PDA

View Full Version : ethical issue: Retaking Azure City?



Pages : [1] 2

Gandariel
2011-03-06, 05:04 PM
let's say the story is over (the order won, snarl problem is fixed, Xykon is killed)
the azurites want to recapture Azure city from the hobgoblins (and maybe they enlist the help of the Order)

Now the ethical problem is, we know the Azurites are GOOD and the hobgoblins are EVIL.
If the azurites went to attack Gobbotopia, that wouldn't be a normal battle.

if a kingdom wants to conquer another, only their armies fight, and the victor rules both kindoms.
in This battle, the azurites would kill and vanquish every single hobgoblin in the town.
And now that we've been with redcloak and we've seen him struggle to finally create his Gobbotopia...

i'd personally root for the hobgoblins.


what i'm trying to say is, the azurites have the right to conquer back their city, but we (the readers) don't see anymore the hobgoblins as a random enemy who deserves to be killed, we see them as a population like the humans, with their right to exist;
so if the azurites were to attack Gobbotopia, would that be "good"?
who would you root for?

Warren Dew
2011-03-06, 05:08 PM
Speak for yourself please. I still see the hobgoblins as a random enemy that deserves to be killed. Gobbotopia's economy is still based on slavery.

That doesn't mean it will happen - in fact, I suspect most Azurites will be more than happy to settle down where Vaarsuvius put them.

JonestheSpy
2011-03-06, 05:10 PM
Couldn't root for anyone. It's be just one of those horrible tragic situations where two sides with understandable, sympathetic points of view are fighting and you just want to make peace somehow.

I'm hoping that the Azureites get all their captives safely out and can make some sort of armistice with Gobbotopia. In fact I rather suspect this might happen within the story, as I'm pretty sure Xykon is going to turn on Redcloak before it's all over.

Tvtyrant
2011-03-06, 05:11 PM
Considering the fact this is politics, I would say there is no objective right or wrong to it. Both sides are right from their own perspective, and if you were to have two of them debate it would be the exact same arguments on both sides.

In this case "right" means whoever wins.

ThePhantasm
2011-03-06, 05:16 PM
. . . are morality threads allowed?'

As for the topic, I'd definitely root for the Azurites.

JonestheSpy
2011-03-06, 05:21 PM
Speak for yourself please. I still see the hobgoblins as a random enemy that deserves to be killed. Gobbotopia's economy is still based on slavery.


I think you're exaggerating a bit there. Team Peregrine freed 112 prisoners - not enough slaves to build an economy on. Yeah, they worked the prisoners. No, it wasn't "good" - but that's only one factor among many in my point of view. Other factors include things like, say, "Azurite military strike forces engaging in ethnic cleansing", and the quite understandable response from those being cleansed.

Gift Jeraff
2011-03-06, 05:22 PM
I'm personally rooting for neither. I'm thinking the whole Azurites vs goblinoids sub-plot will end with both sides winning and losing. Not a peachy "they all holds hands and dance" ending, but both lose a lot of people, come to some agreement, the goblins release the slaves, Azurites (or at least Hinjo & pals) start to be more open-minded (notice how everyone in Azure City was the same skin colour and War & XPs even said you need to have human blood to be a citizen), etc.

Bleak Ink
2011-03-06, 06:01 PM
I could never agree with the people saying it's wrong for goblins to kill humans, but humans can extirpate goblins to their hearts' content. Alignment system ignored, both are sentient, intelligent species; murdering either is deplorable.

Now, personally and unsurprisingly, I'd be rooting for the hobgoblins, too.

blazingshadow
2011-03-06, 06:13 PM
i would root for the ones who have the most power backing them. in this case the azurites still have the wizards the nobles didn't want to send to the battle, higher leveled paladins after all those random encounters at sea, elven support and an underground resistance force.

the goblins have an uphill battle if they want to keep their city without the help of xykon or redcloak. they might have the great numbers and zombies on their side but the decisive card is how much effort and resources will the elves invest into retaking the city

Warren Dew
2011-03-06, 06:30 PM
No, it wasn't "good" - but that's only one factor among many in my point of view. Other factors include things like, say, "Azurite military strike forces engaging in ethnic cleansing", and the quite understandable response from those being cleansed.
Even if one believes the Azurites deserved to lose the city, that doesn't preclude feeling that the hobgoblins deserve to be wiped out too.

G-Man Graves
2011-03-06, 07:11 PM
Even if one believes the Azurites deserved to lose the city, that doesn't preclude feeling that the hobgoblins deserve to be wiped out too.

Now, I don't have the exact quote (if someone could provide it, that would no doubt be helpful), but I'm fairly sure that Rich pointed out that Paladin's fell for exterminating Redcloak's home village in SoD. If paladin's fell for doing that on a relatively small scale, maybe, just maybe, doing the same thing to a city with a population in the thousands isn't the best idea.

Swordpriest
2011-03-06, 07:17 PM
Definitely rooting for the Azurites. Heck, even if everything is relative as the relativists say, then the humans are relatively more like I am, since I'm a human, and therefore I'd automatically root for the ones who wouldn't kill me or enslave me out of hand just based on my species.

I actually can't believe that there are more than one or two people rooting for the hobgoblins, but I can't expound on that without venturing into dangerous territory, so ....

thubby
2011-03-06, 07:49 PM
who says it would be a slaughter if the good guys win? why cant they just expel/banish/assimilate the non-militant gobos?

G-Man Graves
2011-03-06, 07:54 PM
Past events show that the Sapphire guard may not be that forgiving.

Lord
2011-03-06, 07:58 PM
I would root for the azurites. The Hobgoblins may have a sympathetic viewpoint, but then again, so did Cornelia in Code geass, that didn't change the fact that she was oppressing hundreds of thousands of innocent people because of their race.
The Hobgoblins are invaders. If they had their way they would just do exactly the same thing the humans were doing, only worse because their fearless leader is enacting a plan that could destroy the universe.
The Paladins killed one village to avert armageddon. It failed and it certainly wasn't a good guy act, but the fact is that that they had a logical reason for doing it. It was evil, but it holds more water than Redcloaks reason.
Redcloak is doing this for two reasons, cosmic blackmail against the gods, and revenge.
Revenge is not a good motive. If someone kills your brother, and you kill them in the middle ages, the only result is that his brother wants you dead. Revenge only leads to blood feuds, which only end when someone refuses to enact revenge.
While it is true that Redcloaks goblins had reason to hate the Azurites. The Hobgoblins have no real beef with the azurites. In fact if you examine this strip...

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0422.html

...it becomes clear that the Hobgoblins were thinking more along the lines of "Hey lets burn a city and have some fun." rather than "Come comrades, let us defeat those who have commited genocide against us.
The Hobgoblins followed Redcloak for two reasons.
1. an inexplicable loyalty to a man who forced his way into power, and {at the time} cared nothing for them.
2. Because they hated humans. Not Azurites, Humans.

Gobblitopia would only gain the right to live on that land after a generation or two. Then the Azurites would be attacking people because of something their ancestors did then the positions would be reversed. Until then they are slaving murderers who attacked a city for almost no justified reason other than racial hatred.
That said the Azurites would be crossing the moral event horizon if they genocided the Hobgoblins. There should be some form of understanding reached, with the Azurites getting their city back.
Respectfully, Lord

Dalek-K
2011-03-06, 08:09 PM
Both sides view they have a right to the place, and the ones that weren't part of the initial invasion really don't know anywhere else but there to be home... Is it fair to punish those goblins for what their parents did?

The GOOD thing for the Azurites to do right now (as in keep as much bloodshed and violence down with regards to innocents) is to just take the loss and stay where they are at. Yes go back and save the people trapped (or bargain for them) but all and all stay in Elven territory and work out the legal rights to gain custody of the land. Redcloak is willing to negotiate (O-Chul knows this) so really they could negotiate for the greater good.

Really this whole problem is one big circle... Hopefully the elves don't get to mad about them being there haha. Of course them sending the a group in could be for many different reasons ;) lol

Seraphem
2011-03-06, 08:16 PM
Now, I don't have the exact quote (if someone could provide it, that would no doubt be helpful), but I'm fairly sure that Rich pointed out that Paladin's fell for exterminating Redcloak's home village in SoD. If paladin's fell for doing that on a relatively small scale, maybe, just maybe, doing the same thing to a city with a population in the thousands isn't the best idea.


Well I don't know it word for word either, he did only say that "some" of them fell, not all, and it was said in regards to the Paladin's killing innocent women and children in their attack. So it wasn't the attacking the village that caused them to fall, it was some of the things they did during the attack.

Keep in mind the whole reason Redcloak is after the gates is to extort the gods into giving goblinoids full standing as a race, since right now they are, per divine decree, nothing but walking XP for random adventures. Gobotopia is just another way of achieving this equality, but by bypassing the gods and just trying to make the other races accept them without the gods officially editing there monster manual entry.

As to which side I'd root for, tough call, I can't deny the Azurites have a valid claim to get there city back, but I also would like see the goblins given the chance they are looking for. And really neither side is completely clean in the history of the fighting between the two. So really I'd just hope that whichever side lost the battle for the city in the end is at least able to rebuild a new city/country somewhere else.

veti
2011-03-06, 08:47 PM
I can't believe this. Are we seriously discussing rooting for the side whose job induction program includes the instruction, and I quote (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0511.html):

"If one of the elderly slaves starts to falter or slow down, you have to whip them even harder. [...] Because it's funny."

Even at their worst, the Sapphire Guard never did that.

Sure the Azurites may not be "innocent", but there are degrees of evil, and the hobgoblins are clearly more evil.

G-Man Graves
2011-03-06, 09:02 PM
Well I don't know it word for word either, he did only say that "some" of them fell, not all, and it was said in regards to the Paladin's killing innocent women and children in their attack. So it wasn't the attacking the village that caused them to fall, it was some of the things they did during the attack.


Very true. But keep in mind, that those were paladin's attacking. Those were the people (theoretically) held to a certain code of conduct. When the Azurites try to retake Azure City, it's going to be a force of mostly normal soldiers. I would give good odds that they try to kill anything with orange skin and fangs, regardless of gender, age, or ability to fight.



I can't believe this. Are we seriously discussing rooting for the side whose job induction program includes the instruction, and I quote (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0511.html):

"If one of the elderly slaves starts to falter or slow down, you have to whip them even harder. [...] Because it's funny."

Even at their worst, the Sapphire Guard never did that.

Sure the Azurites may not be "innocent", but there are degrees of evil, and the hobgoblins are clearly more evil.

Yes. We are discussing this. We're discussing whether it's better to root for a side who whips slaves, or a side that has no problem with exterminating entire settlements of sentient beings.

blazingshadow
2011-03-06, 09:30 PM
i feel that in the end the azurites will get the city back with the exception of having a goblin district or something

Swordpriest
2011-03-06, 10:41 PM
who says it would be a slaughter if the good guys win? why cant they just expel/banish/assimilate the non-militant gobos?

Precisely. I can't see why the Azurites can't rescue the prisoners and expel the hobgoblins without wiping out every one of them. Of course, if every hobgoblin fights to the death, then that's a different case.

I don't really see how the goblins have a "right" to the city, unless we're talking right of conquest. In that case, if the Azurites take it back, they'll have the same right, so we're back at the same point. At most, it's an ethical tossup.

MoonCat
2011-03-06, 10:49 PM
I think the civilians might want to stay there. It still gives them a place to trade with the elves, water protection, and plenty of room. Then the paladins would start invading, but they'd do that anyway. But for a place to rebuild, I think it would be pretty silly to relocate an entire nation after they've probably just settled down.

Note: In the back of War and XPs the Azure City guidebook says you need to have at least half human blood to live there.

veti
2011-03-06, 11:20 PM
Yes. We are discussing this. We're discussing whether it's better to root for a side who whips slaves, or a side that has no problem with exterminating entire settlements of sentient beings.

Setting aside for a moment the whole "Sapphire Guard" != "Azure City" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0287.html) thing... the SG did wrong because they believed it was necessary. The hobgoblins do it when (they acknowledge) it has zero or even negative utility because, in their own words, "it's fun".

It's like comparing someone who, say, shoots a cat that stares up a tree where a rare bird is nesting, with someone who grabs the same cat and, for no reason at all, sets fire to it. One is Wrong, the other is Evil.

Of course you're entitled to your own value system. But that's how I see it.

slayerx
2011-03-06, 11:26 PM
Yes. We are discussing this. We're discussing whether it's better to root for a side who whips slaves, or a side that has had small faction of its population that a few generations ago had no problem with exterminating entire settlements of sentient beings.
There fixed that for you...
Sapphire guard =/= Azure city
In no way should a group that does not even officially exist as far as the population knows, should speak for the greater population. The greater population had no say in anything they did. Furtharmore, this was something that happened 30 or so years ago; the only ones actually involved in the slaughter are likely old or dead; putting aside nut cases like miko there's no telling what changes have occured. Fact is, redcloak took his revenge out on people who never even had a clue what happened to his village.


I think you're exaggerating a bit there. Team Peregrine freed 112 prisoners - not enough slaves to build an economy on.

Nothing says that the 112 prisoners they released were the entire population of slaves... given the situation thousands of Azurites likely got left behind. So if there was only 112 slaves than that means the goblins did a lot of their own ethnic cleansing.

Swordpriest
2011-03-06, 11:38 PM
Very true. But keep in mind, that those were paladin's attacking. Those were the people (theoretically) held to a certain code of conduct. When the Azurites try to retake Azure City, it's going to be a force of mostly normal soldiers. I would give good odds that they try to kill anything with orange skin and fangs, regardless of gender, age, or ability to fight.

Ah, I see. So we are also judging every Azurite on the basis of what some of them might do at some point in the future, now? Guilty until proven innocent is the order of the day?

The Azurites don't "deserve" the city because they might handle the creatures that invaded their city a bit roughly at some undefined point in the future?


Yes. We are discussing this. We're discussing whether it's better to root for a side who whips slaves, or a side that has no problem with exterminating entire settlements of sentient beings.

Ah, okay. So if some people from a secret organization from my country went into another country a generation ago and killed a couple of dozen people, that gives the army of that other country the moral right to come into my hometown and kill or enslave everyone who is living there, who had no idea that any of this stuff happened and had nothing to do with it?

I think we're moving into the domain of reverse racism here, where the hobgoblins have the moral right to do anything to the Azurites they want because they are hobgoblins.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-07, 01:08 AM
I'm rooting for the Hobgoblins because I think the trade agreement with Cliffport would be enough to get them to change their ways and become less evil if still militant. Plus Jirix seems to be pretty cool and reasonable. Yes they are evil but if they can keep control of Goblintopia they might be redeemed through exposure to other cultures that aren't trying to kill them.


On the other hand the Azurites are the underdogs which must always be rooted for and have sweet characters and leaders such as O-chul, Hinjo, Niu, and Thanh, plus Lein. However while they are working with the Elves they won't show any mercy to any of the hobgoblins. Also one of the reasons they lost the city was due to nobles infighting so its their own fault.

Overall I'm not going to say this is an ethical thing or not. They are both intreasting and have their own valid reasons, to themselves at least, for wanting that land. Its going to be a bloody fight unless the Azurites back down and find another solution or unless the hobgoblins all leave for back home.

Dr.Epic
2011-03-07, 01:18 AM
what i'm trying to say is, the azurites have the right to conquer back their city, but we (the readers) don't see anymore the hobgoblins as a random enemy who deserves to be killed, we see them as a population like the humans, with their right to exist;
so if the azurites were to attack Gobbotopia, would that be "good"?
who would you root for?

I don't see them as that and not every reader does. If the hobgoblins are evil then I don't see the ethical problem. Besides, an empire can be evil. And this is just payback for what the hobgoblins did to the Azurites.

factotum
2011-03-07, 02:32 AM
Why are you assuming that the Azurites will just slaughter all the hobgoblins in the city when they retake it? Quite apart from the logistical difficulties of killing them all (there are twenty thousand or more of them) and then cleaning up the mess, the Azurites are still led by Paladins who would Fall for killing every man, woman and child in the place, regardless of their race or alignment.

Juggling Goth
2011-03-07, 02:46 AM
Redcloak is willing to negotiate (O-Chul knows this) so really they could negotiate for the greater good.

I don't think that's the impression O-Chul got of Redcloak, somehow.

Plus, we readers know Redcloak was never going to negotiate, and it was all in the interests of keeping hobgoblin control of Azure City. Redcloak has many qualities that make him an interesting and sympathetic villain, but an ability to listen to reason and back down is not one of them.

I mean, I would love for Redcloak and O-Chul to face each other again, but I think the result is gonna be less "oh yes, he was reasonable and open to negotiation" and more "SMITE EVIL!"

Forum Explorer
2011-03-07, 02:57 AM
Why are you assuming that the Azurites will just slaughter all the hobgoblins in the city when they retake it? Quite apart from the logistical difficulties of killing them all (there are twenty thousand or more of them) and then cleaning up the mess, the Azurites are still led by Paladins who would Fall for killing every man, woman and child in the place, regardless of their race or alignment.

Because of the elves attitude of "the only good goblin is a dead goblin". YMMV of course. Also there are only four paladins alive that I know of and Hinjo for one won't risk losing his elven allies.

hamishspence
2011-03-07, 03:44 AM
Ah, okay. So if some people from a secret organization from my country went into another country a generation ago and killed a couple of dozen people, that gives the army of that other country the moral right to come into my hometown and kill or enslave everyone who is living there, who had no idea that any of this stuff happened and had nothing to do with it?

A secret organization which has a leader, who is the country's monarch.

The paladins of Azure City are not secret- only the fact that they form a special organization, is.

Gredival
2011-03-07, 04:52 AM
This battle, the azurites would kill and vanquish every single hobgoblin in the town.

And now that we've been with redcloak and we've seen him struggle to finally create his Gobbotopia...

what i'm trying to say is, the azurites have the right to conquer back their city, but we (the readers) don't see anymore the hobgoblins as a random enemy who deserves to be killed, we see them as a population like the humans, with their right to exist;
so if the azurites were to attack Gobbotopia, would that be "good"?
who would you root for?

Trials and tribulations don't vindicate the end result. I'd argue that the goblins have a tremendous evil impact and the absence of Azure City is a tremendous loss of positive impact.


We're discussing whether it's better to root for a side who whips slaves, or a side that has no problem with exterminating entire settlements of sentient beings.

A side that has no problem with exterminating entire settlements of sentient beings AND whips elderly slaves vs. a side that has had small faction of its population that a few generations ago had no problem with exterminating entire settlements of sentient evil beings.

When they invaded the only one with any inkling of fighting "for Goblin freedom and equality" was Redcloak. As pointed out previously the main brunt of the army were there to kill humans.


Because of the elves attitude of "the only good goblin is a dead goblin". YMMV of course. Also there are only four paladins alive that I know of and Hinjo for one won't risk losing his elven allies.

Paladins.

This is war. It has formal rules of conduct. I can't imagine that if the Goblins officially raised a white flag, surrendered, and retreated peaceably that the Paladins could refuse to accept. Breaking common wartime rules of engagement screams unlawful.

hamishspence
2011-03-07, 04:57 AM
A side that has no problem with exterminating entire settlements of sentient beings AND whips elderly slaves vs. a side that has had small faction of its population that a few generations ago had no problem with exterminating entire settlements of sentient evil beings.

When did the Gobbotopians "exterminate entire settlements of sentient beings"? Even after invading Azure City, they did not exterminate it's population.

It's one generation, more than "a few generations" and more importantly, the person who ordered those massacres, was alive and ruling the city, until the day before the battle.

Gredival
2011-03-07, 05:40 AM
When did the Gobbotopians "exterminate entire settlements of sentient beings"? Even after invading Azure City, they did not exterminate it's population.

It's one generation, more than "a few generations" and more importantly, the person who ordered those massacres, was alive and ruling the city, until the day before the battle.

Firstly, I'm going to assume those not enslaved were killed, and in a situation like this I imagine that's no small number.

Secondly, even putting the morality differential between the two aside, the main point is that the Sapphire Guard's actions don't correlate to all citizens of Azure City. But the goblins' actions are their own.

Chaos rising
2011-03-07, 05:55 AM
There is no right answer. Both sides have committed their own wrongs.

faustin
2011-03-07, 06:06 AM
You forget one point: the Sapphire Guard Crusade exterminated a goblin village; the hobgoblins were no directly involved in the conflict, and before the Redcloak´s fascist movement the two subraces didn´t get along very well.
So I am not sure that the hobgoblins conquest of Azure City and the slaving of its people can be defined as "rightful revenge" (except only for Redcloak).

And honestly, do you think that the Azurites, after being conquered and eslaved by an evil (detect alignment) race and his evil lich ally would have any motive to show them mercy once the tables get turned? Put yourselves in their place (and remember that none of them read SoD)

Keejus
2011-03-07, 06:16 AM
the person who ordered those massacres, was alive and ruling the city, until the day before the battle.

Shojo: "Go kill the goblin with the red cloak; our diviners say he will bring great calamity."

Redcloak: "I'm convinced he doesn't have any information. But that's no reason to not torture him. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0548.html)"

It's not really an ethical issue as much as it is "One side is clearly and irredeemably evil and some members of the other side have some grey areas sometimes."

hamishspence
2011-03-07, 06:18 AM
In War & XPs, we find out the hobgoblins "have been kept penned up in the mountains for thirty years" by the Azurites.

As the the basic question, it shouldn't be so much a case of rooting for sides, as a case of rooting for outcomes.

Outcome- Gobbotopia continues to tyrannize over Azurite slave population.

Outcome- Gobbotopia signs a peace treaty with "New Azuritia", repatriates all its slaves- and passes laws banning slavery.

Outcome- Gobbotopia is invaded, its population escape, establish a new home (maybe through the rift) away from any likely enemies.

Outcome- Gobbotopia is invaded, much of its population destroyed- the remainder of it return to their old existence, in the mountains.

Outcome- Gobbotopia is sacked and its entire population killed or imprisoned.

You can probably think of others.

One can sympathise with the Gobbotopians- without rooting for the first outcome, where they both survive and retain slavery.

Koshiro
2011-03-07, 06:41 AM
It's not really an ethical issue as much as it is "One side is clearly and irredeemably evil and some members of the other side have some grey areas sometimes."
Either it's "some members" on both sides.
Or it's convenient, irrational generalization for both sides.

But to pick your favorite side for "eh... a few bad apples" and your least favorite side for "they are probably all like that" won't fly.

The Pilgrim
2011-03-07, 07:36 AM
I support the Hobgobblins. Specially when the other side has already a good place to settle. And specially when the other side is supported by evil elves.

hamishspence
2011-03-07, 07:46 AM
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0707.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0708.html

I wonder how common the "Elves are awesome" perspective will be among the Azurites?

Somehow, I don't think those strips were intended to make us sympathise with them, or those particular Azurites, for approving.

Burner28
2011-03-07, 08:08 AM
Can I take a third option and root for neither side?:smalltongue:

hamishspence
2011-03-07, 08:42 AM
My third option was to root for both sides to get something (the Azurites get their people back, the goblins get an end to adventurers hunting them for XP).

slayerx
2011-03-07, 09:05 AM
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0707.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0708.html

I wonder how common the "Elves are awesome" perspective will be among the Azurites?

After the hobgoblins took their city, destroyed their lives and killed and enslaved their loved ones, and that those who were involved and supported the attack make up the vast majority of the population... i would not be surprised if it was a pretty popular sentiment. Any if's or but's that the azurites might have had probably went out the window with that war.


A secret organization which has a leader, who is the country's monarch.

The paladins of Azure City are not secret- only the fact that they form a special organization, is.

That makes no difference. Fact is the sapphire guard took on actions that was beyond the general population's knowledge or consent, and the whole population should not pay for the crimes of one small faction from 30 years ago.

hamishspence
2011-03-07, 09:16 AM
That faction's head was still the ruler of the city.

Also- the fact that the average Azure City citizen is unaware of the existance of the Sapphire Guard as an organization, doesn't necessarily mean that they are unaware of the fact that paladins of Azure City have left the city, in large numbers, to attack goblins.

It's possible that it's only the "organization's existance" rather than the actions, that is unknown.

A case can be made that, when an organization commits atrocities, and has the resources of a country at its disposal, even if the average member of the country is unaware of the atrocities, invading and occupying the country, to destroy the organization, is a reasonable response.

"The whole population should not pay for the crimes of its leader, and its law enforcement/military officials" may be a reasonable statement as well,

but it doesn't alter the fact that the Sapphire Guard held a great deal of power in the country, even if their name was not known.

slayerx
2011-03-07, 09:30 AM
That faction's head was still the ruler of the city.

Ah yes, the unelected monarch who holds his position by birthright... there are reasons why shojo describes himself as a dictator.



A case can be made that, when an organization commits atrocities, and has the resources of a country at its disposal, even if the average member of the country is unaware of the atrocities, invading and occupying the country, to destroy the organization, is a reasonable response.


Or y'know... you could attempt to give the city an ultimatium to surrender the king and his paladins (most of whom are probably weren't around 30 or so years ago) and thus leave the rest of the city alone. Ofcourse Redcloak and his followers would never settle for that... Hell with an army that size the hobgoblins could have even negotiated to get the azurites to cut themselves a better deal. Really, consiering how Kabuto was willing to try and reason with a lich, i would think Shojo or hinjo would be willing to negotiate rather than risk a bloody battle that they could realistically loose. But god forbid they attempt peace and just go for the slaughter.

hamishspence
2011-03-07, 09:35 AM
Ah yes, the unelected monarch who holds his position by birthright... there are reasons why shojo describes himself as a dictator.

Which makes invasion more reasonable as the approach to dealing with the dictator, or his successor, and his organization, not less.

That said, Redcloak's main reason was to obtain control of a gate. Destroying the Sapphire Guard was just a bonus- but a big one:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0466.html

"At least no more young goblins will have to watch their families be slaughtered by blue-clad humans"


But god forbid they attempt peace and just go for the slaughter.


And when have we seen any Azurites be slaughtered, besides opposing soldiers, during the war?

polity4life
2011-03-07, 09:36 AM
After the hobgoblins took their city, destroyed their lives and killed and enslaved their loved ones, and that those who were involved and supported the attack make up the vast majority of the population... i would not be surprised if it was a pretty popular sentiment. Any if's or but's that the azurites might have had probably went out the window with that war.

That makes no difference. Fact is the sapphire guard took on actions that was beyond the general population's knowledge or consent, and the whole population should not pay for the crimes of one small faction from 30 years ago.

The extent to which the population of Azure City knew of the Sapphire Guard and it's actions are irrelevant. The citizens of Azure City have legitimized their government by accepting it. By virtue of accepting the government, the population has tacitly accepted the government's means of protecting the rights of every citizen. The government created the Sapphire Guard to protect the citizens from multiple threats. To put a more fine point on it, the citizenry of Azure City gave consent to the Sapphire Guard, it's creation, activities, and continuation, by supporting the government that begat the organization. That's social contract theory at work.

Does this mean they should have to be treated as they have by goblins? No. The two are in no way related. However, I do believe that goblin race has the right of self-actualization. Their means, though, leave much to be desired.

Keejus
2011-03-07, 09:42 AM
But to pick your favorite side for "eh... a few bad apples" and your least favorite side for "they are probably all like that" won't fly.
Redcloak is clearly evil, even if he claims he's no worse than anyone else. The hobgoblins whip slaves for fun and go to war for fun.

You could make a case for Jirix being a decent guy, but everything else we've seen is a race that kills, torments and tortures for fun.

How this is even remotely comparable to having an elite group of warriors whose missions sometime evolve killing for far better reasons than "It's funny, heh", is beyond me. The average Azurite has no desire to go to war, nor to kill goblins.

I'm not picking favorites there; I quite like team evil and I'm rooting for the goblins to stay in power, because it's an interesting subplot and it's far more exciting than the restoration of Azure City would be, but that's not what this thread is asking.

Until they stop killing and torturing slaves for giggles, the goblins are clearly in the wrong.

Burner28
2011-03-07, 09:42 AM
Okay let me get this straight and please correct me on something? Is it true it that the Azure City paladins massacred a bunch of innocent goblins(and this is sometwhat related to Redcloak's plan) I haven't read Start of Darkness.

slayerx
2011-03-07, 09:53 AM
Which makes invasion more reasonable as the approach to dealing with the dictator, or his successor, and his organization, not less.
Without making any sort of attempt for a less bloody resolution? no it does not.


The extent to which the population of Azure City knew of the Sapphire Guard and it's actions are irrelevant. The citizens of Azure City have legitimized their government by accepting it. By virtue of accepting the government, the population has tacitly accepted the government's means of protecting the rights of every citizen. The government created the Sapphire Guard to protect the citizens from multiple threats. To put a more fine point on it, the citizenry of Azure City gave consent to the Sapphire Guard, it's creation, activities, and continuation, by supporting the government that begat the organization. That's social contract theory at work.


The citizens of Azure city legitimize the government based ONLY on what they know about it. If the citizens do not know about something going on they can not do anything about it.
For example

Also- the fact that the average Azure City citizen is unaware of the existance of the Sapphire Guard as an organization, doesn't necessarily mean that they are unaware of the fact that paladins of Azure City have left the city, in large numbers, to attack goblins.
Shojo: "I have sent my paladins to kill some evil goblins that threaten us"
Citizen: "evil that threaten us? well that sounds reasonable"

It be a different issue if Shojo sent out proclaimations stating that his paladins were slaughtering women and children; but i rather doubt he'd do something like that... Not to mention again that events were are talking about happened 30 or so years ago; no telling what changes might have happened in that time even with the same ruler.


Okay let me get this straight and please correct me on something? Is it true it that the Azure City paladins massacred a bunch of innocent goblins(and this is sometwhat related to Redcloak's plan) I haven't read Strat of Darkness.

pretty much; some were part of the dark one's plans, but others in the village were just women and children and the paladins did not discriminate

y'know i realize now that we probably should have just thrown on a SOD tag to this thread since we have been disregarding the use of spoiler tags this whole time... can't really discuss the ethical issues around gobbotopia without talking about what helped inspire its creation; it is afterall the primary defense for the existence of gobbotopia

Manga Shoggoth
2011-03-07, 09:57 AM
Okay let me get this straight and please correct me on something? Is it true it that the Azure City paladins massacred a bunch of innocent goblins(and this is sometwhat related to Redcloak's plan) I haven't read Strat of Darkness.

Pretty much...

In Start of Darkness, Redcloak is being ordained as a priest of the Dark One when the Sapphire Guild attack, intent on killing the High Priest (who is wearing the red cloak, which turns out to be an artefact of some form). The high priest is genuinely a threat.

The entire village is wiped out - as far as I can remember, only Redcloak and his brother Right-Eye survive. His sister is hidden in a cave, but beyond that I don't recall her fate.

The Paladins are pretty callous about it as well.

Keejus
2011-03-07, 09:57 AM
They did, to kill Redcloak's predecessor, who was living in a camp with a number of other goblins. It'd been divined that the Bearer of the Crimson Mantle was a threat to creation itself, so they'd set out to stop him.

They did have entirely too much fun slaughtering children, but this should not reflect on Shojo or an Azurite citizen

Howler Dagger
2011-03-07, 10:00 AM
well, in my opinion, the Azurites WONT even try to take back Azure City. Why?
1. We have seen the incompetence (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0501.html) of the recruits for the AC army, the Saphire Guard is close to nothing, and the Nobles wont lend there personal forces (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0414.html), so the chances that they will be able to retake Azure City ATM is close to nothing if they dont rebuild their empire on the Western Continent
2. If they rebuild their empire, something makes me think that the people wouldnt want to embark on a journey that would probably take years(V had to teleport them there, you know) to avenge people long-dead.
3. And by the time the Azurites COULD think about retaking it, Gobbotopia will be EXTREMELY powerful, to the point where it might be hopeless for them to try to retake the city
4. Also, taking their military out of the WC would be a bad idea, since Tarquin or his party members could send one of their nations to conquer them, then the would be left with no empire once again.

hamishspence
2011-03-07, 10:01 AM
In the War & XPs chapter commentaries, this is characterized as a "decades-long history of extermination of goblinoids and other humanoids" and as "most damning of all" of the bad things about Azure City.

As well as it being a "city that in many ways failed to live up to its ideals"

So, there is an element of it reflecting on Azure City as a whole.

polity4life
2011-03-07, 10:20 AM
Without making any sort of attempt for a less bloody resolution? no it does not.



The citizens of Azure city legitimize the government based ONLY on what they know about it. If the citizens do not know about something going on they can not do anything about it.
For example

Shojo: "I have sent my paladins to kill some evil goblins that threaten us"
Citizen: "evil that threaten us? well that sounds reasonable"

It be a different issue if Shojo sent out proclaimations stating that his paladins were slaughtering women and children; but i rather doubt he'd do something like that... Not to mention again that events were are talking about happened 30 or so years ago; no telling what changes might have happened in that time even with the same ruler.

First, let me apologize for the long quote and my message board /fail. I'm interested in addressing the counter points you made.

It sounds like you are stating that a government is only legitimate if there is full disclosure to its citizens. We both know that is neither feasible nor true. Legitimacy is still given to the government by virtue of its continued existence. The citizens may be ignorant of a number and breadth of government activities, many of which are probably very mundane (sewer services offered in Azure City, for example). That does not diminish the legitimacy of the government. Legitimacy is only diminished if the citizens rebel.

The events that sparked Redcloak's hatred of Azure City do not bear much relevance in the discussion of legitimacy of the Azurian government. If we are now talking about the treatment of Azurians left behind after the sacking of the city, which I think you are, then we're onto another discussion. I would argue then that the Azurians are not suffering due to the activities of the Sapphire Guard. Rather, they are suffering due to the activities of the hobgoblins who, for whatever reason, seem as though that they would enslave and slaughter regardless of the sentiments or motivations of their leaders.

From what I can tell, Redcloak's history has only altered his ethical considerations toward his own race and fomented the desire to establish a goblin nation. I would argue that his treatment of the Azurians would be just as harsh even if he did not suffer from such a tragic past.

hamishspence
2011-03-07, 10:37 AM
From what I can tell, Redcloak's history has only altered his ethical considerations toward his own race and fomented the desire to establish a goblin nation. I would argue that his treatment of the Azurians would be just as harsh even if he did not suffer from such a tragic past.

In SoD, there is Redcloak's "I have a dream" speech- to his own followers- about a world where people are judged not by the colour of their eyes or the pointyness of their teeth, but the contents of their character sheets.

I'd say his history is at least a factor in why he hates humans in general and Azurites in particular. It may also modify how severely they are treated.

That said- the hobgoblins have been "penned in the mountains for thirty years" according to War & XPs- it's possible that they have their own reasons to hate the Azurites, and that some of the treatment may be as much due to them, as to Redcloak.

slayerx
2011-03-07, 11:02 AM
It sounds like you are stating that a government is only legitimate if there is full disclosure to its citizens. We both know that is neither feasible nor true. Legitimacy is still given to the government by virtue of its continued existence. The citizens may be ignorant of a number and breadth of government activities, many of which are probably very mundane (sewer services offered in Azure City, for example). That does not diminish the legitimacy of the government. Legitimacy is only diminished if the citizens rebel.


I am talking about the drgree to which the citizens should be held responcible for the actions of their government. you basically say that because the citizens legitimize their gov't they are automatically responsible for everything it does. However, why would they draw away support if they do not know what their gov't is doing?

hypothetically, lets say the citizens were against the actions of the sapphire guard. If they knew what the guard was doing they might protest against their gov't, try to change it and put a stop to their actions. As you said legitimacy is diminished only by rebelling but the citizens needs to have a reason to rebel, and without knowing about such terrible things they don't have a reason to rebel. why would they rebel if there is nothing, to their limited knowledge, to rebel against? This is why i said the gov't is only legitimized based on what the citizens know about it and why the citizens should not be held responsible for the more secretive actions of their gov't.

Dark Matter
2011-03-07, 11:14 AM
Either it's "some members" on both sides.
Or it's convenient, irrational generalization for both sides.Or one side is "Neutral, but led by Paladins who are always LG" and the other side is "Usually Evil".

"Some members" implies a moral equivalence that's simply not true. The Dark One is an Evil god, his Clerics (by definition) support him. Goblotopia is an evil country with evil laws which enable and promote evil. The amount of evil in the world should go up, not down, as Goblotopia gains power and influence. Things are going to get worse because in D&D Evil works.

Yes, humans can be evil, but the group of humans we're talking about isn't the Empire of Blood, and their leadership isn't Elan's Father's crew.

An Enemy Spy
2011-03-07, 11:14 AM
let's say the story is over (the order won, snarl problem is fixed, Xykon is killed)
the azurites want to recapture Azure city from the hobgoblins (and maybe they enlist the help of the Order)

Now the ethical problem is, we know the Azurites are GOOD and the hobgoblins are EVIL.
If the azurites went to attack Gobbotopia, that wouldn't be a normal battle.

if a kingdom wants to conquer another, only their armies fight, and the victor rules both kindoms.
in This battle, the azurites would kill and vanquish every single hobgoblin in the town.
And now that we've been with redcloak and we've seen him struggle to finally create his Gobbotopia...

i'd personally root for the hobgoblins.


what i'm trying to say is, the azurites have the right to conquer back their city, but we (the readers) don't see anymore the hobgoblins as a random enemy who deserves to be killed, we see them as a population like the humans, with their right to exist;
so if the azurites were to attack Gobbotopia, would that be "good"?
who would you root for?

Doesn't matter. The gobbos stormed the city and slaughtered the inhabitants and enslaved everyone left. This is like saying it would be wrong to take back back France from Germany because not every individual German soldier is a bad person.
The city rightfully belongs to the Azurites and they have the right to take it back.

hamishspence
2011-03-07, 11:18 AM
Or one side is "Neutral, but led by Paladins who are always LG" and the other side is "Usually Evil".

We've already seen just how bad "paladins who are always LG" can get, in Origin of PCs- a paladin saying of orcs- who are not in fact there to attack anyone- "They're listed as chaotic evil, so we can kill them without any alignment problems".

Is this a one-off, or a general symptom of a world where certain races get a pass on behaviour that leads others to be described as Evil?

Forum Explorer
2011-03-07, 11:56 AM
Or one side is "Neutral, but led by Paladins who are always LG" and the other side is "Usually Evil".

"Some members" implies a moral equivalence that's simply not true. The Dark One is an Evil god, his Clerics (by definition) support him. Goblotopia is an evil country with evil laws which enable and promote evil. The amount of evil in the world should go up, not down, as Goblotopia gains power and influence. Things are going to get worse because in D&D Evil works.

Yes, humans can be evil, but the group of humans we're talking about isn't the Empire of Blood, and their leadership isn't Elan's Father's crew.


That attitude is exactly why the Dark One is trying to get his plan to work. "Goblin's are usually evil so its alright to kill them," is a common idea amoung individual adventurers and cities. Like what happened with Yikyik. So the hobgoblins may not have a specific reason like Redcloak does to hate Azure city (other than the mention in the War and XPs about being penned up for 30 years) but they would have been raided by adventruers and attacked everytime they left the valley because they are labled as XP fodder by the gods.

Roderick_BR
2011-03-07, 12:13 PM
In in favor of treating any inteligent race as a normal population, no matter how warrying they are. I put it more as a cultural than generic thing.

So, they invaded, killed hundreds (thousands)? Pillaged, tortured, killed, you name it.

The former Azurite has as much right to reclaim it as ever. Having a paladin-based army, though, they'd do better to attack only their military, and drive the rest away, unlike the hobgoblins that attacked civil spots.

Honestly, I don't see how can you be in the hobgoblins' favor.

It's like a gang of criminals invading your town, killing your family, and taking your house, and then you saying the police doesn't have a right to go in there and arrest them and give back your house.

TriForce
2011-03-07, 12:34 PM
first of all, the reason redcloak invaded had nothing to do with the goblin "oppression" (assuming that is real and not just a delusion by a biased goblin with a red cloak) the reason they invaded was the gate, plain and simple.

so, just judging on who has more right on the gobbotopia/azure city grounds, its obviously the azurites, they were born there and lived there their entire lives, for generations as far as we know. the hobgoblins had a place to stay, and seeing how they were obviously thriving there, had no real need or rightful claim to the city, this would be true even if the paladins were evil and the goblins good, so in any case im rooting for the azurites, they can do whatever they want to drive the invaders from their lands. the fact that they made it a goblin city changes nothing.

but as been pointed out before, the paladins arent evil, and the goblins not good (at least 99.9% are not) if you think the goblins will change their ways and stop being evil now that they have the city, your not reading the same comic as i have. even at best, gobbotopia would be another empire of blood type place, with the only difference that anyone being born there has a simple higher chance of being evil then the avarage human. as the few goblins with a good alignment would be outcasts (the discription of how älways X, usually X, etc works in monster manual specifically states this) they wouldnt stay in the city. good aligned beings wont be able to live normally in a city where almost veryone else is evil. they would either be treated as **** becouse of their different vieuwpoints, or they would get so pissed off by the vieuwpoints of everyone else that they leave. so basically, thats also a reason i dont mind seeing gobbotopia's end.

tl;dr : yes goblins have had some sympatethic vieuwpoints, but they simply have no right to be in AC, and on top of that, its a evil empire, and you cant have too few of those

G-Man Graves
2011-03-07, 12:36 PM
The former Azurite has as much right to reclaim it as ever. Having a paladin-based army, though, they'd do better to attack only their military, and drive the rest away, unlike the hobgoblins that attacked civil spots.



The irony of this statement is that when we've seen each side attack the other, it was the paladin's that killed civilians, and the hobgoblins that only attacked military targets (although this was probably because the civilians had evacuated).

Forum Explorer
2011-03-07, 12:44 PM
In in favor of treating any inteligent race as a normal population, no matter how warrying they are. I put it more as a cultural than generic thing.

So, they invaded, killed hundreds (thousands)? Pillaged, tortured, killed, you name it.

The former Azurite has as much right to reclaim it as ever. Having a paladin-based army, though, they'd do better to attack only their military, and drive the rest away, unlike the hobgoblins that attacked civil spots.

Honestly, I don't see how can you be in the hobgoblins' favor.

It's like a gang of criminals invading your town, killing your family, and taking your house, and then you saying the police doesn't have a right to go in there and arrest them and give back your house.

Oh I'm only rooting for the hobgoblins because except for a few Azurites, the group on a whole has been annoying and doing everything possible to sabatoge themselves. While the hobgoblins have been competant and have worked really hard to conquer the city. Plus its fun to root for evil every once in a while.

tis_tom
2011-03-07, 01:30 PM
I'm unsure as to why in this thread an act of utilitarianism is being equated to an act that is evil:

The Sapphire Guard's attack on Redcloak's village was not out of a hatred for hobgoblins, but out of their duty to the greater good: i.e. preventing the end of the universe as they know it by preventing sabotage of the gates (we can tell this because they are explicitly looking for the goblin in the red cloak- they're not killing for sport for example). Although many may argue utilitarianism is wrong, or has too many flaws (I for one am not one of them: I believe it is only in extreme circumstances that utilitarianism isn't justified: slavery/hard labour for the minority for example), that is -not- to say the acts committed are evil ones: wrong/right is different to good/evil.

The invasion of Azure City however was not an act of utilitarianism in trying to establish the greatest good for the greatest number: it was in order to a. obtain the gate in order to use it for evil; and b. to destroy both the Sapphire Guard and Azure City: the civilian inhabitants of which had nothing to do with the fight at hand.

Anyway! The Azurites should have the city returned to them, and any potential 'ethical dilemmas' are minute in comparison to the ethical justifications:

For this aforementioned selfishly-motivated non-utilitarian purpose of the hob-goblins: the Azurites have been forcibly removed from their homes and were reduced to refugees who arguably would not have survived much longer at sea had Uber-V not intervened. This makes the hob-goblin's establishment in the area unjustified as this act had NO beneficial consequences for anyone other than the hobgoblins at hand. Furthermore to argue that they deserve the city because they had the superior military force to is a pretty barbaric way of looking at things.

Now if the situation had been that the majority (or at least a large section) of Azure City (not just the SG) went out of their way to slaughter hobgoblins for sport and pleasure, then maybe the invasion could have been justified, as it would be to protect the hobgoblin race. However even then there are enough alternative options (such as diplomacy) to render full blown invasion a less appealing choice. Instead it was to obtain control of the gate and to satiate some of their hatred towards humans: motivations that are both evil and wrong. The Azurites therefore need not worry about the ethics, as the Hobgoblins' actions far out-strip anything the Azurites are doing.

grimbold
2011-03-07, 02:00 PM
Speak for yourself please. I still see the hobgoblins as a random enemy that deserves to be killed. Gobbotopia's economy is still based on slavery.

That doesn't mean it will happen - in fact, I suspect most Azurites will be more than happy to settle down where Vaarsuvius put them.

agreed
the hobgoblins are clearly evil

Howler Dagger
2011-03-07, 02:09 PM
Even if they are evil, do they deserve to get killed? The south portion of America's economy was once based on slavery, does that mean we deserve to be killed?

King of Nowhere
2011-03-07, 02:18 PM
Ok, it was the sapphire guard that killed those goblin children, but do you think the average Azurite would have given a damn about them in the first place, even before Azure city was conquered?
How many Azurites would have objected if the hobbos were exgerminated to the last?
We can realistically say, very few.

So I'm for the "no one is really rigth or wrong" party.
Ok, maybe the hobbos are more wrong and the azurite more rigth (if only because what is revealed in SoD is not common knowledge among the two factions).
But I'm rooting for a peaceful solution of the conflict.
I don't expect it to end in cheers and love, tha would be far too irrealistic, but I was hoping for a truce of some sort. Then maybe after generations without great acts of hostilities some real recconciliation could happen.

Anyway, that's why I hope Gobbotopia will stand. I see it as the only way to get this happy ending. The Azurites settle on the island, the hobbos settle on the continent, they give up on human slavery because influenced by economic engagement, Gobbotopia is recognized by other nations, no one tries to invade and the hobbos have a good land and no longer reason to invade someone else, everything settles down without other blood being shed.
Remember, hobbos don't need slaves to sustain. They were able to live in the mountains where the land was much worse, and I didn't saw slaves there. And I don't think they could feed 30000 people just with raids.
And without humans killing them for xp, maybe the hobbos will stop hating the humans, and will lose most of their evilness.

If the Azurites regain control of their city, thousands of innocents will die on both sides, then goblinoids and humans will be back to endless, pointless figth.

If the Azurites could bargain with the hobbos, getting their city back but giving the hobbos some land and a peace treaty, it ccould be a good ending, but I don't think any side would trust the other.

hamishspence
2011-03-07, 02:18 PM
The Sapphire Guard's attack on Redcloak's village was not out of a hatred for hobgoblins, but out of their duty to the greater good: i.e. preventing the end of the universe as they know it by preventing sabotage of the gates (we can tell this because they are explicitly looking for the goblin in the red cloak- they're not killing for sport for example.

the main problem with that is what they say and do after they have achieved their perceived goal:

"Exterminate the rest and let us be done here"-

and they slaughter them to the last small child- excepting Redcloak and Right-Eye- Redcloak manages to save Right-Eye, but not his little sister.

tis_tom
2011-03-07, 02:20 PM
This situation is not comparable to the one of the South. The slave-based economy of the U.S South was terrible- however we shouldn't judge it by our modern day standards. If there was a similar situation in the present day with our more developed ethics, system of human rights, and understanding that race does not make someone inferior/deserving of slavery, then although killing the nation would not be justified: prevention of it certainly would be.

tis_tom
2011-03-07, 02:24 PM
the main problem with that is what they say and do after they have achieved their perceived goal:

"Exterminate the rest and let us be done here"-

and they slaughter them to the last small child- excepting Redcloak and Right-Eye- Redcloak manages to save Right-Eye, but not his little sister.

Well the cloak in the hands of any goblin in the area would have resulted in yet another Red Cloak: as is what happened here. Killing the remaining goblins was necessary.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-07, 02:26 PM
Well the cloak in the hands of any goblin in the area would have resulted in yet another Red Cloak: as is what happened here. Killing the remaining goblins was necessary.

why didn't they take the cloak?:smallconfused:

NerfTW
2011-03-07, 02:39 PM
why didn't they take the cloak?:smallconfused:

Because Redcloak ran away.

MoonCat
2011-03-07, 02:47 PM
why didn't they take the cloak?:smallconfused:

They killed the prior Redcloak, then our Redcloak took the cloak from him and wore it, after saving his brother he ran away.

G-Man Graves
2011-03-07, 02:53 PM
Because Redcloak ran away.

Redcloak was only able to get to said red cloak because they walked away from it to kill the remainder of the community. After completing their stated goal.

Warren Dew
2011-03-07, 02:55 PM
The irony of this statement is that when we've seen each side attack the other, it was the paladin's that killed civilians, and the hobgoblins that only attacked military targets (although this was probably because the civilians had evacuated).
The slaves the hobgoblins whip to death are "military targets"?

G-Man Graves
2011-03-07, 03:17 PM
The slaves the hobgoblins whip to death are "military targets"?

No. They're slaves. A completely different set of "rules" applies after you've won. Let's focus on the issue of what happened during the fighting.

NerfTW
2011-03-07, 03:18 PM
Redcloak was only able to get to said red cloak because they walked away from it to kill the remainder of the community. After completing their stated goal.

Besides the fact that they might not have known what the cloak was, or who the actual threat was

(We have no idea anyone besides the bearer knows the Crimson Mantle's power. This is backed up by Redcloak's not knowing until he put it on.)

they also probably didn't expect Red Cloak to get away. Keep in mind he also exhibited a rather impressive "Smite Good" ability that shattered a Paladin's head, at which point he ran. During this scene, we see the paladins searching for survivors, including killing his sister in the cave.

Redcloak got away in the confusion. It's not like the paladins just said "our job's done!" and walked away. And it's also likely they don't know that the Crimson Mantle is anything other than a fashion accessory. For all we know, the Sapphire Guard viewed it as more of a cult than one goblin with special knowledge.

MoonCat
2011-03-07, 03:24 PM
Miko called him the Bearer of The Crimson Mantle. They know it's important, despite not knowing exactly.

tis_tom
2011-03-07, 03:44 PM
Besides the fact that they might not have known what the cloak was, or who the actual threat was

(We have no idea anyone besides the bearer knows the Crimson Mantle's power. This is backed up by Redcloak's not knowing until he put it on.)

...
And it's also likely they don't know that the Crimson Mantle is anything other than a fashion accessory. For all we know, the Sapphire Guard viewed it as more of a cult than one goblin with special knowledge.

SoD spoiler: they specifically say that "one among you threatens the very foundation of creation itself", then in the next strip they specifically note the red cloak as a primary target.. I'd say they certainly know what the cloak is about.

veti
2011-03-07, 04:18 PM
well, in my opinion, the Azurites WONT even try to take back Azure City. Why?
1. We have seen the incompetence (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0501.html) of the recruits for the AC army, the Saphire Guard is close to nothing, and the Nobles wont lend there personal forces (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0414.html), so the chances that they will be able to retake Azure City ATM is close to nothing if they dont rebuild their empire on the Western Continent

Recruits are always incompetent, that's why they need training. After training, it's a different story. And the nobles will definitely lend their forces to retake the city, once they're convinced (a) it's the only way to get their land back, (b) Hinjo is willing to confiscate their land and hand it over to reward those who do take part, (c) every week they wait, their buildings and investments are losing value as the hobgoblins reshape everything to suit their economic needs, and (d) the reinvasion might be viable.

Hinjo may not be the sharpest political tool in the box, but he's capable of working that much out.


2. If they rebuild their empire, something makes me think that the people wouldnt want to embark on a journey that would probably take years(V had to teleport them there, you know) to avenge people long-dead.
3. And by the time the Azurites COULD think about retaking it, Gobbotopia will be EXTREMELY powerful, to the point where it might be hopeless for them to try to retake the city

Both points based on the assumption that they won't make the attempt within the next ten years. I think they'll make it within the next ten months.


4. Also, taking their military out of the WC would be a bad idea, since Tarquin or his party members could send one of their nations to conquer them, then the would be left with no empire once again.

They don't have an empire, they have an unoccupied island. At present nobody else cares about it (or it wouldn't be unoccupied). Their best bet for avoiding Tarquin's attention is to keep a very low profile and not try to establish any kind of presence on the mainland at all.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-07, 04:29 PM
(b) Hinjo is willing to confiscate their land and hand it over to reward those who do take part, ((d) the reinvasion might be viable.

Hinjo may not be the sharpest political tool in the box, but he's capable of working that much out.



Both points based on the assumption that they won't make the attempt within the next ten years. I think they'll make it within the next ten months.



I disagree that Hinjo would be able to handle either of those points. He seems to be too nice to confiscate their land and reward the Katos and he couldn't convince them to defend a highly fortified city. How is he going to get them to agree to assulting a well defended city?


I don't think they will make a reinvasion attempt in the next ten months. They are just setting up on this new island. They need to build and establish a base and make sure its capable of defending itself before setting off on a counter-attack. The only immediate hope for the reconquest of Azure city lies in the Resistance.

veti
2011-03-07, 05:24 PM
I disagree that Hinjo would be able to handle either of those points. He seems to be too nice to confiscate their land and reward the Katos and he couldn't convince them to defend a highly fortified city. How is he going to get them to agree to assulting a well defended city?

Thing is - what makes nobles 'noble'?

Obviously they have more money than anyone else. But money is limited, and once the nobles-in-exile have spent all theirs, they're basically back to commoners. What sets them apart in the long term is their land, which is the source of their income. That's what their private forces are for - not to protect their strongboxes, but to protect their land.

Every week their land is under hobgoblin control, they're bleeding cash.

So why did they refuse to join the defence of Azure City? That's mostly down to Kubota. He was the one who convinced them not to fight for Hinjo, on the grounds that he, Kubota, could stage a coup and institute a regime that would be more friendly to their interests. But even that requires retaking the city within a short timeframe.

Now that Kubota's gone, unless there's another leader, the coup option is off the table, and the best the nobles can hope for is to regain their former position.

Finally: it is a standard law in feudal societies that nobles are obliged to lend military aid in time of need. That's pretty much the entire justification for their privileges. Hinjo merely has to point out that they've already betrayed that obligation once, and he'll have all the moral leverage he needs to justify confiscating anything and everything from them, the moment he has the power to do so, unless they do something to make amends.

slayerx
2011-03-07, 06:15 PM
No. They're slaves. A completely different set of "rules" applies after you've won. Let's focus on the issue of what happened during the fighting.
So killing citizens during the fight bad, killing them afterward ok. Got it


Miko called him the Bearer of The Crimson Mantle. They know it's important, despite not knowing exactly.
That doesn't really point out the true important of the mantle...
For all miko knew the crimson mantle could have been nothing more than a symbol, a simple sign that the goblin wearing it is the high priest of the dark one... Does not mean she knows all the divine and magic properties granted by the mantle.


I disagree that Hinjo would be able to handle either of those points. He seems to be too nice to confiscate their land and reward the Katos and he couldn't convince them to defend a highly fortified city. How is he going to get them to agree to assulting a well defended city?

I don't think they will make a reinvasion attempt in the next ten months. They are just setting up on this new island. They need to build and establish a base and make sure its capable of defending itself before setting off on a counter-attack. The only immediate hope for the reconquest of Azure city lies in the Resistance.

Considering how Kubota was planning on reconquering the city himself, i think Hinjo would find a reason for the noble to return... I would suspect that their political power and living status would be effected living in exile. I mean they would likely not have the same respect they might have once had when it came to other countries, and they left most of their worldly possessions and fortune behind. And their new nation will be nothing compared to what they had with their old nation... its similar to the reason why Kubota refused to just separate and go on his own, because any nation he would found himself would be so much less than what he used to have


Another factor i might throw in is the possibility of gaining support from their old allies... Once Xykon leaves with his most powerful allies hinjo might have enough to convince them that helping recapture azure city is in their best interests as opposed to allow the goblin nation to grow. Furthermore he might be able to show evidence of progress if the resistance makes some serious ground

I might also think that attacking Gobbotopia might be easier for the Azurites than it was for the goblins... first the walls have never been properly repaired and as such may fail with relative ease. And Second the Azurites will be able to launch an attack from the sea which may be easier than assaulting the walls. I might also say that one thing the Azurites could try is setting up a navel blockade and perform a more classic style of seige, starving and weakening the goblins by cutting off their trade routes; one problem of gobbotopia is that it is not self sufficient and relies on trade to keep it running. Bonus if they can find a way to sneak supplies to the resistance to keep them reasonably fed and able to fight.

G-Man Graves
2011-03-07, 06:31 PM
So killing citizens during the fight bad, killing them afterward ok. Got it.

We know that they at least tried killed one (read: 1) slave, one that was no longer considered "useful". They probably don't go around killing slaves for the same reason that every civilization to ever use slaves ever has tried to avoid killing slaves. Not very efficient.

Koshiro
2011-03-07, 07:06 PM
Redcloak is clearly evil, even if he claims he's no worse than anyone else. The hobgoblins whip slaves for fun and go to war for fun.
I must have missed the strip where we see every single Hobgoblin man, woman and child whip slaves for fun. Could you link to it?
(As for war, I'm just gonna speculate and say the Hobgoblins in their vast majority went to war because they were told to.)

veti
2011-03-07, 07:09 PM
(As for war, I'm just gonna speculate and say the Hobgoblins in their vast majority went to war because they were told to.)

So the ones shown here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0422.html) would be a highly unrepresentative minority then?

Narren
2011-03-07, 08:24 PM
We know that they at least tried killed one (read: 1) slave, one that was no longer considered "useful". They probably don't go around killing slaves for the same reason that every civilization to ever use slaves ever has tried to avoid killing slaves. Not very efficient.

I'm not sure what the point is here. Does the fact that they only kill useless slaves make them better than if they killed them during the battle?

G-Man Graves
2011-03-07, 09:02 PM
I'm not sure what the point is here. Does the fact that they only kill useless slaves make them better than if they killed them during the battle?

Yes, actually. It is better that they treated individuals that they consider property poorly than wantonly slaughtering civilians in battle. As I've mentioned, there is ZERO confirmation that any slaves have been killed.

Dark Matter
2011-03-07, 10:07 PM
That attitude is exactly why the Dark One is trying to get his plan to work. "Goblin's are usually evil so its alright to kill them,"...First, "Usually Evil" is something you have to earn. The cultural problem is we humans are used to thinking of people as neutral or "good if they're left alone". Granted, any random goblin can be good, even to the point of goblin paladins, but trying to pretend "usually evil" isn't a deep cause for concern is naive.

Further, these aren't goblins we don't know anything about. They're followers of TDO (who is big time evil), their Clerical organization is also evil, etc. We're past the point where we can even say "usually evil", we should simply say "they're evil".


We've already seen just how bad "paladins who are always LG" can get, in Origin of PCs- a paladin saying of orcs- who are not in fact there to attack anyone- "They're listed as chaotic evil, so we can kill them without any alignment problems". Is this a one-off, or a general symptom of a world where certain races get a pass on behaviour that leads others to be described as Evil?The issue isn't the Paladins behavior. The issue is, would he have fallen if he'd pulled a stunt like that? Or for that matter, if he'd managed to kill his party's LG cleric (which is something else he planned). I think we have to say this was a guy headed for a fall.


Even if they are evil, do they deserve to get killed?Even Belkar doesn't deserve to die purely for being evil, but he does for his various actions. Those goblins certainly need to be stopped, and our expectation is that they'll continue doing their thing until they're stopped.


But I'm rooting for a peaceful solution of the conflict.... maybe after generations without great acts of hostilities some real reconciliation could happen.What you're arguing is that, without the Paladins around to repress them, the goblins will become less evil. However their being evil predates them being hunted for xp.

This is D&D, there are evil gods with evil clerics who actively reward evil. In D&D, evil *works* and it's expected that good and evil will be at odds.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-08, 12:27 AM
First, "Usually Evil" is something you have to earn. The cultural problem is we humans are used to thinking of people as neutral or "good if they're left alone". Granted, any random goblin can be good, even to the point of goblin paladins, but trying to pretend "usually evil" isn't a deep cause for concern is naive.

Further, these aren't goblins we don't know anything about. They're followers of TDO (who is big time evil), their Clerical organization is also evil, etc. We're past the point where we can even say "usually evil", we should simply say "they're evil".

The issue isn't the Paladins behavior. The issue is, would he have fallen if he'd pulled a stunt like that? Or for that matter, if he'd managed to kill his party's LG cleric (which is something else he planned). I think we have to say this was a guy headed for a fall.

Even Belkar doesn't deserve to die purely for being evil, but he does for his various actions. Those goblins certainly need to be stopped, and our expectation is that they'll continue doing their thing until they're stopped.

What you're arguing is that, without the Paladins around to repress them, the goblins will become less evil. However their being evil predates them being hunted for xp.

This is D&D, there are evil gods with evil clerics who actively reward evil. In D&D, evil *works* and it's expected that good and evil will be at odds.

The goblins were created to be XP for adventurers. So them being evil doesn't predate that situation.

Lord_Gareth
2011-03-08, 12:39 AM
The number of folks on this forum that attempt to justify genocide disturb me. Allow me to make a blanket statement:

Genocide is never a good act. No, not even then.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-08, 12:57 AM
The number of folks on this forum that attempt to justify genocide disturb me. Allow me to make a blanket statement:

Genocide is never a good act. No, not even then.

err who's been trying to justify genocide? :smallconfused:

factotum
2011-03-08, 02:58 AM
err who's been trying to justify genocide? :smallconfused:

Presumably all the people who are arguing it would be right and proper for the Azurites to slaughter every single hobgoblin in Azure City while retaking it?

KillItWithFire
2011-03-08, 06:48 AM
Alignment doesn't even matter in this case. The Azurites were living in their nice walled city and the hobgoblins came and changed that. The Azurites do have a right o retake their city and the fact that it's now called "Gobbotopia" makes no difference.

Also, being listed as usually evil does not mean that all these goblins are good. Exceptions are rare by this rule. We've already seen one examle of these goblins cruelty in the slave whipping scene and until you link me to scene where they help an elderly azurite cross the street we have no evidence of their being good. In a wartime situation you can't not attack a city for fear that you might kill the 3 good goblins residing within it.

Retaking the city would not be unethical until the azurites start murdering non-combatents in the street. This is not genocide because this is not the same random group of goblins we see in SoD, this is a legitimate army of hobgoblins that took over Azure city. They're going to be killed for this action, not their alignment.

hamishspence
2011-03-08, 06:54 AM
This is not genocide because this is not the same random group of goblins we see in SoD, this is a legitimate army of hobgoblins that took over Azure city. They're going to be killed for this action, not their alignment.

it's not just the army- various other races (including ordinary goblins) have been flocking to Gobbotopia.

Dark Matter
2011-03-08, 07:06 AM
The goblins were created to be XP for adventurers. So them being evil doesn't predate that situation.XP for adventurers specifically including Paladins (who fall if they commit an evil act).

Or in other words, they were made evil, then they were put on the Earth.

Right Eye is hopefully the future of the goblin race, but Right Eye turned away from TDO. Goblotopia hasn't and with the structure they have, they're not going to.

Lord_Gareth
2011-03-08, 07:13 AM
Retaking the city would not be unethical until the azurites start murdering non-combatents in the street. This is not genocide because this is not the same random group of goblins we see in SoD, this is a legitimate army of hobgoblins that took over Azure city. They're going to be killed for this action, not their alignment.

Vengeance isn't justice. The Azurites may be justified, in a D&D context, in using force or the threat of force to attempt to end slavery in Gobbotopia and to defend innocent lives, but "mercy" is a big part of a Good alignment, and with their new home available for use, the Azurites have no justification in going after Gobbotopia except vengeance. It might not be an [Evil] act in a D&D context, but it's certainly not a [Good] one, even if they only kill soldiers.

AgentofOdd
2011-03-08, 07:20 AM
XP for adventurers specifically including Paladins (who fall if they commit an evil act).

Or in other words, they were made evil, then they were put on the Earth.Or, if one was really cynical they weren't evil, but they became evil. If there's nothing wrong with killing goblins, then surely any creature who'd be willing to use physical, even deadly force to stop... an exercise regime would have to be evil.

Renegade Paladin
2011-03-08, 07:31 AM
Considering the fact this is politics, I would say there is no objective right or wrong to it. Both sides are right from their own perspective, and if you were to have two of them debate it would be the exact same arguments on both sides.

In this case "right" means whoever wins.

No it doesn't, and it never does. The hobgoblins have a tyrannical, autocratic state that practices brutal chattel slavery, and the Azurites do not. Therefore, the hobgoblins are wrong, and winning would not make them right. End of story.

G-Man Graves
2011-03-08, 07:53 AM
Or, if one was really cynical they weren't evil, but they became evil. If there's nothing wrong with killing goblins, then surely any creature who'd be willing to use physical, even deadly force to stop... an exercise regime would have to be evil.

Nope. Read Start of Darkness. Goblins were created evil by the gods, so it would be okay for adventurers (namely clerics, druids, and paladins) to violently murder them.

TheSummoner
2011-03-08, 07:54 AM
So... Has anyone pointed out that Goblinoids tend to have much shorter life-spans and the fact that a (goblin) generation has already passed in the short time since Redcloak took Azure City and now? (Note the young hobgoblin and the "In 20 years, you will tell your great-grandchildren") (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0702.html) Seems to me that if the Azurite survivors were to retake the city, most, if not all of the hobgoblins responsible for the initial invasion would've already died of natural causes...

Not that it would be much consolation to the Azurites, but I think it's worth considering...

hamishspence
2011-03-08, 07:58 AM
Nope. Read Start of Darkness. Goblins were created evil by the gods, so it would be okay for adventurers (namely clerics, druids, and paladins) to violently murder them.

SoD doesn't actually say what alignment they were created with- and the "monstrous races" seen include the usually neutral lizardfolk.

So the gods may not have cared what alignment their "XP fodder" were.

Dark Matter
2011-03-08, 08:49 AM
Or, if one was really cynical they weren't evil, but they became evil. If there's nothing wrong with killing goblins...There are DMs who run their world that way, but thus far we haven't seen it of Rich.

Nor have we seen any evidence that Goblotopia is making the goblins less evil. If the incidences we've seen are stand ins for what passes as "normal", then freeing the goblins from oversight from the forces of good has simply freed them to do evil. Their equiv of the Sapphire Guard is RC's army of evil clerics.

To be clear, I'd like to see a goblin order of paladins trying to steer their people away from evil and towards good... but given what we've seen, I don't expect it.


So the gods may not have cared what alignment their "XP fodder" were.Not all the gods are Good. Or competent for that matter.

King of Nowhere
2011-03-08, 11:07 AM
The way I see it, the evilness of the goblinoids is mostly hate toward humans. Hate that is fairly justified.
I really don't see them as evil per se. Any evil act committed by hobbos that I've seen is made against humans, and is thusly justified in their eyes.
All they had known is war with humans and fear of human addventurers, for generation after generation.

So, I think they deserve a chance to prove themselves.

Of course I would find nothing wrong if the Azurites wouldd try to reconquer their city.
I fully expect them to kill every non-human they find, including children. I wouldn't hold that too much against the azurites, in the same way that I'm not holding too much against the hobbos the enslavement of humans. It's wrong but it's something I can understand from the point of view of those who make the deed. I'm particularly angy at the sapphire guard for the extermination of redclaok's village because paladins are supposed to be better than that, but I can understandd it from a population exposed to perpetual warefare.
But not everything is about rigth, wrong or morally justified.

The world is not black and white, and it is not even shades of grey. There are colors that have nothing to do with black and white at all.
Hoping that two populations that have been at war for centuries may find peace by settling down of different continents, even if that means closing an eye on several injustices, is one of those other colors.
Everyone deserves a chance. Let's give the goblins their.

pendell
2011-03-08, 12:10 PM
I'd root for the Azurites, because although the goblins have been wronged the fact remains that both the Dark One and Redcloak are objectively evil in a D&D world where absolute good and evil really exists. That whatever wrongs they have suffered, they are still pursuing evil means to an evil end.

Readers of Start of Darkness will have seen an alternate vision for goblin society

as led by Right-eye


I would gladly support such a society, and would fight for it against humans who would squash them. But to my mind siding with Redcloak would be like seizing the Ring to use against Sauron in Tolkien's world .. you're replacing one evil with another. As Gandalf would say, it's more important to throw down the dark lord and have no one in his place than it is to simply overthrow the dark lord. Otherwise you just changed the name plate on the office door and everyone is still screwed.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Dark Matter
2011-03-08, 12:56 PM
On a side note, Goblotopia's list of sins doesn't stop with slavery, unjust laws, worshiping evil gods, or even the creation of undead. Goblotopia is actively pursing "The Plan"... and they've got their own riff. In theory they don't need to go after another gate; Given enough time they have the resources to build their own gate.

As things stand the forces of Good have no choice but to retake Azure City for that reason alone, unless TDO sues for peace and agrees to stop risking the destruction of the universe in exchange for being allowed to keep a goblin homeland on good land.

An argument can be made that this would be just and fair... but imho "just and fair" isn't what TDO has in mind.

Scarlet Knight
2011-03-08, 01:40 PM
The goblins were created to be XP for adventurers.

This world runs by D&D rules. Therefore, goblins are the mice of that world. Just like mice serve as food for almost every predator, and are a problem if they are not preyed upon, goblins must be hunted. It's a whole ...circle of...life...death...thing.

Earl William
2011-03-08, 02:10 PM
Has Rich actually confirmed Redcloak's story in SOD? The whole crayon section is what TDO tells his followers, not necessarily what is true, goblins could have been created first and the other race's as surprisingly effective XP-fodder for all we know. Also the Western pantheon has at least one lizardfolk cleric, so they don't exactly seem to be hated by them.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-08, 02:13 PM
This world runs by D&D rules. Therefore, goblins are the mice of that world. Just like mice serve as food for almost every predator, and are a problem if they are not preyed upon, goblins must be hunted. It's a whole ...circle of...life...death...thing.

Right but when a mouse kicks your *** you don't call it evil.


Also is Goblintoppia pursuing the plan? I thought only Redcloak and TDO knew about it.

I think Jirix might be the sort of leader to lead Goblintopia to peace and I would like to see him get the chance to. But that requires the Azurites to not attack. Or at least not win.

Warren Dew
2011-03-08, 02:20 PM
Readers of Start of Darkness will have seen an alternate vision for goblin society

as led by Right-eye

I would gladly support such a society, and would fight for it against humans who would squash them. But to my mind siding with Redcloak would be like seizing the Ring to use against Sauron in Tolkien's world .. you're replacing one evil with another.
That's a good parallel. There is a nonevil path forward for the goblinoids, but Gobbotopia is not it.

JonestheSpy
2011-03-08, 02:32 PM
This world runs by D&D rules. Therefore, goblins are the mice of that world. Just like mice serve as food for almost every predator, and are a problem if they are not preyed upon, goblins must be hunted. It's a whole ...circle of...life...death...thing.

And that attitude pretty much sums up exactly why so many people are sympathetic to the goblins and the Dark One.

And really, I do wish people would get over their fixation on DnD rules in these discussions and actually focus on the world that the story has shown us. We've seen completely innocent humanoids be slaughtered by humans, from the goblin village in SoD to Yokyok. We've seen peaceful negotiations win the day the two times characters in the strip have dealt with orcs. It's pretty obvious that one of the main themes of the strip is exploring the conflicts between simplistic alignment labels that come with the game versus complex, real world morality.

Folks like Dark Matter seem 100% sure that because the goblin god must want more than equality for his people, dominance over the other races or something, even though there has been absolutely nothing in any of the strips to indicate that, and plenty of indications otherwise. Translate that kind of attitude, along with Scarlet Knight's "We get to kill you because that's the natural order of things" line into the OotSworld, and it's no wonder the goblins are so pissed off.

Squark
2011-03-08, 02:59 PM
Has Rich actually confirmed Redcloak's story in SOD? The whole crayon section is what TDO tells his followers, not necessarily what is true, goblins could have been created first and the other race's as surprisingly effective XP-fodder for all we know. Also the Western pantheon has at least one lizardfolk cleric, so they don't exactly seem to be hated by them.

This. This. THIS.

I'm sorry, but I don't trust that crayon drawing any farther than I can throw it. The Dark One has been stated, by his followers, to be evil. That fairy tale reeks of "convienient lie I tell idealistic followers while I work towards installing goblin hegemony." We have yet to see any proof the Dark One really gives a rat's behind about non-goblins. We have no way of knowing if even the story of his death is true- He could have been making totally unrealistic demands- This sort of thing could easily have been forgotten in the crusade that followed his assasination. For that matter, the legitamacy of that summit is sketchy. I don't endorse the ruler's actions by any means, but holding a gun against someone's head while you negotiate is, not only sketchy morally, but more to the point, it voids the deal in pretty much any country I'm familliar with. And the Dark One had an army that was probably bigger than the population of some of those countries. That's one big gun.

I'm not saying the crayon drawings don't have some truth in them. Probably a lot of truth. I could totally see the gods instituting that XP-fodder system. But the fact is, treating them as infallible is a bit much. The only source we can trust infallibly, as far as I'm concerened, is what is directly depicted in the comic (Not second hand stuff), and Word of God.

Of course, I'm also the sort of guy who has, at this point, dismissed the notion of the snarl as a convenient lie that's been told to us.

JonestheSpy
2011-03-08, 03:20 PM
I'm not saying the crayon drawings don't have some truth in them. Probably a lot of truth. I could totally see the gods instituting that XP-fodder system. But the fact is, treating them as infallible is a bit much. The only source we can trust infallibly, as far as I'm concerened, is what is directly depicted in the comic (Not second hand stuff), and Word of God.


Well, let's look at what we know for sure about the Dark One and the plans of his followers.

We saw the Dark One talking to Jirix here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0704.html), telling him that his future battles will ones of trade, logistics, diplomacy and intrigue - i.e. normal peacetime relations between nations. We then saw Jirix proclaiming that they were going to build Gobbotopia into the most prosperous, secure nation in the world "one brick at a time", that it would be hard work but that they would take their rightful place in the world. Not exactly the rhetoric of a would-be empire builder intent on conquest.

In Start of Darkness, we saw Redcloak, the Dark One's prophet, declaring to Right Eye that all he goblins needed was a level playing field, and that if they failed then it was their own fault. We also saw him delivering the "I Have a Dream" speech to his goblin followers before attacking an Azure City outpost, proclaiming that they deserved to stand equally with all the PC races, and that's what they were fighting for (along with defending heir homes in the swamp). I can't see any reason why Redcloak would be wanting to mislead anyone in either instance.

I think that's pretty much it for definitive evidence, and it all supports the one story of the Dark One that we know of.

slayerx
2011-03-08, 03:30 PM
Right but when a mouse kicks your *** you don't call it evil.

Actually i recall watching a documentry that said that was basically what happened to wolves in some areas. Their attacks on livestock and possibly rare attacks on people inspired stories that got them demonized as evil creatures, which lead to people ruthlessly hunting them down... but since wolves don't increase in population as quickly as something like mice, that lead to them to near extinction levels (in those given areas).


Not to say i agree with exterminting goblins to avoid over population, but in theory goblins being treated as equals could in theory lead to over population... given the short life span, their rate of reprodution could be quite high and they may need to start looking to expand their borders of accomodate the growing population... given a few thousnads years they could be as common as humans or even more so... though if they actually gave up their evil ways, that wouldn't really be a problem.

snikrept
2011-03-08, 03:35 PM
Once they get all the slaves out, do the Azurites even want that bit of real estate any more? There's no gate to protect, and now it's got a huge rift in the fabric of reality dripping all over it. I'd pass.

Squark
2011-03-08, 03:43 PM
EDIT:^I'm pretty sure the average Azurite-in-exile has no idea the thing is there. But you actually do have a point.
----------------------
And I'm saying we have no proof that the Dark One is telling the truth there. Now, admittadly, we have no proof he isn't telling the truth here. But assuming an admittadly evil god would behave this way just doesn't fit.


The Hobgoblins are open about their evil nature, but they don't just say they're evil because they're on the other side- We've seen them beat slaves for no reason at all, even when it often causes them (the hobgoblins) great frustration when Adventurers appear. Which suggests that evil in the OoTS universe is not just a matter of being on one side


Of course, we've seen paladins slaughter innocent goblin children en masse, so we do have to take this sort of thing with a grain of salt. But the fact is, everyone we've seen listed as evil has done something to earn the title. So that selfless story just doesn't make sense.

pendell
2011-03-08, 03:49 PM
Has Rich actually confirmed Redcloak's story in SOD? The whole crayon section is what TDO tells his followers, not necessarily what is true, goblins could have been created first and the other race's as surprisingly effective XP-fodder for all we know. Also the Western pantheon has at least one lizardfolk cleric, so they don't exactly seem to be hated by them.

The Dark One might not even be lying. "Those who see the world through the Dark Lord's Eyes see all things crooked", to badly misquote Tolkien.

The Dark One is not objectively omniscient. Instead, he sees the universe from his own perspective ... and if the dark one is a twisted being, his vision of the universe will still be corrupt and twisted, where black is white and white is black.

So even if the Dark One is really, seriously telling the truth to Redcloak .. it doesn't mean that it IS the truth.

I would be very interested in an account of that meeting from the human perspective.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Squark
2011-03-08, 04:11 PM
Even if we take the story at face value, it's still not as damning as you might think. As I said, a negotiation in which one party is holding a gun (or an army) to the other person's head (or kingdom) is no negotiation at all. Even if we assume the Dark One really didn't intend to use it, the other races would understandably be uneasy.

factotum
2011-03-08, 04:28 PM
So... Has anyone pointed out that Goblinoids tend to have much shorter life-spans and the fact that a (goblin) generation has already passed in the short time since Redcloak took Azure City and now? (Note the young hobgoblin and the "In 20 years, you will tell your great-grandchildren") (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0702.html) Seems to me that if the Azurite survivors were to retake the city, most, if not all of the hobgoblins responsible for the initial invasion would've already died of natural causes...


Nobody's pointed that out because it's flat wrong. An average goblin lifespan is fifty years--yes, shorter than human, but not so short that they'd consider a single year (which is all it's been since Azure City fell) as a "generation". Great-grandchildren in 20 years would imply around 6 years for a generation, and even then, that's just the gap between a goblin child being born and becoming ready to have children of their own--it doesn't mean the gap between them being born and dying!

Deliverance
2011-03-08, 04:36 PM
Well, let's look at what we know for sure about the Dark One and the plans of his followers.

We saw the Dark One talking to Jirix here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0704.html), telling him that his future battles will ones of trade, logistics, diplomacy and intrigue - i.e. normal peacetime relations between nations. We then saw Jirix proclaiming that they were going to build Gobbotopia into the most prosperous, secure nation in the world "one brick at a time", that it would be hard work but that they would take their rightful place in the world. Not exactly the rhetoric of a would-be empire builder intent on conquest.

Objection!

We don't see the Dark One talking to Jirix. We see Jirix telling the people a good story about life after death and seeing the Dark One, who sends him back to lead the people, thus by his own words granting himself divine legitimacy as leader, something that will come in very handy when Redcloak leaves.

It is certainly possible that what Jirix narrates is essentially the truth, but one would have to be deaf to politics not to see the alternative: that Jirix made it up to strengthen his own position and present the agenda he intends to pursue as divinely supported.

For those who might argue (as has happened before when this issue came up about that strip) that "a priest would never lie about his God in D&D because of divine retribution etc.", let me just note that Redcloak, being less trusting than the hypothetical GitP poster, certainly believes it is possible that Jirix may have been making it up as proven by his asking Jirix whether it actually happened, at which point Jirix redirects Redcloak's attention with a personal message allegedly from the Dark one.




In Start of Darkness, we saw Redcloak, the Dark One's prophet, declaring to Right Eye that all he goblins needed was a level playing field, and that if they failed then it was their own fault. We also saw him delivering the "I Have a Dream" speech to his goblin followers before attacking an Azure City outpost, proclaiming that they deserved to stand equally with all the PC races, and that's what they were fighting for (along with defending heir homes in the swamp). I can't see any reason why Redcloak would be wanting to mislead anyone in either instance.

I can, but Occam's Razor suggest we take it as given that Redcloak is not trying to mislead since the reasons I can think of aren't very good reasons.



I think that's pretty much it for definitive evidence, and it all supports the one story of the Dark One that we know of.
I am sorry, but no, it does not support the one story of the Dark One that we know of.

It supports the idea that Redcloak believes the story he is telling, which is a completely different thing entirely.

From SoD, we know that Redcloak was not his own master when the Dark One's background story was implanted into him - for a brief time he was acting much more like somebody under heavy mental domination (the whole "THE PLAN MUST SUCCEED" deal) and he has certainly been acting like somebody under a magical compulsion in respect to THE PLAN ever since then, though that might just be sincere belief in it and the cowardly way Redcloak has used eventual success of THE PLAN to excuse his own moral failures rather than actual magical domination.

It is possible that the story he got implanted is the truth and nothing but the truth, but as far as I recall there is absolutely no evidence to weigh in either for or against the theory that what he believes to be the truth is the truth.

veti
2011-03-08, 04:40 PM
Not to say i agree with exterminting goblins to avoid over population, but in theory goblins being treated as equals could in theory lead to over population... given the short life span, their rate of reprodution could be quite high and they may need to start looking to expand their borders of accomodate the growing population... given a few thousnads years they could be as common as humans or even more so... though if they actually gave up their evil ways, that wouldn't really be a problem.

That wouldn't take 'a few thousand years', it'd take a couple of human generations, i.e. about fifty years.

If Gobbotopia were left at peace for that long, it would have enough population to conquer the whole continent. And another 50 years later, it'd be ready to take on the rest of the world.

That's why the elves are most willing to fight Gobbotopia - in their terms, that's practically next week. Human neighbours who've made peace are just doing what humans do best - looking for short-term advantage and hoping that, in the long run, something will come up that means they don't have to deal with it. (And if it doesn't, meh, who cares? - we'll all be dead by then anyway.)

The reasons why empires expand are to do with population. You need something to offer the ambitious younger generation, to keep them from turning on the established older generation. That 'something', invariably, requires new land. Either the older generation can give up some of what they already hold, or the 'new land' has to come from somewhere else.

The only 'good' way to allow Gobbotopia to live at peace would involve integrating goblins completely into human(etc.) society, so there are no race-based laws in either Gobbotopia or its neighbours.

JonestheSpy
2011-03-08, 04:53 PM
Objection!

We don't see the Dark One talking to Jirix. We see Jirix telling the people a good story about life after death and seeing the Dark One, who sends him back to lead the people, thus by his own words granting himself divine legitimacy as leader, something that will come in very handy when Redcloak leaves.

It is certainly possible that what Jirix narrates is essentially the truth, but one would have to be deaf to politics not to see the alternative: that Jirix made it up to strengthen his own position and present the agenda he intends to pursue as divinely supported.


Aside from the fact that it seems amazingly unlikely that Jirix would lie to his Supreme Leader and Prophet, I don't think you're thinking the implications through. If by some weird stratagem the second-highest ranking priest (in a world where gods definitely exist and interact with their worshipers) would lie about a direct message from his god for political purposes - that means his intent was to guide his nation toward non-violent relations with other nations, growth and stability, and all the hobgobilns welcomed the declaration whether it was really the divine word or not. Which still undercuts the entire goblins=evil race that it's OK to massacre POV.


Oh, and Veti, I hope you realize that your argument makes a great case for elves to cull human poplations and only allow them to exist as parts of elven-controlled society.

King of Nowhere
2011-03-08, 05:09 PM
I may doubt that those two hobbos with the whip were serious, maybe they were joking about a supposed evilness.
I doubt that any of the hobbos is evil, except those who have been seen in panel.
I doubt the goood gods are good, actually what proof do you have besides what THEY say (I don't think a mortal ever went to detect alignment on a god)?

No, I don't really think that.
I just want to point out that if we start doubting about the dark one, the crayons, and the story as told in sod, we may as well doubt of everything and go playing at the beach. What we know directly beyond doubt is very little - and among that little, we have word of god that Rich didn't want to make one side clearly rigth, but preferred to keep things ambiguous.
We must accept something as believable if we want to make some arguments.

Humans persuading themselves that some population with a different skin color is evil and/or inferior, after maybe some shady act from some people of perceived population? Humans actively partecipating in genocide against that population, even normal people who would never use violence against a "person"? Pious people committing the most hominous crimes fully believing they are doing nothing but good in smiting the evil wickedness?
It happened so much times in the real history that I have problems in NOT accepting that as the most likely option.

In fact, the whole way that all the evil races are desccribed in the monster manual strongly smells of propaganda. Just read it, it is clear that whoever wrote it was astriving to justify their wholesale slaugther by self-proclaiming champions of good. Long before I read sod, I already tougth it made no sense.
Why none of you is doubting THAT?

veti
2011-03-08, 05:28 PM
Oh, and Veti, I hope you realize that your argument makes a great case for elves to cull human poplations and only allow them to exist as parts of elven-controlled society.

Yep, it does. And that, to me, explains the tensions that exist between elvish and human lands in most fantasy worlds, including this one. (In Tolkien, it even explains why the elves are a declining race.)

The elves are too 'good' to systematically cull humans (a "mostly neutral" race); instead they let humans control their own numbers by fighting one another, while the elves sit in their own lands behind some less-than-inviting mountains (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0698.html).

If the humans ever got together in one unified empire, and formed laws racially discriminating against elves... I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see elven parties systematically attacking them.

TriForce
2011-03-08, 05:48 PM
Aside from the fact that it seems amazingly unlikely that Jirix would lie to his Supreme Leader and Prophet, I don't think you're thinking the implications through. If by some weird stratagem the second-highest ranking priest (in a world where gods definitely exist and interact with their worshipers) would lie about a direct message from his god for political purposes - that means his intent was to guide his nation toward non-violent relations with other nations, growth and stability, and all the hobgobilns welcomed the declaration whether it was really the divine word or not. Which still undercuts the entire goblins=evil race that it's OK to massacre POV.


Oh, and Veti, I hope you realize that your argument makes a great case for elves to cull human poplations and only allow them to exist as parts of elven-controlled society.


Still the entire story is still told in crayons, and we already have seen that that means some "liberties" could be taken with the truth. and i honestly dont think that if jirix made the part about diplomacy etc up, the dark one would be upset and smite his head off. especially not if the dark one gave him a mission to make the goblin empire stronger and prepare it for a new war. nothing better for your PR then to go to war while declaring your opponent gave you no other choice

Squark
2011-03-08, 05:56 PM
On a semi-unrelated note, Gobbotopia marks a turning point in Redcloak's character. Provided the goblins do things right (negotiate with the Azurites, stop their practice of slavery, etc.), they're getting the chance the plan supposedly should give them. Which means The Plan is no longer necessary. I wonder what would happen if Redcloak realized this.

It's kind of sad, actually. If the goblins did this peacefully and tried to negotiate integrating themselves into society, they could very well build their own goblin nation. But because I doubt they'll abandon their policy of human slavery, and might very well attack another nation some day (This is the group that was describing going to war as awesome, after all), that isn't going to happen.

pendell
2011-03-08, 06:19 PM
Oh, and Veti, I hope you realize that your argument makes a great case for elves to cull human poplations and only allow them to exist as parts of elven-controlled society.


Funny you should say that; anyone here play Radiata Stories?


The annihilation of ALMOST the human race every thousand years at the hands of the elves and dragons represents exactly such a culling.



Respectfully,

Brian P.

Dark Matter
2011-03-08, 08:06 PM
Also is Goblintoppia pursuing the plan? I thought only Redcloak and TDO knew about it.And Xykon, Roy, V, Hinjo, and everyone they've told.

That's a good parallel. There is a nonevil path forward for the goblinoids, but Gobbotopia is not it.Well put.

And really, I do wish people would get over their fixation on DnD rules in these discussions and actually focus on the world that the story has shown us. We've seen completely innocent humanoids be slaughtered by humans, from the goblin village in SoD to Yokyok...Those rules are what OOTS is based on, and they say "evil" is a pretty nasty package. Those goblin villagers were the leaders and support staff for that iteration of "The Plan", "innocent" isn't a good word.

Similarly, Yokyok was engaged in an act of open, cold blooded first degree murder on an defenseless innocent man (I dislike calling Belkar "innocent" but he was). We're told that YY was Lawful-Good when he wasn't engaging in seriously CE acts. That's fine... but the fact remains when he was killed what he was doing was neither Lawful nor Good, and that's ignoring the whole "helping Nale's plan" issue.

Folks like Dark Matter seem 100% sure that because the goblin god must want more than equality for his people, dominance over the other races or something, even though there has been absolutely nothing in any of the strips to indicate that, and plenty of indications otherwise.In no way does "Goblotopia" indicate TDO wants "equality" to me.

TDO is seriously *Evil*. "Equality" sounds 'good', but if "Goblotopia" is his idea of equality then his definition isn't the same as mine. Further it stands out that he doesn't want to stop with Goblotopia, his current plan requires he, personally, have a gun to the head of everyone who disagrees with him.

I can think of simpler, less risky, and easier plans which would do what he says he wants... but those wouldn't result in him having a gun to the head of the other gods.
Even if we take the story at face value...You're right about the gun to the head analogy, but the larger problem with the SOD story is none of TDO's victims or opponents are given a voice.

There are lots of reasons other than racism to want to stop evil goblins from doing evil acts. It's not "racism" to not want a god killing abomination set loose.

JonestheSpy
2011-03-08, 11:19 PM
Yeah D.M., I recall having similar discussions with you on this topic before. I still find your line of reasoning out there to the point of being disturbing.



Those rules are what OOTS is based on, and they say "evil" is a pretty nasty package. Those goblin villagers were the leaders and support staff for that iteration of "The Plan", "innocent" isn't a good word.

Really, with that attitude, there is pretty much no atrocity that can't be justified.



Similarly, Yokyok was engaged in an act of open, cold blooded first degree murder on an defenseless innocent man (I dislike calling Belkar "innocent" but he was). We're told that YY was Lawful-Good when he wasn't engaging in seriously CE acts. That's fine... but the fact remains when he was killed what he was doing was neither Lawful nor Good, and that's ignoring the whole "helping Nale's plan" issue.

Oh, please tell me you're kidding. And even if you're not, you're ignoring the fact the Belkar simply put up a sign saying "Koblod Menace - Reward" and a hoard of eager adventurers poured out of the tavern to slaughter him. Yokyok could have been just walking down the street and the same thing would have happened.

Really dude, you quoted from my earlier post but seemed to have missed one of the most important points. Let me reiterate:


It's pretty obvious that one of the main themes of the strip is exploring the conflicts between simplistic alignment labels that come with the game versus complex, real world morality.

Warren Dew
2011-03-08, 11:40 PM
Great-grandchildren in 20 years would imply around 6 years for a generation, and even then, that's just the gap between a goblin child being born and becoming ready to have children of their own--it doesn't mean the gap between them being born and dying!
Not even that. It's likely that the average person in Redcloak's audience already has kids - perhaps even kids close to puberty. A generation time of 10-15 years is perfectly consistent with Redcloak's speech.


In fact, the whole way that all the evil races are desccribed in the monster manual strongly smells of propaganda. Just read it, it is clear that whoever wrote it was astriving to justify their wholesale slaugther by self-proclaiming champions of good. Long before I read sod, I already tougth it made no sense.
Why none of you is doubting THAT?
Perhaps because we kind of suspect that most of the races described in the monster manual don't actually have any independent reality outside of D&D games.

FujinAkari
2011-03-08, 11:48 PM
And Xykon, Roy, V, Hinjo, and everyone they've told.

Except that none of them know the plan, they only know what Redcloak told Xykon the plan was, which was a lie.

Gift Jeraff
2011-03-08, 11:48 PM
I really loathe the idea that the Secret Lore of the Crimson Mantle is a lie. Given the way it's presented to the reader, it feels like it's basically saying "here's the situation." Omitted truths? Yes, that seems quite possible. But I'll feel a bit ripped off if the story just basically turned around and said "lol nah jk" to a crucial plot point. And the Secret Lore of the Sapphire Guard concurs with the idea that the gods are jerks (yeah, I know the idea that Soon, Shojo, and/or Shojo's dad fudged some truths is quite popular, but that would apply more to the Order of the Scribble stuff, and not the primordial stuff).

I'm not saying the monster races are perfect little poopsie poos that deserve all our pity--since I'd say the goblinoids equally at fault for their horrible act of revenge against the humans--I'm just sayin' I hate the idea of the audience being flat-out lied to. It's alright in a standalone piece, but for something which takes years to fully reveal, it just feels like bad writing.

As for the hobgoblins being unnecessarily evil for evil's sake, I always interpreted that kind of "cultural evil" as basically being ingrained into their minds because their ancestors were full of vengeance for their mistreatment, and this sentiment continued because they continued to be treated as XP fodder. Sort of a chicken or the egg situation; the PC and monster races are equally to blame (with the gods--including the Dark One--being the trulu responsible ones).

Narren
2011-03-08, 11:56 PM
Those rules are what OOTS is based on, and they say "evil" is a pretty nasty package. Those goblin villagers were the leaders and support staff for that iteration of "The Plan", "innocent" isn't a good word.

Similarly, Yokyok was engaged in an act of open, cold blooded first degree murder on an defenseless innocent man (I dislike calling Belkar "innocent" but he was). We're told that YY was Lawful-Good when he wasn't engaging in seriously CE acts. That's fine... but the fact remains when he was killed what he was doing was neither Lawful nor Good, and that's ignoring the whole "helping Nale's plan" issue.

Though many of the goblin villagers were anything but innocent, I don't think the young ones had to be put to the sword.

And I would hardly call Yokyok's actions Chaotic Evil. I would consider avenging your father's death in that manner Chaotic Neutral at worst. Maybe even Chaotic Good, considering that taking out Belkar would be a public service.

Narren
2011-03-09, 12:00 AM
Oh, please tell me you're kidding. And even if you're not, you're ignoring the fact the Belkar simply put up a sign saying "Koblod Menace - Reward" and a hoard of eager adventurers poured out of the tavern to slaughter him. Yokyok could have been just walking down the street and the same thing would have happened.


Even though I just said Yokyok's actions were not CE, I still think Belkar had every right to defend himself. Whether or not Yokyok deserved revenge, Belkar didn't "slaughter" him.

EDIT - my mistake...you were referring to the adventurers that killed him just because a sign said they should.

Narren
2011-03-09, 12:13 AM
As for the hobgoblins being unnecessarily evil for evil's sake, I always interpreted that kind of "cultural evil" as basically being ingrained into their minds because their ancestors were full of vengeance for their mistreatment, and this sentiment continued because they continued to be treated as XP fodder. Sort of a chicken or the egg situation; the PC and monster races are equally to blame (with the gods--including the Dark One--being the trulu responsible ones).

That may be a reason that monster races are evil, but I don't consider it an excuse. When you attack another creature unprovoked (or invade their homeland, etc) then you become responsible for that action, regardless of what happened to you or your ancestors. A parallel would be a child growing surrounded by criminals and denied opportunity. It's no surprise when they grow up the same way, but it doesn't excuse their actions. After all, others grew up in the same environment but still maintain a level of respect for the rights and lives of fellow beings.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-09, 12:35 AM
That may be a reason that monster races are evil, but I don't consider it an excuse. When you attack another creature unprovoked (or invade their homeland, etc) then you become responsible for that action, regardless of what happened to you or your ancestors. A parallel would be a child growing surrounded by criminals and denied opportunity. It's no surprise when they grow up the same way, but it doesn't excuse their actions. After all, others grew up in the same environment but still maintain a level of respect for the rights and lives of fellow beings.

Mostly true but there is a slight difference here. You could consider there to be a constant state of open war between the monsterous races and the PC races. If a hobgoblin turned away from his people he would almost certainly be killed or at least have to fight the PC races anyways. Its also very easy to hate those who are a constant threat to yourself and your faimly. Afterall if you can't expect mercy why should you show it? Redcloak even considers humans to be savages for not valueing their own fellows lives.

Juggling Goth
2011-03-09, 02:41 AM
Those goblin villagers were the leaders and support staff for that iteration of "The Plan", "innocent" isn't a good word.

No, they weren't. Read SoD again. Redcloak didn't know about the Plan until he listened to his master's ghost and put the cloak on, and he was the previous Bearer's protege. If another cleric in the same religious organisation doesn't know about it, then the lay villagers certainly don't - which is borne out when they're escaping and Right-Eye says "what plan?" All the villagers are utterly confused as to why they're being attacked, except the High Priest, who makes it clear that it's him alone the paladins want.


Similarly, Yokyok was engaged in an act of open, cold blooded first degree murder on an defenseless innocent man

The innocent man who killed his father? When Inigo Montoya does that, we cheer.

Deliverance
2011-03-09, 04:47 AM
Aside from the fact that it seems amazingly unlikely that Jirix would lie to his Supreme Leader and Prophet,

It seems amazingly unlikely to you - it didn't seem amazingly unlikely to Redcloak.



I don't think you're thinking the implications through.

I have - you are making a wrong assumption about me.



If by some weird stratagem the second-highest ranking priest (in a world where gods definitely exist and interact with their worshipers) would lie about a direct message from his god for political purposes - that means his intent was to guide his nation toward non-violent relations with other nations, growth and stability, and all the hobgobilns welcomed the declaration whether it was really the divine word or not. Which still undercuts the entire goblins=evil race that it's OK to massacre POV.

And the assumption that you are wrong about is that I believe that goblins are an evil race that it is OK to massacre. I have said no such thing and completely agree with your line of reasoning that it undercuts the evil/massacre POV. Even if Jirix is lying about his non-violent goals (making it a triple?-deception), the fact that the hobgoblins appear to welcome it would undercut it. (Unless Gobbutopia had a really effective secret police such that people would cheer their leaders regardless of what they said, of course :smallwink:)

ANYHOW, the whole "goblins = evil so massacre = goo" is nonsense in OOTS, since one of the major points of OOTS is presenting people regardless of race or species as, well, people. Rich goes out of his way to point out time and time again that the different species aren't just "humans with quality X exaggerated" but that their behaviour and motivations are for all practical purposes what we consider human. The "all Ys behave like humans with quality X exaggerated" is occasionally used in OOTS, but mostly as a component of jokes.


As regards Azure City, my answer is simple: I consider the former masters completely justified in returning and wreaking bloody vengeance on the occupiers - it is the normal human thing to do under the circumstances regardless of race, creed, colour, or species of the occupiers. Whether that should be classified as a good, neutral, or evil act under D&Ds fixed morality schemes I don't know, but it is the human thing to do.

TheArsenal
2011-03-09, 05:08 AM
Maybe Im a total wuss, but If I was the Azurites I would turn the Canyon the Gobs live into a lush Fertile land (Using mages and Druids), and ask them to move back. If they refuse, attack them (And Release the Fertile land magic). The Goblins Deserve thier own land....A demiplane maybe? Just not others land.

Dark Matter
2011-03-09, 09:23 AM
Really, with that attitude, there is pretty much no atrocity that can't be justified.If you ever find yourself working on a project designed to end all life on Earth, even if you're just emptying garbage cans, then you have no cause for complaint if you're treated like you're working on such a project.


Yokyok was engaged in an act of open, cold blooded first degree murder on an defenseless innocent man (I dislike calling Belkar "innocent" but he was).Oh, please tell me you're kidding.What word do you disagree with? Open? First Degree Murder? Defenseless? (Belkar had the curse on him, YY knew it). Innocent? (YY's dad was one of Nail's killers, killing YY's Dad was something Roy could have done, and YY knew darn well what Nail was).

What does that leave? CE? Murder is evil. That you're "avenging" one of Nail's killers doesn't make it less so. Further YY was clearly going against the laws of society, and claiming to be following some personal code is a Hailey type action. It's amusing to think of YY as LG, but his actions at that time were seriously CE.

If YY had been trying to kill Belkar for being Belkar it'd be a different story, but that plainly wasn't what he was doing.

And even if you're not, you're ignoring the fact the Belkar simply put up a sign saying "Koblod Menace - Reward" and a hoard of eager adventurers poured out of the tavern to slaughter him. Yokyok could have been just walking down the street and the same thing would have happened.You're making a big assumption there and it's not warranted. None of those adventurers had read the sign, funny trumped everything. We don't know what they knew and what they didn't (and some of those adventurers looked pretty evil to me).

YY was treated as one of Nail's killers who had been caught red handed while carrying out vile acts. One hopes they'd treat Nail himself the same way.

It's pretty obvious that one of the main themes of the strip is exploring the conflicts between simplistic alignment labels that come with the game versus complex, real world morality.True. But at the same time, Rich isn't ignoring D&D conventions either. Goblins are usually evil. The Sapphire guard might have made things worse, not better, and karma eventually kicked them for it.

But now that the goblins have Goblotopia... they're still usually evil. They're *people*, and they're sentient, and "usually" doesn't mean "all of them". But those guards were whipping the slaves out of sadism, not species-hatred. If the slaves had been goblins I doubt anything would have changed.

This comic has often shown goblins treating other goblins in ways we'd call evil, and the goblins don't seem to find this unremarkable.

Dark Matter
2011-03-09, 09:36 AM
Those goblin villagers were the leaders and support staff for that iteration of "The Plan", "innocent" isn't a good word.No, they weren't. Read SoD again. Redcloak didn't know about the Plan until he listened to his master's ghost and put the cloak on, and he was the previous Bearer's protege.The Paladins were told (correctly) by their gods. The Cleric was village leader, so basically he's led his people over a cliff. None of this prevents the Paladins for falling for what they did, i.e. excessive force.

If another cleric in the same religious organisation doesn't know about it, then the lay villagers certainly don't - which is borne out when they're escaping and Right-Eye says "what plan?" All the villagers are utterly confused as to why they're being attacked, except the High Priest, who makes it clear that it's him alone the paladins want.Red Cloak had been a cleric for all of a few minutes. We don't know whether the other clerics knew or not.

Further RC's reply to his brother is insightful. He made it clear "The Plan" was what had brought about this mess.

The innocent man who killed his father? When Inigo Montoya does that, we cheer.Montoya's dad was a innocent, not a serial killer who died because his victim was better. A fair legal system would grant Montoya justice by punishing his dad's killer.

The same legal system would laugh at YY.

Warren Dew
2011-03-09, 12:25 PM
Unless Gobbutopia had a really effective secret police such that people would cheer their leaders regardless of what they said, of course :smallwink:
The normal thing to do when listening to an inspirational speech, especially right after being delivered a massive victory, is to cheer at the appropriate points, without actually listening to the content of the speech. There's no evidence the hobgoblins are doing any different. No secret police is required.

In a few months or a year, when the hobgoblins notice they aren't getting to kill humans any more, that's when the unrest will start.

Lord_Gareth
2011-03-09, 12:30 PM
This whole thing skips the bit where war and vengeance are not [Good] acts, and in fact, [Good] characters are encouraged to abdicate vengeance in favor of mercy. Yes, the Azurites have been wronged, but attacking Gobbotopia won't make that right any more than Momma!Dragon's attack on V's family was right.

slayerx
2011-03-09, 12:37 PM
This whole thing skips the bit where war and vengeance are not [Good] acts, and in fact, [Good] characters are encouraged to abdicate vengeance in favor of mercy. Yes, the Azurites have been wronged, but attacking Gobbotopia won't make that right any more than Momma!Dragon's attack on V's family was right.

and what of justice? Should the goblins be allowed to kill and enslave people?
The mama dragon comparison does not work since she was attempted to take out her anger on innocent people who had nothing to do with her son's death. V is the only one responsible for what he's done and as such the only one who should pay for his crimes. That is one of the big differences between justice and vengeance. Justice makes criminals pay fairly for their crimes, while vengerance will go further than that, be acted on out of anger, and often go so far as to involve innocents.

in the case of gobbotopia, atleast 20,000 members of the population took part in the attack and as such are responsible for all the death and carnage. There would be justice behind the Azurites taking back what belongs to them and freeing the enslaved people... it's only when they go a step furthar and attempt full on geneocide of the entire population that it will become an act of vengeance.

Lord_Gareth
2011-03-09, 12:43 PM
I disagree; attacking Gobbotopia would cause numerous losses for both sides, which would only add to the death toll and make the situation more wretched and messed up. If the Azurites want justice, why not play Gobbotopia's game against them? Seventeen nations recognizing their borders is seventeen nations that can demand war crime reparations.

slayerx
2011-03-09, 12:52 PM
I disagree; attacking Gobbotopia would cause numerous losses for both sides, which would only add to the death toll and make the situation more wretched and messed up.
Not if the gobbo's just surrender and give back what they took from the Azurites


If the Azurites want justice, why not play Gobbotopia's game against them? Seventeen nations recognizing their borders is seventeen nations that can demand war crime reparations.

Ya i really don't think the goblins will be too keen on giving the Azuirtes anything at all... besides, reparations come AFTER the people that were attacked get their land back. Afterall, the full war crime reparations would essentially amount to the price of an entire city plus damages to the city and the population... only way the gobbo's can pay back the reparations is by surrendering the city itself first. When someone steals something he generally has to give it back first in addition to paying for the crime in question.

Lord_Gareth
2011-03-09, 01:04 PM
Ya i really don't think the goblins will be too keen on giving the Azuirtes anything at all... besides, reparations come AFTER the people that were attacked get their land back. Afterall, the full war crime reparations would essentially amount to the price of an entire city plus damages to the city and the population... only way the gobbo's can pay back the reparations is by surrendering the city itself first. When someone steals something he generally has to give it back first in addition to paying for the crime in question.

That's the point - instead of just invading, put political pressure on them and threaten overwhelming force.

Keejus
2011-03-09, 02:58 PM
I must have missed the strip where we see every single Hobgoblin man, woman and child whip slaves for fun. Could you link to it?
(As for war, I'm just gonna speculate and say the Hobgoblins in their vast majority went to war because they were told to.)

I would posit that the burden of proof belongs to the opposite argument, unless you happen to have a strip containing goblins opposed to any of these actions handy.

We've seen plenty of good Azurites, but even neutral goblins are a rarity. We have no reason to believe the goblins are redeemable.

I'm just referring to the goblins in Azure Town, by the way.

G-Man Graves
2011-03-09, 03:17 PM
I would posit that the burden of proof belongs to the opposite argument, unless you happen to have a strip containing goblins opposed to any of these actions handy.


Actually no, I'm pretty sure the generally accepted method these days is "innocent until proven guilty". It is, after all, much easier to prove someone guilty than innocent.

Mystic Muse
2011-03-09, 03:30 PM
We have no reason to believe the goblins are redeemable.

Read Start of Darkness. In there is the reason to believe goblins are redeemable.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-09, 03:30 PM
I would posit that the burden of proof belongs to the opposite argument, unless you happen to have a strip containing goblins opposed to any of these actions handy.

We've seen plenty of good Azurites, but even neutral goblins are a rarity. We have no reason to believe the goblins are redeemable.

I'm just referring to the goblins in Azure Town, by the way.

Well I can't prove my argument because Goblintopia is unique (as far as I know) and only time will tell if being treated as a sovreinge nation will make the goblins go more 'good'

slayerx
2011-03-09, 03:46 PM
That's the point - instead of just invading, put political pressure on them and threaten overwhelming force.

The azurites have enough trouble drumming up enough to support just to challenge gobbotopia much less convince multiple nations to threaten gobbotopia with force if they do not pay reparations. Hell i'd might expect that the majority of those 17 nations are nations that are either evil like greysky City, neutral to the point where they don't really care that much about who owns the city or just plain fearful of the goblins; nations that wouldn't be too quick to come to the Azurite's help... cities like cliffport would the exception, though even with them i might wonder if they would be willing to help out the Azurites since they seem to stand to gain some ground in their trade war against the elves by supporting gobbotopia.

Really at this point the Azuites will be lucky to put together enough of a power to make the goblins realize they are still a threat, much less get the overwhelming to threaten them to do anything

pendell
2011-03-09, 04:11 PM
The azurites have enough trouble drumming up enough to support just to challenge gobbotopia much less convince multiple nations to threaten gobbotopia with force if they do not pay reparations. Hell i'd might expect that the majority of those 17 nations are nations that are either evil like greysky City, neutral to the point where they don't really care that much about who owns the city or just plain fearful of the goblins; nations that wouldn't be too quick to come to the Azurite's help... cities like cliffport would the exception, though even with them i might wonder if they would be willing to help out the Azurites since they seem to stand to gain some ground in their trade war against the elves by supporting gobbotopia.


OR the nations in question are lawful good, but don't consider Gobbotopia to be enough of a problem to justify a military expedition. Or if it is, they may not have the power to do anything about it. I didn't see many tears being shed because the Shire didn't mass-conscript and send the hobbits off to man the walls of Minus Tirith.

Just because something bad is happening thousands of miles away doesn't mean it's a good idea to load up an army (not trivial, even with D&D magic) and send it marching off to die in some forgotten place. There's always going to be a BBEG or a crazy warlord or a mad lich, and if you make it your nation's business to swat them all down A) you'll probably spend a LOT of blood and treasure and B) you'll set a precedent where OTHER people won't do the job. There ARE other countries in the world, after all.

I think of it like this: It's all very well for superman to rescue people from burning buildings. But if he does it too often it's possible Metropolis will stop paying for a fire department. The result being that Superman has to spend all his time literally fighting fires -- something ordinary humans can do -- and that means he has less time for those threats only he can solve, like Cyclops or Lex Luthor or Bizarro.

So it's not that those other countries are evil; it's just that it's not worth the cost in blood and treasure to make it happen. A man in our world once said "[Country] is not worth the bones of a single [Country] grenadier".

The alternative, I suppose, are people like the Sapphire Guard who make it their business to crusade thousands of miles away to eliminate any threat to the gates, no matter how remote or unlikely. I'm not convinced that's a better answer. Looking at Start of Darkness, and how their actions in that story led directly to the sack of their city, it's possible such an approach causes more problems than it solves.


Respectfully,

Brian P.

slayerx
2011-03-09, 05:11 PM
OR the nations in question are lawful good, but don't consider Gobbotopia to be enough of a problem to justify a military expedition. -snip-

We are talking about the 17 nations that decided to go ahead and recognize gobbotopia. Also i said the majoroity not "all" of them so there is room for some exceptions. Refusing the recognize a country is NOT a declaration of war (unless gobbotopia threatens to make it one); they do not need to provide the azurites any aid just because they do not recognize gobbotopia. If a lawful good nation does not want to launch a military campaign against them, that's fine, going to war is a tough choice, but does not mean they must recognize them and legitimize their nation. The only reason i could see nations recognizing a nation like gobbotpia is because they either want to be allies (evil), fear them and want to appease them (fearful nations), or if they want to deal economically with them(cliffport, evil and neautral).

now technically, a lawful good nation might recognize them so that they can deal with them politically to try and change them, but that requires the nation believe that the goblins are capable of such change... which i doubt after they both conquered and enslaved a lawful good nation. Not to mention i think those lawful good nation would have been more worth mentioning rather than just cliffport.... so the lack of mention put serious doubts there

veti
2011-03-09, 06:32 PM
All Redcloak says of those 17 nations is that they have "recognized our borders".

And all that means, in political terms, is they've said: "Okay, everything that happens in that area there is your problem, set one foot over that line and we'll skewer you like a cocktail snack."

It doesn't imply support, it doesn't even imply peace. Indeed, according to medieval theory, you have to recognize your enemy before you can legitimately go to war with them.

In this case, what I suspect it means is "okay, that's your border. Everything on this side of the line is nothing to do with you, okay? That includes these massive fortifications and training camps that we just happen to be building here."

Keejus
2011-03-09, 06:55 PM
Read Start of Darkness. In there is the reason to believe goblins are redeemable.

I'm only referring to the goblins occupying Azure City; that was what I meant by the last line, though I guess it's easily misread. There certainly are decent-ish goblins out there, but we haven't seen anyone stand up to Redcloak's evil ways since SoD, so my gut feeling is nobody who still serves Xykon is really against what he's doing.


Well I can't prove my argument because Goblintopia is unique (as far as I know) and only time will tell if being treated as a sovreinge nation will make the goblins go more 'good'

It's entirely possible, and like I said, I want to see where Gobbotopia is headed, but until we at least see some goblins considering that slavery is not the way or something similar, I stand by my judgment.

Narren
2011-03-09, 07:20 PM
What word do you disagree with? Open? First Degree Murder? Defenseless? (Belkar had the curse on him, YY knew it). Innocent? (YY's dad was one of Nail's killers, killing YY's Dad was something Roy could have done, and YY knew darn well what Nail was).

What does that leave? CE? Murder is evil. That you're "avenging" one of Nail's killers doesn't make it less so. Further YY was clearly going against the laws of society, and claiming to be following some personal code is a Hailey type action. It's amusing to think of YY as LG, but his actions at that time were seriously CE.

YY was treated as one of Nail's killers who had been caught red handed while carrying out vile acts. One hopes they'd treat Nail himself the same way.


Nale. Haley. I'm usually not a spelling Nazi....but you don't even HEAR these names, you only see them spelled :smalltongue:

Dark Matter
2011-03-09, 08:57 PM
Well I can't prove my argument because Goblintopia is unique (as far as I know) and only time will tell if being treated as a sovreinge nation will make the goblins go more 'good'I'd have more faith in this idea if we knew of at least one non-evil goblin there, or if we weren't seeing goblins teaching other goblins how much fun evil is. Right now the system is part of the problem.

IMHO the only one who might be able to challenge and change this is Red Cloak, and he's dug an amazingly deep hole for himself.
...If a lawful good nation does not want to launch a military campaign against them, that's fine, going to war is a tough choice, but does not mean they must recognize them and legitimize their nation...Recognition is a VERY low bar. Goblotopia exists, other countries are recognizing that.

If you want to talk with a nation about fishing rights, you need to recognize it. If you're going to go to war with them and destroy them... there's still no reason to not recognize them. We recognize countries we refuse to talk to.

Nale. Haley.Fair enough.

pendell
2011-03-10, 09:35 AM
I'm only referring to the goblins occupying Azure City; that was what I meant by the last line, though I guess it's easily misread. There certainly are decent-ish goblins out there, but we haven't seen anyone stand up to Redcloak's evil ways since SoD, so my gut feeling is nobody who still serves Xykon is really against what he's doing.


I can't make that conclusion.

Recall the discussion of the short lifespan of the goblins we've just had. It's possible a number of goblins now in his army were born in Xykon's service. They may not like it, but it is literally all the world they know. Leaving such a world requires A) knowing an alternative is possible and B) the ability to do something about it.

There is only one goblin we've seen in all the books who ran away from Xykon. He was a rogue and an intelligence operative. He had infiltrated human cities and knew how the other half lives. He also had levels in rogue and other skills enabling him to live alone in a world where every human's hand was against him.

And even then, Xykon still hunted him down.

Compare that to the average goblin in the ranks -- born in Xykon's army, never known any life outside Xykon's army, fed a steady diet of propaganda and indoctrination, and if he leaves, gets to try to survive in a world where almost every adventurer will SMITE EVIL! them on sight for the XP.

The goblins are in a prison. A prison in their minds and a prison in their bodies. A prison enforced not only by Xykon on the inside but by the "only good goblin is a dead goblin" attitude of those on the outside.

So I don't think it's fair to infer any assumptions about the willingness of the average goblin in the ranks. Certainly Xykon doesn't give a rip whether they're willingly or not. All he cares about is that they obey his orders. If they don't, he'll zombify them and they'll STILL obey his order.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Warren Dew
2011-03-10, 12:23 PM
It's possible a number of goblins now in his army were born in Xykon's service.
Xykon and Redcloak have been in charge of the hobgoblins - orange skin - a couple of years at most. That's not enough time for them to grow up and join the army.

It's possible that some of the goblins serving under Xykon in Dorukan's dungeon had been born in his service. However, all those goblins died when the dungeon exploded. Note that we see no minions other than the monster in the darkness accompanying Xykon and Redcloak between the dungeon explosion and their taking over the hobgoblins (strips 147-149). None of those goblins are alive to serve Xykon any more.

slayerx
2011-03-10, 12:36 PM
Xykon and Redcloak have been in charge of the hobgoblins - orange skin - a couple of years at most. That's not enough time for them to grow up and join the army.

Even less than that, its probably been like less than a year... i mean its only been like what, 4 months since the war with Azure city and the time between the war and when the hobgoblins were recruited does not seem to be more than a few months... at best we are talking about hobbos that are less than a year old

Forum Explorer
2011-03-10, 01:24 PM
I'd have more faith in this idea if we knew of at least one non-evil goblin there, or if we weren't seeing goblins teaching other goblins how much fun evil is. Right now the system is part of the problem.

IMHO the only one who might be able to challenge and change this is Red Cloak, and he's dug an amazingly deep hole for himself. Recognition is a VERY low bar. Goblotopia exists, other countries are recognizing that.

If you want to talk with a nation about fishing rights, you need to recognize it. If you're going to go to war with them and destroy them... there's still no reason to not recognize them. We recognize countries we refuse to talk to.
Fair enough.

I have high hopes for Jirix. He outright says he will be a peacetime leader and he seems to be a clear thinker. He also seems to be honerable and would take a deal to release the slaves for a better trade agreement or something.

veti
2011-03-10, 03:39 PM
I have high hopes for Jirix. He outright says he will be a peacetime leader and he seems to be a clear thinker. He also seems to be honerable and would take a deal to release the slaves for a better trade agreement or something.

I think that's an excessively rose-tinted view. "Honorable" is not the same as "Good".

Jirix will, I'm sure, work hard to get the best possible deal for his people. But release slaves - give up a major asset and reorder the entire economy - for the sake of a better trade agreement?

If he tried, he'd have a revolution on his hands. The hobbos like whipping humans, and nobody likes having to do hard manual labour themselves. It'd be like the American Civil War, only without the North.

Warren Dew
2011-03-10, 03:51 PM
If he tried, he'd have a revolution on his hands. The hobbos like whipping humans, and nobody likes having to do hard manual labour themselves. It'd be like the American Civil War, only without the North.
Maybe they could hire some regular green skinned goblins to do the manual labor at starvation wages. I wonder what Redcloak's reaction to that would be.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-10, 05:08 PM
I think that's an excessively rose-tinted view. "Honorable" is not the same as "Good".

Jirix will, I'm sure, work hard to get the best possible deal for his people. But release slaves - give up a major asset and reorder the entire economy - for the sake of a better trade agreement?

If he tried, he'd have a revolution on his hands. The hobbos like whipping humans, and nobody likes having to do hard manual labour themselves. It'd be like the American Civil War, only without the North.

Well if they have to constantly deal with rebellions and have to protect the slaves I can see them being more bother than their worth. Plus if you can get something for them? Good deal. So it wouldn't happen without the Resistance to pester the hobgoblins, but it could still happen.

Also while the Hobgoblins like whipping the slaves they also have other intrests like creating fine gouda cheese with Hydra burgers.

Narren
2011-03-10, 05:23 PM
Well if they have to constantly deal with rebellions and have to protect the slaves I can see them being more bother than their worth. Plus if you can get something for them? Good deal. So it wouldn't happen without the Resistance to pester the hobgoblins, but it could still happen.

Also while the Hobgoblins like whipping the slaves they also have other intrests like creating fine gouda cheese with Hydra burgers.

Not a bad point, but it really depends on the level of trouble vs. level of productivity they get from these slaves. And I don't think we've really seen a good enough sample to know if the slaves are worth the trouble they may or may not bring.

slayerx
2011-03-10, 05:33 PM
Well if they have to constantly deal with rebellions and have to protect the slaves I can see them being more bother than their worth. Plus if you can get something for them? Good deal. So it wouldn't happen without the Resistance to pester the hobgoblins, but it could still happen.

I rather doubt it. One thing you have to factor in is that the resistance is ultimately trying to get the city and the land back; freeing their people is just the first and most important priority. Just freeing the slaves in a trade deal with another nation like cliffport would likely only result in many slaves joining the resistance.

freeing the slaves might have some effect on the resistance, but i think the only way to stop the resistance would be to make a deal with the Azurites. Only when Hinjo and the Azurites get back all of the imprisoned people AND decide to give up on the city, will the resistance begin to really loose its steam. Afterall while one faction of resistance do not care for hinjo, the other 2 factions fought with the expectation that he would one day come back for them. So once they know that Hinjo (and his allies by extention) will not support them, those factions may find the continued fight to be utterly pointless.

another possible deal would be allowing all humans, including the former azurites, slaves and resistance equal rights and citizenship... Aswell as porbably getting rid of any evil laws and taking a more neautral-to-good stance... this would allow them to return home, just to one under new management. though i'm not sure how cleanly that would actually work out in practice... Lots of bad blood after the war, much less the on going specism going on... things probably would not work out well at all

Narren
2011-03-10, 06:04 PM
another possible deal would be allowing all humans, including the former azurites, slaves and resistance equal rights and citizenship... Aswell as porbably getting rid of any evil laws and taking a more neautral-to-good stance... this would allow them to return home, just to one under new management. though i'm not sure how cleanly that would actually work out in practice... Lots of bad blood after the war, much less the on going specism going on... things probably would not work out well at all

That.....would be a bloodbath.

Dark Matter
2011-03-10, 06:34 PM
Recall the discussion of the short lifespan of the goblins we've just had. It's possible a number of goblins now in his army were born in Xykon's service.No. Xykon goes through minions really fast. With the exception of RC, these are new recruits. http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0149.html

Further Xykon isn't orderly enough to bother with setting up laws and civil societal structures.

...Aswell as porbably getting rid of any evil laws and taking a more neautral-to-good stance... this would allow them to return home, just to one under new management. though i'm not sure how cleanly that would actually work out in practice... Lots of bad blood after the war, much less the on going specism going on... things probably would not work out well at allThere's a ton of Evil clerics running around who worship a god of Evil. Is it reasonable to expect them to consent to "Good" laws? Much worse, why should the goblins reorder their laws and society so that some other race can be comfortable?

We're not looking at RC imposing evil laws on an unwilling population. This is a city by goblins, for goblins, and everything we've seen suggests that Evil is popular.

KillItWithFire
2011-03-10, 08:32 PM
Even less than that, its probably been like less than a year... i mean its only been like what, 4 months since the war with Azure city and the time between the war and when the hobgoblins were recruited does not seem to be more than a few months... at best we are talking about hobbos that are less than a year old

Xykon recruited the hobos around the Azurite new year and Roy says we're about 7 weeks from the next one.

As for my two cents: goblins are listed as usually evil for a reason, exceptions are rare. So until we see proof otherwise we have to assume they're evil. Granted there's a difference between assumed and confirmed evil so there's still a level of caution to be assumed when throwing those smite evils. As for the Azurites personal situation, they just got their home invaded, for no action they took but for the gate. Yes they have a right to take it back!

Lord_Gareth
2011-03-10, 09:11 PM
For all future reference, "Usually Evil" contains a built-in 35% exception rate, as well as inherent redeemability.

Dark Matter
2011-03-10, 10:19 PM
Sure. Fully agreed.

They can drift around in their alignment, just like humans. Red Cloak himself may have started out as LN and been lured into evil by TDO, Xykon, and the Sapphire Guard. His brother may have been turned Good after experiencing how self destructive The Plan and (especially) Xykon were.

But "exception" doesn't mean "Good", it just means "non-Evil". Much worse, as far as I can tell they're on a downward spiral, not an upward one. *None* of their leadership has shown any "Good" signs and the laws and setup of their new city aren't designed to shift them into redemption.

It's speculation but from the point of view of a generic 'neutral' goblin... Evil appears to work. TDO and his high priest have made things much better, why should anyone want to sign up for the losing team, and a losing human team at that? And that's the minority who aren't included in the "usually evil" grouping.

Herald Alberich
2011-03-10, 11:51 PM
And don't forget that it's "usually Lawful Evil" (for hobgoblins) and "usually Neutral Evil" for green-skin goblins. Meaning, not all of the 35% of non-LE hobgoblins are Neutral or Good. Some are NE and CE.

hamishspence
2011-03-11, 06:51 AM
I've seen figures bigger than 35% for Usually X alignment.

the highest figure I've seen for "Usually Evil" was for a type of fiend (the cambion in Expedition to the Demonweb Pits) that is "usually Evil, Often Chaotic Evil"- and the figure was 90% are Evil, 10% are Neutral or Good.

TriForce
2011-03-11, 08:47 AM
none of the people who are rooting for gobbotopia have actually said anything about the fact that the city isnt actually theirs even if they are redeemable, even if its 100% certain that the goblins will become a good race after redcloak leaves (highly unlikely at best, but regardless) they are still in a city they never had any right to take, and kicked thousands if not more people out of their homes they were in for generations, without compensation, hell, they probably killed or enslaved anyone who didnt want to leave his home or couldnt escape.

why would you want them to keep azure city? if someone comes into your home, kills your father, and throws the rest out, all becouse of something your grandfather did that you didnt even know about, and afterwards becomes a perfect gentleman. would YOU say "well, he deserves a chance, ill just go and sleep in this box i found here on the street"

i dont think so

faustin
2011-03-11, 09:19 AM
Not to mention the Resistence or the slaves experiences under Team Evil and the Gobbos´ feet. Those aren´t exactly gonna gain any friendliness from their exiled comrades to the goblin race.

Lord Raziere
2011-03-11, 09:54 AM
now now.....attacking the city only leads to worse things and will only continue the cycle of vengeance DnD is built upon.

the only right way to retake Azure City is peacefully without confrontation, work out a deal in negotiations for a way for both of them to live. if the Azurites attack they will be no better than the original invaders.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-11, 12:16 PM
none of the people who are rooting for gobbotopia have actually said anything about the fact that the city isnt actually theirs even if they are redeemable, even if its 100% certain that the goblins will become a good race after redcloak leaves (highly unlikely at best, but regardless) they are still in a city they never had any right to take, and kicked thousands if not more people out of their homes they were in for generations, without compensation, hell, they probably killed or enslaved anyone who didnt want to leave his home or couldnt escape.

why would you want them to keep azure city? if someone comes into your home, kills your father, and throws the rest out, all becouse of something your grandfather did that you didnt even know about, and afterwards becomes a perfect gentleman. would YOU say "well, he deserves a chance, ill just go and sleep in this box i found here on the street"

i dont think so

If they managed to kick me out, without me dieing, which is pretty impressive. I might forgive them if they improved themselves. I wouldn't want the house back in any case and any actions I would take would be out of revenge. And its more like something my father did not my grandfather. So I don't know, it depends if we end up talking or not. If we do, I could very well forgive them. If we don't I would do something stupid like burn down the house.

slayerx
2011-03-11, 12:31 PM
If they managed to kick me out, without me dieing, which is pretty impressive. I might forgive them if they improved themselves. I wouldn't want the house back in any case and any actions I would take would be out of revenge. And its more like something my father did not my grandfather. So I don't know, it depends if we end up talking or not. If we do, I could very well forgive them. If we don't I would do something stupid like burn down the house.

Well that implies that the only one that was killed was the person who wrong them... in this case it would be more like the someone who broke into your house didn't just kill you father, but also your siblings; who like yourself, didn't know about and had nothing to with what happened years ago. So would you be so willing to allow all those innocent deaths to go unanswered and leave your home to go live in some run down house?

Forum Explorer
2011-03-11, 01:24 PM
Well that implies that the only one that was killed was the person who wrong them... in this case it would be more like the someone who broke into your house didn't just kill you father, but also your siblings; who like yourself, didn't know about and had nothing to with what happened years ago. So would you be so willing to allow all those innocent deaths to go unanswered and leave your home to go live in some run down house?

Listen the metaphor just doesn't work on a single person level. Would I try to get revenge? Perhaps, but I doubt I would leave in the first place even if that killed me.

Also why would my own house have to be run down? I would build up a better and new house. And again once I've done so I wouldn't want to go back though I would want justice/revenge.

pendell
2011-03-11, 01:45 PM
Lord Raziere,



the only right way to retake Azure City is peacefully without confrontation, work out a deal in negotiations for a way for both of them to live.


I assess the probability of Redcloak's people giving up Gobbotopia or even allowing humans to share it to be a vanishingly low probability.

What, then? To put this bluntly, the Azurites were robbed. How is the recovery of stolen property anything but a good act?

To put this in Tolkien terms, how is it wrong for the dwarves to try to recover Khazad-dum, their ancient home, from the orcs and balrog who stole it from them, murdering a fair number of their kin in the process?

The problem with "cycle of vengence" rhetoric, to my mind, is that to break the cycle of vengeance someone has to be left holding the bag of suffering a wrong without making the other guy pay for it. Why does it have to be the Azurites who pay that price?

I see there are some very moral people on this thread who suggest the right thing to do would be for the humans to simply give up their homes and live in peace.

To put it bluntly, it ain't happening.

Individual human beings may be willing to do that. Human beings in the main won't, and any leader who proposed that to the people of Azure City would be deposed in favor of someone else who would be willing to fight. Ordinary people just aren't built that way, in D&D or the real world. That's one reason why land borders -- usually set as the result of theft, treachery, doubledealing, and murder -- are such contentious issues in the real world.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

slayerx
2011-03-11, 02:42 PM
Also why would my own house have to be run down? I would build up a better and new house.

Well that was to compare what the azurites are going through; the living in a box thing seemed inaccurate... their elven settlement is not gonna be as nice as their old city... and after being kicked out of your home and everything stolen from you i doubt you'd have the resources to build a better home. your life was effectively ruined

Gray Mage
2011-03-11, 04:48 PM
I don't see the argument that the hobgoblins were wronged before and because of this invaded AC, if it was the goblins then I could see it. They were kept at the valley, but had 88 legions. They had what seems like a huge city for themselves, with fortifications. They cleary weren't in the same conditions as the goblins in SOD at all.

T.H. Everything
2011-03-11, 05:26 PM
If the Azurites were to try to take over the city, I would definitely root for them. And since by that point, they'd have hopefully learned from their mistakes, they'd give the goblins who survived some sort of ethnic neighborhood within the city.

Deliverance
2011-03-11, 06:51 PM
none of the people who are rooting for gobbotopia have actually said anything about the fact that the city isnt actually theirs even if they are redeemable, even if its 100% certain that the goblins will become a good race after redcloak leaves (highly unlikely at best, but regardless) they are still in a city they never had any right to take, and kicked thousands if not more people out of their homes they were in for generations, without compensation, hell, they probably killed or enslaved anyone who didnt want to leave his home or couldnt escape.

It is theirs by right of conquest -and the previous owners, who may well disagree, can choose to either suck it up or dispute it in the traditional way: by the sword.

Or they can sulk in a corner and whine about the unfairness of the world now that their opponents have the upper hand for once.

Since it is a safe bet that neither the goblins nor the humans have signed treaties with eachother disallowing conquest, the whole "they had no right to take it!!!" can be pretty much ignored as philosophical nitpicking of no relevance to the situation: for both the humans and goblins currently in Azure City/Gobbutopia, the question of "who has the right to the City" is completely irrelevant to their current situation, their possibilities, and their actions.

Lord Raziere
2011-03-11, 06:57 PM
Lord Raziere,



I assess the probability of Redcloak's people giving up Gobbotopia or even allowing humans to share it to be a vanishingly low probability.

What, then? To put this bluntly, the Azurites were robbed. How is the recovery of stolen property anything but a good act?

To put this in Tolkien terms, how is it wrong for the dwarves to try to recover Khazad-dum, their ancient home, from the orcs and balrog who stole it from them, murdering a fair number of their kin in the process?

The problem with "cycle of vengence" rhetoric, to my mind, is that to break the cycle of vengeance someone has to be left holding the bag of suffering a wrong without making the other guy pay for it. Why does it have to be the Azurites who pay that price?

I see there are some very moral people on this thread who suggest the right thing to do would be for the humans to simply give up their homes and live in peace.

To put it bluntly, it ain't happening.

Individual human beings may be willing to do that. Human beings in the main won't, and any leader who proposed that to the people of Azure City would be deposed in favor of someone else who would be willing to fight. Ordinary people just aren't built that way, in D&D or the real world. That's one reason why land borders -- usually set as the result of theft, treachery, doubledealing, and murder -- are such contentious issues in the real world.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

sadly I never said that they would do the right thing, or that humanity always does so. that is my stance. you are right and the world is only sadder because of it. it isn't right, but it will be what they will do :smallfrown:

Lord_Gareth
2011-03-11, 07:22 PM
Lord Raziere,



I assess the probability of Redcloak's people giving up Gobbotopia or even allowing humans to share it to be a vanishingly low probability.

What, then? To put this bluntly, the Azurites were robbed. How is the recovery of stolen property anything but a good act?

To put this in Tolkien terms, how is it wrong for the dwarves to try to recover Khazad-dum, their ancient home, from the orcs and balrog who stole it from them, murdering a fair number of their kin in the process?

The problem with "cycle of vengence" rhetoric, to my mind, is that to break the cycle of vengeance someone has to be left holding the bag of suffering a wrong without making the other guy pay for it. Why does it have to be the Azurites who pay that price?

I see there are some very moral people on this thread who suggest the right thing to do would be for the humans to simply give up their homes and live in peace.

To put it bluntly, it ain't happening.

Individual human beings may be willing to do that. Human beings in the main won't, and any leader who proposed that to the people of Azure City would be deposed in favor of someone else who would be willing to fight. Ordinary people just aren't built that way, in D&D or the real world. That's one reason why land borders -- usually set as the result of theft, treachery, doubledealing, and murder -- are such contentious issues in the real world.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

A lot of folks confuse [Good] with [Law]. In D&D, they're not the same thing, even if in real life they're often portrayed to be. Recovering stolen property? [Law]ful. Retribution is also a very [Law]ful behavior. Now, it has been established that Azure city is [Law]ful indeed, and they may seek reconquest on those grounds, but attacking Gobbotopia is not going to be a [Good] act. In fact, [Good] necessitates abdicating vengeance. A character that seeks to be a paragon of [Good] is the one that decides to hold the bag of suffering. Will that be the Azurites? Probably not, especially since the Paladin Code literally requires that they punish the guilty, but it won't be a [Good] act, and will in fact probably cause reckless amounts of suffering and death on both sides. It might not be [Evil], and it's certainly [Law]ful, but it's not [Good] and there's no point in pretending otherwise. War never is.

Valley
2011-03-11, 07:57 PM
so if the azurites were to attack Gobbotopia, would that be "good"?
who would you root for?

To answer the questions - If the Paladins attack Gobbotopia, would that be "good"? - No. I don't think either side is "Good". I think, frankly, that the goblins have been shaped by the hate of the Paladins to be what they are today. Yet I don't think that gives them excuse - they could try to rise above it. In fact Redcloak kind of has, in small ways. As for the Paladins, they made THEMSELVES zealots. And they refuse to change also.

Who would you root for? - Knowing the backstory in which I believe the Paladins very likely started the cleansing, knowing the goblins are just not NPCs created just to die and allow people to loot their farms, and having dealt with a Paladin in a D&D in college, I have to say I hope the goblins get to win. They ALREADY have another nations supporting their right to have a homeland. And if the Paladins are defeated, the Order wiped out - it ends. If the goblins are defeated - there are more out there to come back and the cycle continues. They are a race - more goblins will pick up arms, scream "Remember Redcloak, Never Forget, Next Year Gobbotopia!" and keep the blood flowing.

Valley
2011-03-11, 08:07 PM
If the Azurites were to try to take over the city, I would definitely root for them. And since by that point, they'd have hopefully learned from their mistakes, they'd give the goblins who survived some sort of ethnic neighborhood within the city.

Mistakes? :smallsigh: Are we talking about the same people who keep trying to kill each other's leaders? If they let the goblins/hobgoblins live at all they will very likely end up in ghettos, be forced to carry papers, and will have to use different public restrooms. Do you think they would let those "Evil" goblins/hobgoblins use the same schools? Use the same libraries? Use the same..you get the point...:smalleek:


I mean, knowing the history of humankind and all... :smallfrown:

Forum Explorer
2011-03-11, 08:12 PM
To answer the questions - If the Paladins attack Gobbotopia, would that be "good"? - No. I don't think either side is "Good". I think, frankly, that the goblins have been shaped by the hate of the Paladins to be what they are today. Yet I don't think that gives them excuse - they could try to rise above it. In fact Redcloak kind of has, in small ways. As for the Paladins, they made THEMSELVES zealots. And they refuse to change also.

Who would you root for? - Knowing the backstory in which I believe the Paladins very likely started the cleansing, knowing the goblins are just not NPCs created just to die and allow people to loot their farms, and having dealt with a Paladin in a D&D in college, I have to say I hope the goblins get to win. They ALREADY have another nations supporting their right to have a homeland. And if the Paladins are defeated, the Order wiped out - it ends. If the goblins are defeated - there are more out there to come back and the cycle continues. They are a race - more goblins will pick up arms, scream "Remember Redcloak, Never Forget, Next Year Gobbotopia!" and keep the blood flowing.

The Order doesn't have to lose for the cycle to end, just the paladins.

Valley
2011-03-11, 08:50 PM
The Order doesn't have to lose for the cycle to end, just the paladins.Sorry, I don't mean the Order of the Stick - I meant the Paladins as in - their organization - Order of the Knights.

Dark Matter
2011-03-11, 09:02 PM
...attacking Gobbotopia is not going to be a [Good] act. In fact, [Good] necessitates abdicating vengeance. A character that seeks to be a paragon of [Good] is the one that decides to hold the bag of suffering. Will that be the Azurites? Probably not, especially since the Paladin Code literally requires that they punish the guilty, but it won't be a [Good] act, and will in fact probably cause reckless amounts of suffering and death on both sides. It might not be [Evil], and it's certainly [Law]ful, but it's not [Good] and there's no point in pretending otherwise. War never is.Vengeance? You're leaving out all the Evil acts the goblins are doing *right* *now*.

Good doesn't insist we stand back and let the slaves be whipped, simply because the person holding the whip would suffer from the amount of force it will take to stop him.

Yes, it would be a Good act to overthrow an evil country, even if it takes a war. This is true for Gobbotopia and it'd also be true for the Empire of Blood.

The problem is what happens to the people in the empire afterwards. One hopes Good laws enforced justly... but that implies different results for a usually evil people (i.e. the goblins) than it does for an undefined people (humans).

Warren Dew
2011-03-11, 09:08 PM
Individual human beings may be willing to do that. Human beings in the main won't, and any leader who proposed that to the people of Azure City would be deposed in favor of someone else who would be willing to fight. Ordinary people just aren't built that way, in D&D or the real world. That's one reason why land borders -- usually set as the result of theft, treachery, doubledealing, and murder -- are such contentious issues in the real world.
I think what's likely to happen will be that the Azure rulers will talk about "retaking Azure City" for a couple of generations, but in fact they'l settle in on the elf island and never get around to recrossing the ocean. They would certainly be justified in retaking Azure City - it would be a lawful nonevil act - but it's easier to settle down where they are, and humans usually take the easy way out.


I don't see the argument that the hobgoblins were wronged before and because of this invaded AC, if it was the goblins then I could see it. They were kept at the valley, but had 88 legions. They had what seems like a huge city for themselves, with fortifications. They cleary weren't in the same conditions as the goblins in SOD at all.
Very good point. There's zero evidence that Azure City ever did anything bad to the hobgoblins.

For that matter, we saw as many goblin villages wiped out by Xykon/Redcloak as by the Azure City paladins.

Narren
2011-03-11, 09:10 PM
Who would you root for? - Knowing the backstory in which I believe the Paladins very likely started the cleansing, knowing the goblins are just not NPCs created just to die and allow people to loot their farms, and having dealt with a Paladin in a D&D in college, I have to say I hope the goblins get to win. They ALREADY have another nations supporting their right to have a homeland. And if the Paladins are defeated, the Order wiped out - it ends.

I still can't understand support for the goblins. The "cleansing" was a small group of misguided paladins trying to prevent the end of the world. They went way overboard, but the average Azurite didn't even know that at it happened. Imagine if a foreign military invaded your country, butchered most, brutalized and enslaved the survivors, and occupied it while you had to find some place else to live if you were lucky enough to escape. And another nation supporting that right (and all they did was recognize their existence, didn't they) means nothing to the person it was taken from.

And we really have no idea just how far the "cleansing" of the goblins goes. IIRC, we only see it happen once. Was their mention of horrific slaughter at any other villages? And I'm not talking about taking down the Bearer of the Crimson Mantle, I'm talking about killing children.

And let's not forget that the goblin's are NOT THE ONE'S that invaded. It was the hobgoblins, and we've never had any indication that they got the same shaft. As was previously said, they had a pretty good operation going before Redcloak and Xykon got there.



If the goblins are defeated - there are more out there to come back and the cycle continues. They are a race - more goblins will pick up arms, scream "Remember Redcloak, Never Forget, Next Year Gobbotopia!" and keep the blood flowing.

That's why the Azurites should do what we learned from WWI. When you defeat a nation, don't drag it through the mud. That will only create the exact circumstances you are describing. Do everything you can to help that nation stay on it's feet, don't seek revenge, and in a generation or two you will have a staunch ally.

Lord_Gareth
2011-03-11, 09:32 PM
Vengeance? You're leaving out all the Evil acts the goblins are doing *right* *now*.

Good doesn't insist we stand back and let the slaves be whipped, simply because the person holding the whip would suffer from the amount of force it will take to stop him.

Yes, it would be a Good act to overthrow an evil country, even if it takes a war. This is true for Gobbotopia and it'd also be true for the Empire of Blood.

The problem is what happens to the people in the empire afterwards. One hopes Good laws enforced justly... but that implies different results for a usually evil people (i.e. the goblins) than it does for an undefined people (humans).

Invading will likely result in the slaves being used as hostages or as fuel for more Wights, and the AC has more than enough information to know this. Sending an army won't save any lives, and would amount only to - wait for it - vengeance.

pendell
2011-03-11, 09:37 PM
If the Azurites were to try to take over the city, I would definitely root for them. And since by that point, they'd have hopefully learned from their mistakes, they'd give the goblins who survived some sort of ethnic neighborhood within the city.

The only lesson they've learned is not to lose. That even one goblin or hobgoblin in the world is one too many.

I can hear the speech now: For every goblin you kill today, you save the life of ten -- a thousand -- humans tomorrow. Every goblin you let live today is a soldier who will come back to kill your children tomorrow. Every hobgoblin infant is a problem you leave to your children. Kill them now! Kill them all, and let us make peace for all time!

FOR THE SAKE OF THE CHILDREN!

I shouldn't have to say that I think that attitude toward the goblins is wrongheaded. But I think it is more likely that the humans will take this approach then allow any survivors of the people who killed their relatives, enslaved and zombified others, and overturned the altars of their gods.

What have the humans seen, on-panel, to convince them that goblins are beings like themselves who deserve a place in the sun? So far, the only things they've seen reinforce the propaganda image already old when they were in their cribs -- that the goblins are savage , evil monsters who must be destroyed to the last and least.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-11, 09:41 PM
For those saying that there has been nothing saying that Azure city has done anything to the Hobgoblins you should look earlier in this thread where people were talking about the Hobgoblins being penned up in those valleys by force.

Kish
2011-03-11, 09:55 PM
And let's not forget that the goblin's are NOT THE ONE'S that invaded. It was the hobgoblins, and we've never had any indication that they got the same shaft.

Rich said in the comments to (War and XPs, I think, one of the books anyway) that Azure City had kept the hobgoblins penned up in the mountains for generations, that each side blamed the other for starting the hostilities, and that neither really knew how the long-running feud between Azure City and the hobgoblins had begun now.


That's why the Azurites should do what we learned from WWI. When you defeat a nation, don't drag it through the mud. That will only create the exact circumstances you are describing. Do everything you can to help that nation stay on it's feet, don't seek revenge, and in a generation or two you will have a staunch ally.
Indeed.

KillItWithFire
2011-03-11, 10:06 PM
For those saying that there has been nothing saying that Azure city has done anything to the Hobgoblins you should look earlier in this thread where people were talking about the Hobgoblins being penned up in those valleys by force.

By force? the Azurites never even met these hobgoblins before they attacked. The goblins from Redcloaks villiage may have had reason to go to war with Azure city but guess what, they're all dead now. These hobgoblins have no such vendetta and as far as I know, no reason to go to war other than their supreme leader told them to.

Narren
2011-03-11, 10:18 PM
Invading will likely result in the slaves being used as hostages or as fuel for more Wights, and the AC has more than enough information to know this. Sending an army won't save any lives, and would amount only to - wait for it - vengeance.

Any invasion plans could be precipitated by rescuing the hostages. The fact that slaves are present is no reason to give up any plans of reclaiming your home.

Dark Matter
2011-03-11, 10:22 PM
Invading will likely result in the slaves being used as hostages or as fuel for more Wights, and the AC has more than enough information to know this. Sending an army won't save any lives, and would amount only to - wait for it - vengeance.Killing people who are actively engaged in murder, torture, slavery, empowerment of Evil gods, and the creation of undead isn't "vengeance". Standing back and allowing those things to occur isn't "Good".

I'd love to think that the source of the problem was two sets of people fighting over land... but thus far it looks like the "usually evil" issue isn't going away.

Lord_Gareth
2011-03-11, 10:27 PM
Killing people who are actively engaged in murder, torture, slavery, empowerment of Evil gods, and the creation of undead isn't "vengeance". Standing back and allowing those things to occur isn't "Good".

I'd love to think that the source of the problem was two sets of people fighting over land... but thus far it looks like the "usually evil" issue isn't going away.

There's also better options than invading a numerically-superior, intelligent enemy that's entrenched in your former fortifications and chock-full of powerful spell casters. Politics are the weapon here, and any attempt at invasion without overwhelming backup is inexcusably reckless and stupid.

Narren
2011-03-11, 10:54 PM
There's also better options than invading a numerically-superior, intelligent enemy that's entrenched in your former fortifications and chock-full of powerful spell casters. Politics are the weapon here, and any attempt at invasion without overwhelming backup is inexcusably reckless and stupid.

I don't think anyone is saying they should charge in on a suicide run (though they are pseudo-Japanese paladins, so you can't put it past them :smallwink:)

In any event, they've tried securing allies, but no one will help them out of fear of being the next target. I think the order of the day is the standard operating procedure when facing a numerically superior and more powerful foe. Guerrilla warfare. Wait for Xykon and Redcloak to leave (do they know they're leaving?) and then rescue the slaves and take out as many competent leaders, spell casters, religious leaders, and key infrastructure personnel, equipment, and facilities as possible. Weaken them, starve them, thin their numbers, and then try to secure allies when the hobgoblins appear to be less of a threat.

Lord_Gareth
2011-03-11, 10:55 PM
I don't think anyone is saying they should charge in on a suicide run (though they are pseudo-Japanese paladins, so you can't put it past them :smallwink:)

In any event, they've tried securing allies, but no one will help them out of fear of being the next target. I think the order of the day is the standard operating procedure when facing a numerically superior and more powerful foe. Guerrilla warfare. Wait for Xykon and Redcloak to leave (do they know they're leaving?) and then rescue the slaves and take out as many competent leaders, spell casters, religious leaders, and key infrastructure personnel, equipment, and facilities as possible. Weaken them, starve them, thin their numbers, and then try to secure allies when the hobgoblins appear to be less of a threat.

If you tear down their infrastructure like that, why invade? You can save lives by forcing a surrender and then treating your enemies honorably. Additionally - fun fact - paladins are required to act with honor, which is the reason Miko fell (among others).

Narren
2011-03-11, 11:09 PM
If you tear down their infrastructure like that, why invade? You can save lives by forcing a surrender and then treating your enemies honorably. Additionally - fun fact - paladins are required to act with honor, which is the reason Miko fell (among others).

If you can force a peaceful surrender, then go for it. You may NEED the allies to play that hand, but I would have no problem handling the situation with as little bloodshed as possible. It saves lives on both sides.

I don't think the hobgoblins should live in some ethnic neighborhood in the city, though. For one, the Azurites won't like having people in their city that previously butchered and zombiefied their friends and loved ones. And I can't say that I blame them. It simply wouldn't work. And two, they had what appeared to be a perfectly fine homeland before they invaded. They don't NEED this land, I see no reason why it would be considered better than what they previously had.

JonestheSpy
2011-03-11, 11:10 PM
I think the order of the day is the standard operating procedure when facing a numerically superior and more powerful foe. Guerrilla warfare. Wait for Xykon and Redcloak to leave (do they know they're leaving?) and then rescue the slaves and take out as many competent leaders, spell casters, religious leaders, and key infrastructure personnel, equipment, and facilities as possible. Weaken them, starve them, thin their numbers, and then try to secure allies when the hobgoblins appear to be less of a threat.

You know, I can totally seeing the Elves and the Resistance pursuing this strategy once Xykon and Redcloak leave. It would be a very interesting plotline if Redcloak had to choose between going back to Gobbotopia to save his fledgling nation or following Xykon and continuing the Plan.

Dark Matter
2011-03-11, 11:15 PM
Agreed about an invasion not being a good idea, and also agreed about asymmetric warfare being the best current option. I seriously doubt that this can force a "surrender" on it's own thought.

But when Xykon leaves, he's taking the powerful spellcasters we know about with him. That's going to be a serious game changer.

As for Paladins being honorable... yes, they are. But that city just drips with evil and evil actions, and I doubt the goblins will want to go back to the hills.

What's worse, I'm not even sure what peace would look like.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-11, 11:18 PM
By force? the Azurites never even met these hobgoblins before they attacked. The goblins from Redcloaks villiage may have had reason to go to war with Azure city but guess what, they're all dead now. These hobgoblins have no such vendetta and as far as I know, no reason to go to war other than their supreme leader told them to.

Read the post above yours.

Witty Username
2011-03-11, 11:32 PM
Azurites vs. Goblitopia,
both are in need of moral improvement.

What if scenario: Xykon Murders Redclock, Jirax finds out and Xykon loses his support from Goblitopia (assumes Xykon doesn't just kill them all). Azurites find out, as Xykon is a threat to both of them they work together to destroy him. Leading the charge is the Order of the stick.(i guess i should be specific)

otherwise Azurites are my vote, its their city.

Gray Mage
2011-03-12, 12:02 AM
For those saying that there has been nothing saying that Azure city has done anything to the Hobgoblins you should look earlier in this thread where people were talking about the Hobgoblins being penned up in those valleys by force.

So what? They being penned up only means they can't expand more, not that it seems like they need to. It doesn't mean that the paladins were opressing them, just that the expansion (most likely by warfare, since they had so many troops) on what is most likely someone's territory was halted. So, the paladins were to blame for stopping the hobs from invading someone's (maybe even AC's) territory? I don't see how that makes the hobs any way like the goblins.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-12, 12:20 AM
So what? They being penned up only means they can't expand more, not that it seems like they need to. It doesn't mean that the paladins were opressing them, just that the expansion (most likely by warfare, since they had so many troops) on what is most likely someone's territory was halted. So, the paladins were to blame for stopping the hobs from invading someone's (maybe even AC's) territory? I don't see how that makes the hobs any way like the goblins.

It means that the two nations were already on a war footing with each other and the Hobgoblins felt like they were being oppressed. (Kish said it best) The hobgoblins had their own reasons for wanting this war that didn't involve Redcloak.

This also colors there actions to the survivors more. They aren't just enslaving random humans. They are enslaving their oppressors in a sort of poetic justice. (Not saying that the hobgoblins were oppressed just that they felt they were)

Gray Mage
2011-03-12, 12:26 AM
It means that the two nations were already on a war footing with each other and the Hobgoblins felt like they were being oppressed. (Kish said it best) The hobgoblins had their own reasons for wanting this war that didn't involve Redcloak.

This also colors there actions to the survivors more. They aren't just enslaving random humans. They are enslaving their oppressors in a sort of poetic justice. (Not saying that the hobgoblins were oppressed just that they felt they were)

So if someone feels like they're being opressed they get a free pass at doing anything they want? Because that's kinda what it's sounding like, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Edit: Nevermind, I think that wasn't you who said that.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-12, 12:30 AM
So if someone feels like they're being opressed they get a free pass at doing anything they want? Because that's kinda what it's sounding like, please correct me if I'm wrong.

No its not that. I'm just replying to those people who are saying that the hobgoblins had no reason to go after Azure City besides Redcloak's orders. They did have their own motivation however wrong it might have been. They wanted justice (well lets be honest, vengence) for precived crimes against them.

Gray Mage
2011-03-12, 12:34 AM
No its not that. I'm just replying to those people who are saying that the hobgoblins had no reason to go after Azure City besides Redcloak's orders. They did have their own motivation however wrong it might have been. They wanted justice (well lets be honest, vengence) for precived crimes against them.

No, they still didn't, since they haven't said or mentioned that anywhere. Also, I mixed you with someone else that said the goblin incident was justification for the invasion, sorry about that. But I still don't see how that (they wanting revenge) would mean that the azurites shouldn't want their terrytory back or how the hobs should keep it.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-12, 12:53 AM
No, they still didn't, since they haven't said or mentioned that anywhere. Also, I mixed you with someone else that said the goblin incident was justification for the invasion, sorry about that. But I still don't see how that (they wanting revenge) would mean that the azurites shouldn't want their terrytory back or how the hobs should keep it.

Oh there is nothing wrong with the Azurites wanting their territory back, its just I think that the hobgoblins keeping it is their best chance to become a good or at least neutral race. So that plus I don't like very many of the Azurites is why I'm rooting for the hobgoblins to keep the city.

Gray Mage
2011-03-12, 12:55 AM
Oh there is nothing wrong with the Azurites wanting their territory back, its just I think that the hobgoblins keeping it is their best chance to become a good or at least neutral race. So that plus I don't like very many of the Azurites is why I'm rooting for the hobgoblins to keep the city.

Sorry, but I don't see how Jirix can turn the hobs to good. He's a cleric of an LE deity, so at best he's LN, and I wouldn't even count on that.

Lord Raziere
2011-03-12, 12:59 AM
Invading will likely result in the slaves being used as hostages or as fuel for more Wights, and the AC has more than enough information to know this. Sending an army won't save any lives, and would amount only to - wait for it - vengeance.

Lord Gareth as usual possesses wisdom.

and Sure we don't know what peace will look like- why do you think humanity always seeks it?

Forum Explorer
2011-03-12, 01:01 AM
Sorry, but I don't see how Jirix can turn the hobs to good. He's a cleric of an LE deity, so at best he's LN, and I wouldn't even count on that.

Off topic but for an acsended god would its alignment change as its primary worshipper race's alignment changed?

Jirix along with pressures from nations like Cliffport could convince the hobs to put in place more neutral laws. When later generations grow up with such laws they will be less evil and more neutral leading to more support for that way of life creating a possible spiral towards neutrality. If other nations get used to seeing hobgoblins in their cities (traders and such) and start treating them as people the hobs might soften a bit to those cities and adopt more of their attitudes. It would take generations for it to get to mostly neutral but it could happen and what's more it would serve as a symbol to other goblin and monster races on how to act to be treated as more than just XP. As well as to 'good' races on that monster races are people as well.

Lord_Gareth
2011-03-12, 01:01 AM
Sorry, but I don't see how Jirix can turn the hobs to good. He's a cleric of an LE deity, so at best he's LN, and I wouldn't even count on that.

Because, you know, people never change, perspectives don't evolve, and Rich hasn't been emphasizing how shallow and retarded alignment is for the entire comic.

Noooope. None of that in this story.

Gray Mage
2011-03-12, 01:14 AM
Off topic but for an acsended god would its alignment change as its primary worshipper race's alignment?

I don't think so, but it'd still require Jirix to be good while the rest of the worshippers remain evil.

Because, you know, people never change, perspectives don't evolve, and Rich hasn't been emphasizing how shallow and retarded alignment is for the entire comic.

Noooope. None of that in this story.

Then maybe after Jirix has his change of heart Xykon will follow? Just because they can it doesn't mean they will. Also, I never said it was impossible for Jirix or the hobs to stop being evil, I just don't assume that they're going to until we have some evidence of that.

Forum Explorer
2011-03-12, 01:22 AM
I don't think so, but it'd still require Jirix to be good while the rest of the worshippers remain evil.


Then maybe after Jirix has his change of heart Xykon will follow? Just because they can it doesn't mean they will. Also, I never said it was impossible for Jirix or the hobs to stop being evil, I just don't assume that they're going to until we have some evidence of that.

I don't assume but I hope.

Gray Mage
2011-03-12, 01:33 AM
I don't assume but I hope.

Hoping that it'll happen is fine.

Now, I think I didn't express myself very well in the other post, which could have lead Lord Garreth to misunderstand me. Jirix, as of right now, is at best LN, so if he doesn't turn to good, I don't see him turning the other hobs to gooo as well.

Lord_Gareth
2011-03-12, 01:48 AM
Hoping that it'll happen is fine.

Now, I think I didn't express myself very well in the other post, which could have lead Lord Garreth to misunderstand me. Jirix, as of right now, is at best LN, so if he doesn't turn to good, I don't see him turning the other hobs to gooo as well.

Umm...

>.>

<.<

I was testing your Sense Motive! You passed!

veti
2011-03-12, 05:23 AM
In any event, they've tried securing allies, but no one will help them out of fear of being the next target. I think the order of the day is the standard operating procedure when facing a numerically superior and more powerful foe. Guerrilla warfare. Wait for Xykon and Redcloak to leave (do they know they're leaving?) and then rescue the slaves and take out as many competent leaders, spell casters, religious leaders, and key infrastructure personnel, equipment, and facilities as possible. Weaken them, starve them, thin their numbers, and then try to secure allies when the hobgoblins appear to be less of a threat.

Guerrilla warfare is most effective when used against people who are too 'nice' to inflict reprisals against civilian populations. That definitely doesn't describe the hobgoblins. A much quicker and less painful way to thin their numbers would be to persuade another country to invade the hobgoblins' mountain homeland (must be pretty good land, if it supported 80-something legions), which would result in at least half the hobbos going home to defend it.

Obviously it'd be crazy to attack while Team Evil are still on the scene. But once they're out of the way, I think the Azurites will have no trouble finding volunteers to help them retake their city, in exchange for a piece of the action. Gobbotopia's life expectancy is best expressed in weeks, possibly months, but definitely not years.

hamishspence
2011-03-12, 05:58 AM
Now, I think I didn't express myself very well in the other post, which could have lead Lord Garreth to misunderstand me. Jirix, as of right now, is at best LN, so if he doesn't turn to good, I don't see him turning the other hobs to gooo as well.

He doesn't need to turn them to good, only to "peaceful attitude toward neighbours".

If Jirix is pragmatic, he might want Gobbotopia to become as friendly with its neighbours as possible- so that it doesn't get invaded.

Repatriating the Azurite prisoners might be a part of that.

One could have a neutral, or even mildly Evil, Jirix, who nonetheless recognizes just how precarious Gobbotopia's position is- and sets out to ensure that it will last.

pendell
2011-03-12, 07:20 AM
He doesn't need to turn them to good, only to "peaceful attitude toward neighbours".

If Jirix is pragmatic, he might want Gobbotopia to become as friendly with its neighbours as possible- so that it doesn't get invaded.

Repatriating the Azurite prisoners might be a part of that.

One could have a neutral, or even mildly Evil, Jirix, who nonetheless recognizes just how precarious Gobbotopia's position is- and sets out to ensure that it will last.

The fundamental issue is that the Azurites are led by Hinjo, who is a paladin.

Can a paladin even make a treaty with evil beings without falling? And make no mistake -- the inhabitants of gobbotopia have got a fair number of evil in the ranks and precious few good. Presumably that's why "detect good" is useful for detecting resistance fighters. If it was set off by many goblins or hobgoblins , the false positive rate would be too high to be useful.

Someone earlier suggested that the Azurite leaders would TALK about liberation but not actually DO it. I don't know what Azurite leaders they have in mind, but they can't mean Hinjo. Hinjo has that paladin code which says he can't lie to his own or make peace with evil. That first reason is why he was ready to arrest Lord Shojo, remember?

Which means there has to be at least ONE attempt to liberate the city by force. An attempt which I fully expect to succeed.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

hamishspence
2011-03-12, 07:30 AM
The fundamental issue is that the Azurites are led by Hinjo, who is a paladin.

Can a paladin even make a treaty with evil beings without falling?

May depend on the setting. Eberron and Faerun, I think, have had situations with paladins at least making some kind of agreement, or diplomatic negotiation, with evil characters.

TriForce
2011-03-12, 07:43 AM
It is theirs by right of conquest -and the previous owners, who may well disagree, can choose to either suck it up or dispute it in the traditional way: by the sword.

Or they can sulk in a corner and whine about the unfairness of the world now that their opponents have the upper hand for once.

Since it is a safe bet that neither the goblins nor the humans have signed treaties with eachother disallowing conquest, the whole "they had no right to take it!!!" can be pretty much ignored as philosophical nitpicking of no relevance to the situation: for both the humans and goblins currently in Azure City/Gobbutopia, the question of "who has the right to the City" is completely irrelevant to their current situation, their possibilities, and their actions.

now your just dodging the issue AND making stuff up. first of all, the question was if the azurites would be justified in taking the city back, my arguement is that since it was their home for generations, yes they certainly are. i also was trying to point out that specifically what the goblins actual alignment will be or become is totally irrelevant to the entire discussion.

furthermore, saying someone has a right to something simply becouse they are strong enough to take it from someone else is just caveman mentality. thats what animals do and anyone with even a smidgem of civilization (as in what the goblins appearantly want) would disagree with that. someone who lived at a place for years and years has all the right to want that home back. someone who invades and drives people from their homes has no right to that place, and there is no reason to root for them to keep it.

faustin
2011-03-12, 07:51 AM
I think, if a character who belongs to a race of "usually evil" want to show he is a good guy (or at least try to be a good guy), he must earn it (think in Drizzt Do'Urden entire live). Gobbotopia´s gobblin have not make any attempt to show azurites they can be a not evil alignment people, and I don´t see Jirix following Right-Eye´s path.

hamishspence
2011-03-12, 08:08 AM
I think, if a character who belongs to a race of "usually evil" want to show he is a good guy (or at least try to be a good guy), he must earn it (think in Drizzt Do'Urden entire live). Gobbotopia´s gobblin have not make any attempt to show azurites they can be a not evil alignment people, and I don´t see Jirix following Right-Eye´s path.

In The Orc King (by that same author) while Obould is most definitely not a good guy, he seeks to upgrade Orc civilization from raiders into a true nation that operates on the same level as other nations.

His method is pretty similar- invasion, fortify, resist repeated attacks to take back the land, and finally, when the others are tired of attacking, sue for peace. At the end of the book, Mithril Hall, Silverymoon, and others, sign a peace treaty with him- and in the prologue and epilogue, his kingdom still stands 100 years later- there are vigilantes who murder orcs, but people like Drizzt hunt the vigilantes.

In Eberron, Lhesh Haruuc, the hobgoblin king, started out as a mercenary- turned on his employers at a critical point, and created a kingdom of his own- Darguun. It was eventually recognized as a nation, at the end of the Last War.

Dark Matter
2011-03-12, 09:26 AM
Sorry, but I don't see how Jirix can turn the hobs to good. He's a cleric of an LE deity, so at best he's LN, and I wouldn't even count on that.He certainly seemed to enjoy watching OChul being tortured by Xykon, and we've never seen him oppose, even just mentally, anything RC or X has done.


Because, you know, people never change, perspectives don't evolve, and Rich hasn't been emphasizing how shallow and retarded alignment is for the entire comic.As far as I can tell, empowering the goblins as made them more, not less, evil. That's "change" but not what we want. Further, Clerics turning away from their gods is a big deal, and thus far we've seen nothing to suggest Jirix's on that path.


...and Sure we don't know what peace will look like- why do you think humanity always seeks it?My point is the current "peace" is fundamentally "Evil Wins". The forces of Good aren't going to tolerate that.

It's easy to picture a "Good Wins" setup which is intolerable by the forces of Evil (the goblins are driven back into the hills). It's hard to picture a "Good Wins" situation where we actually have peace.

Lord Raziere
2011-03-12, 09:53 AM
My point is the current "peace" is fundamentally "Evil Wins". The forces of Good aren't going to tolerate that.

It's easy to picture a "Good Wins" setup which is intolerable by the forces of Evil (the goblins are driven back into the hills). It's hard to picture a "Good Wins" situation where we actually have peace.

peace is elusive, because one does not sacrifice enough to achieve it, you want your cake and to eat it to. if you want justice for them taking Azure city, you sacrifice any hope of peace and continue the cycle of revenge, if you want peace, you must sacrifice justice to stop the cycle with you- sure it may be unfair, but whoever said life ever was?

the only real hope is to accept that things have happened and move on- it is too bad that more people don't listen to "give me the wisdom to accept the things I cannot change" part of Vonneguts old phrase. for to progress, we must focus on the things we can change and not the things we can't.

Kish
2011-03-12, 10:42 AM
It's easy to picture a "Good Wins" setup which is intolerable by the forces of Evil (the goblins are driven back into the hills).
That would certainly be "Azure City wins," but it's an odd concept of good that would call that "Good wins."

What you're saying only makes sense if "Good" and "Evil" are nothing more than team jerkins, and if that's the case, there's no particular reason to want soi-disant "Good" to win. I get that you want to ignore what Rich said about the origins of the conflict and replace it with "the goblins constantly acted evil and Azure City's actions were above reproach except in the one snapshot we saw, them massacring Redcloak's village, where their actions were an inexplicable anomaly," but, no.

G-Man Graves
2011-03-12, 11:02 AM
To anyone who says that "The City is the Azurites, they deserve it no matter what, I would like to direct your attention to panel 10 of this strip. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0480.html)

When he says, "this is my city now", he's not lying. That is actually how it works. The Goblins came in, killed everyone in their way, and took over the city. Those are the rules.

Narren
2011-03-12, 11:09 AM
To anyone who says that "The City is the Azurites, they deserve it no matter what, I would like to direct your attention to panel 10 of this strip. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0480.html)

When he says, "this is my city now", he's not lying. That is actually how it works. The Goblins came in, killed everyone in their way, and took over the city. Those are the rules.

No one denied that Redcloak controls the city. The question is whether or not the Azurites should be trying to take it back.

Narren
2011-03-12, 11:12 AM
peace is elusive, because one does not sacrifice enough to achieve it, you want your cake and to eat it to. if you want justice for them taking Azure city, you sacrifice any hope of peace and continue the cycle of revenge, if you want peace, you must sacrifice justice to stop the cycle with you- sure it may be unfair, but whoever said life ever was?

the only real hope is to accept that things have happened and move on- it is too bad that more people don't listen to "give me the wisdom to accept the things I cannot change" part of Vonneguts old phrase. for to progress, we must focus on the things we can change and not the things we can't.

If no one is going to stand against them when they forcibly take a city, then why not just conquer the whole world?


By that philosophy, justice can NEVER be taken. Murderers and thieves would run rampant, because their actions will be ignored in the name of peace. The Ghandi and MLK approach doesn't work when the enemy is literally pretty much all evil.

Narren
2011-03-12, 11:15 AM
Guerrilla warfare is most effective when used against people who are too 'nice' to inflict reprisals against civilian populations. That definitely doesn't describe the hobgoblins. A much quicker and less painful way to thin their numbers would be to persuade another country to invade the hobgoblins' mountain homeland (must be pretty good land, if it supported 80-something legions), which would result in at least half the hobbos going home to defend it.

Obviously it'd be crazy to attack while Team Evil are still on the scene. But once they're out of the way, I think the Azurites will have no trouble finding volunteers to help them retake their city, in exchange for a piece of the action. Gobbotopia's life expectancy is best expressed in weeks, possibly months, but definitely not years.

I don't know...would the hobbos want to defend their homeland? They never really showed one way or another if they care about it.

And the hobbos wouldn't be able to retaliate on the slaves if the first course of action is to free them.

Gray Mage
2011-03-12, 11:27 AM
If no one is going to stand against them when they forcibly take a city, then why not just conquer the whole world?


By that philosophy, justice can NEVER be taken. Murderers and thieves would run rampant, because their actions will be ignored in the name of peace. The Ghandi and MLK approach doesn't work when the enemy is literally pretty much all evil.
"All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing", right?


I don't know...would the hobbos want to defend their homeland? They never really showed one way or another if they care about it.

And the hobbos wouldn't be able to retaliate on the slaves if the first course of action is to free them.

Well, most of the hobgoblings civilians should be there, so they probably care.

Btw, Narren, could you please not triple post? If you want to quote more than one person you can use the multiquote feature.

Narren
2011-03-12, 11:46 AM
Well, most of the hobgoblings civilians should be there, so they probably care.

Would the hobgoblins really harm their own race because the Azurites are attacking? I doubt it...they have an "us vs them" mentality. And it would be pointless as it would probably not be very effective. All it would do is inflame the hobgoblin civilians, and give the Azurites underground support. That's one of the main problems of fighting guerrillas, you have to keep the citizens from helping them. Terrorizing them is the best way to turn them to other side.

Also, are the actually any hobgoblin civilians? I can imagine a warrior race like the hobgoblins to require mandatory military service, so that their reserve forces can consist of every single citizen if necessary.


Btw, Narren, could you please not triple post? If you want to quote more than one person you can use the multiquote feature.

I ummm.....didn't know I could do that. :smallredface:

faustin
2011-03-12, 12:24 PM
There is no posibility of peace, because the two parts hate each other so much that next time they are going to battle, they will sing before "Savages" from Pocahontas. :smallbiggrin:

Valley
2011-03-12, 02:06 PM
So, the Paladins have evey right to try to take back the city because it was their homeland before goblins/hobgoblins invaded it? Great! We found the answer to peace in the Middle East...not sure Israel would like it..:smallconfused:

And I am more than happy to give back some of the USA to the Native Americans - before the next President needs to be elected if possible. :smallamused:

Frankly, I think we may wish to let this one rest in peace.

Dark Matter
2011-03-12, 02:53 PM
peace is elusive... if you want justice for them taking Azure city, you sacrifice any hope of peace and continue the cycle of revenge, if you want peace, you must sacrifice justice to stop the cycle with you- sure it may be unfair, but whoever said life ever was?

the only real hope is to accept that things have happened and move on...Making peace at the cost of living with evil is going to be hard on the tortured slaves and it isn't "Good".

That would certainly be "Azure City wins," but it's an odd concept of good that would call that "Good wins."Depends on how narrow we want to define it. There are certainly factions in Azure which aren't "Good". That lord with the assassins. Belkar. But even with that the dominate faction is plainly the order of paladins and good aligned PCs.

What you're saying only makes sense if "Good" and "Evil" are nothing more than team jerkins, and if that's the case, there's no particular reason to want soi-disant "Good" to win. I get that you want to ignore what Rich said about the origins of the conflict and replace it with "the goblins constantly acted evil and Azure City's actions were above reproach except in the one snapshot we saw, them massacring Redcloak's village, where their actions were an inexplicable anomaly," but, no.You're holding Good up to an amazingly high standard compared to Evil. Yes, Good screws up, and yes, I doubt RC's village was the only incident where Paladins fell. But you're allowing the perfect to be enemy of the Good.

The two sides aren't morally equiv. We *expect* the goblins to be evil, and not just because of "the cycle of revenge". We expect goblins to murder innocents and torture other goblins. We expect them to pass vile laws and carry out vile deeds. We expect them to do this regardless of whether there are paladins around to bring them to justice.

If we have to make a choice between an imperfect system where the Paladins slip up occasionally and a system where goblins are free to be as sadistic as they want to be, then the former is imho better.

The question is whether we need to make that choice. Ideally goblins would live in Azure city, but *not* have the ability to pass laws allowing the legal torture of innocents. I don't see anything which prevents them from declaring themselves a PC race... but even if that happens, I expect they're going to have more than their fair share of members executed for committing vile acts.

Warren Dew
2011-03-12, 02:55 PM
Rich said in the comments to (War and XPs, I think, one of the books anyway) that Azure City had kept the hobgoblins penned up in the mountains for generations, that each side blamed the other for starting the hostilities, and that neither really knew how the long-running feud between Azure City and the hobgoblins had begun now.
You have a page reference? I thought he said that about the goblins, not the hobgoblins.


Someone earlier suggested that the Azurite leaders would TALK about liberation but not actually DO it. I don't know what Azurite leaders they have in mind, but they can't mean Hinjo. Hinjo has that paladin code which says he can't lie to his own or make peace with evil. That first reason is why he was ready to arrest Lord Shojo, remember?
I absolutely include Hinjo in that. He may be sincere about trying to retake the city, but even he is unlikely to try to do it alone - and he's going to have trouble finding anyone willing to try it under his command. He's the one who managed to lose the city in the first place - would you join his army to try to take it back? I certainly wouldn't - at a minimum, I'd want a more competent commander.

He'll keep talking about retaking the city, but he'll never manage to put together an assault force with any chance of actual success. At best he'll go off half cocked and end up killing more Azurites in the attempt. Meanwhile, those divvying up Vaarsuvius island will become more and more entrenched, and the motivation to go back to the eastern continent will continue to decline.

About the only thing likely to change that would be if the elves said they wanted the island back.


furthermore, saying someone has a right to something simply becouse they are strong enough to take it from someone else is just caveman mentality.
I think you're doing cave men an immense injustice here.

Witty Username
2011-03-12, 06:08 PM
The only chance goblitopia has in not being evil from what I can tell is for them to stop worshiping the dark one (Not an impossibility). Whether it gets wiped off the map by Azurites is not dependent on this, but if gobs stay on team evil their chances are lower, and so is my sympathy for them over the Azurites.
The only chances I see are if 1) Redcloak has an alignment shift, 2) Xykon murders Redcloak and gobs unite against him, 3) Right-eye reses 4) Snarl eats the Dark One
1 and 2: Redcloak is in control of the situation, he is high level enough to save Goblitopia
3: I felt weird typing that :smallconfused:
4: funny, possible, not likely :elan: "One in a Hundred shot":smallamused:

Narren
2011-03-12, 07:04 PM
Frankly, I think we may wish to let this one rest in peace.

Especially when we start bringing up off-limit topics :smallamused:

Juggling Goth
2011-03-13, 02:16 AM
There's author's commentary about this in Don't Split the Party, though it doesn't necessarily clear things up.

What he says is that with the invasion of Azure City, the Sapphire Guard have "paid in full" for their past actions, including the destruction of Redcloak's village. IIRC. If I've got the wording wrong then this whole post is a bit pointless ;)

So it seems pretty clear that the author, at least, regarded the invasion as something that was coming to them, and IIRC he describes their past actions as "sins".

Where this gets tricky is how you interpret "paid in full" in terms of future options. Have they paid in full, therefore, the slate is now wiped clean and they can take their city back? Or have they paid in full, therefore, they can't try and take their payment back, and now they have to live with what they've lost? Is it the temporary or the permanent loss of Azure City that counts as paying in full?

t209
2011-03-13, 12:22 PM
Despite all the arguments, I wanted to post one thing...
How about giving one land for hobgoblins and named it "Autonomous Region of Gobbotopia" (causing disapproval from azurites but goblins would be loyal to the Lord Hinjo instead of red cloak or xykon) Or disenfranchise the goblins (causing more unrest from Goblins but make azurites happy) instead of ethnic cleansing (more evil).