass since Roy's death, but don't make great jokes)

Roy is a serious character, and Vaarsuvius only can be funny in certain situations. So, only Elan would be a comic mediumly-effective character (Unless his PrC has some GameBreaker habilities on any level)

So YEAH: I find that without Belkar, many situations that The Belkster would carry, simply won't happen.

[Cizak]

Haley is a greedy liar...

Yeah, she never tells anyone anything (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0670.html), and never give random guards 500 gp. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0740.html)


Durkon has a bit of a closed mind to other religions

Yup, doesn't respect other religions at all. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html)

[Maryring]

I do indeed.

[Reverent-One]

"I'll side with him over you because he's one of my own and I think you're a bitch" to be more specific.

Not really. That's more V's attitude on the matter.

[HalfTangible]

I think it's highly unlikely that Belkar dying will mean him leaving the comic. What I'm expecting is for Rich to use the opportunity like he did with Roy, to give his whacky version of the D&D afterlife, but for Evil characters. Probably leading up to some kind of involvement with the fiends' plotline.

Remember, we have word of God that Belkar isn't just evil, his evil is measured in kilonazis, and the archfiends have been watching him along with the rest of the OotS. The idea of him making enough of an impression in the Abyss to become involved with that plotline isn't much of a stretch.

Maybe he takes over hell. That'd be funny and/or weird, depending on how it was done


Not really. That's more V's attitude on the matter.

V's attitude is just 'you're a bitch and i'm gonna kick your ass so hard that even physics will be surprised at how much i break it!'

No loyalty is involved with him =P

[Reverent-One]

V's attitude is just 'you're a bitch and i'm gonna kick your ass so hard that even physics will be surprised at how much i break it!'

No loyalty is involved with him =P

Eh, fair enough. In that case that statement just doesn't apply to anyone then.

[Mordaenor]

I do! I want to see that lousy low-life of a Halfling get exaclty what's coming him to him. I want to see him die in a horribly awful, painful, and above all un-glamorous way............. Then I want to see the look on Roy's face when Elan convinces him that they need to resurrect Belkar (natural 20 on a Charisma check, Roy can't argue the point) And you KNOW Elan will.

[Anterean]

Durkon has a bit of a closed mind to other religions

Slightly off topic, but what gives you that impression ?

[Mystic Muse]

I do! I want to see that lousy low-life of a Halfling get exaclty what's coming him to him. I want to see him die in a horribly awful, painful, and above all un-glamorous way............. Then I want to see the look on Roy's face when Elan convinces him that they need to resurrect Belkar (natural 20 on a Charisma check, Roy can't argue the point) And you KNOW Elan will.

Only works that way in 4th edition, not 3.5

And actually, Elan hates Belkar too.


Who says hes gonna be gone when he dies? Undead any one? No pulse, no breathing, but still moving around.
doesn't fit with "Not long for this world"

[Flame Gryphon]

I don't think Belkar should die. While he's not the only character that has good jokes, he does the best ones.

[Reverent-One]

Only works that way in 4th edition, not 3.5

Doesn't work in 4e like that either.

[Mystic Muse]

Doesn't work in 4e like that either.

Huh. My DM plays as if it does and he's usually a stickler for the rules.

[LOTRfan]

Slightly off topic, but what gives you that impression ?

:durkon: Why do I have tha nagging feelin' that with a few more ranks a' Knowledge (Religion), I'd be a lot more worried aboot all a' this? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0052.html)

I think that this is what Gd8908 meant. Still, I think this shows more that Durkon is not knowledgeable about religions than that he is close minded.

[Kish]

I do! I want to see that lousy low-life of a Halfling get exaclty what's coming him to him. I want to see him die in a horribly awful, painful, and above all un-glamorous way............. Then I want to see the look on Roy's face when Elan convinces him that they need to resurrect Belkar (natural 20 on a Charisma check, Roy can't argue the point) And you KNOW Elan will.
Oh, I don't know. It didn't work out so well the last time Elan tried to convince Roy to do something where Belkar was concerned.

What was it then, anyway? Oh, right. It was leave Belkar in Shojo's prison.

So, no. I grant neither "Elan could convince Roy to have Belkar resurrected" nor, "Elan would try to convince Roy to have Belkar resurrected, nor the implied "Belkar's death and resurrection would fulfill the prophecy."

[137beth]

I don't want Belkar to permanently leave the strip...
But I do want him to die so that the board stops getting cluttered with "how will Belkar die?" threads.
I suppose he could always be raised from the dead, possibly by an enemy of the OOTS.

[Anterean]

:durkon: Why do I have tha nagging feelin' that with a few more ranks a' Knowledge (Religion), I'd be a lot more worried aboot all a' this? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0052.html)

I think that this is what Gd8908 meant. Still, I think this shows more that Durkon is not knowledgeable about religions than that he is close minded.

And Loki is a god within the pantheon of Durkon's own religion

[LOTRfan]

And Loki is a god within the pantheon of Durkon's own religion

Which makes it even funnier. :smalltongue:

[Geddoe]

I want Belkar to die. I don't find him funny(anymore), and he deserves some epic comeuppance.

[Swordpriest]

For some reason, I find him hilarious in the earlier strips, but in this desert arc, he's just coming across as profoundly detestable without any humor. I'm not sure if I'm just Belkar-jaded or if he's genuinely unfunny, but I hope the little blighter bites it, because he's just obnoxious now, not funny.

[Cracklord]

I don't want him to die, I want him gone. If he has to die for that to happen, so be it, but regardless I want him out of the story.

But if he does die, I want it quick, over quicker, and no longer relevant in at least two strips, and from then on I want no more refference to him.

[cho_j]

And Loki is a god within the pantheon of Durkon's own religion

Ah, but the joke here is really that Thor and Loki often fight in Norse mythology (and in the comic– in fact, they seem to be more serious enemies in the comic than in the myths, where they sometimes hang out or fight for the same side). The way Loki gets portrayed in the strip, and CERTAINLY from the way his follower Hilgya is, I think he's probably either Chaotic Neutral or Chaotic Evil in the comic.

Thus, given that Durkon is a Lawful Good follower of Loki's enemy Thor, I would consider this less "being intolerant of other religions" and more "following his own."

The only other time I think we really see Durkon being touchy about religion is when Banjo is being taken seriously, but I think that as a deeply religious man, Durkon finds it hard to have his god put on the same level as a hand-puppet held by someone as dim as Elan. To me, this isn't intolerance either, but rather taking personal affront to something silly Elan is doing. We saw Vaarsuvius react the same way when Elan wanted to be a wizard— which makes sense, Durkon and V both take themselves and life very much more seriously than Elan does.

BUT when we see Durkon with another serious, religious character who practices a different but much more legitimate than Banjoism religion (Malack), he acts quite respectful and gets along great. I think any time Durkon seems intolerant of another religion, what he's really intolerant of is the specific follower he's encountering.

...Was that way too long for a post that's not even about the main topic of the thread? Heh, sorry, couldn't resist putting my two cents in.

[mastermind]

I've read a theory somewhere about Belkar
I'm quite fond of the idea, since it would let Belkar to continue to be a member of the comic after fulfilling his prophecy (hell, dying didn't stop Roy from starring in the comic between his death and resurrection).

If Belkar does die before the climax, I find it likely that he will end up accompanying the party like Roy did. I agree completely.

[Cracklord]

The Dnd Abyss would chew Belkar up and burn the remains. You have to work your way up, and he'd start on the lowest tier. Ammunition.


Who will do his jokes when he won't be there?

Joke. Singular. As his subconcious noted, he's a linier character, and his behavior can basicaly be summurised as a child with no emotional maturity desperate for attention. Far from being badass, he's a reflection of the RPG character who wants to make everything about him.
Fact of the matter is, he's not funny and never was. He's the Seth Rogan or Seth McFarlene of OoTS, {Scrubbed}.

[Lord Thurlvin]

Joke. Singular. As his subconcious noted, he's a linier character, and his behavior can basicaly be summurised as a child with no emotional maturity desperate for attention. Far from being badass, he's a reflection of the RPG character who wants to make everything about him.
Fact of the matter is, he's not funny and never was. He's the Seth Rogan or Seth McFarlene of OoTS, {Scrubbed the original, scrub the quote.}.

I'm not a Belkar fan, but calling Belkar fans people who "don't know what funny actually is" seems unfair. Humor is subjective.

[Swordpriest]

Fact of the matter is, he's not funny and never was. He's the Seth Rogan or Seth McFarlene of OoTS, {Scrubbed the original, scrub the quote.}.

Don't you think that's a trifle insulting, mayhaps? :smallsigh:

[Skaven]

I do want to see him die.


Belkar is worse then most creatures the order killed without feeling guilty about it.

This.

Honestly though at this point though, I dislike V more than him. And I consider V more evil, despite any outside influence, familycide was the most evil act committed in this comic.

[Evil DM Mark3]

Honestly though at this point though, I dislike V more than him. And I consider V more evil, despite any outside influence, familycide was the most evil act committed in this comic.True. However V has done one horrific act, Belkar churns out low grade malevolance every second of every day. For V an evil act was a choice. For Belkar evil acts are a way of life.

Not that V's spell was not evil, but he learning from it. Belkar's grand revelation was "Fake Growth."

[grimbold]

Just a note: not everyone finds Belkar funny.
everybody finds belkar funny
some just dont realize it yet

[Anterean]

Ah, but the joke here is really that Thor and Loki often fight in Norse mythology (and in the comic– in fact, they seem to be more serious enemies in the comic than in the myths, where they sometimes hang out or fight for the same side). The way Loki gets portrayed in the strip, and CERTAINLY from the way his follower Hilgya is, I think he's probably either Chaotic Neutral or Chaotic Evil in the comic.

I am well aware of this



Thus, given that Durkon is a Lawful Good follower of Loki's enemy Thor, I would consider this less "being intolerant of other religions" and more "following his own."

The only other time I think we really see Durkon being touchy about religion is when Banjo is being taken seriously, but I think that as a deeply religious man, Durkon finds it hard to have his god put on the same level as a hand-puppet held by someone as dim as Elan. To me, this isn't intolerance either, but rather taking personal affront to something silly Elan is doing. We saw Vaarsuvius react the same way when Elan wanted to be a wizard— which makes sense, Durkon and V both take themselves and life very much more seriously than Elan does.

BUT when we see Durkon with another serious, religious character who practices a different but much more legitimate than Banjoism religion (Malack), he acts quite respectful and gets along great. I think any time Durkon seems intolerant of another religion, what he's really intolerant of is the specific follower he's encountering.

...Was that way too long for a post that's not even about the main topic of the thread? Heh, sorry, couldn't resist putting my two cents in.

And I agree with everything single word of this, except the perhaps that it is too long.

[Crossfiyah]

How can this forum be simultaneously home to so many moral pedestals and individuals who think burning slaves is not an evil act?

Belkar is bad, but he's supposed to be. He's funny. Hating him as a character for that is stupid. And wanting him gone, and it having no impact on the story, is just bad storytelling. Wishing for it to happen makes you a bad fan.

[Mystic Muse]

Belkar is bad, but he's supposed to be.
Exactly.


He's funny. Hating him as a character for that is stupid. No, that just means you don't find his brand of humor funny. Funny is subjective.


wanting him gone, and it having no impact on the story, is just bad storytelling. Wishing for it to happen makes you a bad fan.

Hating a character, wishing them gone, and not wanting their death to have any significance hardly make you a bad fan. You have to go a lot farther than that to be a bad fan.

Personally, I don't care what Rich does with Belkar as long as he does it well. He hasn't disappointed me so far so I suspect that he will do it well.

[Dark Faun]

And wanting him gone, and it having no impact on the story, is just bad storytelling.
And a character who prevents the heroes to be seen as such when they're supposed to be seen as heroes is better storytelling, how exactly?

[Crossfiyah]

And a character who prevents the heroes to be seen as such when they're supposed to be seen as heroes is better storytelling, how exactly?

He's been a main character for nearly 800 strips. Removing him for no reason would completely invalidate his entire presence, and it would cast a negative shadow over the entirely of the plot, not to mention Rich's story-telling abilities.

I also can't stand this "Black and white" morality so many people here are stuck with, like all heroes have to behave a certain way, and all villains another. Is it just a side-effect of being stuck in 3.5? Because Rich, more than nearly any other author, has NEVER demonstrated that viewpoint. It's that ability to see the entirety of existence that has always put him head and shoulders over the majority of his contemporaries, not to mention the posters here.

[Kish]

How can this forum be simultaneously home to so many moral pedestals and individuals who think burning slaves is not an evil act?
Rich has not yet seen fit to give all the members of his forum guns and instruct them to shoot other forumites they disagree with, is how.

Belkar is funny, sometimes, especially when he's the butt of the joke, though less so than Roy, Haley, Durkon, or Elan. My ability to find him funny hinges on his death prophecy relieving me of worries that he'll turn out to be a disgusting Karma Houdini. (Conversely, I enjoy Vaarsuvius much less than I do Belkar now.) I am in no particular hurry for him to die, as long as it happens eventually and conclusively. I wouldn't mind if he died next strip either.

[Maximum Zersk]

-Ahem-

Now, mind you, I don't hate Belkar. I think he's an okay character, and can be funny at times.

But you know? I don't mind it if he dies. I'm not going to say that the comic could not go on without him, or that it wouldn't be funny anymore. See, the way that I think of it, Belkar, the Chaotic-Evil Halfling Ranger/Barbarian, is a character. Specifically Rich's character. If Rich says that Belkar is going to die some time in the comic, well then I have no problem with it as long as the death is suitably interesting to read. I don't really see the point of it being pointless, or of him being quickly replaced. If he was replaced, it would feel cheap. If it was pointless, well then why did he die? If he didn't die, well then that would contradict what Rich already said was going to happen to the character. Again, I see characters as products of the author. What the authors does with his characters is not my problem as long as long as what they do with their characters is entertaining or interesting. Other than that, whatever. Make your character die. Make them have a happy ending. Give them hell. As long as it's written well.

[Psyren]

<-----------

And I think it would be funnier if he doesn't end up in the Abyss. That would actually be worse punishment from his perspective.

[Gd8908]

I want him to die so people will stop making threads like this.
Hahaha! I like that. :smallamused:

[Lvl45DM!]

You know i wanted him gone for a while. You know what turned me around? The gay joke with Tarquin shortly following his philosophical rant about prison. The first was hilarious, and thats hard to do with gay jokes, and the second was both mildly amusing but also very true. Not Good, but true, having psychopaths in prison is part of why prison sucks. So yeah he turned me around from wanting him gone to just wanting him dead. Undead!Belkar or Afterlife!Belkar have potential as far as I'm concerned
He's still an evil psychopath who deserves death, but so do Tarquin and Xykon and ill be devastated when they leave the strip

[Gd8908]

Okay, I've reverted some of my previous statements. I should have more faith in the Giant. With all he's done before, I should at least have some hope that he can find some way to work it out. And sure, not everybody finds him funny, but I'm still sticking with my statement that it might damage the quality of the strip in the long-run.
EDIT: And, BTW, calling people who like Belkar people who "don't know what humor is" or just saying they are childish is totally wrong. Humor is completely in the eye of the beholder, so just saying if you find something stupid, it flat-out is, you're being hypocritical. (At least I apologized for thinking everybody finds the same things funny as me.)

[Kish]

(At least I apologized for thinking everybody finds the same things funny as me.)
...Really? I'm not finding you apologizing for that in this thread.

[Evil DM Mark3]

I want him to die so people will stop making threads like this.You do remember how long it took for the "Miko was wronged" threads to go away, right? Imagine that, but with a main character. You will not get rid of these threads so long as this comic continues to exist.

[cho_j]

You do remember how long it took for the "Miko was wronged" threads to go away, right? Imagine that, but with a main character. You will not get rid of these threads so long as this comic continues to exist.

Sadly, I fear this to be true. Amazing how a forum so full of excellent people can start ripping each other apart over alternate interpretations of a comic they all love. But it's kind of addictive... I mean, that's why I'm up at 2:14 a.m. replying to a post on a thread titled "Who Wants Belkar to Die?" amirite?

[Yendor]

Sadly, I fear this to be true. Amazing how a forum so full of excellent people can start ripping each other apart over alternate interpretations of a comic they all love. But it's kind of addictive... I mean, that's why I'm up at 2:14 a.m. replying to a post on a thread titled "Who Wants Belkar to Die?" amirite?

Well, we're not allowed to discuss politics or religion here. We've got to do something with all that excess anger. :smalltongue:

[ThePhantasm]

And a character who prevents the heroes to be seen as such when they're supposed to be seen as heroes is better storytelling, how exactly?

I've been reading your comments through this thread and have to disagree that Belkar's presence in the Order somehow makes everyone else in the order "lesser heroes." Belkar's death aside.

Roy's philosophy for keeping Belkar in the Order is to keep him pointed in the right direction. Belkar can be a tremendously powerful weapon. He's kicked evil butt plenty of times. The Order continually constrains Belkar and prevents him from committing evil acts. Repeatedly they protest his attempts to do evil and then prevent him from committing evil acts, much to his frustration. Exceptions are cases like the dead gnome and dead Oracle - but even then, such an act leads to Belkar getting temporarily kicked out of the Order. They don't just turn their backs on his crimes.

The fact is, keeping Belkar around as long as possible is useful simply because he does a lot of damage to the enemy. Since his death is imminent and Roy knows this, he is willing to suffer Belkar's presence even a little while longer for this very reason.

I can understand your dislike for Belkar's evil deeds (I think he is kinda funny... Xykon is kinda funny in his own evil way too. Doesn't mean I condone their actions, they are just characters I love to hate). But I don't think that the Order is any less heroic because of how they've handled his presence among them. They've a) kept him (mostly) from harming innocents and b) used him to deal a lot of damage to the ranks of more seriously dangerous villains.