V's Conscience Vs His Cowardice: Taking Bets Now!

[Alex Warlorn]

Assuming they're not attacked where they stand. Or V tries to confess and is shut up by his/her friends being too busy, we are TAKING BETS on whether V will have the guts to confess to his friends.

One million quatloos says that V is a chicken of an elf who won't fess up because V can't face the guilt or the consequences of his own actions!

[zimmerwald1915]

The word you're looking for in the title is "cowardice".

[Alex Warlorn]

The word you're looking for in the title is "cowardice".

Thank you sir. And what may I put you down for?

[Chess Tyrant]

It wouldn't be hard for V to logically conclude that the party gains nothing by knowing what happened, or hir part in the clan's deaths. In fact, s/he'd probably be correct - it's an unnecessary complication to a critical mission, and the knowledge will do nothing to further the Order's goals.

Owing the IFCC 45 minutes of hir soul is a different matter, of course, but s/he probably hasn't realized how important that could be.

Edit: to clarify, I'm betting V isn't going to voluntarily fess up to what s/he has done. If s/he's found out by the Order anyway, though, s/he might admit hir guilt.

[B. Dandelion]

Isn't there a dramatic convention that covers this, along the lines of "V will get close to confessing, and then someone in the party will go on at length about what a horrible, depraved, and unforgivable crime this was, followed up with '...I'm sorry, Vaarsuvius, what were you about to say?'"

(Which is pretty much a long-winded way of saying I don't know and am attempting to fall back on meta-reasoning.)

[Velaryon]

Put me down for "gives a partial confession that is either interrupted or is cut short in order to avoid long exposition." I know that being wordy is Vaarsuvius's style, but under the present circumstances I think V will make an exception.

With the Gate apparently unguarded, time is now of the essence as the Order believe Nale to be either on their heels or a step ahead of them, and also know that Xykon could head for Windy Canyon at any time. They don't have a moment to lose for a long-winded explanation of soul-splicing that would be necessary to fully detail how V managed to kill off the entire Draketooth clan unknowingly.

[Flame of Anor]

I'm going to say--as I did in the discussion thread last comic--that V will have some sort of anguished outburst, the Order will press him/her for information, and s/he will give it. Then we get the whole "Dude wtf totally not cool" from Roy and company, and the "I'm so sorry there are no words for it" from V. Not sure what happens then. I hope they get Durkon to raise some of them.

[xxleilaxx]

My vote will be split between cowardice, and a confession but of an incredibly cliched, dramatic sort.

V really is a chicken. Far too ashamed of bartering with fiends to admit anything that was done during that time.

[Porthos]

Put me down for him thinking/rationalizing "If I tell them now, I'll get kicked out when they can least afford it".

And I dearly hope I am wrong....

[Chess435]

Put me down for "V decides not to talk about it but gets called out by Blackwing and eventually convinced to after a long rant about morality and so on."

[zimmerwald1915]

There are two things V values: arcane power and people with whom she's managed to connect. That she's bad at connecting with people only makes the people that do care about her more valuable. The lesson she leared from her time spliced was that power isn't worth sacrificing her relationships with people - something she did when she abandoned Durkon and Elan. I argued more fully on this point here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11545756&postcount=103).

The calculus V will use in deciding whether or not to tell the rest of the Order that she killed the Draketooths in the pyramid with Familicide will be "will this action help or hurt my relationships with my friends?" Velaryon's scenario gives V a little more information beyond the Order's proclivities to plug into the calculus.

[ti'esar]

V seems to be second only to Redcloak at the skill of rationalizing one's conscience away. My bet is that she's going to come up with as many excuses as possible not to tell the Order, but I could be wrong (and certainly hope I am).

[Porthos]

Repeating my nasty thought I had in the discussion thread:

V might decide to spill the beans and fess up...

Only to have the IFCC take him over that very second as part of their deal, thus stopping him from telling the truth.

Depending on how this works, V might never know he was unsuccessful in telling the Order what they need to know. This would also allow the IFCC to only use a couple of minutes of their time and use the rest later when needed.

I doubt it will happen simply because I don't know how likely it is that V won't recognize he blanked out for a second. But it is a possibility, if not a huge one.

[Chess435]

Now I see why TVtropes has OotS listed under "Troper Critical Mass" :smallwink:

[Morgan Wick]

It wouldn't be hard for V to logically conclude that the party gains nothing by knowing what happened, or hir part in the clan's deaths. In fact, s/he'd probably be correct - it's an unnecessary complication to a critical mission, and the knowledge will do nothing to further the Order's goals.

Aside from the fact that if they know, they can stop looking for clues or, more importantly, a Draketooth. (Although I just re-read the comic and the "right now, Girard's Gate may have no defenses at all" line...) At the very least, what he knows increases the likelihood that this is the location of Girard's Gate considerably.

I can definitely see Blackwing try to guilt-trip V into fessing up and maybe almost fessing up for her. I could also see V pointing out the family tree without drawing any direct conclusions from it.

[Templarkommando]

I'd like to put down 3 brag-dollars down on this being an escalation of some sort. V isn't going to mention the evil that he's done, and at some point the party will find out. A party of adventurers walking into a room full of plot-related corpses is just begging to be investigated, so my thinking is that the party will discover what killed the draketooths. (draketeeth?) This will lead to Roy and associates being unable to trust V at a critical moment in the plot.

[PebbleInTheSky]

Put me down for V starts rationalizing, Blackwing guilts the elf, and shi starts to confess, but is either interrupted or loses patience with the Order and stops confessing.


Or whatever is most dramatic/comedic/dramedic.


Bit of a longshot, but I might as well have fun with it.

[Purgatorius]

V isn't going to mention the evil that he's done, and at some point the party will find out.

For example:
:roy: "V, what are you so upset about? A drawing on the wall? Wait, that dragon looks just like the one we fought in the cave with the star-metal!"
:vaarsuvius: "Well, perhaps there is some similarity between them..." :smalleek:

Oh, and the betting. I think V will at least try to tell the others that he knows how the Draketooths died, but perhaps he will be stopped by the arrival of Linear Guild or Team Evil.

[Spacewolf]

Im going with tells Haley who then tells her to keep quite about it or tells her to fess up to roy

[Kaytara]

Hmm, I could see V reacting with visible shock at the fact that he'd killed so many regular people - he'd been meaning to eradicate black dragons and likely didn't give much thought to how far the spell went beyond black dragons.

If he goes on to have something of an emotional breakdown, I could see him stammering out a partial confession without thinking about what he's doing. If he's able to keep his wits about him, then yeah, rationalising a need to keep quiet is probably more likely, but he might try to tell them the truth about what happened to the dragons while lying about his own part in it.

Put me down for "V starts giving information but the whole thing is interrupted by something big and dramatic happening and distracting all of them".

[The Succubus]

I don't care how neutral someone is - if they have even the remotest trace of a conscience, there's no way they can keep their emotions locked up over *genocide*.

So yeah, V says or does something to fess up or she goes insane.

[Duric]

The best way to protect his/her family is to keep it secret.

[Doorhandle]

... I'm going for the long shot of both.

V's conscious will make him leave an illusionary image explaining how he has been a bad, bad puppy.

V's common sense and need for continued survival will mean after using that one spell slot, the rest will be filled with as many teleports, planes shifts, dimension doors, flys and general escapes to be FAAAAAAAAR beyond the reach of suddenly-justified Belkar retribution, not to mention horrified Hailey retribution or semi-divine retribution from Durkon.

[zimmerwald1915]

... I'm going for the long shot of both.

V's conscious will make him leave an illusionary image explaining how he has been a bad, bad puppy.

V's common sense and need for continued survival will mean after using that one spell slot, the rest will be filled with as many teleports, planes shifts, dimension doors, flys and general escapes to be FAAAAAAAAR beyond the reach of suddenly-justified Belkar retribution, not to mention horrified Hailey retribution or semi-divine retribution from Durkon.
V can't teleport, plane shift, or dimension door. :smallwink:

[Klear]

suddenly-justified Belkar retribution

I think V's relationship with Belkar can only be improved by the revelation.

[Klear]

(accidental double post)

[Valyrian]

I don't care how neutral someone is - if they have even the remotest trace of a conscience, there's no way they can keep their emotions locked up over *genocide*.
The spell is still called familicide, so it's not genocide. I know the Big Words are tempting, but it's really egregious when even the spell's title says it isn't.

[zimmerwald1915]

The spell is still called familicide, so it's not genocide. I know the Big Words are tempting, but it's really egregious when even the spell's title says it isn't.
What made Familicide a near-run genocide for black dragons was how small the black dragon population was and how much of that population was sufficiently tied to ABD's bloodline to be included in the spell. Familicide, despite it killing all (?) the Draketooths, does not constitute a genocide for humans, because there are many humans and few of them can connect their bloodlines to ABD. What makes genocide genocide is not how many people die, but how much a crisis the amount of people dying is for the gens concerned.

[martianmister]

S/he shouldn't tell it to them right now. OotS have a much more important task.

[The Succubus]

The spell is still called familicide, so it's not genocide. I know the Big Words are tempting, but it's really egregious when even the spell's title says it isn't.

Wow, quite the patronising post there. ^^

So if a quarter of the human race suddenly got obliterated, you wouldn't deem that an act of genocide? Because I certainly would.


Genocide is defined as "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group",

[stabbybelkar]

Genocide is defined as "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group",

I wouldn't exactly count a familly as any of those things, unless the entire Draketooth Familly founded a cult specifically dedicated to defending the gates similar to the Saphire Guard.

[pendell]

Assuming they're not attacked where they stand. Or V tries to confess and is shut up by his/her friends being too busy, we are TAKING BETS on whether V will have the guts to confess to his friends.

One million quatloos says that V is a chicken of an elf who won't fess up because V can't face the guilt or the consequences of his own actions!

V has an 18 intelligence. What profit would it be to the OOTS, the mission, or to V personally, to confess to them now?

Were I V, I would say this information is on a need-to-know basis, and as of this moment the rest of the order has no need to know.

Another issue too is that, unlike real-world religions, there are crimes beyond redemption in OOTSworld. It may be that V has no way back from the evil side of the street. In which case, ze might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[martianmister]

Another issue too is that, unlike real-world religions, there are crimes beyond redemption in OOTSworld. It may be that V has no way back from the evil side of the street. In which case, ze might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb.

According to the Giant, s/he's still True Neutral.

[Psyren]

Isn't there a dramatic convention that covers this, along the lines of "V will get close to confessing, and then someone in the party will go on at length about what a horrible, depraved, and unforgivable crime this was, followed up with '...I'm sorry, Vaarsuvius, what were you about to say?'"

If he clams up after that, that would be cowardice.
If he continues to explain regardless, that would be conscience.

Put me down for conscience - owning up to his mistake is V's only hope for redemption now.




Another issue too is that, unlike real-world religions, there are crimes beyond redemption in OOTSworld. It may be that V has no way back from the evil side of the street. In which case, ze might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb.


There is no crime, in either OotS or D&D, that cannot be atoned for in some way. (As long as you are still alive to atone anyway.)

But you have to acknowledge that you were wrong, which Miko was unable to do - it remains to be seen whether V will make the same mistake.

[Tev]

Unless Rich just wants to throw away all his/her character development since F, I don't see not confessing as an option. And since V wants to be accepting consenquences now, this is just one more huge reason to tell them. Not being honest just for sake of rationalizing in style "how much will it help/hurt our mission now" is just returning to the path that led her to F in the first place.

As for what will actually happen I doubt the confession will go uninterrupted, there are so many things that could happen anytime near the gate (besides the evil teams, think about trap/vengeance by surviving Draketooths). So I just don't feel like taking guesses, and want next comic NOW.

(hey, Rich, now would be good time to go 7-in-7 again!)

[Anarion]

I don't see V confessing here. There's nothing else really going on at the moment and a confession at this point would lead to a long side-story hashing out how the order is going to deal with V.

From an in-story perspective, I don't see the confession happening now either. V would say that she has learned her lesson already, that she's trying to help the world and has given up everything at this point to try and stay with the order to stop the threat to reality. Therefore it would be illogical to jeopardize her status with the order now.


There is no crime, in either OotS or D&D, that cannot be atoned for in some way. (As long as you are still alive to atone anyway.)

But you have to acknowledge that you were wrong, which Miko was unable to do - it remains to be seen whether V will make the same mistake.

In a D&D setting, I don't see why you still need to be alive to atone either. *cough* Planescape: Torment *cough*

[Emulgator]

Put me on: "V breaks down and confesses, also possibly throwing away path of magic. The Order tries to reason, because Xykon and Tarquin, and then something happens."
Something similar in feeling to that strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0667.html).

[pendell]

Reading the responses to my post, I have two comments.

1) I don't see that in the middle of a dungeon crawl when we're about to fight the LG and Xykon in a double-header as the best place to start sorting this out. Afterwards, when the team has down time, would be better.

2) Assuming that V needs to confess and atone, who made Roy V's confessor ? They don't even serve the same gods. If V has any confession and atonement to make to a being on the mortal plane, as opposed to V's gods, that confession and atonement should be best made to the victims of the spell, and also restitution.

Or do we really want to get into the situation where we confess all our shortcomings to everyone else on the team? Would Haley be good with that? How about Belkar? How about Durkon and his adventure with Hilgya, which he refused to talk about to the rest of the team?

The fact is, everyone on this team except Elan and possibly Roy have some dark secret in their past that they aren't interested in having dug up and exposed to the light of day. I say let sleeping dogs lie unless there's a specific reason those out-of-party antics are important to the mission.

Were I V, this is what I would say:

"I know why this was happening. I encountered a spell called 'Familicide' by one Haerta Bloodsoak. It kills all beings who directly share a bloodline as a form of evil revenge. Some mage must have cast it on a member of the Draketooth clan, and it killed the entire family."

It tells the party what they need to know while keeping a potential party-breaking problem under wraps. I would not divulge that I, personally, was responsible unless there was some specific reason to do so. Some reason OTHER than assuaging my own conscience. We're trying to save a world here.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[SavageWombat]

A slight adjustment:

V will try to explain. In a typical, long, verbose, V fashion.

And, for the first time, V will find he/mself unable to find the words. Struck speechless by hi/r own actions.

[LordRahl6]

I'll take my bets on V being guilted into it by Blackwing as in my opinion V conscience is not fully formed. However that being said V's confession to the Order will be Sooo verbose that the rest of the group won't iniatially pay attention.:smallamused:

[Voshkod]

Im going with tells Haley who then tells her to keep quite about it or tells her to fess up to roy

V tells Haley that V is going to tell Roy. Haley stops V, saying that the mission is far too important to drop a bombshell like that.

[Tev]

Reading the responses to my post, I have two comments.

1) I don't see that in the middle of a dungeon crawl when we're about to fight the LG and Xykon in a double-header as the best place to start sorting this out. Afterwards, when the team has down time, would be better.

2) Assuming that V needs to confess and atone, who made Roy V's confessor ? They don't even serve the same gods. If V has any confession and atonement to make to a being on the mortal plane, as opposed to V's gods, that confession and atonement should be best made to the victims of the spell, and also restitution.

Or do we really want to get into the situation where we confess all our shortcomings to everyone else on the team? Would Haley be good with that? How about Belkar? How about Durkon and his adventure with Hilgya, which he refused to talk about to the rest of the team?

The fact is, everyone on this team except Elan and possibly Roy have some dark secret in their past that they aren't interested in having dug up and exposed to the light of day. I say let sleeping dogs lie unless there's a specific reason those out-of-party antics are important to the mission.

Were I V, this is what I would say:

"I know why this was happening. I encountered a spell called 'Familicide' by one Haerta Bloodsoak. It kills all beings who directly share a bloodline as a form of evil revenge. Some mage must have cast it on a member of the Draketooth clan, and it killed the entire family."

It tells the party what they need to know while keeping a potential party-breaking problem under wraps. I would not divulge that I, personally, was responsible unless there was some specific reason to do so. Some reason OTHER than assuaging my own conscience. We're trying to save a world here.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Yeah, V might rationalize like that. Sounds logical. -ish.

No more arguing about the conscience/alignment (it's too obvious and if not, hey nothing bad about being aligned to neutral), just one argument you made yourself:

I say let sleeping dogs lie unless there's a specific reason those out-of-party antics are important to the mission.
So wiping out defense of the Gate, by whom and why (very important questions already mentioned in strip) is explained by

"I know why this was happening. I encountered a spell called 'Familicide' by one Haerta Bloodsoak. It kills all beings who directly share a bloodline as a form of evil revenge. Some mage must have cast it on a member of the Draketooth clan, and it killed the entire family."
this?
Ok, no reason to spill the beans.

[Chess Tyrant]

You realize what'll happen if V does confess:

*Shocked silence*

:belkar: NO! HOW COULD YOU HAVE DONE THIS?!

*Quizzical expressions all around*

:belkar: My mass murdering record! You... You've BEATEN me!

[Dr. Strangelove]

You realize what'll happen if V does confess:

*Shocked silence*

:belkar: NO! HOW COULD YOU HAVE DONE THIS?!

*Quizzical expressions all around*

:belkar: My mass murdering record! You... You've BEATEN me!

This is absolute pure Unobtanium.

(I.E. it's way past gold or even platinum.)

[Dr. Strangelove]

Uh, would the fact that the massacre of the draketooth line was unintentional and V was aiming at black dragons, an evil species, in any way mitigate her guilt?

Also, if the IFCC maneuvered V into this some of the blame goes to them. It might be funny if the ghosts of the braketooth line attack them in revenge and bone their big plans at the last moment.

[LordRahl6]

V tells Haley that V is going to tell Roy. Haley stops V, saying that the mission is far too important to drop a bombshell like that.

That or only telling Haley first is consistent with their character's connections.:smallwink:

Also Dr. Strangelove try to edit as much as possible when you make a new thought directly on top of an old one.

[Psyren]

In a D&D setting, I don't see why you still need to be alive to atone either. *cough* Planescape: Torment *cough*

Well, in D&D you can atone post-mortem (this is what leads to Hellbred.) But it's understandably much more difficult and much less likely to work. After all, if the only reason you're atoning is because you're afraid of the punishment waiting for you - rather than truly being sorry simply because you understand your deeds to have been wrong - that shouldn't be an acceptable means of escaping punishment.

In OotS though, so far we've only seen petitioners being judged on their deeds in life. The assessment of Eugene's situation by Roy's Archon indicates that he's "locked in" to some degree as well.


Uh, would the fact that the massacre of the draketooth line was unintentional and V was aiming at black dragons, an evil species, in any way mitigate her guilt?

No, it would not - this is the very thought process the Giant has been railing against time and time again. Racial alignments simply do not apply to his setting, whether they be from goblins or dragons.

[Namorax]

I cant really see V confessing his/her guilt. Its true that V still has a chance of redemption, it was said so by Hell (the three Gentlemens) and Heaven also wanted Roy to interfere with V and his/her actions. If he/she keeps quiet, it is bound to come back and bite him/her in his/her elven ass.

Its true that confessing might lead to a party-split. But NOT confessing might lead to something even worse, and I dont want to think that the author is willing to sacrifice or permanently remove a member of the order...


I say V confesses his/her guilt and I bet an internet cookie.
Its the only right thing to do. He/she is intelligent, and therefore knows that its next to impossible to keep this under wraps.

[Arancaytar]

gets called out by Blackwing

:roy: "Wait, do you hear something?"
:haley: "Are you playing around with sound illusions, V?"

[pendell]

No, it would not - this is the very thought process the Giant has been railing against time and time again. Racial alignments simply do not apply to his setting, whether they be from goblins or dragons.


Actually, I think they do. It's just that racial alignment is a stereotype, not a fixed certainty. The same principle by which you can judge that the largest segment of professional sports fans are males, but you can't look at a male and automatically assume they're also a basketball fan.

I think it works the same way in OOTSverse. The majority of times you play a good character, you're going to encounter goblins or black dragons as antagonists. But there's a big jump from there to 'the only good goblin is a dead goblin'.

Of course, that second bit is only of concern in the vanishingly small number of cases you won't encounter these creatures as armed foes in a dungeon context. If you encountered, say, a goblin accountant or goblin schoolchild in a city. Or a goblin village full of unarmed children. I suspect that isn't an issue in a campaign unless the DM wants something more complex than "raid the dungeon, fight the bad guys, take the treasure".

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[zimmerwald1915]

He/she is intelligent, and therefore knows that its next to impossible to keep this under wraps.
Intelligence is powerless against rationalization. Indeed, intelligence contributes to the intricacy and persuasiveness of any given rationalization. You need to be wise not to lie to yourself, or to recognize and not believe your own lies.

[Belkster11]

"I know why this was happening. I encountered a spell called 'Familicide' by one Haerta Bloodsoak. It kills all beings who directly share a bloodline as a form of evil revenge. Some mage must have cast it on a member of the Draketooth clan, and it killed the entire family."

Well, if I were Roy, I'd probably respond with, "Wait, who's Haerta Bloodsoak? How did you come to know her? Where did you meet her when you learnt about this spell?"

Then Haley or Elan would probably ask her, "Did she turn you into that glowy-eyed, fanged person you were a few dozen strips ago?"

I'm sure V could talk her way out of this, but it may be best if V doesn't say anything about it.

I put it in spoilers, just in case.

[Psyren]

Actually, I think they do. It's just that racial alignment is a stereotype, not a fixed certainty. The same principle by which you can judge that the largest segment of professional sports fans are males, but you can't look at a male and automatically assume they're also a basketball fan.

Sure it's a stereotype. But that doesn't mean that stereotypes should be acted on, nor should they be rewarded with narrative justification.

[sockmonkey]

Yanno, in some ways V kind of reminds me of Baltar from NBSG series.
The slow-motion train wreck. Bigger lies needed to cover the previous lies.

Regarding confessing to Roy: He may not be V's father confessor but he is the team leader that V follows willingly and takes orders from. That implies a certain amount of respect and trust. Particularly in light of one being a decades-old elf and the other being human.
Also, Roy is the only authority figure that might possibly understand and forgive her/him. (we really need a new pronoun)
Heck, when someone needs to get something of their chest badly enough, anyone will do.

[silvadel]

I think the bird will blab....

Whether or not the order believes it however is another story.

[Particle_Man]

I'd say a confession to the party cleric would make the most sense. But it might be to the party as a whole.

I don't see V giving up the path of magic, though I could see a spider-man "with great power comes great responsibility" moment of truth. Maybe V will atone and become good?

[Tyndmyr]

V confesses. Has to...it's the maximally dramatic thing at the moment, while surrounded by the bodies of the people he/she killed.

[Bedinsis]

Something that could potentially turn up is the fact that Blackwing knows that Qarr works with the linear guild (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0797.html), but Vaarsuvius hasn't been told yet. I suspect the next strip (or the next or the one after that one) will feature Vaarsuvius finding this out from Blackwing. This could potentially lead to a discussion of the specific terms Vaarsuvius agreed to with the IFCC, but I doubt it.

I dare not make a bet.

[allenw]

I'll take my bets on V being guilted into it by Blackwing as in my opinion V conscience is not fully formed. However that being said V's confession to the Order will be Sooo verbose that the rest of the group won't iniatially pay attention.:smallamused:

I'm still holding out for "V's conscience is fully formed, and it currently goes by the name 'Blackwing'." :smallsmile:
Although if the actual familiar was killed by the Explosive Runes on RC's holy symbol, then how would "Blackwing" have been able to report what it saw inside the Rift? Oh, well.
But in any case, my money is on BW guilting V into confessing, but circumstances intervening.

[pendell]

Well, if I were Roy, I'd probably respond with, "Wait, who's Haerta Bloodsoak? How did you come to know her? Where did you meet her when you learnt about this spell?"


My response would be "I am a wizard! I've spent my entire life learning about magic! My knowledge (arcana) checks are through the roof!"

Really, it's like asking "You've heard of Bugsby's crushing hand? Who is Bugsby and how do you know them?" Hello! Life's profession.

Realistically , though, if V hasn't come forward with the fact of the deal ze made with fiends or what came of it, I strongly doubt this will encourage hir to come forward now. Ze's been keeping secrets from the party for awhile. I expect this to push hir further down that path, until it all comes out in some truly horrible way several strips down the line, when the revelation will cause even more damage than it would now.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[zimmerwald1915]

Well, if I were Roy, I'd probably respond with, "Wait, who's Haerta Bloodsoak? How did you come to know her? Where did you meet her when you learnt about this spell?"

Then Haley or Elan would probably ask her, "Did she turn you into that glowy-eyed, fanged person you were a few dozen strips ago?"

I'm sure V could talk her way out of this, but it may be best if V doesn't say anything about it.

I put it in spoilers, just in case.
Really? Isn't the most intuitive response

"I read about her in a book."

A variation: "I came across a description of her when I was researching new spells in Azure City's library."

EDIT: ninja'd. I thought I would be; the page took forever to load.

[Ghosty]

I think V'll confess. Exactly how, I'm not certain, but I think that it'll be done in a way that Tarquin is going to hear V's confession that V might have been the one to kill all of the Draketooth bloodline, including his wife. Which might upset Tarquin a bit. I pointed out in the 841 thread that this might help out the Order as, I don't think Tarquin in a blind rage is as effective a tactician as his normal, cool Xanatos-self.

As for retribution/punishment, can the rest of the Order really do anything to V that V doesn't want done? In the Order's position, I wouldn't relish tackling a ~15-16th level mage. Especially when they know at least one very high level group (and the LG too) is about to show up. I'm curious whether V will confess before Durkon starts breaking out the Speak with Dead and Resurrection spells, or after.

Still having a hard time with the idea that an Epic Illusionist can be one-shotted so easily, and I'm wondering if the statute of Girard outside is going to play a role in this.

[zimmerwald1915]

As for retribution/punishment, can the rest of the Order really do anything to V that V doesn't want done? In the Order's position, I wouldn't relish tackling a ~15-16th level mage. Especially when they know at least one very high level group (and the LG too) is about to show up. I'm curious whether V will confess before Durkon starts breaking out the Speak with Dead and Resurrection spells, or after.
Sure they can. Holy Word can give V four rounds of 20% failure chance to cast her spells (Deafened). Destruction is basically insta-death for her, given her poor Fort save and low HP. Greater Dispel Magic opens up counterspelling options. And that's just what Durkon can do.

[pendell]

And why exactly is it a good idea to kill their primary caster when we're expecting company shortly?

Roy has already made his stance on evil team-mates (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0838.html), such as Belkar, clear. Point them at the bad guys until they die for the sake of the greater good.

Roy can't "forgive" Vaarsuvius, because the crime was not committed against him and Roy has no power to grant absolution. The most he can do is use Vaarsuvius to save the world. If he can tolerate the existence of the most evil halfling on the planet on his team, he can certainly tolerate a remorseful familicide. Use V and Belkar like hand grenades -- point them at the bad guys and pull the pin. Plenty of time for judgement on the mountain when all of this is over. Assuming we win and the Snarl doesn't devour all creation. Again.

ETA: Were I Vaarsuvius, I would A) see the quest through B) afterward, shave my head and take vows. Then spend the rest of my life working to repair the damage I did. It is unlikely that I would ever find either forgiveness or atonement, but it's the least that can be done.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Balok]

So if a quarter of the human race suddenly got obliterated, you wouldn't deem that an act of genocide? Because I certainly would.
It would depend on how the quarter was selected. Hand out six billion or so d4s and everyone who rolls a '1' dies - that's a tragedy, but it's not genocide. On the other hand, if you murdered mostly or entirely Oriental people, or black people, or white people, or Russians - that's genocide.

[Balok]

Unless they knew what was killing them while still alive, restoring them to life isn't going to help. Most GMs rule that anything you learn "over there" stays over there when you get raised or resurrected.

Durkon is powerful enough to cast Commune, but the usefulness of any answers he gets depends on asking the right questions and on whether Thor thinks it is a good idea for him to know this answer. Targets of commune give answers in their own interest - and Thor might believe keeping the Order together is in his best interest, if he believes they're the best shot at saving the world.

[recluso]

The last few comics V acted quite nasty to YukYuk.

I think that prepared us for now. V won't confess.

And, if V decides to confess anyway, something will interupt and prevent her confession.

V might blame Haerta.

[rbetieh]

let me go with, the Bird confesses for V, but nobody believes him

[AntMac]

V is going to try to avoid explaining, because, feeling very guilty. The party is going to work it out, and accuse V and refuse to understand or accpet V's reasons as moral.

Was it immoral to make the spell?.

I lean to sort of understanding V's reasons. If revenge had brought a terribly dangerous creature into my home, and it deliberately broke my childrens legs and stabbed my partner . . . killing every chance of any repeat would be the very first thing I thought of. And that is ignoring the whole thing about, you know, thinking, non-human creatures that can fly and wield magic, and are known to eat humans. Why would you let them or their kin live, can someone explain?.

The Draketooths were just collateral damage, stuff that happens in a war, not what you would like, but standing over your children that have had their legs broken by a thinking creature?, so that it could torture them then eat them?. Kill it, and all its kind.

Hard to see why she didn't word the spell correctly, and rub all dragons out while she had the chance.

[ThePhantasm]

If revenge had brought a terribly dangerous creature into my home, and it deliberately broke my childrens legs and stabbed my partner . . . killing every chance of any repeat would be the very first thing I thought of.

So let me get this straight: based off of the angry actions of one person you would stereotype and judge an entire family and decide to wipe them all out, men, women, and children, even though they are innocent and there was no real indication that they would behave in a vengeful manner?

...

I have no words to express... I mean... what is this I don't even... I give up.

[pendell]

And that is ignoring the whole thing about, you know, thinking, non-human creatures that can fly and wield magic, and are known to eat humans. Why would you let them or their kin live, can someone explain?.


The best answer I can give is from another work altogether ...



What a pity that Bilbo did not stab that vile creature, when he had a chance!’

‘Pity? It was Pity that stayed his hand. Pity, and mercy: not to strike without need. And he has been well rewarded, Frodo. Be sure that he took so little hurt from the evil, and escaped in the end, because he began the ownership of the Ring so. With Pity.’

‘I am sorry,’ said Frodo. “I am frightened; and I do not feel any pity for Gollum.’

‘You have not seen him,’ Gandalf broke in.

‘No, and I don’t want to,’ said Frodo, ‘. . . He deserves death.’

‘Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. For even the very wise cannot see all ends. I have not much hope that Gollum can be cured before he dies, but there is a chance of it. And he is bound up with the fate of the Ring. My heart tells me that he has some part to play yet, for good or ill, before the end; and when it comes, the pity of Bilbo may rule the fate of many.' (J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring (New York: Ballantine Books, 1994) 65-66.)



I can understand V's panic, but it's blindingly obvious now that familicide killed many good and / or innocent people as well as the vengeful dragon. So, yes, it would be blameworthy to unleash such potent magic on an unsuspecting world for no better reason than that one member of the family used family relationship as a pretext to stalk V.

I can understand V wanting to correct hir previous error of leaving behind loose ends that would come back to devour hir children. But familicide was not the answer.

What would have been ...?

Knowing what we know now, possibly some scrying/divination/communion/other to find which creatures were likely to take revenge for the death of mama dragon, then attack them pre-emptively if they're already evil villains who can be removed from the face of the world. If they're young or otherwise not targets , work and hope that something can dissuade them from vengeance.

But you can't kill a creature for no better reason than that they happen to be related to an enemy.

I believe Rich wrote this strip specifically to discredit the thesis you are advancing.

ETA: What we're dealing with here is a blood feud. Historically, blood feuds can end in one of three ways:

1) One side or both gives up on revenge, either because of forgiveness or because they simply can't be bothered anymore. Eugene Greenhilt is an example of this during his lifetime.

2) Justice. Some impartial third-party arbitrator who both sides accept hands down a ruling which balances the scales.

3) Everyone on one or both sides is dead.

It's very hard to make that last happen , as even those who aren't in the direct family line still have people who care about them and might avenge there death. Plus, in a world like OOTSverse, the death of innocents generates a karmic weight that will eventually bounce back and hit the perpetrator in the face.

So a better answer would be for Vaarsuvius to take reasonable and proper precautions to protect hir family, and allow karma to work FOR hir instead of against hir.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[jmucchiello]

I think V will want to confess and will flashback to Inky's reaction to what V did and clam up. V could not handle rejection from the party and won't risk it. V might rationalize it in other ways. But the root cause for saying nothing is so V is not once again rejected by V's companions.

OTOH, I can also imagine V becoming unruly because V knows there's no reason to continue investigating their deaths.

In the event that V starts to confess and is interrupted, I suspect the interruption will be a sending from one of Hinjo's mages telling the party that he just found out Xykon defeated the resistance, found his phylactery, and is leaving Azure City now.

[Whitney]

I think that V will feel the need to inform them, not specifically out of conscience but because they don't have the time to spare searching for answers that s/he already has.

[Flame of Anor]

Repeating my nasty thought I had in the discussion thread:

V might decide to spill the beans and fess up...

Only to have the IFCC take him over that very second as part of their deal, thus stopping him from telling the truth.

Depending on how this works, V might never know he was unsuccessful in telling the Order what they need to know. This would also allow the IFCC to only use a couple of minutes of their time and use the rest later when needed.

I doubt it will happen simply because I don't know how likely it is that V won't recognize he blanked out for a second. But it is a possibility, if not a huge one.

I think that wouldn't work--they would be like "What the heck happened just there?"


The spell is still called familicide, so it's not genocide. I know the Big Words are tempting, but it's really egregious when even the spell's title says it isn't.

Well, Mr. Condescension, I'd have you know that "geno-" is the Latin root for the word meaning "family". So they are basically synonyms.

[AntMac]

So let me get this straight: based off of the angry actions of one person you would stereotype and judge an entire family and decide to wipe them all out, men, women, and children, even though they are innocent and there was no real indication that they would behave in a vengeful manner?

...

I have no words to express... I mean... what is this I don't even... I give up.

Viciously and deliberately hurt two of my children then, standing over them threatening to eat them, ask me to be reasonable?. You would talking to the wrong person. Oh, no, that is not right of course, you would be dead as a doornail, so, no talky.

But, in this world, would I go after your family too?. No, of course not. that would be insane, by our standards

But in a world with thinking creatures that don't share our culture, genes, or morals, that in fact have their own imperatives and 'moral' sense, a "moral" sense that justifies eating human children, damn straight, I would destroy all of them if I could. It would be nothing more than the same thing we did destroying smallpox. In fact, it would be arguably more moral, because the DRAGONS are doing it deliberately, deliberately sacrificing human children to their goddess, or whatever.

They would have to go.

[Namorax]

And we have to remember that V kinda acted "in the heat of the moment". He achieved power and tried to do as much as he could in the shortest amount of time possible, seeing how much he hurried around and didnt want to be bothered with anything unecessary...

I'm not saying it was Ok, but lets be honest: after seeing the Black Dragon and what it did to Vs family, did anyone here think of the "innocents" the spell might target? After rereading that part I noticed the "half-dragon-centaur", a subtle hint of what happened now. I have to admit my thoughts were "Good Riddance!", followed by a small "Isnt that a bit overkill?".
But I never thought of something like the Draketooths.


Unless they knew what was killing them while still alive, restoring them to life isn't going to help. Most GMs rule that anything you learn "over there" stays over there when you get raised or resurrected.

Well, Roy apparently remembered everything that happened when he came back. No idea if that was because he was "on earth" and observed everything directly, or because the dead in the OotSvers get to keep their knowledge gained after death.
And even if they come back and remember everything: the whole family died at the same moment, so unless some clerk on the other side tells them what happened (I doubt the Black Dragon is personally there to explain (or on the same plane)) this wouldnt help the order.

[Othesemo]

I'd like to cast a 10 gp towards V telling the order the truth. I've never seen him as the type to lie to someone close.

[zimmerwald1915]

I'd like to cast a 10 gp towards V telling the order the truth. I've never seen him as the type to lie to someone close.
"Trancing is not biologically required for elves. I have become far more efficient since I eliminated it from my schedule."

"And yet I see no reason why I still need ye. You."

Both from strip 599 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0599.html). Both blatant lies.

[ThePhantasm]

Viciously and deliberately hurt two of my children then, standing over them threatening to eat them, ask me to be reasonable?. You would talking to the wrong person. Oh, no, that is not right of course, you would be dead as a doornail, so, no talky.

But, in this world, would I go after your family too?. No, of course not. that would be insane, by our standards

But in a world with thinking creatures that don't share our culture, genes, or morals, that in fact have their own imperatives and 'moral' sense, a "moral" sense that justifies eating human children, damn straight, I would destroy all of them if I could. It would be nothing more than the same thing we did destroying smallpox. In fact, it would be arguably more moral, because the DRAGONS are doing it deliberately, deliberately sacrificing human children to their goddess, or whatever.

They would have to go.

You should read this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12718471&postcount=108) and this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12718550&postcount=120) and this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12718655&postcount=132). In OOTS Rich is trying to challenge the very sorts of presumptions you presented above.

[Psyren]

"Trancing is not biologically required for elves. I have become far more efficient since I eliminated it from my schedule."

"And yet I see no reason why I still need ye. You."

Both from strip 599 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0599.html). Both blatant lies.

Those don't really count as lies, because at the time he genuinely believed what he was saying. The fact that he had another reason to get away from everyone is beside the point.

[AntMac]

{scrubbed}

[Psyren]

If a thinking race of creatures not human, think or thought it was "right" to prey on human beings, and eat children and sacrifice humans to a "god", it would be perfectly moral to extinguish that whole race, even if only the majority really thought their races practice was "proper". If we ever come across aliens that feel that way, and can't be one hundred percent sure of blockading them, humanity will destroy them root and branch. Probably go to all sorts of lengths avoid it, but in the end we have that duty to our children, the ultimate reality, the trumpcard.

Where did all these dragons (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0639.html) advocate a practice like that?

[AntMac]

Um. Black Dragon. Black Evil Dragon. oooh yuck, kill it.

Hey, you should read this link, please.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html

If you scroll down to the part where the bloke from the Holey Brotherhood is trying to extend the concept of morality to cover the "rights" of holes, then see the other guy about to offer his risposte, you are going to see quite a graphic depiction of my point. And likely the same conversation that will be held between theorists and pragmatists every time a war comes up.

"It isn't moral to wage war" . . . "Pardon me, what was that, I missed what you were saying while I was off killing all these Nazis that want to put our children into gas chambers according to some warped idea of racial purity. You are welcome, by the way".


imho, of course. :smallwink:

No point in carrying this any further I think, we fundamentally disagree. You have a kind of ethics on your side, and I respect that, I am not getting at you, or holding you in contempt you know. I just think you are utterly wrong.

I have Darwin on my side, and you know , Darwin for the Win.

[Kikon9]

V seems to be second only to Redcloak at the skill of rationalizing one's conscience away. My bet is that she's going to come up with as many excuses as possible not to tell the Order, but I could be wrong (and certainly hope I am).

Aren't you forgetting about someone? :miko:

[Leliel]

I have Darwin on my side, and you know , Darwin for the Win.

No. This is not Darwin. Darwin has nothing whatsoever to do with morality. This is Spencer, who was also a classist idiot.

And even if we accept the premise-that still doesn't excuse the Draketeeth. Collateral damage is tragic but occasionally necessary. Killing an entire city because you didn't want to navigate around it is a war crime.

[[TS] Shadow]

Um. Black Dragon. Black Evil Dragon. oooh yuck, kill it.

Hey, you should read this link, please.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html

If you scroll down to the part where the bloke from the Holey Brotherhood is trying to extend the concept of morality to cover the "rights" of holes, then see the other guy about to offer his risposte, you are going to see quite a graphic depiction of my point. And likely the same conversation that will be held between theorists and pragmatists every time a war comes up.

"It isn't moral to wage war" . . . "Pardon me, what was that, I missed what you were saying while I was off killing all these Nazis that want to put our children into gas chambers according to some warped idea of racial purity. You are welcome, by the way".


imho, of course. :smallwink:

No point in carrying this any further I think, we fundamentally disagree. You have a kind of ethics on your side, and I respect that, I am not getting at you, or holding you in contempt you know. I just think you are utterly wrong.

I have Darwin on my side, and you know , Darwin for the Win.

Here's the problem with your arguement as a whole: you are assuming that V used Familicide for a morally sound reason: to rid the world of these evil black dragons. And no doubt, most of the black dragons that V killed were likely evil. However, you have to remember this: V didn't kill the dragons for the greater good, he did it in petty revenge. He didn't HAVE to kill the dragon's family. If another black dragon went to attack V in revenge, the rest of the Order would likely be there (as V intended to use his splice powers to reassemble the group.) V might not be able to take an ABD on his own, but the entire Order has a pretty good chance of success.

So, where does that leave us on the morality of V's Familicide? Well, it was wrong. He killed sentient creatures for petty revenge, when they have never slighted him. V didn't know how evil they were, or what they did, and V didn't care. Their alignment was of no importance; V was merely removing a potential threat.

Comparing using Familicide to something like the Nazis isn't really fitting, either. The Nazis were a threat to a large group of people, and could have taken over all of Europe and eliminated an entire culture. The black dragons, as far as we know, don't have those sort of lofty goals; they are content to kill any adventurers that bother them and gather treasure. Both are evil, but one is much eviler than the other.

[Subbo]

Morality is better at dealing with convention than with extremity. Confession and repentance seem like the "good" reactions to this discovery, and in one sense they are. But at the same time the OotS is involved in a mission with critical implications for the fate of the entire world. A Team Evil victory would be far worse than V keeping mum about her horrible actions...I don't know how V will see it, and the shock of the moment might well lead to a confession, which could sink the Order right here and now. But it'd be safer to shut up about it...though the problem of the fiends calling in their 45 minutes remains either way.

I have no idea how we can come out of this feeling sympathetic for V given what she did...just seems unlikely that her part of this story will share in Elan's happy ending

[Flame of Anor]

"Trancing is not biologically required for elves. I have become far more efficient since I eliminated it from my schedule."

"And yet I see no reason why I still need ye. You."

Both from strip 599 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0599.html). Both blatant lies.

Those aren't lies. The first is true, the second is a delusion, and the third is a true statement describing a delusion.

[AntMac]

No. This is not Darwin. Darwin has nothing whatsoever to do with morality. This is Spencer, who was also a classist idiot.

And even if we accept the premise-that still doesn't excuse the Draketeeth. Collateral damage is tragic but occasionally necessary. Killing an entire city because you didn't want to navigate around it is a war crime.

You just called Darwin a classist idiot?.

lol. And yes, I realise you didn't mean Darwin, but that is what it reads as.

Anyway, no, I am right. Because if we meet an intelligent race that eats, and justifies eating, our children, if we don't wipe them out, we will have failed the only test evolution holds. At what point should we do it, when they have eaten all the children?. Ninety percent of them?. We should let them eat one child in every two, just so your moral sense can be nestled in cotton wool?. We shouldn't wipe them out unless 51% of them justify Toddler Tiramasu?.

And why theoretically would we have chosen to fail the Evolution test?.

Because you would rather not do something "immoral" to a race that eats your children.

{scrubbed}

[[TS] Shadow]

You just called Darwin a classist idiot?.

lol. And yes, I realise you didn't mean Darwin, but that is what it reads as.

Anyway, no, I am right. Because if we meet an intelligent race that eats, and justifies eating, our children, if we don't wipe them out, we will have failed the only test evolution holds. At what point should we do it, when they have eaten all the children?. Ninety percent of them?. We should let them eat one child in every two, just so your moral sense can be nestled in cotton wool?. We shouldn't wipe them out unless 51% of them justify Toddler Tiramasu?.

And why theoretically would we have chosen to fail the Evolution test?.

Because you would rather not do something "immoral" to a race that eats your children.

When you grow up, get back to me. In the meantime, the adults will make the hard choices for you, and you can hide under the bed from the nasty reality.

Okay, with that last comment, I snap. I'm sorry, but calling someone a child because they hesitate at the thought of killing a sentient being is just uncalled for. Let me just leave a little quote here:
The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.-- Mahatma Gandhi

Let me give you a hypotheical situation: you, a solider, are charged with killing everyone in a town. In this town, the men routinely go out and pillage other villages, and take back the valuables of those they killed. When you, the solider, reach the town, you find no men (as they have gone out for a raid and will not be back for a few hours) but you find all of their wives and children. You were ordered to kill everyone in the town. Obviously, if the men are evil, surely everyone else must be right? But you see in front of you that these people are causing no one harm. They can't be blamed for where they lived; they were born in this village, they didn't choose to live there. Now, answer honestly: would you order their deaths even though there is no evidence of them commiting an evil act? Would you kill innocent women and children because you were ordered to, under the vauge justification that they were "evil?" If you said yes...I really don't know what to say.

And don't pull any crap about them being human and V killing dragons, 'cause that arguement doesn't fly. They are powerful and sentient beings, it's not like V was killing off some variety of rat or insect.

[SavageWombat]

You just called Darwin a classist idiot?.

lol. And yes, I realise you didn't mean Darwin, but that is what it reads as.

Anyway, no, I am right. Because if we meet an intelligent race that eats, and justifies eating, our children, if we don't wipe them out, we will have failed the only test evolution holds. At what point should we do it, when they have eaten all the children?. Ninety percent of them?. We should let them eat one child in every two, just so your moral sense can be nestled in cotton wool?. We shouldn't wipe them out unless 51% of them justify Toddler Tiramasu?.

And why theoretically would we have chosen to fail the Evolution test?.

Because you would rather not do something "immoral" to a race that eats your children.

When you grow up, get back to me. In the meantime, the adults will make the hard choices for you, and you can hide under the bed from the nasty reality.

This sounds very Heinlein/Niven/Card sort of thinking.

I would ask for a different viewpoint - what would Picard do? He would not surrender to an enemy that wished to eat his children, but he would not wipe them out either. Even the Borg, remember. He would find another way, because that is the moral choice.

[SinsI]

I'd put my bet on "willingly confesses to prevent Durkon from raising his enemies". He cast Familicide for a reason, and undoing that pretty much puts his family back at risk.

[AntMac]

Shadow;12816806']Here's the problem with your arguement as a whole: you are assuming that V used Familicide for a morally sound reason: to rid the world of these evil black dragons. .

Nope, I actually asked why were we condeming his killing a bunch of dragons as wrong. My comment was a question, because I am not some ironbound enthusiast, if someone presents me with a convincing argument against an opinion I hold, I seriously consider its merits, if I consider it valid, I may well completely change my mind.

What I asked was
"Was it immoral to make the spell?".

All I have heard so far, are morality arguments I first heard and thought deeply about (and discarded as mere faiths that the real world sometimes has to sigh over and put aside) more than 30 years ago. As an aside, both your country and mine outfit their armed forces with area effect weapons. While not as egregious a choice as a "Kill every member of that species I am pointing at" spell, do you seriously think the morality is different when one of our protectors kills one civilian as collateral damage, to Vs' choice to kill ten thousand?. Do you think it appears different to the one our guys kill?. Dead is dead, and if the one is sound policy, why not the ten thousand?.

Other people feel a different way, that is cool, I am good with that.


Shadow;12816806']. And no doubt, most of the black dragons that V killed were likely evil. However, you have to remember this: V didn't kill the dragons for the greater good, he did it in petty revenge. He didn't HAVE to kill the dragon's family. .
That is a different question. That one would have been me asking,

"Was it immoral to make the spell without making it specific enough for his intentions?".

And yes, I think I agree with you there, he ought to have made it " All you black dragons that are a proven potential threat to my children". Or he ought not have cast it. The neccesary evil of murdering a group has its justification in protecting his children, if it doesn't, well that is immoral. Not to mention worse than doing nothing, from the point of view of ensuring his childrens safety.

We can agree I am sure that his intent for the spell ( protect children from dragonic revenge) might be less evil than his crowing and saying "That is all yours dead, go think about it in the next life".

[SavageWombat]

What I asked was
"Was it immoral to make the spell?".

So what you want answered is equivalent to "Was it immoral to invent the atomic bomb? Is it immoral to keep making them?"

My answer is that the required level of philosophy may be beyond the scope of this comic.

Using the spell is vastly immoral. Hell, considering using this spell is probably immoral. But researching it?

[AntMac]

Shadow;12817101']And don't pull any crap about them being human and V killing dragons, 'cause that arguement doesn't fly. They are powerful and sentient beings, it's not like V was killing off some variety of rat or insect.

But that was entirely my point. We have human morality because we are human. The Dragons ( or aliens ) are not.

Look, if it was sharks, or some unthinking creature, of course we could work out some way to avoid exterminating them. But, if like smallpox ( which, you know, is also life ) the only way available at the time was extermination, and the only other alternative was to put up with X number of children eaten alive a year, are you seriously saying the children ought to die because making a species extinct would be wrong?.

That is moral in your world?.

Now, aliens, or thinking dragons, you wouldn't have the choice to try to find a "cure" for. If a thinking spieces was preying on us, and you had a chance to rub them right out, it would be the height of immorality to not take it, what if it was the last opportunity on offer?.
Or more to the point, are you not then morally responsible for every barbqued baby from that point till whatever solution is finally found?. How many decades of baby gnawing would be a small enough "moral" price to pay to protect the "rights" of a bunch of evil dragons?.

Edit to add, I notice you expect me to answer your question but refused to answer my two questions. Here you go.

At what point should we do it, when they have eaten all the children?. Ninety percent of them?. We should let them eat one child in every two, just so your moral sense can be nestled in cotton wool?. We shouldn't wipe them out unless 51% of them justify Toddler Tiramasu?.

[AntMac]

So what you want answered is equivalent to "Was it immoral to invent the atomic bomb? Is it immoral to keep making them?"

My answer is that the required level of philosophy may be beyond the scope of this comic.

Using the spell is vastly immoral. Hell, considering using this spell is probably immoral. But researching it?

Yes. You need not even go to the A bomb.

The bloke who makes a crossbow in 1489 ad, is just as guilty, they carry far further than the target, and get fired into towns and stuff. Haley is just as guilty as V, every time she shoots an arrow, there is the real potential of killing an innocent.

It is just that people get their noses out of joint about large numbers.

The truth of the matter is the world is a hard place, and morals are for show. We can even make our anthems reference them, but our soldiers and police have to act another way.

[[TS] Shadow]

It is just that people get their noses out of joint about large numbers.

As they should. You have been saying, throughout this entire thread, that there is no difference between killing one person and killing a thousand.

That assumption is wrong.

Every person who dies is unable to impact the world any more. If I am the only one to die in an explosion, my familiy will be the only one to grieve. But what if a friend dies with me? Then that's two families. What if it were 5 people dead? 10? 20? I understand that numbers mean nothing for you, but let me put it to you this way: everyone's death affects someone else. If 1000 people die, a lot more people are going to be affected than if 1 person were to die. One person's death is an accident, or a murder. But a 1000 people? Deaths on that sort of scale can and have lead to wars being fought.

[SaintRidley]

Nope, I actually asked why were we condeming his killing a bunch of dragons as wrong.

Because as sapient beings, dragons are just as much people as humans or elves, or goblins. Do not let the color and texture of their skin or their non-humanoid shape fool you into thinking otherwise. Killing a bunch of people, the only thing you know about them being that they are related to, let's say Albert Fish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Fish), is wrong.

[AntMac]

{{scrubbed}}

[[TS] Shadow]

You missed my point, others didn't. You are inexperienced in philosophy I suspect, because this is one of the first lessons almost.

MORALLY there is no difference between one murder and two.

It just seems that way to the young.

And who says that the philosphers are right? Just because Aristotle and Plato said something along those lines hundreds of years ago doesn't mean that it's applicable today. They might not have even been right back when their works were considered "modern." Something like murder works on a case by case basis. In fact, I can come up with an arguement in less than 30 seconds that proves your point moot.

Hypothetical situation: you're arguing with your brother and you kill him in the heat of the moment. You're obviously remorseful about the situation, as you did not mean to kill him and you didn't want this to happen. Then, his girlfriend walks into the room and sees both you and the dead body. Knowing that she's a witness who could potentially turn you in, you kill her too.

Now, morally, what is the difference between these two murders? Well, with the murder of the brother, you could justify that by saying it was a mistake. You're not a killer, it was just an accident. Now, with the girlfriend, you made the choice to kill her there. That's not justifiable, or at least not justifiable to anyone but yourself.

There. Two murders with two different moral standands by one person. And just for the record, I'd feel a hell of a lot worse if I left two families in mourning than just one. But that's just me. I'm young and naive, remember, so my opinion apparently doesn't matter.

[AntMac]

Because as sapient beings, dragons are just as much people as humans or elves, or goblins. Do not let the color and texture of their skin or their non-humanoid shape fool you into thinking otherwise. Killing a bunch of people, the only thing you know about them being that they are related to, let's say Albert Fish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Fish), is wrong.

Yes, there is something in your point. I do accept that we have to treat thinking creatures in a different catagory. I just don't think it means we have to run the risk of extinction for our species because of "morality" questions.

If only one thinking black dragon ( or alien ) was ever known to eat human children and sacrifice humans to its god, it would be kind of immoral to wipe them all out. But when we come to know it is wide-spread, practically a given, that they prey on us?. Immoral not to wipe them out, they have obviously CHOSEN their path, puts the onus on them.

It is the intelligence that makes them such a clear threat, don't you see?.

If humans moved into some aliens neighbourhood and got up to no good, they would be mugs if they didn't rub us out, because , we are a problem, and can think and learn. And if they tried to negotiate and lost, evolution would be done with them, and give them a fail mark.

No, it is the dragons intelligence that makes rubbing the lot out, moral. Anything else would be a fail mark for humanity.

[AntMac]

Shadow;12817314']
There. Two murders with two different moral standands by one person. .
You are confusing morality with legality.

Shadow;12817314']
And just for the record, I'd feel a hell of a lot worse if I left two families in mourning than just one. .
You are confusing morality with emotion.

Shadow;12817314']
But that's just me. I'm young and naive, remember, so my opinion apparently doesn't matter.

Being inexperienced isn't a crime, nor was I getting at you when I mentioned it. And I was only guessing, because your comment to me had all the hallmarks of inexperience, I promise you I have said exactly the same thing when I was young, in just about the same situation.

And you are probably right about Plato et al, no one has ever thought out The Killer App" for philosophy, that is for certain.

The best one is "The more I know, the more ignorant I understand myself to be".

[Dr.Gunsforhands]

This whole thing kind of makes me want to make a sort of scale for the heinousness of murders in various circumstances, but LUCKILY, that isn't even the point of this thread!

I suspect that, out of shame, V will just claim ignorance on the matter until it comes back to bite everyone and gets revealed at the worst possible time. That's what I think Elan would expect, at least.

However, since the knowledge is immediately relevant to what the Order needs to prepare for, it would be irresponsible to not get at least some of it across, so confiding in a single party member in hopes of getting their support isn't a bad idea. But who? How would each of them react?

Belkar is clearly right out. Confessing to Roy is liable to go something like this:

:roy: < You did WHAT?!

So that isn't a great option either. Durkon and Haley would both try to be supportive friends and counselors while working out what they could hold back in good conscience; V is likely to gravitate towards Haley for that reason.

...have we ever considered confessing to Elan? I guess it's the last thing he needs to deal with right now, but I have no clue how he would react.

[NinjaStylerobot]

It can go either way. Hes nuetral. :smallwink:

Hopefully I se him/her redeemed. I just like the character.

[ti'esar]

Yes, there is something in your point. I do accept that we have to treat thinking creatures in a different catagory. I just don't think it means we have to run the risk of extinction for our species because of "morality" questions.

If only one thinking black dragon ( or alien ) was ever known to eat human children and sacrifice humans to its god, it would be kind of immoral to wipe them all out. But when we come to know it is wide-spread, practically a given, that they prey on us?. Immoral not to wipe them out, they have obviously CHOSEN their path, puts the onus on them.

This is the biggest flaw in your argument - letting aside all other moral issues, when we move from the theoretical realm to the practical, there is no evidence to indicate that dragons (black or otherwise) pose any kind of existential threat to the human species. I don't believe we've seen a single dragon mount an unprovoked attack on humans (or humanoids) in the comic so far - the YBD responded with lethal force to an invasion of his home, and the ABD subsequently sought revenge for his death. Look at the dragons killed by familicide - the only one we see in combat with humans appears to be battling a group that's after its hoard. And now we know of at least one black dragon that procreated with a human - we don't know the exact details, but it would be very unlike to be an prominent position on the family tree if it was non-consensual or the like. There is no evidence so far in OOTS of anything even approaching a "them or us" conflict with dragons.

[SaintRidley]

Yes, there is something in your point. I do accept that we have to treat thinking creatures in a different catagory. I just don't think it means we have to run the risk of extinction for our species because of "morality" questions.

If only one thinking black dragon ( or alien ) was ever known to eat human children and sacrifice humans to its god, it would be kind of immoral to wipe them all out. But when we come to know it is wide-spread, practically a given, that they prey on us?. Immoral not to wipe them out, they have obviously CHOSEN their path, puts the onus on them.

It is the intelligence that makes them such a clear threat, don't you see?.

If humans moved into some aliens neighbourhood and got up to no good, they would be mugs if they didn't rub us out, because , we are a problem, and can think and learn. And if they tried to negotiate and lost, evolution would be done with them, and give them a fail mark.

No, it is the dragons intelligence that makes rubbing the lot out, moral. Anything else would be a fail mark for humanity.



I'll work from your analogy first.

Difference here is that dragons aren't moving into a world that humans own and then getting up to no good. Dragons and humans inhabit this world jointly and have since the beginning. Valid ecological niches and whatnot aside, as that's getting to far into the environmental aspect of the ethics issue (and we simply lack the information to assess that aspect properly), the point is that this world has contained dragons and humanoids interacting throughout its entire history.

Pretty crucial failing in the analogy.

Now, if dragons and humans have been stuck on the same world for so long, how much of a threat are these dragons really? Given their size, natural affinity for magic, increased power with age, etc. one could reasonably assume, as you do, that they pose a danger to humanity.

However, their rate of reproduction is low and their numbers not large. Furthermore, if the dragons really wanted to be a threat to humanity they would simply wipe out the entire species. It wouldn't be hard. But they make no such moves. Many dragons are indeed fascinated by humanity and consider our attempts at civilization to be marvelous entertainment.

If the dragons truly were a credible threat to the humanoids we would see dragon attacks more often and on less pretense than revenge. We would see dragons initiating the attacks more often.

The dragons are also smart enough to know not to do that. It ruins the entertainment to kill the entertainers. The occasional snack notwithstanding (humanoids come in a variety of flavors after all), killing all or many of the humanoids would just be impractical. Better to hang out on your treasure hoard and let lunch find you. The ones trying to kill you and steal your stuff you can get away with killing without making any heavy impact.


Again, dragons are people too. Just because their capabilities can pose a threat to humanoids does not mean that they will pose a threat to humanoids.

[Stormlock]

Two things people don't seem to be mentioning:

Roy saw V when she was spliced. While there's no way he can draw the full conclusions from what he knows now, he can probably figure it out with significantly less than the full story if he can remember that part (and he remembers the crap he learned from the oracle, so why not this?) He's a smart cookie too.

Qarr knows exactly what happened when V went all spooktacular. Since the LG is headed for the gate too, there is a significant possibility he might realize that V killed these people too with that spell. Whether he'll divulge that information to either the OotS or the LG, who knows. He'd likely at least tell Sabine, who may well tell Nale, who would dearly love to use such a thing for mind games.

My money is on V keeping her mouth shut for at least the next few strips, if only to keep us in suspense. She'll no doubt want to confess to someone eventually, but whether it's to the whole party, or before they find out some other way, who knows? I would imagine either Roy or Haley would tell her that now is not the time, with the fate of the entire universe literally in the balance at these very moments. The others would... probably set aside the fate of the world for the sake of some judgment, lecturing, or mockery.

Bonus far out there possibility: Girard is still out there, and he finds out, either through scrying on V or Qarr or however and the order finds out when he arrives for some serious revenge.

PS: V did not cast Familicide out of 'petty' revenge. Revenge for being cut off in traffic is petty. Revenge for getting a small tip from your customers is petty. Revenge for having your family tortured and threatened with an eternal damnation of having their souls trapped forever so they can never move on to the afterlife, is serious business lose your **** and do something you may regret later revenge.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Just to bring up a possibility no one else has, I think V may want to confess but her bird will stop her, pointing out that the order needs to be a full effectiveness to save the world and that if V confesses, it will cause a rift that will weaken the order.

This would be interesting in that the bird would be advocating the pragmatic option and V would be the one moralizing. The bird could explain that V must bear the guilt alone and unconfessed as part of her penance for her act.

I could see this, as it would be a real table turn on v.

[Sneaky Weasel]

It could go either way, but I think V is going to fess up. He looks so aghast at what happened that I imagine he will feel that keeping it a secret would make it worse. But I could be completely wrong.

Also, for those of you arguing about morality: You shouldn't be doing this in the first place, as per forum rules, and it makes the atmosphere so much less congenial. Lighten up, will you? And please don't take offense at this attempt to straiten things out, as it was written in a light hearted manner.

[The Pilgrim]

I bet for Cowardice.

The OOTS can only realize what's going on when the IFCC takes over her soul and begins to blast her former associates.

[ThePhantasm]

OK, read the mans opinion in those links, as you asked. For your future reference, if you are asking someone to do something, you ought to include the social lubricants i.e. the word please, you know, for moralities sake?.

Ironically, when making this suggestion, you yourself used no "social lubricants." There was nothing wrong with my phrasing - it was just a suggestion, not a command.


But, he doesn't contain the final word of truth on the subject of morality just because he writes a comic we both like.

Neither I nor Rich suggested that so I'm not sure why you are bringing it up, to be honest.


Yes, I was already aware that he is using the comic to parse his feelings on various moral questions humanity faces. And you may even agree with him I guess, rather than just be convinced by his arguments, though you do come across as a sort of earnest disciple forwarding his masters works. Did he ask you to berate people in his name?. I guess not.

Ouch, I haven't berated anyone. I am sensing some irony here again though...


If a thinking race of creatures not human, think or thought it was "right" to prey on human beings, and eat children and sacrifice humans to a "god", it would be perfectly moral to extinguish that whole race, even if only the majority really thought their races practice was "proper".

Where do you see this "marjority" regular practice happening in the strip, pray tell? As far as I can recall such a thing has not been shown once. You seem to indicate in your other comments that you think dragons will soon be attacking children everywhere and making an all out assault on everyone, but absolutely nothing in the strip suggests this is the case at all.

I won't address the rest of your post, as it deals with inappropriate forum topics.

[pendell]

Reading AntMac's comments.

1) As others have argued, dragons are intelligent creatures. It is precisely because they are NOT roaches that they cannot be exterminated. The entire point of the character of Redcloak and Therkla is that evil characters are not interchangeable cardboard cutouts. They sometimes have a reason for being evil, they are sometimes capable of redemption, and the children don't necessarily inherit the sins of the fathers.

Just as it would be wrong to wipe out all Drow in the forgotten realms because that would mean killing Drizzt Do'urden and Liriel Baenre (http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Liriel_Baenre) as well as a whole bunch of evil drow.

2) "Evolution" is a poor argument to make in OOTSworld, because evolution does not exist in OOTSworld. The world, and all the species in it , have been created by gods for a specific purpose. Nothing came into being by accident or by chance but as the direct result of divine magic in accordance with a divine plan.

Also, recall that humans, elves, and the rest only exist on the prime material plane for a short time and then spend the rest of it on Mount Celestia or the Nine Hells or whatever. Life on the prime material plane is the merest fraction of their existence as individuals.

Because of this, creatures in OOTSworld cannot afford to use "survival of the species" as an argument or pretext for evil. Nor is simple self-interest a valid reason to kill because, again, Good and Evil in OOTSverse are real, supernatural forces. They take an interest in the doings of creatures and are able both to raise the dead and to determine their eternal destinies of the same. If you want your family to be happy, it is far better to ensure their arrival on the Mountain and the unlimited food , drink, and sex it contains than to give them a short respite on the material plane followed by an eternity fighting in the Blood War.

Because of this, it is far better for a person in OOTS world to order their lives and their actions around the objective principles of good or evil than to take actions under the Darwinist principles of personal or species-self interest. Those principles flatly don't hold in OOTS world at all, and placing personal interest over the other things , even when it means the deaths innocents, is a very quick trip to the Evil side of the street.


To what extent Darwinian principles apply in the real world is , of course, outside forum scope.


3) Also, if the graphic evidence that V's actions resulted in the deaths of innocents in 842 do not shock the conscience enough to realize that V made a major mistake, not only killing innocents who were NOT dragons but directly endangering the safety of the gate and the cosmos as a result, well, there's probably not much more to say.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: Rather than merge this into the Familicide mega-thread, I'm just going to lock it. It seems like thread-type we don't allow, inquiries into whether X's (in)action is morally justified. Trying to debate a comic character's actions in the context of real world morality tends to lead to inappropriate real world religious and political references. Also, they tend to propagate into asking if everything is morally justified. So we don't do them here.