What Will Happen to Enor and Gannji? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Quild

2011-04-06, 07:32 AM

They're bounty hunters.
There's no bounty on Elan and I don't think they could claim the bounty on Nale anymore even if they could find an capture him.

The only reason they could go after Tarquin is to prevent having a bounty on their own heads which is likely. But you're not bounty hunter without making a lot of enemies and having your prey's friend mad about you.
Trying to help fighting Tarquin would be more dangerous than anything else and they could only count on Roy and Belkar (to them, others of the Oots seems to be friendly with Tarquin)... Not a really probable alliance.

So I don't think we would see them anymore. Therefore death would have been a much "better" outcome for them :/

Damaris

2011-04-06, 07:40 AM

I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have been around this long if they weren't going to be central to the plot eventually. I'm guessing they'll help bring down Tarquin in the end as well.

Jay R

2011-04-06, 10:32 AM

They will show up when we least expect them, to do something completely unpredicted, in a totally surprising way.

Why do people keep starting threads trying to predict a comic that
a. we've demonstrated people can't predict, and
b. would be less fun if we knew what was coming?

I, for one, am very glad that nobody is good enough to spoil the comic by guessing what will happen in advance.

I'm very glad that nobody wrecked the cat vs. commoner strip by guessing it in advance. It would have been lame if we had known that Tarquin was going to set the slaves on fire. I learned that Tarquin was Elan's father at just the right time for maximum enjoyment.

Sit back and enjoy the ride. Rich is driving.

Blisstake

2011-04-06, 10:52 AM

Why do people keep starting threads trying to predict a comic that
a. we've demonstrated people can't predict

It's fun to predict.

snikrept

2011-04-06, 11:06 AM

King of Nowhere

2011-04-06, 12:30 PM

The trick is that if enough people fire darts at the space of possible comic happenings, someone will probably hit the real prediction, thus enabling the entire community to say "we (collectively) predicted that outcome!"

yes, the advantage of teamwork is that you can take credit for the job of your companions, and blame them for your failures. the problem is, they'll try to do the same with you. :smalltongue:
I see it all the time in online games.

back on topic, I don't think rich would have saved those two if he hadn't some use for them in the future. if they already finished their narrative role, he would have left them to die.
Of course it could be a misdirection, but I don't hink it would work because there would be no "surprise" moment, just some slow fading away. The most I can think, on that regard, is if in the next strip gannji says "i didn't expected to to survive" and something random came to kill them.

MesiDoomstalker

2011-04-06, 12:38 PM

The most I can think, on that regard, is if in the next strip gannji says "i didn't expected to to survive" and something random came to kill them.

That would be so.....anticlimatic. I know it would be a good reversal but.....I don't think Giant would build them up so much, and especially after 783, to have a random mook kill them after a weird turn of events allowed them to survive certain doom.

Jay R

2011-04-06, 07:59 PM

The trick is that if enough people fire darts at the space of possible comic happenings, someone will probably hit the real prediction, thus enabling the entire community to say "we (collectively) predicted that outcome!"

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54

There. I just gave you the next winning lottery numbers.

slayerx

2011-04-06, 08:29 PM

Perhaps they will want to join up with Nale; Nale may not care about evil opposites but he will still want a party... they can't make a claim on Nale's bounty and they may want to join him for a chance of getting a shot at the order who they blame for getting them mixed with tarquin and the arena. Nale's crew seems like a pretty good fit for them... not to mention Nale's probably still has his farther on his to do list; so an eventual real shot at getting back at tarquin might also be encouraging

Gift Jeraff

2011-04-07, 12:53 AM

Perhaps they will join the resistance movement attempted by Haley's aunt Ivy, which has finally started to pick up due to the recent arrival of a certain "strategist" with leadership experience, a passionate grudge against Tarquin, experience working with Tarquin, and a goatee. :smalltongue:

grimbold

2011-04-07, 11:09 AM

King of Nowhere

2011-04-07, 12:08 PM

Don't think so, those two have moral principles. I don't think they'll work for nale. Or, if they would, they would quit soon after realizing what kind of guy he is. And maybe betray him somehow.

Forum Explorer

2011-04-07, 01:45 PM

I doubt they'll join Nale. They might end up as replacements for Belkar but personally? I think Girard is going to recruit them.

Mutant Sheep

2011-04-07, 09:55 PM

They will die, because Nale will just pop out of nowhere and kill them so everyone goes "OMG HE KILLED SOME1 WITH SCREEN TIME HE really IS EVIL" instead of "I think he's like his dad, lawful neutral with evil-ish tendencies". If he didn't then we'd be stuck with a dozen more " This guy is evil guys"/" No he's neutral because he's funny" threads. Or they will be in an unpredictable appearance later, who knows. Just wait and see.

Swordpriest

2011-04-08, 06:46 AM

Um .... Tarquin is lawful neutral with evil-ish tendencies? :smalleek: Burning 30 people alive because they wanted to escape slavery, raping a series of women, holding bloodthirsty gladiatorial games where people with the equivalent of minor parking ticket offenses are killed by each other or eaten alive by monsters, eating the internal organs of sapient creatures which were cut out while said creatures were still alive, and engaging in a long round of bloody coups and conquests constitutes "lawful neutral with evil-ish tendencies"? :smalleek:

I'm speechless. What would it take to qualify as evil? I mean we've got murder, rape, torture, and war crimes beyond count here, and that translates to lawful neutral?!!?!?

Anyway, what will happen to Enor and Gannji? That depends on how far and how fast they run. :smallwink:

Tass

2011-04-08, 07:51 AM

Um .... Tarquin is lawful neutral with evil-ish tendencies? :smalleek:

He made a joke on the people who refused to believe Belkar was evil among others. It wasn't his opinion.

Mutant Sheep

2011-04-08, 09:24 PM

Originally Posted by Swordpriest View Post

Um .... Tarquin is lawful neutral with evil-ish tendencies?
Tass
He made a joke on the people who refused to believe Belkar was evil among others. It wasn't his opinion.
Yeah making fun of the Belkar and Tarquin alignment debate(s) is fun. I never saw any threads on disputing Nale's alignment before, so I used to assume everyone knew HE is evil, but with so many people sure Tarquin and Belkar were nuetral, I'm not sure that's a safe assumption to make anymore.

Kish

2011-04-08, 10:02 PM

There is no good or evil, only power and those too afraid to seek it.

Theodoriph

2011-04-08, 10:10 PM

They will diminish and go into the west.

grimbold

2011-04-09, 02:39 AM

They will diminish and go into the west.

but why the west exactly?

Nimrod's Son

2011-04-09, 03:18 AM

but why the west exactly?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/150000/images/_150355_jim_morrison_150_%2813-08-98%29_elvis.jpg
/
"The west... is the best..."

Jimorian

2011-04-09, 03:39 AM

but why the west exactly?

Lord of the Rings reference.

Icedaemon

2011-04-09, 04:17 AM

Um .... Tarquin is lawful neutral with evil-ish tendencies? :smalleek: Burning 30 people alive because they wanted to escape slavery, raping a series of women, holding bloodthirsty gladiatorial games where people with the equivalent of minor parking ticket offenses are killed by each other or eaten alive by monsters, eating the internal organs of sapient creatures which were cut out while said creatures were still alive, and engaging in a long round of bloody coups and conquests constitutes "lawful neutral with evil-ish tendencies"?

I am not disagreeing with the Tarquin is evil bit, but I do question the logic that leads to 'seduces on false premises' = rape. Tarquin does typically marry those women and seems more content to divorce or become widowed via unfortunate accident than to repeatedly take his marital rights after his full villainy has become obvious.

Ancalagon

2011-04-09, 04:48 AM

So, binding a woman and putting her feet into ice (torture) until she agrees to marry you does not pose any problem for you? And, second, do you expect Tarquin stops there to be sure she is reminded where "her place is"?

Nimrod's Son

2011-04-09, 05:23 AM

So, binding a woman and putting her feet into ice (torture) until she agrees to marry you does not pose any problem for you?
Lots of things can "pose a problem" without being rape.

And, second, do you expect Tarquin stops there to be sure she is reminded where "her place is"?
What we may or may not expect is immaterial; you can't accurately claim Tarquin is a rapist without more evidence than we currently have. If the other person consents, even grudgingly, then it's not rape. And we know that Tarquin has gone to lengths to ensure he has no further children - this could have involved extended periods of abstinence for all we know. His marriages may have been for political reasons, or for show.

That Tarquin is an unspeakable monster is quite certain. But a rapist? Utterly unproven at this point.

Icedaemon

2011-04-09, 05:47 AM

Huh. I must've missed that. When was it?

Kish

2011-04-09, 08:40 AM

Detrinex

2011-04-09, 08:45 AM

Sorry to divert the topic from Tarquin's rape crave, but I think Enor and Gannji will pull a Nale and hide for a few hundred strips before inevitably reappearing.

Maybe they can reappear en masse.

Darkspear

2011-04-09, 09:11 AM

Lots of things can "pose a problem" without being rape.

What we may or may not expect is immaterial; you can't accurately claim Tarquin is a rapist without more evidence than we currently have. If the other person consents, even grudgingly, then it's not rape. And we know that Tarquin has gone to lengths to ensure he has no further children - this could have involved extended periods of abstinence for all we know. His marriages may have been for political reasons, or for show.

That Tarquin is an unspeakable monster is quite certain. But a rapist? Utterly unproven at this point.

I know this is getting way off topic, but "If the other person consents, even grudgingly, then it's not rape" is completely and totally wrong. If a person is coerced, even if they give "consent", it is not consent as they are not free and able to give consent. So grudging coerced consent is not acceptable and the act is rape.

Nimrod's Son

2011-04-09, 09:17 PM

Considering Tarquin's "your old man may be a silverback but he can still bathe an ape...I wouldn't call him a dwarf but there will be some spelunking involved" lines, I'm afraid I consider the idea that his coerced marriages don't include coerced sex (that is to say, rape) utterly absurd (instead of just "really really really not the way to bet," as they would be if he had never actually made any sexual references).
Talk, from someone with a proven track record of dishonesty. C'mon, Kish, many's the time you've argued against taking Tarquin's words at face value.

Is it possible that Tarquin is an actual, no-bones-about-it rapist? Certainly. Is it likely? On balance: yeah, fairly. But is it proven? No, not by any stretch of the imagination.

I know this is getting way off topic, but "If the other person consents, even grudgingly, then it's not rape" is completely and totally wrong. If a person is coerced, even if they give "consent", it is not consent as they are not free and able to give consent. So grudging coerced consent is not acceptable and the act is rape.
"Not acceptable", I will happily grant you. "Rape"? Nope, sorry, can't agree with you there; that word is used far too casually these days.

But this is an avenue of conversation I really have no intention of pursuing here, so, uh, yeah.

Kish

2011-04-09, 09:44 PM

"Not acceptable", I will happily grant you. "Rape"? Nope, sorry, can't agree with you there; that word is used far too casually these days.

Whereas I would say the word is parsed all out of reason these days. "So he tortured you into marrying him, but he didn't actually use force to consummate the marriage?" "I thought, if I resisted him--" "Yes or no?" Yeah, sorry, if you don't call that rape you're just plain using the word wrong.

But this is an avenue of conversation I really have no intention of pursuing here, so, uh, yeah.
Good plan.

Nimrod's Son

2011-04-09, 09:46 PM

Good plan.
I know, right? Almost good enough to forgo the temptation to have the last word for. :smalltongue:

And on that note:

Whereas I would say the word is parsed all out of reason these days. "So he tortured you into marrying him, but he didn't actually use force to consummate the marriage?" "I thought, if I resisted him--" "Yes or no?" Yeah, sorry, if you don't call that rape you're just plain using the word wrong.
Yeah, sorry, Kish, but we really don't know for sure if any of those marriages were consummated.

As I said, it's fairly likely. But if you want me to accept that it's proven, then I'm afraid I am going to have to ask you to show that proof. That is the way these things work, as well you know. :smallwink:

Flame of Anor

2011-04-09, 09:57 PM

I'm speechless. What would it take to qualify as evil? I mean we've got murder, rape, torture, and war crimes beyond count here, and that translates to lawful neutral?!!?!?

Plus, it explicitly says he's Lawful Evil in the flashback to the divorce proceedings.

They will diminish and go into the west.

:smallbiggrin:

I know this is getting way off topic, but "If the other person consents, even grudgingly, then it's not rape" is completely and totally wrong. If a person is coerced, even if they give "consent", it is not consent as they are not free and able to give consent. So grudging coerced consent is not acceptable and the act is rape.

This is true not just morally but legally. But of course we can't talk about the law on this forum so I won't go into that.

Nimrod's Son

2011-04-09, 10:18 PM

This is true not just morally but legally.
As defined in The Bumper Guide to Moral & Legal Truths, 3rd Edition (Macmillan, 2002). It's important to cite your sources, see.

I dunno... We know for sure that Tarquin's done enough vile stuff to condemn him for all eternity as it is. Insisting that he's the perpetrator of rapes that we don't even know actually happened kinda seems like overkill to me.

Kish

2011-04-09, 10:26 PM

Yeah, sorry, Kish, but we really don't know for sure if any of those marriages were consummated.

Just as we really don't know for sure Nale has ever had sex with Sabine.

As I said, it's fairly likely. But if you want me to accept that it's proven, then I'm afraid I am going to have to ask you to show that proof. That is the way these things work, as well you know. :smallwink:
Feel free not to accept that it's proven. For my part, given that you have, in part, said that coerced consent makes the difference between rape and not-rape, I cannot prove that Tarquin has done anything you would agree is rape. In fact, I think he probably hasn't. Those women, after all, agreed to marry him, at least one of them after being tortured; I'm sure they also "agreed" to sex.

Nimrod's Son

2011-04-09, 10:49 PM

Just as we really don't know for sure Nale has ever had sex with Sabine.
...Except we've seen conversations involving both parties where they say they have, so why you'd think that is a good analogy I've no idea.

Feel free not to accept that it's proven.
Until it is proven, I can't do anything but. But thanks anyway.

For my part, given that you have, in part, said that coerced consent makes the difference between rape and not-rape, I cannot prove that Tarquin has done anything you would agree is rape.
I believe a distinction should exist between sleeping with a man due to coercion and being taken by physical force. Obviously both are abhorrent, this goes without saying. But like it or not, the word "rape" conveys the idea of physical violence, and as such I think it should be reserved for such cases.

In fact, I think he probably hasn't. Those women, after all, agreed to marry him, at least one of them after being tortured; I'm sure they also "agreed" to sex.
If this is a sly way of trying to paint me as some kind of misogynistic sex-pest sympathizer, well, nice try. All I'm saying is that the issue is a complicated one, with tangents ranging from the ethics of pornography to arranged marriages... none of which we can discuss here, of course.

So, yeah, why not focus on the stuff we know he's done, rather than the stuff you expect he's done?

Kish

2011-04-10, 06:11 AM

...Except we've seen conversations involving both parties where they say they have,

Oh? Where? The closest I can remember is Sabine saying "It's not like we've never tried--" about Nale having sex with a man, but that's as much implication rather than statement as all the things Tarquin said which you're dismissing.

I believe a distinction should exist between sleeping with a man due to coercion and being taken by physical force.

Indeed, there is such a distinction: between "violent rape" and "coercive rape." Notice the word in both of those?

(And don't even think about giving me the same "cite your sources" line you gave Flame of Anor, since that was a response to a response to you making an "If the other person consents, even grudgingly, then it's not rape." claim which was not only equally uncited, but happened to be wrong.)

Obviously both are abhorrent, this goes without saying. But like it or not, the word "rape" conveys the idea of physical violence, and as such I think it should be reserved for such cases.

You can't have that wish.

If this is a sly way of trying to paint me as some kind of misogynistic sex-pest sympathizer, well, nice try.
I meant exactly what I said. Tarquin has certainly coerced women to have sex with him. He has probably not used physical violence on any of them (indeed, based on everything we've seen--he didn't even strike Amun-Zora or use a weapon to block when she was trying to kill him, and in the flashback, he was standing with his hands behind his back while his future wife was tortured--I would be very surprised if he has personally used violence on any of them). So he's a rapist, but not by the definition you want to use.

So, yeah, why not focus on the stuff we know he's done, rather than the stuff you expect he's done?
I am focusing on the stuff we know he's done. He has made it more than sufficiently clear that the stuff he'd done includes coerced sex with women who despise him, i.e., rape. You are apparently not in the same We as me, whether your We knows that he has coerced sex but asserts that it is not proven that he violently forces women, or your We thinks he makes claims to third parties he may or may not follow through with and it is a possibility worth considering that he secretly maintains a chaste lifestyle.

ThePhantasm

2011-04-10, 07:45 AM

Oh? Where? The closest I can remember is Sabine saying "It's not like we've never tried--" about Nale having sex with a man, but that's as much implication rather than statement as all the things Tarquin said which you're dismissing.

She says "I'm a shapechanger, it's not like we've never tried -" thus implying that Sabine WAS the man.

But don't you guys think this whole conversation seems like a bad idea? Best to nip it. Nip it in the bud.

Kish

2011-04-10, 07:49 AM

She says "I'm a shapechanger, it's not like we've never tried -" thus implying that Sabine WAS the man.

Yes, that's what I meant. It's as close as Sabine or Nale ever gets to coming out and saying, as opposed to unambiguously implying, "We have sex," and it's still no closer than Tarquin's lines about "bathing an ape" were.

But don't you guys think this whole conversation seems like a bad idea? Best to nip it. Nip it in the bud.
You're right.

Nimrod's Son

2011-04-10, 08:55 AM

I am focusing on the stuff we know he's done. He has made it more than sufficiently clear that the stuff he'd done includes coerced sex with women who despise him, i.e., rape.
No, he hasn't. For all we know, Tarquin has had every single one of his wives killed because they refused to have sex with him.

As I keep saying, Tarquin is a monster on pretty much every level imaginable. But it ISN'T proven that he's a rapist, whichever definition you want to use. His bragging to his son that he was going to sleep with Amun-Zora (which it now appears never happened, incidentally) does not constitute proof that he has ever had sex with ANYONE against their will.

G-Man Graves

2011-04-11, 02:09 PM

But don't you guys think this whole conversation seems like a bad idea? Best to nip it. Nip it in the bud.

That would require someone to admit they were wrong. But that would require that there is a wrong answer. This whole line of thought is opinions. So no one can be wrong. So debate must continue.

ThePhantasm

2011-04-11, 02:18 PM

That would require someone to admit they were wrong.

No it wouldn't. It would just require it to stop.

Which Kish did.

Nimrod's Son

2011-04-11, 02:32 PM

No it wouldn't. It would just require it to stop.

Which Kish did.
I stopped talking about the "define rape" stuff long ago, and said as much, and everyone else has insisted on chiming in since then. After the most cursory bit of clarifying my position due to being directly challenged, I dropped the issue and instead concentrated on my main point: that we don't know for sure that Tarquin has ever even had sex with these woman he women he supposedly raped AT ALL, and which cannot be refuted from in-comic evidence no matter how much Kish would like to think it can. And I don't believe I've broken any forum rules in doing so, either (Well, apart from being off-topic, I guess, but I'm hardly alone there, am I?). I'd already stopped talking about the sensitive stuff of my own volition. I'm not about to stop talking altogether just because you tell me to; likely the opposite, in fact.

*Notes irony of this thread having been dead for the best part of a day before G-Man decided to pipe up...* :smallwink:

G-Man Graves

2011-04-11, 03:16 PM

No it wouldn't. It would just require it to stop.

Which Kish did.

I'm sorry, but putting forth an argument, which itself can lead to questioning and further argument, and then saying in the same post "But I'm done fighting" is not stopping. That's trying to have the last word.

ThePhantasm

2011-04-11, 03:18 PM

http://i456.photobucket.com/albums/qq282/JAKSaph/1284576891883.gif

Nimrod's Son

2011-04-11, 03:22 PM

I'm sorry, but putting forth an argument, which itself can lead to questioning and further argument, and then saying in the same post "But I'm done fighting" is not stopping. That's trying to have the last word.
Yes, I can't help but agree. I mean, I'm TOTALLY trying to have the last word here, but at least I'm copping to it. :smallsmile:

(I would let it go if someone can show me in-comic proof that Tarquin has forced someone - anyone - to have sex with him against their will, but so far no one has.)

G-Man Graves

2011-04-11, 03:49 PM

@ThePhantasm, if you could please spoiler the oversized (not to mention tired and overused) image, I personally would be grateful.

@NS The reason that no evidence is forthcoming is because there is none. There are only shades of implication, and how far someone is willing to go with that is, in this case, based entirely on how much they hate the person in question. It makes you sound more morally grounded to shout "I hate Tarquin because he's a rapist" than if you just say "I just don't like Tarquin as a character".

Nimrod's Son

2011-04-11, 03:59 PM

Swordpriest

2011-04-12, 07:59 AM

Far from "morally grounded", in my eyes it just makes them look a bit hysterical. Tarquin's a fictional character. He hasn't raped anyone until Rich says he has, which so far he hasn't. And god knows Tarquin's been shown to have done enough things for people to get on their high horses about, without them having to resort to speculation.

I take it that in your view, marriage is by default a celibate institution, with no sexual element except by chance -- and that a sexual element is only to be inferred if there is direct, explicit, open proof of it? :smallconfused:

I don't know if "hysterical" really fits the nature of people who, like myself, assume that marriage implies at least a high probability of sex between the partners, especially with Tarquin slavering over Haley's perky round "eyes" and making constant sexual innuendos.

To use a simile, if someone hires a gourmet chef, we can probably assume that people who think he's going to eat the food prepared by this person are using logic rather than hysteria. Do we need direct, unequivocal proof of eating to think that hiring a gourmet chef does not imply it?

Sure, maybe the guy paying the chef is a weird eccentric and just wants to look at the fancy food and then throw it out. It's not impossible. But to say that this is the best default assumption, and call people who assume the gourmet food is being eaten "hysterical", doesn't really add up to me.

Nothing changes this if the chef is compelled to make food at gunpoint rather than being hired.

So, is the only reasonable default assumption that all marriages are sexless unless the couple does it out in public with video cameras rolling? Because your words seem to imply something along those lines. :smallconfused:

To clarify my position: marriage is usually believed to involve sex, and there is considerable empirical evidence that this connection is valid. Is it, then, illogical and "hysterical" to infer that forced marriage involves a high probability of forced sex as well? Does Tarquin have a special dispensation of some kind exempting him from the general human connection between marriage and sex?

Sarco_Phage

2011-04-12, 08:14 AM

You know, I hate Tarquin as much as the next rational person, but there's really nothing to imply that he's a rapist. These are like, anti-leather pants.

Kish

2011-04-12, 08:39 AM

You know, I hate Tarquin as much as the next rational person, but there's really nothing to imply that he's a rapist.
He has forced at least one woman (the flashback woman whose feet were being frozen) to marry him, and implies he's forced multiple others.

He joked with his son about the planned consummation of his (forced) marriage to Amun-Zora.

He started to compliment his son's girlfriend on her breasts as soon as he was introduced to her, thereby demonstrating himself to be both lecherous and crude, not at all a detached "I just collect wives from conquered nations to look at them" figure.

To say that he's not a rapist, you need to presume either:
1) Any of his marriages which were forced were unconsummated.
2) Those of his marriages which were forced were somehow consensually consummated.
3) He's all talk and has never actually forced a woman to marry him.

None of these are impossible, in the same way it's not impossible that Nale and Sabine have never actually had sex, or that Durkon is actually Chaotic Neutral and thinks it's funny to fake being Lawful. But none of them merit consideration as serious possibilities, either.

Sarco_Phage

2011-04-12, 08:41 AM

He has forced at least one woman (the flashback woman whose feet were being frozen) to marry him, and implies he's forced multiple others.

He joked with his son about the planned consummation of his (forced) marriage to Amun-Zora.

He started to compliment his son's girlfriend on her breasts as soon as he was introduced to her.

To say that he's not a rapist, you need to presume either:
1) Any of his marriages which were forced were unconsummated.
2) Those of his marriages which were forced were somehow consensually consummated.
3) He's all talk and has never actually forced a woman to marry him.

None of these are impossible, in the same way it's not impossible (again) that Nale and Sabine have never actually had sex. But none of them merit consideration as serious possibilities, either.

Hmmm, good points (except for the third one, because really, all that implies is that he is a lech).

Now for my second question: He's a serial killer and a mass murderer. Why does him being a rapist even matter at all? (Unless he is also a mass rapist and a serial rapist, in which case it does matter)

Kish

2011-04-12, 08:46 AM

Hmmm, good points (except for the third one, because really, all that implies is that he is a lech).

Yes, I edited my post while you were posting to clarify that it was meant to establish "Tarquin is a lech" as a counterpoint to previous claims made that his marriages are likely detached political occurrences.

As for why the point matters, well, as far as I'm concerned it's just one more entry on his resume of evil.

Sarco_Phage

2011-04-12, 08:50 AM

I know, but at a certain point, the fact that, say a bad guy likes Korean boy bands becomes irrelevant. I mean, we don't really need to go out of our way to compile a list of his evil. He's a rancid bastard and a monster, in general. One more crime isn't really much in the face of that.

A_Moon

2011-04-12, 09:35 AM

In response to the original question: They will both go off and marry Hilgya. Possibly one after the other with a poison-related divorce in between, or possibly both at the same time. Whichever.

Gift Jeraff

2011-04-12, 10:02 AM

I had this thought: What if Gourntonk (the lizardfolk ambassador of Reptilia that has something important to tell the Empress) is planning some mass reptilian takeover? I think Gannji might be down for such a thing.

Valley

2011-04-12, 10:57 AM

Enor and Gannji fly away to Neveneverland...where they capture Peter Pan and hand him over to Hook for a reward. The End.

Frankly, I don't want to even know how the R word got into this thread.

G-Man Graves

2011-04-12, 12:16 PM

Words words words words, metaphor involving a chef, slanted view of marriage in favor of what is the societal norm of today.

Tarquin is the ruler of a continent. If he wants to cut himself a slice, he could do anything from get his soldiers to fetch the finest wenches in the land to stroll down to the local tavern and use his good looks and charm to get ladies.

What makes more sense, given the political atopmesphere, is that he used marriage as a tool to add land and legitamicy to his empire. Then, once everything was all nice and settled, he had the lady put on ice so he could go and do it again.

Sarco_Phage

2011-04-12, 12:19 PM

You're forgetting the part where Tarquin is a lech.

Also, how would marriage ensure legitimacy? Have you forgotten that Tarquin is a shadow ruler? The Empress of Blood rules the Empire, not lord Tyrinar.

G-Man Graves

2011-04-12, 12:28 PM

I said it's possible, and in my opinion more appealing than just adding a silly moral thing so that the readers of the comic can feel like they're reading a paticularly mature work.

Sarco_Phage

2011-04-12, 12:33 PM

Well, what if he's a rapist AND using the marriages to fulfill his political ambitions at the same time? :smallamused:

Kish

2011-04-12, 02:21 PM

Lord Tyrinar was a hapless, bespectacled puppet ruler who was eaten by the Empress of Blood when Tarquin changed pawns. Just sayin'.

Sarco_Phage

2011-04-12, 02:21 PM

Lord Tyrinar was a hapless, bespectacled puppet ruler who was eaten by the Empress of Blood when Tarquin changed pawns. Just sayin'.

What's this about Lord Tyrinar?

Nimrod's Son

2011-04-12, 11:21 PM

So, is the only reasonable default assumption that all marriages are sexless unless the couple does it out in public with video cameras rolling? Because your words seem to imply something along those lines. :smallconfused:
My words imply nothing of the sort.

As I said before, what if he kills them if they continue to resist? Tarquin's got some pretty warped morality; what if the idea of actually having sex with someone against their will is abhorrent to him, but he has no problem with having them killed if they refuse?

I really don't see the following as an especially unlikely scenario: Tarquin makes his proposal. It is rejected. He begins his pressure campaign, and the lady eventually relents. They are married, but on their wedding night she resists him. Seething, Tarquin retires and tries again the next night with similar results. The following morning, there are some Mysterious Circumstances.

Do I think that is the case? Perhaps, perhaps not. I wouldn't be shocked if I did find out that's what happened, put it that way. We only know for sure that he's forced one woman to marry him. I expect there were more, but I kinda doubt they were ALL forced marriages. Tarquin's a good-looking, charming guy and a poweful and respected general to boot; I'm sure he's not short of admirers. Tarquin can get his jollies pretty much anywhere he wants (even with men, should he so desire, it would seem (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0753.html)), so he doesn't HAVE to be a rapist. There are other possibilities that don't involve some kind of abstinence fairytale.

And yes, I still think it's a bit hysterical to claim otherwise. As and when Rich wants us to decry Tarquin as a rapist, he'll make it explicit in the story. Until then, I'll decry him as a tyrant, a sadistic torturer and a mass murderer, and leave it at that.

Mutant Sheep

2011-04-13, 03:20 PM

Dang, does this count as me having derailed the thread? Since I brought up alignment? Tarquin is a rapist in my eyes, but exact definition differs, why are we talking about this? Enor and Gannji are gonna reappear later and it will be unexpected, unless expects it. 2 pages of debate on rape is too much man.
EDIT- and Nimrod, the Giant did make it explicit. He showed us a panel where he was freezing a past "wife" of his, and implies that he washed monkeys many times. Hes Lawful, so I guess he needs marriage to have sex or something, so he forces marriage, hes a rapist, unhappy days for the Empire of Blood. :smallbiggrin:

ThePhantasm

2011-04-13, 03:24 PM

Why are we talking about this?

That's a great question. I'm afraid there is no good answer.

And you're right, 2 pages of debate on rape is pretty ridiculous.

G-Man Graves

2011-04-13, 04:37 PM

and Nimrod, the Giant did make it explicit. He showed us a panel where he was freezing a past "wife" of his, and implies that he washed monkeys many times. Hes Lawful, so I guess he needs marriage to have sex or something, so he forces marriage, hes a rapist, unhappy days for the Empire of Blood. :smallbiggrin:

Explicit, hmmmmm?
http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/2/6/129099886145036139.jpg

ThePhantasm

2011-04-13, 05:27 PM

EDIT- and Nimrod, the Giant did make it explicit. He showed us a panel where he was freezing a past "wife" of his, and implies that he washed monkeys many times. Hes Lawful, so I guess he needs marriage to have sex or something, so he forces marriage, hes a rapist, unhappy days for the Empire of Blood. :smallbiggrin:

So. . . he explicitly implied something? :smallbiggrin:

Lol.

Nimrod's Son

2011-04-13, 10:22 PM

Tarquin is a rapist in my eyes, but exact definition differs, why are we talking about this? Enor and Gannji are gonna reappear later and it will be unexpected, unless expects it. 2 pages of debate on rape is too much man.
Which presumably means you're not about to add to it, I suppose.

...

Oh, wait-

EDIT- and Nimrod, the Giant did make it explicit. He showed us a panel where he was freezing a past "wife" of his, and implies that he washed monkeys many times. Hes Lawful, so I guess he needs marriage to have sex or something, so he forces marriage, hes a rapist, unhappy days for the Empire of Blood. :smallbiggrin:
Hmm. You're addressing me directly, yet you don't appear to have read a word I wrote. So I guess my rebuttal is: everything I've already said.

Mutant Sheep

2011-04-14, 07:01 PM

I cant think of anything to say that hasnt been said, so trying to seems like a waste of time. I read what you wrote, and really everyone else can phrase this stuff better than I can. Too bad I only got a few posts on explicit :smallfrown:. I was hoping there'd be a whole page by now. Ah well, got a couple remarks and an overused picture in spoilers, I'm happy. :smallbiggrin: Thank you for presuming I wouldn't add onto this conversation, because I want to. It's fun.

Nimrod's Son

2011-04-15, 02:12 PM

Thank you for presuming I wouldn't add onto this conversation,
I was being sarcastic. You already did add to it, see.

because I want to. It's fun.
So why are you complaining that it's "too much", then?

Mutant Sheep

2011-04-16, 12:06 AM

Because I'm in the conversation now. That makes it fun for me.:smallwink:

RLivengood

2011-05-08, 11:48 AM

I think that during their escape, Gannji and Enor should meet Capt. Amun-Zora and they team up.

Sorry if this makes things worse, but I agree with Kish.

harmsc12

2011-05-08, 08:58 PM

If Enor and Ganji reappear, I want the airship guy to resurface, too.

Raistlin82

2011-05-10, 12:47 PM

I want them to come back.

Not to do some unlikely heroics, like everybody here appears to be wishing for. Just to mind their own business and make profit of the situation... like they always have. :smallannoyed:

Oh, and incidentally to die horribly and slowly, as they deserve. :smallcool:

kthxbai :smallsmile:

MoonCat

2011-05-10, 12:53 PM

I want them to come back.

[...]

Oh, and incidentally to die horribly and slowly, as they deserve. :smallcool:

I'm with you on them coming back, but how do they deserve a horrible, slow death?

Prowl

2011-05-11, 09:18 AM

E & G will be back, swooping in on the Millennium Falcon in the nick of time as the protagonist is about to be shot down by the villain.

theNater

2011-05-11, 01:44 PM

He joked with his son about the planned consummation of his (forced) marriage to Amun-Zora.
Does it count as consummation of the marriage if they do it before they get married? 'Cause he's still calling Amun-Zora "the future Mrs. Tarquin" when she's leaving his room the morning after the dinner (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0749.html). You know, while she still thinks he's helping her?

I suspect the joking is about that event, not any post-marriage event.

Also, how would marriage ensure legitimacy? Have you forgotten that Tarquin is a shadow ruler? The Empress of Blood rules the Empire, not lord Tyrinar.
A marriage between high-ranking officials is a reasonable way to demonstrate everyone is serious about an alliance, even if neither official is in the ruling family of their respective countries.

Edited to add the link.

MoonCat

2011-05-11, 01:52 PM

The Nater, you did read the strips in 2010, right? Specifically this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0757.html)one? They never had sex. It was implied to the readers, IT NEVER HAPPENED.

Kish

2011-05-11, 01:53 PM

Does it count as consummation of the marriage if they do it before they get married? 'Cause he's still calling Amun-Zora "the future Mrs. Tarquin" when she's leaving his room the morning after the dinner (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0749.html). You know, while she still thinks he's helping her?

I suspect the joking is about that event, not any post-marriage event.
Relevance? Or are you one of those who, despite her stating clearly that she rebuffed his advances and told him she's already married, still thinks she had consensual sex with Tarquin before finding out what he's really like?

theNater

2011-05-11, 02:19 PM

The Nater, you did read the strips in 2010, right? Specifically this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0757.html)one? They never had sex. It was implied to the readers, IT NEVER HAPPENED.

Relevance? Or are you one of those who, despite her stating clearly that she rebuffed his advances and told him she's already married, still thinks she had consensual sex with Tarquin before finding out what he's really like?
I had forgotten that we learned later that she had turned him down.

But I do think it's reasonable to assume that the ape-bathing statement, made before that event, was Tarquin assuming she would consent, rather than planning to force her. Were you referring to a later joke about the planned consummation of the forced marriage?

MoonCat

2011-05-11, 02:26 PM

I had forgotten that we learned later that she had turned him down.

But I do think it's reasonable to assume that the ape-bathing statement, made before that event, was Tarquin assuming she would consent, rather than planning to force her. Were you referring to a later joke about the planned consummation of the forced marriage?

He believed he'd be having sex with her, and when she turned him down because she was married she killed her husband. Now he'll force her to marry him.

Kish

2011-05-11, 02:46 PM

I had forgotten that we learned later that she had turned him down.

But I do think it's reasonable to assume that the ape-bathing statement, made before that event, was Tarquin assuming she would consent, rather than planning to force her.
Why?

It's a perfectly serious question, if you had any doubt. He's willing to torture women to force them to marry him. He treats her rebuttals dismissively, assuring Elan that she'll retract her "unflattering accusations" and continuing to refer to her as his future wife even after she tried to kill him and he had her locked up. He's an established lech.

Why would you think it's reasonable to assume he balks at coerced sex?

harmsc12

2011-05-11, 03:07 PM

This thread is about Enor and Gannji. Why are people talking about Tarquin?

ThePhantasm

2011-05-11, 03:27 PM

This thread is about Enor and Gannji. Why are people talking about Tarquin?

The best way to steer the convo back on topic is to make a quality post about Enor and Ganjii that people can respond to. So have at it, we'd love to hear from you.

The reason I suspect the discussion has drifted is because we already found out what would happen to Enor and Ganjii in the arena, and now that they've escaped it is a bit harder to say if they'll ever even show up again.

MoonCat

2011-05-11, 03:32 PM

They probably will show up, but to be honest, I was disappointed when they escaped. I didn't want them to die, but their escape seemed stretched, not plot helpful, and removed the poignancy of the final panel of the previous strip.

The Succubus

2011-05-11, 03:37 PM

Actually, I have a feeling that Ganji and Enor will appear as an Epilogue additional strip in the next book. They may be jerks but I think everyone wants to see a happy ending for them.

MoonCat

2011-05-11, 03:38 PM

Actually, I have a feeling that Ganji and Enor will appear as an Epilogue additional strip in the next book. They may be jerks but I think everyone wants to see a happy ending for them.

I either wanted them to have a properly executed happy ending, or a sad death to show what a monster Tarquin is (some people might need convincing)

ThePhantasm

2011-05-11, 03:40 PM

Actually, I have a feeling that Ganji and Enor will appear as an Epilogue additional strip in the next book. They may be jerks but I think everyone wants to see a happy ending for them.

They got a happy ending by escaping, didn't they? What would that happy ending look like? A really nice bounty that makes them filthy rich?

Kish

2011-05-11, 03:54 PM

I either wanted them to have a properly executed happy ending, or a sad death to show what a monster Tarquin is (some people might need convincing)
People who need convincing on that subject are unlikely to be swayed by a sad death for Gannji and Enor.

And some people (though I'm certainly not one of them) still express the desire for the bounty hunters to come back onstage long enough to end up badly.

MoonCat

2011-05-11, 04:03 PM

People who need convincing on that subject are unlikely to be swayed by a sad death for Gannji and Enor.

Note Kish, that I am one of the people who still thinks that you can admire a character like Tarquin and hate him at the same time. I certainly find him to be a magnificent bastard and affably evil, but I don't need to be told he's an evil, evil man.

Goosefarble

2011-05-11, 04:24 PM

They'll go to work on a farm with a black Kobold called Crookscrooks and an old one-handed Lizardfolk called Candy, then Enor will get in trouble because he tries to tough a gnome's wife and then he's about to be lynched so Gannji kills him out of mercy.

Maybe John Steinbeck'll write a book about it.

theNater

2011-05-11, 10:31 PM

He believed he'd be having sex with her, and when she turned him down because she was married she killed her husband. Now he'll force her to marry him.
True. I'm just talking about one joke here, made before he knew she was married.

Why?
Because they are two attractive people, he has the desire to sleep with her, and he has a great deal of charisma. These are conditions under which consensual sex has been known to occur.

It's a perfectly serious question, if you had any doubt. He's willing to torture women to force them to marry him. He treats her rebuttals dismissively, assuring Elan that she'll retract her "unflattering accusations" and continuing to refer to her as his future wife even after she tried to kill him and he had her locked up. He's an established lech.

Why would you think it's reasonable to assume he balks at coerced sex?
I never said that I think it's reasonable to assume he balks at coerced sex. I said I think it's reasonable to assume that particular joke is about expected consensual sex, not expected coerced sex.

Gift Jeraff

2011-05-13, 12:29 AM

So I had a few ideas for what may happen to Gannji and Enor:

-They somehow get involved in Gobbotopia, since Team Peregrine should have quite the bounty on their heads, if they're ever sighted.
-This is more epilogue material, I suppose: they capture one of the other antagonistic duos still out there--the assassins or Pompey & Leeky.

Though I personally think they'll reappear one more time in a Tarquin-related plot and then get written off or just be saved for the epilogue or bonus material or something.