Is Elan a child-killer?

[pendell]

Note I said killer , not murderer. There is a reason for that, which I will explain below.

Anyone remember the good goblin children (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0093.html)?

As far as I can tell, of all the goblins in Durkon's dungeon, there was only one survivor (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0149.html).

The reason those goblin children are dead is because Elan pushed the self-destruct rune.

So far as I can tell, there was no particular reason to press that rune (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0119.html). Elan pressed the rune for no other reason than dramatic potential.

THEREFORE, Elan sacrificed a number of innocent lives solely for the sake of dramatic potential.

FURTHER, unlike the charge of "weakening the fabric of the universe", Elan was fully aware that those children were within the dungeon. He should have known that they had no ready or obvious means of escape, yet took no steps to ensure their safety or, indeed, thought about them at all before blowing up the entire dungeon .


I must further note that Durkon was a good-aligned wizard, and that many of the rooms in the castle had been left alone by Xykon (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0071.html). Given the presence of the good-aligned Celia in this dungeon, it's possible that there were other good-aligned creatures in the dungeon. Elan most likely killed them all by pressing that rune. He was in the room when Celia gave that speech, should have known that, but went ahead and pushed the button anyway.

THEREFORE, I charge Elan with Criminally negligent manslaughter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_manslaughter#Involuntary_manslaughter) . It isn't murder because he didn't intend to kill those creatures -- he hasn't got a malicious bone in his body. But he still was negligent and reckless, and that negligence and recklessness resulted in the deaths of innocent children. So criminally negligent manslaughter (goblinslaughter, technically) applies.


OBJECTION: Those children were only faking it! At least one of them was really evil!

REBUTTAL: So ? killing evil children is not a good act (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0639.html). Per SOD that's the kind of justification the Sapphire Guard would use for THEIR actions . So it doesn't matter. They were children, alignment unimportant. Elan failed to consider the possible danger to their life and limb when he blew up the castle.

OBJECTION: By the power of plot, those kids all got away!
REBUTTAL: So we reduce the charge from manslaughter to Child endangerment and Reckless endangerment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reckless_endangerment). Even if the power of plot magically saves the kids, Elan still had a responsibility either to ensure their safety or to demonstrate the pressing need to destroy the dungeon despite the innocent deaths it would probably cause. He did neither. Thus in this one aspect he is worse than his father, who may be a murderer and a tyrant but we've never seen him kill a child.

THEREFORE, I conclude that Elan is a menace to any and all creatures who cross his path , who get between him and dramatic potential. Since he's not malicious, I do not recommend the death sentence or prison. I do , however, recommend his confinement in some institute for the criminally insane until he can demonstrate that he has some clue how his actions harm others.

Am I wrong?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[G-Man Graves]

So the Chaotic Moron did something chaotic and moronic with unforeseen yet possibly terrible consequences. Give me a second, I have the New York Times on the phone.

[HUMVEE Driver]

You make a very clear argument. I think you're right.

[Themrys]

Interesting thought. I guess you are right. Elan is a danger to others. If, for example, he hadn't been there when Captain Amun-Zora attacked Tarquin, Tarquin may be dead by now, which would make the country a better place, even if only slightly.
(One could argue that the PCs need Tarquin to tell them where Girard is, but there's the chance someone else would have told them, or maybe Tarquin is only bluffing)

Also, if Haley weren't more clever than Elan, Elan would either have caused Haley's and his death, or the unnecessary death or lots of guards.

Elan should not be allowed to go anywhere without a legal guardian.

[KillianHawkeye]

I propose we dismiss the case on account of the defendant being a fictional character from a webcomic. :smallbiggrin:

[Comet]

Elan's dramatic senses informed him that the children and everyone else were out of the dungeons, picking mushrooms in a nearby forest. As such it was okay for him and the rest of the heroes to make a dramatic, explosive escape out of the dungeon.

There were good people on the Death Star, too, but they all managed to escape on various shuttles and escape pods right before Luke fired his torpedoes. It all makes perfect sense.

Alternatively, Elan's mother was abused by his father a bit too much, which resulted in frustration and anger which she channeled into Elan by beating him senseless whenever she got drunk off her own merchandise in the tavern.
This unhappy childhood left Elan bitter. When he saw the goblin children, he saw that their lives we're generally speaking pretty okay. From that point onward he vowed to find a way to ruin their lives in secret without being attacked by the rest of the order. In comes the self-destruct button and Elan's plan finally became crystal.

[rakkoon]

Good point indeed.
Please won't somebody think of the children and hang him?
Your kid could be next

[druid91]

Interesting thought. I guess you are right. Elan is a danger to others. If, for example, he hadn't been there when Captain Amun-Zora attacked Tarquin, Tarquin may be dead by now, which would make the country a better place, even if only slightly.
(One could argue that the PCs need Tarquin to tell them where Girard is, but there's the chance someone else would have told them, or maybe Tarquin is only bluffing)

Also, if Haley weren't more clever than Elan, Elan would either have caused Haley's and his death, or the unnecessary death or lots of guards.

Elan should not be allowed to go anywhere without a legal guardian.

The solution is clear. Tarkin must join the order.

[Raging Gene Ray]

I always thought Elan just pressed the rune because Roy ordered him to earlier. Also, it was shiny and looked important and he didn't realize it was a self-destruct rune until AFTER he pressed it.

The only thing he did solely for dramatic potential was when he asked Roy to wait with him until the very last microsecond to escape the 'splosion.

[pendell]

I always thought Elan just pressed the rune because Roy ordered him to earlier. Also, it was shiny and looked important and he didn't realize it was a self-destruct rune until AFTER he pressed it.

The only thing he did solely for dramatic potential was when he asked Roy to wait with him until the very last microsecond to escape the 'splosion.

I don't think so (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0118.html).

1) Elan saw and recognized it as a self-destruct rune.
2) Roy didnt' see it.
3) Elan went and pressed it, presumably because it's just what you do when the villain dies. I mean, why ELSE would he press it?
4) When Roy was made aware of it, he was absolutely shocked -- as was the rest of the order, though for different reasons. NO ONE wanted Elan to press that rune except Elan himself. And Elan never did give a convincing explanation for why he did what he did. Dramatic instincts, perhaps.



Please won't somebody think of the children and hang him?
Your kid could be next


FOR THE SAKE OF THE CHILDREN!

Well, he's not really an *evil* guy, he just needs adult supervision. So I wouldn't hang him. We don't punish children for the horrible mistakes they make, but we don't let them wander around unattended, either.



Elan's dramatic senses informed him that the children and everyone else were out of the dungeons, picking mushrooms in a nearby forest. As such it was okay for him and the rest of the heroes to make a dramatic, explosive escape out of the dungeon.


We know that's at least partly not true. The flumphs (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0120.html) suffered injury from the explosion and had to beat feet -- tentacles? -- to get out in time. So I think a charge of "reckless endangerment" could be made with respect to the flumphs, at least.



Alternatively, Elan's mother was abused by his father a bit too much, which resulted in frustration and anger which she channeled into Elan by beating him senseless whenever she got drunk off her own merchandise in the tavern.
This unhappy childhood left Elan bitter. When he saw the goblin children, he saw that their lives we're generally speaking pretty okay. From that point onward he vowed to find a way to ruin their lives in secret without being attacked by the rest of the order. In comes the self-destruct button and Elan's plan finally became crystal.


Objection! Speculation. We have no evidence to substantiate these claims.

Besides ... Elan? Bitter? ELAN??? Since when? Where? Whut? Elan as broody anti-hero? Am I reading a different comic from everyone else?




I propose we dismiss the case on account of the defendant being a fictional character from a webcomic.


But if we did THAT, then we'd have to do real work and jobs and stuff. And who wants that? :smallbiggrin:

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[rakkoon]

Well, he's not really an *evil* guy, he just needs adult supervision. So I wouldn't hang him. We don't punish children for the horrible mistakes they make, but we don't let them wander around unattended, either.

Shackles it is then.

And an adult supervisor. Perhaps a halfling because they are so jolly.

[Leecros]

I must further note that Durkon was a good-aligned wizard

Wait...Durkon's a wizard?

[Ron Miel]

We know that's at least partly not true. The flumphs (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0120.html) suffered injury from the explosion and had to beat feet -- tentacles? -- to get out in time. So I think a charge of "reckless endangerment" could be made with respect to the flumphs, at least.


First of all, the flumphs weren't injured in the explosion. They had already been injured by falling dwarfs. They were injured again by falling humans. The explosion per se did not hurt them.

Second, they obviously left by a different door than the OOTS. We can reasonably presume that there were emergency exits all over the dungeon.

Third, we know that the medusa (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0087.html)in the bathroom queue survived (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0416.html).

It's therefore highly probable that the goblin children also escaped. And were freed from Xykon's influence too.

[Warren Dew]

OBJECTION: Those children were only faking it! At least one of them was really evil!

REBUTTAL: So ? killing evil children is not a good act (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0639.html). Per SOD that's the kind of justification the Sapphire Guard would use for THEIR actions . So it doesn't matter. They were children, alignment unimportant. Elan failed to consider the possible danger to their life and limb when he blew up the castle.
Killing evil children is no more evil than killing evil adults. That applies to both Elan and the Start of Darkness situation, which I agree are parallel.

[pendell]

First of all, the flumphs weren't injured in the explosion. They had already been injured by falling dwarfs. They were injured again by falling humans. The explosion per se did not hurt them.



The falling humans were debris from the explosion. So yes, they were injured by the explosion. :) It's like saying a person wasn't killed by a bomb but rather by the shards thrown about by the bomb's explosion.



It's therefore highly probable that the goblin children also escaped. And were freed from Xykon's influence too.

Given that big KA-BOOM, I think it's fair to assume anyone inside that dungeon is now dead unless proven otherwise.




Third, we know that the medusa (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0087.html)in the bathroom queue survived (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0416.html).


Erm ... we do? I looked at that second strip, and I see *A* medusa. How do you know it's the same one as the one DurUkon's mansion?

And yes, I got "Durkon" and "DorUkon" confused. Oops.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[zimmerwald1915]

Why does it matter that some of the goblins were children? The defendant should have the criminally negligent manslaughter of all the still-living goblins in the Dungeon of Dorukan added to his list of charges. They surrendered, after all (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0115.html).

[VeisuItaTyhjyys]

Wow, Elan might actually be responsible for the loss of a lot more innocent lives than Belkar. Take that, moralists!


There were good people on the Death Star, too, but they all managed to escape on various shuttles and escape pods right before Luke fired his torpedoes. It all makes perfect sense.

All those innocent contractors hired to do a job were killed- casualties of a war they had nothing to do with. All right, look-you're a roofer, and some juicy government contract comes your way; you got the wife and kids and the two-story in suburbia-this is a government contract, which means all sorts of benefits. All of a sudden these left-wing militants blast you with lasers and wipe out everyone within a three-mile radius. You didn't ask for that. You have no personal politics. You're just trying to scrape out a living.

[derfenrirwolv]

No.

Elan works on the power of plot. Since the unimportant goblins weren't shown being destroyed, they weren't destroyed, they simply ceased to exist when the story stopped mentioning them.

[pendell]

No.

Elan works on the power of plot. Since the unimportant goblins weren't shown being destroyed, they weren't destroyed, they simply ceased to exist when the story stopped mentioning them.

Redcloak specifically stated they were all wiped out, so they didn't cease to exist.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Ron Miel]

Erm ... we do? I looked at that second strip, and I see *A* medusa. How do you know it's the same one as the one DurUkon's mansion?

Because they look exactly the same.

I'm pretty sure they are meant to be the same person. The Giant clearly copied his earlier design. If he intended them to be different characters, he could have given her different clothes, for instance.

I know he said something about how many vatiations on a stick figure are there? But with only two medusas, he could certainly show variations between them.

[Nimrod's Son]

Anyone remember the good goblin children (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0093.html)?
Um... no. It even says in the strip you've linked that they're not children. But even if they were, why are their deaths any worse than any of the other goblins the Order killed during the crawl? Because these goblins are very slightly younger than the others? Mmmkay.


Well, he's not really an *evil* guy, he just needs adult supervision. So I wouldn't hang him. We don't punish children for the horrible mistakes they make, but we don't let them wander around unattended, either.
Perhaps there's some big, strong, smart Lawful Good guy we can put in charge of him, in that case. :smallwink:

And yeah, what Ron Miel said. There's every chance Dorukan had emergency exits all over the place, otherwise it was pretty negligent of him to have such a rune in the first place.

[King of Nowhere]

As his lawyer, I plead him not guilty because of mental defect.
Of course, he needs someone supervising over him.

So, basically, I agree with the op. Elan is a danger. Just the idea of someone with the brain of a child and the power of a level 14+ adventurer (unoptimized maybe, but still level 14+) is already fearsome enough.

[Forum Explorer]

Which is why Roy needs to be broken out of prison immeditly. Because Tarquin is just spoileing Elan.

[Chaos rising]

This may not be strictly canon, but in the adventure game version the rules require you to remove all of the monsters from play once Zykon is defeated, because they sensed that the dungeon is about to self destruct and leave.

[Psyren]

Killing evil children is no more evil than killing evil adults.

It's no less evil either.

But the morality of a child is not easily determined, as they typically lack the capacity for true malice. Whether or not you personally believe this to be true, it is true in OotS ("We generally don't consider childhood escapades" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0488.html)) and that is what matters where the comic is concerned.

[faustin]

There wasn´t any mention of children on Azure City trial, and they even summoned the ghost of a dead goblin.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0271.html

[Ron Miel]

Um... no. It even says in the strip you've linked that they're not children. But even if they were, why are their deaths any worse than any of the other goblins the Order killed during the crawl? Because these goblins are very slightly younger than the others? Mmmkay.

The adults are working for Xykon, and are a legitimate enemy. (Even if they were conscripted.)

The children haven't done any evil yet. They have the potential at least to grow up as good people, like right-eye.

[Forum Explorer]

but they have the teenager template which has the always evil alghinment. :smallwink:

[Nimrod's Son]

The adults are working for Xykon, and are a legitimate enemy. (Even if they were conscripted.)

The children haven't done any evil yet. They have the potential at least to grow up as good people, like right-eye.
a) They're not children, and b) yes, they had that chance, but they chose to turn on the Order for no reason other than suddenly deciding being Good was a "phase". At that point they went from being allies of the Order to being a legitimate enemy themselves.

Of all the Good characters that we know were in the dungeon when Elan touched the rune, 100% survived. Everyone that we know for sure died in the dungeon was either a legitimate threat to the Order or else they were killed by the Linear Guild or Team Evil. I don't see the problem here.

(We don't even know what happened to the goblin teenagers, anyway, but we do at least know they were deliberately working in Xykon's favour.)

[SoC175]

There were good people on the Death Star, too, but they all managed to escape on various shuttles and escape pods right before Luke fired his torpedoes. I think the novel about the people on the death star says otherwise

[KingFlameHawk]

Wait...Durkon's a wizard?

He means Dorukan (the similiar name is pointed out in the don't split the party book), the wizard who made the dungeon and all the runes and hired all the good creatures like Celia.

[pendell]

I'm pretty sure they are meant to be the same person. The Giant clearly copied his earlier design. If he intended them to be different characters, he could have given her different clothes, for instance.

I know he said something about how many vatiations on a stick figure are there? But with only two medusas, he could certainly show variations between them.


Think so? I think the Medusa was an unimportant character, so he simply copied-and-pasted. The Giant has demonstrated some real artistic flair in variation at times, down to making pretty much the entire Sapphire Guard in the throne room a different drawing, but he's allowed to be lazy from time to time :).


a) They're not children, and b) yes, they had that chance, but they chose to turn on the Order for no reason other than suddenly deciding being Good was a "phase". At that point they went from being allies of the Order to being a legitimate enemy themselves.


Erm, one of the goblin children betrayed the order. I cannot say that all the goblin children we encountered intended to betray the order or were "going through a phase". It is possible that some of the goblin children might eventually have undergone a genuine alignment shift. Who knows what potential they might have had or not?

*Glares sternly at Elan*
And now we'll never know.

*Elan tears up*
*pendell feels guilty , like he's kicked a puppy*



(We don't even know what happened to the goblin teenagers, anyway, but we do at least know they were deliberately working in Xykon's favour.)

We know that at least ONE of them was deliberately in Xykon's favor, but I don't think we can necessarily assume they ALL were.

And just like the Death Star blowing up, unless explicitly spelled out otherwise I think it's a safe assumption everyone who was around for the earth-shattering kaboom is in tiny little pieces.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Toper]

Because they look exactly the same.
Except they tied their wraps in opposite directions! One of them could be the evil twin (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0365.html)! Or it could be the same medusa, but Teevo could be showing a rerun... of the dead.

That's pretty funny, though; nice find.

[Gredival]

Wow, Elan might actually be responsible for the loss of a lot more innocent lives than Belkar. Take that, moralists!

I wouldn't go so far to say innocent. It's definitely not LG to kill enemies who have surrendered, but the fact that they have surrendered does not render them "innocent."

Belkar kept killing them because he's Belkar, but I could also see a CG character making the determination that justice demanded execution for crimes already committed.


It's no less evil either.

But the morality of a child is not easily determined, as they typically lack the capacity for true malice. Whether or not you personally believe this to be true, it is true in OotS ("We generally don't consider childhood escapades" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0488.html)) and that is what matters where the comic is concerned.

I think one thing everyone is forgetting here is that these are not toddler children. As Haley pointed out: these are teenagers.

The juvenile/adult distinction exists in law because we believe the diminished mental capacity of children negatives (this is the proper word) the mens rea of their criminal action. When we put children on trial as adults the argument is that the child is sufficiently developed and aware to realize the consequences and wrongness of their actions. The age of 18 is an arbitrary limit the state recognizes because at some point we are going to hold people accountable for their actions despite stupidity/immaturity.

Remember that the one who betrayed the Order to Xykon was after a college recommendation. There is a decent argument to be made that the goblin teenagers were of sufficient mental capacity such they should be held culpable for their actions/alignment.

EDIT: Something I just caught in that comic, Roy justifies taking gifts because they would have been destroyed anyway. So it seems to some extent there is a recognition that final consequences can justify/negative an act.

[zimmerwald1915]

Belkar kept killing them because he's Belkar, but I could also see a CG character making the determination that justice demanded execution for crimes already committed.
But we never see Elan make that determination. He killed the goblins who surrendered because either he 1) didn't know they had and didn't bother to find out, which makes him negligent, or 2) didn't care.

[SPoD]

Why does everyone take such joy in tearing down the good guys in this strip for making mistakes? Was this a conversation that needed to happen, years after the fact? How does this help anyone understand anything about the comic or accomplish anything useful?

It's true what they say: the perfect is the enemy of the Good.

[Red XIV]

yes, they had that chance, but they chose to turn on the Order for no reason other than suddenly deciding being Good was a "phase". At that point they went from being allies of the Order to being a legitimate enemy themselves.
One of them turned on the Order. The other teenage goblin present made it clear that he had no part in it.

[Xondoure]

Elan should not be allowed to go anywhere without a legal guardian.

Well technically that is Roy's job. (and Haley's)

[Nimrod's Son]

One of them turned on the Order. The other teenage goblin present made it clear that he had no part in it.
Yes, that was pointed out over an hour ago. He was still pretty quick to claim his parents were right about "stinky humans", though - a truly Good goblin would surely have understood why Roy was so upset about the betrayal, and try to convince him they were still on the same side.

[pendell]

Was this a conversation that needed to happen, years after the fact?


No statute of limitations on homicide.



How does this help anyone understand anything about the comic or accomplish anything useful?


Well, the thought occurred to me, and turned it 'round and 'round and upside down, and found that it seemed to be right. So I posted it here to see if someone could post a convincing refutation. So far, no one has. At least, not convincing to me.

I think a full and proper appreciation of a character's actions is useful in understanding a comic strip; to appreciate the flaws as well as the good things, and not simply give Elan a pass because he's funny and zany.

It seems to be an issue on this forum that characters such as Belkar or Thog or even Tarquin get a presumption of innocence or non-evil alignment because they make us laugh, or because they're charming, or because they've got fleshtone instead of green skin and teeth. We automatically hate the ugly and love the beautiful, even when the beautiful is doing terrible things and the ugly is doing wonderful things. Compare and contrast the MITD and Tarquin.

I think this disconnect is a fundamental theme of this strip and something the Giant has harped on repeatedly. So I don't think we should give Elan a pass ; to judge alignment we need to consider his actions, not his appearance or the fact that he makes us laugh.

And if this forum isn't for meaningless alignment debates and over-analysis, I don't know what it's for :smalltongue:. I say this as no small offender in either regard.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Nimrod's Son]

So I posted it here to see if someone could post a convincing refutation. So far, no one has. At least, not convincing to me.
Remind me again how arguably causing the accidental death of a handful of maybe-Good goblins is any worse than definitely deliberately killing a whole load of probably-not-Good goblins that, really, all belong to the same team? If you're gonna condemn Elan for that, you've got to condemn the whole Order for a great many things.

[Psyren]

Personally, I don't take anything that happened before this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0162.html) seriously, alignment-wise. I just don't see the point. That wasn't the focus of the strip back then, and so any moral issues, quandaries etc. we could draw from the characters' actions have no meaningful context. It's a great thing that the comic has matured, but like a child itself, can't be held accountable for the message it conveyed in its infancy.

(Nor the message that can be inferred from it through intentionally judgmental reading.)

[Forum Explorer]

Regarding the death star the first one would have only been crewed by the Imperial Military. Were they all evil? No but they were in direct opposition to the rebellion (who aren't all good) The second one was still under construction though....


Still I don't think any of the children got killed. The children would be kept someplace away from the dungeon along with the weak and infirm. The teenagers were there to learn how to be proper evil goblins. The teenagers probly booked it after getting threatend by the Order and the other evil goblin likely got away after fleeing from Belkar.

Redcloak didn't know about the survivors or didn't want them to be enslaved by Xykon anymore.

[Themrys]

Remind me again how arguably causing the accidental death of a handful of maybe-Good goblins is any worse than definitely deliberately killing a whole load of probably-not-Good goblins that, really, all belong to the same team? If you're gonna condemn Elan for that, you've got to condemn the whole Order for a great many things.

People do condemn Vaarsuvius for the quarter-genocide of probably-not-Good black dragons. While this wasn't accidental, Elan's deed was not accidental either, he did that on purpose because...no idea, maybe he thought it was dramatic.

Maybe Elan is too stupid to know the consequences of his actions, but if this is the case, he needs to be made Roy's ward and not allowed to do anything on his own.

Of course, Belkar is even more dangerous, but people acknowledge that in Belkar's case.

The only person who is (probably) better than Roy thinks in the strip where he stays up the whole night is Haley. She would not run away with the group's treasure...although she might only stay because of Elan.

Even if we do not take things that happened before the comic became more serious into consideration, Elan is still dangerously dumb and Roy's fear that he might just stand around and play on his banjo while goblins kill the rest of the group is not that far-fetched.
(Remember the orc-island-episode? If Lien hadn't begged Elan to do something, he'd just have watched the orcs sacrifice her)

[KoboldRevenge]

And how is this news to almost any story? I mean characters kill random nameless non-plot essential people again and again.
In Ocean's 11 when they set off the EMP they could have killed thousands in car crashes, plane crashes, and hospital equipment failures.

Transformers: they felt the need to bring the alien robot battle to the death into a populated city.

Speed: The amount of damage to the city should have costed them 100 times the ransom cost.

Lord of the rings when the ground swallowed up the bad guys at the end it's a miracle that none of the good guys fell in while they were fighting in close quarters.

Point of the story the writers didn't find the need to flesh out that point in the story that doesn't matter to them.

[TriForce]

did the children Teenagers die becouse of the self-destruct?
very likely yes

should we care?
just as likely: no

as explained in the comic, the only reason they were "good" at the moment the order encountered them was becouse they wanted to do whatever pissed of their parents, meaning they were all evil, just acting like they were good. meaning that they would be just as dispicable and evil as their parents as soon as they grew out of it.

a very obvious conclusion, case dismissed

[Leecros]

He means Dorukan (the similiar name is pointed out in the don't split the party book), the wizard who made the dungeon and all the runes and hired all the good creatures like Celia.

I'm well aware of that.

[Warren Dew]

Whether or not you personally believe this to be true, it is true in OotS ("We generally don't consider childhood escapades" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0488.html)) and that is what matters where the comic is concerned.
"Escapade" implies a relatively harmless prank - something that likely wouldn't be held against an adult, either. There isn't any implication there that children get pass on truly evil actions.


It seems to be an issue on this forum that characters such as Belkar or Thog or even Tarquin get a presumption of innocence or non-evil alignment because they make us laugh, or because they're charming, or because they've got fleshtone instead of green skin and teeth. We automatically hate the ugly and love the beautiful, even when the beautiful is doing terrible things and the ugly is doing wonderful things. Compare and contrast the MITD and Tarquin.
Thog has green skin, so his favorable treatment obviously isn't because of fleshtone skin. In fact, it seems to me that if anything, Thog and Therkla and Redcloak tend to get more of a pass than they deserve on these forums, precisely because they have green skin.

[Cerlis]

You think Elan was smart enough to remember the children where there (if indeed they where) when he pressed it.



Have fun talking about some made up character, cus you're obviously not talking about elan

[Bleak Ink]

Personally, I don't take anything that happened before this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0162.html) seriously, alignment-wise. I just don't see the point. That wasn't the focus of the strip back then, and so any moral issues, quandaries etc. we could draw from the characters' actions have no meaningful context. It's a great thing that the comic has matured, but like a child itself, can't be held accountable for the message it conveyed in its infancy.

(Nor the message that can be inferred from it through intentionally judgmental reading.)

I am inclined to agree with you, good sir. ...Hence lurking about this thread rather than posting.


did the children Teenagers die becouse of the self-destruct?
very likely yes

should we care?
just as likely: no

as explained in the comic, the only reason they were "good" at the moment the order encountered them was becouse they wanted to do whatever pissed of their parents, meaning they were all evil, just acting like they were good. meaning that they would be just as dispicable and evil as their parents as soon as they grew out of it.

a very obvious conclusion, case dismissed

This, however, I will gladly engage in.

As you stated: no matter how they behaved, or what they claimed, or their motivations, regardless of personal action, belief or ambition, they were and always would be Evil. I believe this is your point, yes?

Now, does Monster-Race-sentenced Alignment detract from the fact that those teenagers were youths who had in all likelihood (not possibility. Likelihood.) never done anything morally or ethically corrupt enough to earn the title Evil, as, say, a human youth would?
Would killing dozens of Evil human teenagers be justified so quickly?


meaning that they would be just as dispicable and evil as their parents as soon as they grew out of it.

a very obvious conclusion, case dismissed

Despicable: an adjective. Deserving hatred and contempt.
Now, to throw further my personal opinion into this, I find using the term despicable in reference to an entire population of sentient, family-forming groups horrific. I'm not trying to verbally attack you, really I'm not... I'm just saying. It seems wrong.


Regarding the death star the first one would have only been crewed by the Imperial Military. Were they all evil? No but they were in direct opposition to the rebellion (who aren't all good) The second one was still under construction though....


Still I don't think any of the children got killed. The children would be kept someplace away from the dungeon along with the weak and infirm. The teenagers were there to learn how to be proper evil goblins. The teenagers probly booked it after getting threatend by the Order and the other evil goblin likely got away after fleeing from Belkar.

Redcloak didn't know about the survivors or didn't want them to be enslaved by Xykon anymore.

I vastly prefer this idea to the original. The thought of hundreds of families dying because of, pre-character-depth or no, Elan's lack of intelligence makes me like him less.

[Occasional Sage]

So the Chaotic Moron did something chaotic and moronic with unforeseen yet possibly terrible consequences. Give me a second, I have the New York Times on the phone.

Um, you know that the "chaotic" alignment deals with the response to laws and authority, not your ability to act rationally, right?


Personally, I don't take anything that happened before this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0162.html) seriously, alignment-wise. I just don't see the point. That wasn't the focus of the strip back then, and so any moral issues, quandaries etc. we could draw from the characters' actions have no meaningful context. It's a great thing that the comic has matured, but like a child itself, can't be held accountable for the message it conveyed in its infancy.

(Nor the message that can be inferred from it through intentionally judgmental reading.)

Hasn't Elan himself said something very similar to Haley? I don't remember the context to track it down, but she told him she was impressed by something he did, and he pointed out that the stakes have gotten higher since the early strips and it's time for him to buckle down and be more serious.

[G-Man Graves]

To anyone arguing that "Goblins are always evil, so nothing of value was lost", I regret to inform you that that's not how it works. I believe is is stated in both PHB and Book of Exalted Deeds that to kill all members of a race due to their alignment is evil. Hence, V performed and evil act, as did Elan.

[snoopy13a]

Recklessness and negligence are two different things. By using them interchangably, you are confusing the argument.

Negligence is an objective test. Basically, it is whether the conduct is unreasonable and creates a foreseeable risk of harm. The standard measured is a "reasonable person" standard. If there is gross negligence then the negligence can have criminal implications. However, if it is only simple negligence then you're dealing with tort law.

Recklessness involves two components:
1) The person's conduct must have been unreasonable and created a foreseeable risk of harm
2) The person was aware of the risk and disregarded it. Note, the person did not intend the harm.

Awareness of the risk is the difference between negligence and recklessness. Essentially, "I didn't know any better" excuses one from recklessness but not negligence.

Assuming that:

1) The Dungeon follows common-law (which is a big assumption as it might be considered a lawless area)
2) The common-law is applicable to the killing of good-aligned creatures
3) There were good-aligned creatures killed when the tower blew up

Then there are two possiblities:

1) Elan is unaware that pressing the self-destruct button will create a risk that innocents will die. However, a reasonable person would certainly be aware of this risk. If Elan can prove unawareness this then he is likely has a mens rea of criminal negligence and is either guilty of criminally negligent homicide or in some jurisdictions, manslaughter.

2) If Elan is aware that pressing the button will create a risk that innocents will die but did not intend to do so then he will have a mens rea of recklessness.

The reckless mens rea creates a new problem. Murder is defined as an unlawful killing with malice aforethought.

Malice is defined in four ways:

1) Intent to kill
2) Intent to cause grievous bodily harm that results in death
3) Reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human (can probably can sub in sentient here) life (called depraved indifference murder)
4) Felony Murder - death resulting from the commission or attempt of a dangerous felony such as burgarly, arson, robbery, rape, etc.

Note the third definition. A reckless unlawful killing can either be murder or manslaughter. A prosecuting attorney would argue that pressing a self-destruct button in a dungeon with innocents inside demostrates a depraved indifference to human life and constitutes murder even though the person might not have intended the death.

So, Elan could be convicted of murder if he was aware of the high risk to life created by pressing the button.
4)

[Bleak Ink]

To anyone arguing that "Goblins are always evil, so nothing of value was lost", I regret to inform you that that's not how it works. I believe is is stated in both PHB and Book of Exalted Deeds that to kill all members of a race due to their alignment is evil. Hence, V performed and evil act, as did Elan.

I love your statement, however I don't think Elan intentionally killed them. Their deaths were the result of his "shiny button, must push" mentality. Agreed, regardless.

[Dvandemon]

Because they look exactly the same.

I'm pretty sure they are meant to be the same person. The Giant clearly copied his earlier design. If he intended them to be different characters, he could have given her different clothes, for instance.

I know he said something about how many vatiations on a stick figure are there? But with only two medusas, he could certainly show variations between them.

Of course, he would go through the slight effort to make another medusa distinguishable just so the fans would not be confused :smalltongue:

Would the Prosecution and Defense please cite any and all evidence. Elaborate all points to avoid confusion. This is a legal battle

[Cúchulainn]

OBJECTION: By the power of plot, those kids all got away!
REBUTTAL: So we reduce the charge from manslaughter to Child endangerment and Reckless endangerment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reckless_endangerment). Even if the power of plot magically saves the kids, Elan still had a responsibility either to ensure their safety or to demonstrate the pressing need to destroy the dungeon despite the innocent deaths it would probably cause. He did neither. Thus in this one aspect he is worse than his father, who may be a murderer and a tyrant but we've never seen him kill a child.

THEREFORE, I conclude that Elan is a menace to any and all creatures who cross his path , who get between him and dramatic potential.

Responsibility is a big word to use against a chaotic character, especially Elan. He was under no obligations to save, warn or rescue anyone within a hostile controlled fortress, regardless of creed, race, age or for any other reason. There is no doubt in my mind that Elan acted and has always acted recklessly; he casually endangers his own team mates, of which all alignments are represented, and no one bats an eyelash. Trying to apply real world laws and the psychology they are based on to actions like these is self-defeating and pointless, it's why the infamous black dragon mother morality arguments still go on in some circles.

To the broader morality argument, from what we've seen from the comic, Roy would be equally culpable for letting someone "clearly" deranged and unbalanced as Elan walk around free before and after the events of the explosion. He was judged in heaven for Belkar's misdeeds, however Elan's alleged GREATER misdeeds were never even mentioned, so I find it hard to believe Elan is walking around with a hundred gallons of innocent blood weighing down his bags of holding.

Finally, to address the last quoted statement: no.

[pendell]

So, Elan could be convicted of murder if he was aware of the high risk to life created by pressing the button.
4)


In that case I , personally, would drop the reckless charge but hold the "negligent" charge. Because the two components of recklessness are 1) knowledge and 2) willful disregard resulting in a finding of 3) malice.

Elan is defended from the first component by virtue of being dumber than a box of rocks, (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0031.html) . With 1 down, 2 fails. Plus, the argument of "Elan is malicious" is easily defeated by character witness -- give me the ability to show his life as seen through these strips, and I think any unbiased jury would agree Elan hasn't got a malicious bone in his body. I can't accuse him of malice with a straight face, and all here know I'm not exactly shy about nailing him when he DOES deserve it.



Remind me again how arguably causing the accidental death of a handful of maybe-Good goblins is any worse than definitely deliberately killing a whole load of probably-not-Good goblins that, really, all belong to the same team? If you're gonna condemn Elan for that, you've got to condemn the whole Order for a great many things.


I'm not seeing any argument here that Elan isn't guilty of criminally negligent homicide, only that additional charges may be filed after this court adjourns. Your motion is noted, counselor :).




Regarding the death star the first one would have only been crewed by the Imperial Military. Were they all evil? No but they were in direct opposition to the rebellion (who aren't all good) The second one was still under construction though....



The deaths of innocent people on the death star -- and if you read the novel by that same name there was at least one Alderaanian on the ship who punched out a guard for celebrating the destruction of his home planet -- could reasonably be considered "collateral damage". Military law recognizes that some civilian casualties are unavoidable in war, and they are acceptable provided 1) The deaths are incidental to a real military purpose and 2) the civilian casualties are not way out of proportion to the goal gained.

For example, if, say, a BBEG takes a hostage and uses him as a human shield, and I have no way to save the world but to kill both him and the hostage, that's collateral damage. I have no choice but to stop him, and no alternatives. It's not disproportionate. If the BBEG is hiding in a house and I wound up accidentally killing the family living there as well in the course of getting him out, that's not disproportionate. If the BBEG is hiding in a house and I destroy the whole city in the hopes of getting this one man -- that IS disproportionate. That would be wrong.

The rules of war say that because taking innocent hostages or threatening innocents is one of the first items in the BBEG handbook. That's why he's a BBEG. If you aren't willing to sacrifice innocents, you won't be able to fight him at all.

So, with that background, what military purpose was served by destroying the castle? Xykon was dead and the other goblins had surrendered. So it's not like blowing up the death star , where it was necessary to save not only Yavin 4 but any other planets the death star might reasonably destroy. So far as I can see, there is no pressing reason to destroy the dungeon, and everyone in the order except Elan thought it was a bad idea.

Still, there may be the makings of a defense case here -- we could argue that the goblin's childrens deaths were "collateral damage" in the course of a military operation , said operation being to keep the gate out of evil hands. Roy and company could reasonably argue they had no way to defend the gate , and were therefore forced to destroy it in order to safeguard the cosmos. They could also argue that they could not reasonably search and evacuate the entire dungeon, so their only recourse was to push the self-destruct button and hope that the dungeon inhabitants knew what to do in the event of self-destruct.

The weakness in that defense is it is obvious that wasn't what Elan had in mind, and I think intent matters here. Because unlike "weakening of the fabric of the universe" , which they had no reasonable way of knowing, they SHOULD reasonably know what happens when the dungeon collapses. "He didn't think it through" opens him up to charges of manslaughter, as above.



Responsibility is a big word to use against a chaotic character, especially Elan.


Responsibility -- that we demand that creatures account for their actions -- is common to all sapient beings regardless of alignment. A chaotic alignment describes how a creature meets those obligations, it does not excuse them. That's why there's a difference between "chaotic good" and "chaotic evil".

Elan has demonstrated previously that he seriously considers the impact his actions have on others. Although his mental capacity is limited, when he broke out of cliffport jail he left an apology note when he was forced to steal clothing. He chose to be faithful to Haley when tempted to take Therkla as his girlfriend. He chose to tell Haley the truth about that escapade rather than conceal it. He refused to murder Kubota when he surrendered , and then rebuked Vaarsuivius both for murdering Kubota and suggesting Elan lie about it.

Elan is not an Int-2 creature devoid of responsibility. He is a chaotic good character who, despite his humor, really does try to do right by other people he comes across. I think he's shown more character development than almost any other character in the strip. Which is why I hope he comes to the realization I've discussed and finds some way to make it right.



Trying to apply real world laws and the psychology they are based on to actions like these is self-defeating and pointless,


But it's part of the strip. We had dozens of strips worth of courtroom drama, so laws do come into play.



To the broader morality argument, from what we've seen from the comic, Roy would be equally culpable for letting someone "clearly" deranged and unbalanced as Elan walk around free before and after the events of the explosion. He was judged in heaven for Belkar's misdeeds, however Elan's alleged GREATER misdeeds were never even mentioned, so I find it hard to believe Elan is walking around with a hundred gallons of innocent blood weighing down his bags of holding.


Objection! We can only speculate at their reasons for not judging Roy's actions, and this post is already long enough :).


======
In sum, in my mind Elan is cleared of "reckless" but is still open to charges of gross negligence and possible manslaughter. We may be able to get him off that if we can demonstrate that the castle's destruction was a military necessity. Thoughts?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Kish]

Elan is the most dangerous member of the Order. Always has been. A lot of his character development after what happened with Therkla was finally realizing, oh, hey, being stupidly well-meaning doesn't guarantee people won't die.

[Nimrod's Son]

I'm not seeing any argument here that Elan isn't guilty of criminally negligent homicide, only that additional charges may be filed after this court adjourns.
That's because I haven't made an argument yet. I'm merely asking you to acknowledge that the killing of the goblin teens (a) is for all intents and purposes no worse than any of the other goblin slayings in the dungeon and (b) might not even have happened.


Your motion is noted, counselor :).
It doesn't appear that it is.

But if you're pressing additional charges: might I suggest you start with Roy, his commanding officer, who knew the stakes of the situation far better than Elan did, and despite having clear tactical direction for his other underlings gave Elan a direct order to do exactly what he pleased during the battle (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0106.html). Because there was no way Elan could "influence" things. Yet, as has been pointed out, we know that Celestia itself doesn't consider this as a blip.

[Warren Dew]

Now, does Monster-Race-sentenced Alignment detract from the fact that those teenagers were youths who had in all likelihood (not possibility. Likelihood.) never done anything morally or ethically corrupt enough to earn the title Evil, as, say, a human youth would?
To the contrary, in D&D beings are evil because they do evil acts. That a race is "usually evil" is shorthand for saying that individuals of that race usually do a preponderance of evil acts. Evil teenagers have done evil acts; it's not just a matter of intent.


To anyone arguing that "Goblins are always evil, so nothing of value was lost", I regret to inform you that that's not how it works. I believe is is stated in both PHB and Book of Exalted Deeds that to kill all members of a race due to their alignment is evil. Hence, V performed and evil act, as did Elan.
I've never seen anyone actually find a quote from the player's handbook saying that. Someone linked recently to the author's own post here that killing evil beings is not evil, in reference to all the baddies Roy has killed. Optional supplements often contradict each other, so while the Book of Exalted Deeds might say something like that, it wouldn't mean much.

[pendell]

That's because I haven't made an argument yet. I'm merely asking you to acknowledge that the killing of the goblin teens (a) is for all intents and purposes no worse than any of the other goblin slayings in the dungeon and (b) might not even have happened.



I can't. They had a legitimate mission do defeat Xykon the lich -- even if they are technically outside the laws of any country there is a reasonable argument that Xykon and his henchmen are "hostis humani generis" which means "the common enemy of mankind ... placed beyond society, to be treated as wolves are. They may be killed without consequence by any man's hand."

Most of their goblin encounters were with armed enemies attempting to thwart their legitimate mission against Xykon. Even killing sleeping goblins after a sleep spell could be forgiven on the grounds that the sleep was short-lived and they had no reasonable way to take prisoners.

Killing the goblin teenagers is something that occurred AFTER the mission, so it can't be justified as part and parcel either of a legitimate military operation or as justifiable collateral damage incidental to that mission.

My wife is dragging me out the door, so I'll try to look in on Roy later.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Themrys]

Even killing sleeping goblins after a sleep spell could be forgiven on the grounds that the sleep was short-lived and they had no reasonable way to take prisoners.

There was no spell. The goblins were bored to sleep by V's long speech. No one intended to kill them in their sleep.


I don't agree with the argument "The goblin teenagers would have become evil as adults." This is nonsense. Not everyone who rebelled against their parents has returned to the parents' lifestyle as an adult. Roy, for example, is still a fighter.

[zimmerwald1915]

There was no spell. The goblins were bored to sleep by V's long speech. No one intended to kill them in their sleep.


I don't agree with the argument "The goblin teenagers would have become evil as adults." This is nonsense. Not everyone who rebelled against their parents has returned to the parents' lifestyle as an adult. Roy, for example, is still a fighter.
Roy didn't become a fighter as part of an adolescent rebellion. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0162.html)

[pendell]

Okay,

I will now answer two questions

1) What culpability does Roy have for Elan destroying the castle?
2) Why was this not brought up during his Celestia interview?

1) I would answer none.

Elan was in the party because
origin spoilers

Without Elan, there is no OOTS. Elan taught Roy how to recruit adventurers. Without him, Roy would still be solo.


So his presence in the party was mandatory; Roy owed Elan a debt of honor.

Once Elan's incompetence was revealed, Roy could neither spare a party member to baby sit him nor cut him loose in the dungeon. That would be "abandoning a friend" , and Roy was almost made true neutral over a similar incident.

Pre-battle Roy gave Elan discretion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0106.html) because he judged that Elan could neither help much nor come to much harm. This was a reasonable assessment.

Roy had no way of knowing :

A) That there was a self-destruct rune.
B) That Elan would find it first.
C) That Elan would respond to this find by activating it.

This is an unlikely series of events, and the third the least likely of all. Note the dumbfounded looks (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0118.html). No one could have reasonably predicted Elan's action because it was an incredibly unreasonable thing to do.

As Elan's commanding officer, Roy is responsible to keep his subordinates in check, but he cannot reasonably be expected to predict when his subordinates will do something so utterly rash, so utterly beyond the pale of intelligent conduct, that it completely dumbfounds the entire rest of the team.

Further, it should be noted that Roy was in a combat situation. His primary objective is to win the battle, his second to preserve the lives of his subordinates. Given these overriding factors, it is not reasonable to expect him to sit on each of his subordinates as if he were their nanny during that time. Not when there are hordes of goblins and ghouls and ghasts and a power-mad lich to fight.

If Roy had known that Elan had found the rune and was going to press it, and Roy failed to prevent it then, there might be a case against Roy.

As it is, Roy had no way of knowing that this would happen or any reasonable way of preventing it, so I believe he is blameless.

2) Why was this not mentioned during his interview?

In-story, for the reason I just described. Roy is without fault in this case.

Out-of-story, it's because we'd already spent many strips dissecting the events of the castle in the trial scene and it was not necessary to re-hash those events for the benefits of the readers.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Themrys]

Roy didn't become a fighter as part of an adolescent rebellion. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0162.html)

That's what Roy says.
Adolescent rebellion isn't about doing stupid things, it is about questioning the way of life your parents tell you is right.
In some cases, at least.
Not all teenagers just try to annoy their parents, you know?

Anyway, I don't really need an example. Everyone knows there are people who dress in black as adults, who very likely started to do so as teenagers.

[Psyren]

"Escapade" implies a relatively harmless prank - something that likely wouldn't be held against an adult, either. There isn't any implication there that children get pass on truly evil actions.

And yet Roy's own alarmed response implies something very serious befell Miss McNulty as a result of the "escapade."


Hasn't Elan himself said something very similar to Haley? I don't remember the context to track it down, but she told him she was impressed by something he did, and he pointed out that the stakes have gotten higher since the early strips and it's time for him to buckle down and be more serious.

Do you mean this? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0647.html)

But Kish's response below addresses that point better than I could have:


Elan is the most dangerous member of the Order. Always has been. A lot of his character development after what happened with Therkla was finally realizing, oh, hey, being stupidly well-meaning doesn't guarantee people won't die.

I agree with this 100%. I just don't think we should make moral judgments about Elan because of it. (Not saying you are, Kish.)

[G-Man Graves]

I've never seen anyone actually find a quote from the player's handbook saying that. Someone linked recently to the author's own post here that killing evil beings is not evil, in reference to all the baddies Roy has killed. Optional supplements often contradict each other, so while the Book of Exalted Deeds might say something like that, it wouldn't mean much.

Fair enough, the PHB guideline must have been a word of mouth kind of thing. However, I would say that unless directly contradicted by another book, we can hold the BoED, the book that was written solely for the purpose of showing how to play good characters, as a guideline as to haw to be good.

Here's an example, to my understanding.

You have just killed a small group of orc. Walking into a nearby tent, you find that the orcs had children, and now, you have killed their parents. This is how people on the good-scale would react (Probably Lawful or Neutral).

Good: "Upon seeing these children, I should make an effort to ensure that they are brought up well and taught to become well adjusted members of society." (Cares for children until more appropriate lodgings are found.)

Neutral: "Eh. Not my problem. They'll live, or they'll die" (Leaves)

Evil (Probably lawful, in this case): "These are an abomination. They must be slain, lest they grow to be the same monsters their parents were." (Cue murder)

[TriForce]

This, however, I will gladly engage in.

As you stated: no matter how they behaved, or what they claimed, or their motivations, regardless of personal action, belief or ambition, they were and always would be Evil. I believe this is your point, yes?

Now, does Monster-Race-sentenced Alignment detract from the fact that those teenagers were youths who had in all likelihood (not possibility. Likelihood.) never done anything morally or ethically corrupt enough to earn the title Evil, as, say, a human youth would?
Would killing dozens of Evil human teenagers be justified so quickly?


well, they were living in the powerbase of a lich that kills anything he gets his hands on when bored for longer then 5 minutes, your assumption that they would have been 100% innocent is possible, however it strikes me as unlikely. also, its obvious that they have had parents teaching them to become evil (see the flashback about drinking the blood of the innocents) for their entire life, so any remote possibility of them not earning that evil title is going out the window. so in short, even if they were human children, i would have the same opinion



Despicable: an adjective. Deserving hatred and contempt.
Now, to throw further my personal opinion into this, I find using the term despicable in reference to an entire population of sentient, family-forming groups horrific. I'm not trying to verbally attack you, really I'm not... I'm just saying. It seems wrong.


i didnt type my comment with a dictionairy on my lap, and english is not my first language, so i didnt specifically pick that word for that exact meaning, however, since im talking about a small group of people, living with and supporting a lich that puts the capital E in Evil (i was talking about the adults remember) i dont really find it out of place at all

[pendell]

well, they were living in the powerbase of a lich that kills anything he gets his hands on when bored for longer then 5 minutes, your assumption that they would have been 100% innocent is possible, however it strikes me as unlikely.


Have you read Start of Darkness?


In SoD Right-eye --Redcloak's brother -- lives in a peaceful goblin village that is no harm to its human neighbors. They co-exist with humans amiably.

Xykon comes along and tells them they all work for him now. There are only two kinds of goblins in a thirty mile radius -- those who work for him and those whose internal organs are distressingly .. external.

Which kind are YOU, Right-eye?

Xykon asks this while Right-Eye's wife and two small children are in shot.

Right eye and the other goblins unwillingly burn down their own village and follow Xykon on his mad quest, because it's that or die.


Given this, I think it's reasonable that a percentage of Xykon's horde follow him unwillingly. Just what that percentage is -- or whether they would co-exist peacefully absent Xykon, or just do some other evil on their own -- is speculation. But because of this, I don't think it's fair to assume that all of Xykon's followers are either willing or evil. They just prefer it to zombiehood.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Warren Dew]

And yet Roy's own alarmed response implies something very serious befell Miss McNulty as a result of the "escapade."
No, it just implies that Roy was such a straight arrow that the single time he was called to the principal's office was traumatic for him.


Have you read Start of Darkness?

Right eye and the other goblins unwillingly burn down their own village and follow Xykon on his mad quest, because it's that or die.

Fixed.


Given this, I think it's reasonable that a percentage of Xykon's horde follow him unwillingly. Just what that percentage is -- or whether they would co-exist peacefully absent Xykon, or just do some other evil on their own -- is speculation. But because of this, I don't think it's fair to assume that all of Xykon's followers are either willing or evil. They just prefer it to zombiehood.
If they were actually unwilling, they wouldn't do it. Some may be following Xykon reluctantly, but it's still of their own volition.

Being evil because they prefer it to zombiehood doesn't change the fact that they're evil.

[JonestheSpy]

I think it's reasonable that a percentage of Xykon's horde follow him unwillingly. Just what that percentage is -- or whether they would co-exist peacefully absent Xykon, or just do some other evil on their own -- is speculation. But because of this, I don't think it's fair to assume that all of Xykon's followers are either willing or evil. They just prefer it to zombiehood.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

I think this is true of the beginning of the story, but I think it's worth pointing out that currently Xykon has precisely two followers, Redcloak and Tsukiko (three if you want to include the MitD, I suppose). All the rest are Redcloak's followers.

As for how evil they are, it's a bit tricky. Yes they conquered Azure City, have slaves, etc. On the other hand, they seem just fine with establishing normal diplomatic relations with with their human neighbors and want to just have a secure homeland where they won't be harassed by adventurers - not particularly more evil than human nations going to war, possibly less since they seem fine with stopping after one conquest instead of building an empire, which human victors tended to try to do throughout history.

[Warren Dew]

As for how evil they are, it's a bit tricky. Yes they conquered Azure City, have slaves, etc. On the other hand, they seem just fine with establishing normal diplomatic relations with with their human neighbors and want to just have a secure homeland where they won't be harassed by adventurers - not particularly more evil than human nations going to war, possibly less since they seem fine with stopping after one conquest instead of building an empire, which human victors tended to try to do throughout history.
Well, we have a direct comparison with a human state that uses slaves, has normal diplomatic relations with their neighbors etc. I take it you think the Empire of Blood isn't evil either?

[JonestheSpy]

Well, we have a direct comparison with a human state that uses slaves, has normal diplomatic relations with their neighbors etc. I take it you think the Empire of Blood isn't evil either?

Drifting way OT here, but I do feel obliged to point out that Gobbotopia and the Empire of Blood have almost nothing in common. Gobbotopia has no plans we know of for expansion, militarily or through duplicity. Gobbotopia seems to treat its citizens just fine, at least to the extent that Redcloak and Jirix can shield them from Xykon. Gobbotopia has no secret police. Gobbotopia's citizens seem quite happy with their government, which provides hydraburger picnics to entertain its populance instead of gladiator matches.

Yes they both have slaves - the hobgoblins have captured prisoners from the battle that they could a)kill b)free c)keep in their cells forever or d) put to work. They do not seem to be at all interested in capturing more humans to enslave or building any kind of economic system on slavery, which the EoB totally has done.

[pendell]

Gobbotopia has no plans we know of for expansion, militarily or through duplicity. Gobbotopia seems to treat its citizens just fine, at least to the extent that Redcloak and Jirix can shield them from Xykon.


I'm running short of time so can't find the strip right now, but ISTR when Redcloak was interrogating O-chul, O-chul responded that Redcloak was offering the humans nothing but the "peace of the grave".

Redcloak's response was "Yes! Exactly!"

I do not know whether this implies Gobbotopia has aggressive plans toward its neighbors, but given the evil alignment of many of its inhabitants (goblins are usually something evil, IIRC), and given that Gobbotopia's rulers plan to harness a god-killing abomination to achieve their goals, I think it's reasonable to assume that "peaceful co-existence with humans" is not a part of Gobbotopia's long-range plans.




If they were actually unwilling, they wouldn't do it. Some may be following Xykon reluctantly, but it's still of their own volition.


People typically aren't held responsible for things they do at gunpoint, are they? It is possible that those goblins are being coerced with a perfectly reasonable threat to their lives. Are they, then, fully responsible for any actions they take while under such a threat?

Based on the principle of "judge others as I would want to be judged myself", I would say no. I can well imagine being forcibly drafted into an evil army with no way out besides death. I can't promise that I would allow myself to be shot out of hand -- play along until an opportunity presents itself to desert, more likely.


Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Nimrod's Son]

So his presence in the party was mandatory; Roy owed Elan a debt of honor.
Roy's not a Wookiee. Wherever do you get the idea that Roy is duty-bound to team up with anyone who happens to help him out along the way?


As Elan's commanding officer, Roy is responsible to keep his subordinates in check, but he cannot reasonably be expected to predict when his subordinates will do something so utterly rash, so utterly beyond the pale of intelligent conduct, that it completely dumbfounds the entire rest of the team.
Sure, but I'd argue that "Stay right here and DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING" might have been a more sensible order than "Do whatever the hell you like, it won't make the slightest difference".


As it is, Roy had no way of knowing that this would happen or any reasonable way of preventing it, so I believe he is blameless.
Likewise, Elan had no way of knowing the consequences of his actions, so I guess he's blameless too.


2) Why was this not mentioned during his interview?

In-story, for the reason I just described. Roy is without fault in this case.
Whereas Elan is guilty as sin. Of a crime we don't know even happened.


Given this, I think it's reasonable that a percentage of Xykon's horde follow him unwillingly.
So, again, how are the goblin teenagers any more of a loss than all the other goblins killed in the dungeon? We know for a fact that at least one fifth of all the goblin teenagers we've seen were following Xykon willingly. We don't have the numbers on the rest of them, unfortunately.

[Gredival]

But we never see Elan make that determination. He killed the goblins who surrendered because either he 1) didn't know they had and didn't bother to find out, which makes him negligent, or 2) didn't care.

That was not my point. I was saying the goblins were not innocent. Proof of this is the fact they could be killed by a good character in perfect compliance with a reasonable good-aligned moral code.

What would make Belkar's actions evil, if they were evil, isn't that the goblins are innocent it's the fact he's Belkar.

[Dr.Epic]

The dungeon caving in killed them. Who's fault that is is completely up for debate:

-Elan for pushing the rune
-Xykon from forcing them to be in the dungeon
-Dorukan for putting the device there

The list goes on.

[Psyren]

No, it just implies that Roy was such a straight arrow that the single time he was called to the principal's office was traumatic for him.

Then why mention her allergies at all?

The point being, before we stray too far afield, that the line at which we can hold a child responsible for his actions is not clearly defined.

Your argument comes off to me like the Penny Arcade strip "Babicide." (link excised)

[G-Man Graves]

The dungeon caving in killed them. Who's fault that is is completely up for debate:

-Elan for pushing the rune
-Xykon from forcing them to be in the dungeon
-Dorukan for putting the device there

The list goes on.

That's like saying "It was the bullet that killed them. It's not completely the shooters fault, it was the guy who sold him the gun, and the victims for being in the wrong place at the wrong time."

[Psyren]

That's like saying "It was the bullet that killed them. It's not completely the shooters fault, it was the guy who sold him the gun, and the victims for being in the wrong place at the wrong time."

EDIT for caution's sake.

I feel this will be locked soon.

[G-Man Graves]

And the manufacturer who built the gun, plus the miners who dug the iron up to make it, and then there's the guy who owns the plot of land the mine is on...

Although I do know the guy who owns the land, and he is a bit of a jerk.

[Ron Miel]

And the manufacturer who built the gun...

Actually, now you mention it, why not? People that make and sell weapons ARE partly responsible for what is done with them. In my opinion, anyway.

[Warren Dew]

Drifting way OT here, but I do feel obliged to point out that Gobbotopia and the Empire of Blood have almost nothing in common. Gobbotopia has no plans we know of for expansion, militarily or through duplicity. Gobbotopia seems to treat its citizens just fine, at least to the extent that Redcloak and Jirix can shield them from Xykon. Gobbotopia has no secret police. Gobbotopia's citizens seem quite happy with their government, which provides hydraburger picnics to entertain its populance instead of gladiator matches.

Yes they both have slaves - the hobgoblins have captured prisoners from the battle that they could a)kill b)free c)keep in their cells forever or d) put to work. They do not seem to be at all interested in capturing more humans to enslave or building any kind of economic system on slavery, which the EoB totally has done.
Pretty much your only valid point here is that gobbotopia decides citizenship privileges and slave status largely on the basis of race, whereas Tarquin decides who is privileged and who is a slave without regard to race. That's hardly a recommendation for gobbotopia.

Both are lawful evil, both have comparable numbers of slaves that we've seen so far, neither is obviously expansionist. If you remove the skin color aspects, they have everything in common except for the details of who oppresses whom.

[G-Man Graves]

Both are lawful evil, both have comparable numbers of slaves that we've seen so far, neither is obviously expansionist. If you remove the skin color aspects, they have everything in common except for the details of who oppresses whom.

Did... did you just say that the Empire of Blood isn't expansionist?

[Narren]

Actually, now you mention it, why not? People that make and sell weapons ARE partly responsible for what is done with them. In my opinion, anyway.

That's a slippery slope. The manufacturer can only control who they give the weapons to. The responsibility now rests with that party to ensure that the weapons aren't used improperly or go to the wrong hands.

And besides, do we blame the auto manufacturer if someone runs over someone else with a car? Can we blame the company that makes a certain hammer if someone is assaulted with one? That list can go on and on.

[Kish]

Guys? Discussion of the morality of gun control is very much explicitly forbidden here, you know.

[Narren]

Guys? Discussion of the morality of gun control is very much explicitly forbidden here, you know.

Yeah...that pretty quickly slipped off the original topic and into a banned one.

[G-Man Graves]

Yeah...that pretty quickly slipped off the original topic and into a banned one.

The comparison stands, regardless of how quickly it derailed the conversation.

[veti]

Did... did you just say that the Empire of Blood isn't expansionist?

The EoB is kinda-sorta expansionist, in that it expects to swap territory with its neighbours on a fairly regular basis. But given that it's designed to collapse within a few years, you could argue that the expansion is illusory.

Gobbotopia is definitely expansionist. It's already expanded from its historical mountain territory to take over the land formerly known as Azure City. When population pressure grows strong there, you can bet they'll be expanding again.

[Forum Explorer]

The EoB is kinda-sorta expansionist, in that it expects to swap territory with its neighbours on a fairly regular basis. But given that it's designed to collapse within a few years, you could argue that the expansion is illusory.

Gobbotopia is definitely expansionist. It's already expanded from its historical mountain territory to take over the land formerly known as Azure City. When population pressure grows strong there, you can bet they'll be expanding again.

The EoB is being lead by people trying to conquer the whole continant. They are very expansionist.

We have no proof that the hobgoblins will keep expanding. That is pure speculation on your part.

[SadisticFishing]

a direct order to do exactly what he pleased during the battle (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0106.html)

This is him telling Elan to touch the GATE, not the Self Destruct Switch. Two VERY different things.

[Warren Dew]

The EoB is being lead by people trying to conquer the whole continant. They are very expansionist.
Tarquin has stated that he's happy with the way things are. Indeed, the whole "empires secretly cooperating" thing is an explicit repudiation of Tarquin's original "conquer the continent" attempts.

[G-Man Graves]

Tarquin has stated that he's happy with the way things are. Indeed, the whole "empires secretly cooperating" thing is an explicit repudiation of Tarquin's original "conquer the continent" attempts.

He also states in 763 that he intends to absorb the rest of the continent.

[Ron Miel]

That's a slippery slope. The manufacturer can only control who they give the weapons to. The responsibility now rests with that party to ensure that the weapons aren't used improperly or go to the wrong hands.

And besides, do we blame the auto manufacturer if someone runs over someone else with a car? Can we blame the company that makes a certain hammer if someone is assaulted with one? That list can go on and on.

Not a valid analogy. A hammer is designed for driving nails. Hitting someone with one isn't its intended purpose. Totally not the hammer makers' fault.

But a weapon of war, made by a defence contractor, is different. They are designed to kill people. A soldier who kills with that weapon is using it for its intended purpose. Some of the blame lies with the weapons maker.

[pendell]

Or to quote Raistlin speaking to his brother Caramon: "A sword in your hands is a tool for protecting the innocent. A sword in the hands of our dear sister Kitiara would split the heads of the innocent wide open."


That's from the Dragonlance trilogy, incidentally.

If the tool has both good and bad uses, it seems to me you can't blame the smith who forged it unless he's A) forged a Stormbringer which is useable only by evil or B) he's deliberately selling to known evil villains and not caring what comes of it.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Warren Dew]

If the tool has both good and bad uses, it seems to me you can't blame the smith who forged it unless he's A) forged a Stormbringer which is useable only by evil or B) he's deliberately selling to known evil villains and not caring what comes of it.
Exactly. You can murder with arrows even if they're sold for use in hunting, or even just in target practice.

[Narren]

Not a valid analogy. A hammer is designed for driving nails. Hitting someone with one isn't its intended purpose. Totally not the hammer makers' fault.

But a weapon of war, made by a defence contractor, is different. They are designed to kill people. A soldier who kills with that weapon is using it for its intended purpose. Some of the blame lies with the weapons maker.

A wood axe is a tool designed to split wood. A small dagger is a weapon designed to kill. Which is more dangerous? Why the distinction of what the manufacturer made it for?