The Plan - Abandoned?

[suzaliscious]

SoD Spoilers.

The goblinoids have conquered Azure City, renaming it Gobbotopia. They have been recognized as a sovereign nation by several other kingdoms and live as a civilized, unified people.

Does this sound kind of familiar to you?

Specifically, RedCloak's big Plan? It's happened. He's done it. Oh, maybe not *every* nation recognizes their existence and the Azurites are still out there, posing a very credible threat, but they're a lot closer than they've ever been. Using Xykon to distract the city's strongest contagion of fighters - the Sapphire Guard - Redcloak was able to successfully take Azure City and establish the goblinoid people there.

The Dark One's Plan, with the Snarl and God-threatening? Not necessary any longer. With good administration and consolidation, Jirix and Gobbotopia can achieve the Plan's goals without any of its inherent risks.

The question is: Has RedCloak realized this? Has he finally accepted the truth of the last words his brother said to him? Has he finally faced the truth, the futility of serving an undead lich or a petty, spiteful God and no longer seeks to further the specific Plan of the Dark One, but to eliminate the last remaining threat to the goblinoids - and the world? Is the line that RC fed about helping Xykon further their Plan as quickly possible simply that: a line?

RedCloak changed a lot since losing his eye. Maybe he's finally stopped deluding himself. Maybe looking at a one-eyed goblin that strongly remembers the brother he killed every time he looks in the mirror has helped him come to some crucial realizations. What do you guys think?

[SaintRidley]

To Redcloak:

Don't screw this up. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0704.html)

Hugs and Kisses

The Dark One

[Mikhailangelo]

I think the rift above the city looks bigger each time a scene is set there.

The plan itself may be redundant, to a degree, but something needs to be done about the rifts.

Not those rifts.

[factotum]

To Redcloak:

Don't screw this up. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0704.html)


Which could have meant "Don't screw the Plan up" or could have meant "Don't screw Gobbotopia up by continuing to follow the old Plan".

And no, I don't think Redcloak realises that Gobbotopia fulfils what he believes the Plan to be, and I doubt he ever will.

[RMS Oceanic]

I think the Dark One recognises Gobbotopia as a decent consolation prize, hence his instructions to Jirix to help it flourish. However I also think he's still hell bent on the Gates, but possibly not for the reason we think.

I have two tenuous pieces of evidence for the following theory: The first piece is Right-Eye's bitter accusation that the Dark One has become embittered at what a cosmic joke the Goblinoid's plight is. The second is more subtle: In the Mega Poster Rich made, on the "Good" side we see Thor blessing Durkon's weapon, but on the "Evil" side the Dark One is just standing there as Redcloak does his bidding. It may just be a representation of how Good/Evil gods act, but the implication that the Dark One genuinely doesn't care for his "True Prophet" to me suggests that he has gone beyond wanting to even the odds for Goblins, but possibly to carry out his threats and kill the Gods regardless of what they concede.

Again, I have no evidence for this, but that is the vibe I get from the Dark One. He has moved from a form of cosmic justice to vengence.

[TDG]

Admittedly until my Kickstarter package arrives I don't actually have a copy of SoD and therefore haven't seen the exact wording of the plan from that book, but from my readings around the forum I thought the plan entailed putting goblins on (at least) equal footing with other races.

Sure, Gobbotopia houses a fair whack of Goblins, Hobgoblins, Bugbears and the like - but everywhere else in the world those creatures remain XP fodder for adventurers. I thought the plan was not just to establish a safe haven for Goblins, but to rewrite their purpose in general: turn them from a page in the Monster Manual frequently used to level up with, to a respected member of the world that (like everything else in the Manual) is occasionally used to level up with

In my mind Gobbotopia isn't the end goal of the plan, its just a nice bonus in the middle.

[Euodiachloris]

To be honest, I don't think we have enough clues about the Dark One. And, most of the big ones we have come via Redcloak. We have no idea how accurate he is. Besides, he's hardly an unbiased source. :smallamused:

Plus, whoever else could give info would also have their little biases. :smallsigh:

I think it's a big shrug as to what, exactly, the Dark One meant with the rather direct form of revelation. Even for far-less-than-Oracle standards of vagueness, you can read it both ways. :smallconfused:

Maybe that was the point: both were meant as a duel message for his brand new ruler and long-term cleric. "Screw up with Gobbotopia, you're toast. Screw up with the Gates, ditto."

[t209]

What if the gate's plan goes wrong? I mean Dark One tried to fire a warning shot with the monster but it went out of control.

[Hamiltonz]

What if the plan going wrong is what destroys Goblintopia...

[t209]

What if the plan going wrong is what destroys Goblintopia...

I could expect an evil smile from Niu.

[ti'esar]

Realizing that the creation of Gobbotopia fulfills the Plan in a far more sane manner then trying to threaten the gods with the Snarl is possibly one of the last hopes for Redcloak's "redemption". Although even if he does realize it, I suspect he's going to just stick with his sunk-cost obsession anyway.

At any rate, he certainly doesn't realize it now.

[martianmister]

Gobbotopia is a dictatorship that builded upon human-slavery. It's not what Redcloak dreamed of.

[Morty]

Gobbotopia is a dictatorship that builded upon human-slavery. It's not what Redcloak dreamed of.

Actually, I'm pretty sure crushing humans under the feet of goblinkind is right up Redcloak's alley.

[ti'esar]

Actually, I'm pretty sure crushing humans under the feet of goblinkind is right up Redcloak's alley.

In the long run, Gobbotopia is going to have to move away from that if it hopes to outlive Xykon, but I'd certainly agree that Redcloak has no problem with revenge on humans.

It's not what Right-Eye wanted, but he's not really relevant to the discussion at hand (except as a reason why the Plan is not getting abandoned anytime soon).

[martianmister]

Actually, I'm pretty sure crushing humans under the feet of goblinkind is right up Redcloak's alley.

SoD spoilers:

In Redcloak's ideal world, humans and goblinoids are equals. That's what he said in there.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

SoD spoilers:

In Redcloak's ideal world, humans and goblinoids are equals. That's what he said in there.
Redcloak may be Lawful, but that doesn’t mean he is honest. He is pretty good at lying to himself in particular.

[Euodiachloris]

Hmmm: coexistence is maybe part of what he wanted, way back when he and his brother started out. Now is another matter.

Without his brother to play the retraining bolt... well... Redcloak seems to loose more perspective as he invests time and emotion into anything he does.

Looking into the mirror just doesn't cut it as far as restraining bolts go. He could do with his brother's level-headed sarcasm to go with the image.

[Subzero008]

Seconded. Right-Eye acted as a counterbalance for nearly everything.
Seriously, in SoD, Right-Eye and RC take opposite sides in nearly everything, and one usually has to convince the other.

Without Right-Eye... Redcloak is going to be like a burnt-out cop. Fighting what he perceives as the forces of evil(not Evil) for years, and seeing(and causing) many atrocities repeatedly has made him bitter. This bitterness bottled up turns into anger, then ferments into hate.

I think RC is frozen in time; he is perpetually pissed off at the enemy, but when or if there is no enemy, how can he function in a normal society?

[Winter Light]

nth-ed about Redcloak being unable to see the forest because there are so many trees in the way.

It's been mentioned a few times in this thread alone, but anyone who isn't familiar with the Sunk Cost Fallacy should go read it (can't take more than a few minutes on wikipedia) because it explains just about everything you need to know about Redcloak.

And, SoD spoilers:
Gobbotopia is Right-Eye's Village, except far grander in scope. Redcloak was willing to abandon the plan to settle down there, until Xykon showed up--and had he not sacrificed so much already, one imagines he might be willing to again turn his back on the Dark One for the greater good of his people.

That being said, were we to ignore Redcloak's actual personality and whatnot, his best bet would probably be to get Xykon killed chasing after the rifts then get rid of the phylactery (or get rid of the phylactery and then get Xykon killed) more permanently. But, he's a flawed character, which is really what makes him interesting.

[Cavenskull]

Of course Redcloak should abandon The Plan. Xykon will be totally ok with that. There's no danger of Xykon going totally ballistic when he's told that Redcloak is no longer interested in helping Xykon seize control of the gates AND/OR that The Plan doesn't actually benefit Xykon at all. Xykon totally won't go all Familicide on Redcloak and the Goblin species when he finds out he's not going to get what he wants. Sunk cost fallacy and self delusion have nothing on a vengeful, evil epic sorcerer lich.

Redcloak needs a 100% sure-fire way to kill Xykon. Without one, Redcloak has no choice but to follow through with The Plan. And not every opportunity to get Xykon killed is a good one. For instance if Vaarsuvius had succeeded in killing Xykon, that doesn't mean that suddenly all the Goblins' problems are solved. Imagine Vaarsuvius ending the Azure City occupation by casting Familicide on the goblins. Darth V might very well have ended up slaughtering the Goblins faster than Xykon could have.

[ti'esar]

I don't think Xykon's high-level-enough to pull off a Familicide.

But yes, if Redcloak were to give up on the Plan, he'd need a pretty good plan of his own to deal with the fallout.

[Cavenskull]

I don't think Xykon's high-level-enough to pull off a Familicide...
Probably not, but he could certainly go on a big enough rampage to achieve a similar effect, which was what I meant.

[ti'esar]

Probably not, but he could certainly go on a big enough rampage to achieve a similar effect, which was what I meant.

I agree - in fact, that's why I think Gobbotopia's best move in the longer run is to move for true coexistence with humans, if it wants to survive Xykon's demise. The reason why none of the other Southern nations offered military assistance is explicitly given (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0501.html) as fear of the lich. Once he's gone, if the goblins are still seen as a hostile power, I doubt it will be long before a coalition moves against them.

[Forikroder]

SoD Spoilers.

The goblinoids have conquered Azure City, renaming it Gobbotopia. They have been recognized as a sovereign nation by several other kingdoms and live as a civilized, unified people.

Does this sound kind of familiar to you?

Specifically, RedCloak's big Plan? It's happened. He's done it. Oh, maybe not *every* nation recognizes their existence and the Azurites are still out there, posing a very credible threat, but they're a lot closer than they've ever been. Using Xykon to distract the city's strongest contagion of fighters - the Sapphire Guard - Redcloak was able to successfully take Azure City and establish the goblinoid people there.

The Dark One's Plan, with the Snarl and God-threatening? Not necessary any longer. With good administration and consolidation, Jirix and Gobbotopia can achieve the Plan's goals without any of its inherent risks.

The question is: Has RedCloak realized this? Has he finally accepted the truth of the last words his brother said to him? Has he finally faced the truth, the futility of serving an undead lich or a petty, spiteful God and no longer seeks to further the specific Plan of the Dark One, but to eliminate the last remaining threat to the goblinoids - and the world? Is the line that RC fed about helping Xykon further their Plan as quickly possible simply that: a line?

RedCloak changed a lot since losing his eye. Maybe he's finally stopped deluding himself. Maybe looking at a one-eyed goblin that strongly remembers the brother he killed every time he looks in the mirror has helped him come to some crucial realizations. What do you guys think?

your missing multiple things
1) Gobbtopia is still having alot of trouble stabilizing due to the fact they have alot more enemies then allies
2) Redclaok cant turn back now, becuase if he stops going after the gate then the OoTS heads to him and a high level adventuring party would be able to free Azure city
3) he doesnt want one city of hobbies to be living in peace, he wants every single goblin to live in peace
4) even assuming he wanted to jsut settle down in Azure and work it into the free land of Goblins and reach out all around the world and bring every goblin within his borders to live a peaceful life, neither Xykon nor the dark one would let him

his chips are all in the pot he cant fold now

[MyNameIsSecret]

1) Gobbtopia is still having alot of trouble stabilizing due to the fact they have alot more enemies then allies

Gobbotopia seems to be going quite well. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0702.html) Where is it stated otherwise?


2) Redclaok cant turn back now, becuase if he stops going after the gate then the OoTS heads to him and a high level adventuring party would be able to free Azure city

If RC abandons the Plan, I doubt the OotS would go after him. And even if they did, I don't the think the six of them would be able to defeat a whole city full of hobgoblins.


3) he doesnt want one city of hobbies to be living in peace, he wants every single goblin to live in peace

Gobbotopia isn't just a city, it's a nation now, and it's just the beginning. Nations can expand and grow, and if more goblinoids decided to settle, this could easily happen to Gobbotopia.


4) even assuming he wanted to jsut settle down in Azure and work it into the free land of Goblins and reach out all around the world and bring every goblin within his borders to live a peaceful life, neither Xykon nor the dark one would let him

I don't think the Dark One would really matter, but yes, Xykon is a problem, and it is a good point. Betraying Xykon isn't going to be an easy matter... but RC has Xykons phylactery...

[Bogardan_Mage]

SoD spoilers:

In Redcloak's ideal world, humans and goblinoids are equals. That's what he said in there.
No, he said he wanted equal opportunity. His whole issue is that goblins were specifically created in an inferior position to humans, and he wants to fix that. He doesn't say he wants to maintain that equality.

Also, Redcloak clings to the Sunk Cost Fallacy pretty damned hard. It seems unlikely he'd abandon the Plan, even if it made sense to do so, simply because he's invested so much effort in it.

[factotum]

I don't think the Dark One would really matter, but yes, Xykon is a problem, and it is a good point. Betraying Xykon isn't going to be an easy matter... but RC has Xykons phylactery...

Which is worth two things: jack and squat. While Xykon is still "alive" his soul is not in his phylactery, so Redcloak still has to figure out a way to destroy him even with it to hand.

[Math_Mage]

RC's situation and RC's motives are two different things.

RC's situation is that if he cares about the goblin people, he CANNOT desert Xykon without ending him once and for all. His objective sunk costs (N goblin deaths and the eye) are weighed against what Xykon would do to goblinkind just to make Redcloak suffer for his deception. That's before mentioning what the Dark One might do to punish his high priest's betrayal. In that sense, his costs are not fallacious at all. The mistake was making Xykon a lich in the first place, not anything that has happened since.

But RC's MOTIVE is that he cannot admit that the Plan is unnecessary, or that he doesn't need Xykon, because of Right-Eye. That subjective sunk cost is a fallacy, and RC continues to reaffirm his devotion to that mistaken belief.

[MyNameIsSecret]

[/LIST]
Which is worth two things: jack and squat. While Xykon is still "alive" his soul is not in his phylactery, so Redcloak still has to figure out a way to destroy him even with it to hand.

Of course he does, and I'm not saying he'll be able to kill Xykon because of it. But if the phylactery is in the Astral Plane, where Xykon thinks it is, then when Xykon is killed he will just regenerate there and the effort RC spent killing him will all be for nothing. The fact that RC has the phylactery isn't worthless, it's a key point. That's half the battle - or at least a third of :smalltongue: - and the only problem he has to solve is how to kill Xykon.

Which is still a daunting task, however. :smalleek:

[Forikroder]

Gobbotopia seems to be going quite well. Where is it stated otherwise?

a small task force sent from the elves was enough to do tons of damage, and if they had been higher level they would have been able to escape from redcloak, what happens whenthe elves join Azure city and march there armys there?

it may be doing Okay now but the resistance showed how fragile it really is


If RC abandons the Plan, I doubt the OotS would go after him. And even if they did, I don't the think the six of them would be able to defeat a whole city full of hobgoblins.

yes the order will because
1) Redcloak and Xykon is there overall goal, defending the gates is essentially a side quest there ultimate goal is to kill Xykon and Redcloak

2) even if the above is false, there would still be trying to save Azure city because since REdcloaks goal still hasnt succeeded, to the world goblins are still always evil and always OK to kill for XP and they have ties to Azure city so would save it regardless


Gobbotopia isn't just a city, it's a nation now, and it's just the beginning. Nations can expand and grow, and if more goblinoids decided to settle, this could easily happen to Gobbotopia.

doesnt matter how big it grows, wont change the public perception of goblins would make it worse


I don't think the Dark One would really matter

you think the Dark One would be Okay if Redcloak decided to abandon the plan that was going to give him ultimate power? really?

[Math_Mage]

a small task force sent from the elves was enough to do tons of damage, and if they had been higher level they would have been able to escape from redcloak, what happens whenthe elves join Azure city and march there armys there?

it may be doing Okay now but the resistance showed how fragile it really is

You mean, some level 9+ adventurers joined a small army of dedicated insurgents, and they were able to cause trouble until Redcloak squashed them like ants? Uh, okay.

And yes, if Gobbotopia faces the combined might of several nations it will be in trouble--just like any other developing nation.


yes the order will because
1) Redcloak and Xykon is there overall goal, defending the gates is essentially a side quest there ultimate goal is to kill Xykon and Redcloak

Their ultimate goal is to kill Xykon. Redcloak is only relevant because he carries the phylactery.


2) even if the above is false, there would still be trying to save Azure city because since REdcloaks goal still hasnt succeeded, to the world goblins are still always evil and always OK to kill for XP and they have ties to Azure city so would save it regardless

I question whether the Azurites will be particularly eager to leave the elven vacation island and fight at severely reduced strength to reclaim Azure City, rift and all, from the goblins. I mean, we know Hinjo is (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0670.html), but his will is not necessarily his people's.


doesnt matter how big it grows, wont change the public perception of goblins would make it worse

True. The development that needs to happen is not an increase in size, but a change in how Gobbotopia relates to other nations.

[malloyd]

Redcloak needs a 100% sure-fire way to kill Xykon. Without one, Redcloak has no choice but to follow through with The Plan.

I'm not sure he's any better off going through with The Plan in that respect. Assuming it works perfectly to his expectations and gives the Dark One control of the gates, it still leaves him in a situation where Xykon is un-dead, standing next to him, and very unhappy about having been tricked.

[allenw]

I'm not sure he's any better off going through with The Plan in that respect. Assuming it works perfectly to his expectations and gives the Dark One control of the gates, it still leaves him in a situation where Xykon is un-dead, standing next to him, and very unhappy about having been tricked.

If Redcloak actually succeeds, I think he'd be okay with dying as a result. Might be welcome, IMO.

[RMS Oceanic]

If Redcloak actually succeeds, I think he'd be okay with dying as a result. Might be welcome, IMO.

Indeed. He was happy to risk the entire unmaking of the world if it meant the recreated Goblinoid races of the Third World would have a better life. It wouldn't matter what Xykon did to him or even what he tried to do to the Goblin people as a whole if the Dark One gains control over a gate. Assuming the Gods yielded, they could probably get Xykon to cut it out as part of the negotiations.

[ti'esar]

Indeed. He was happy to risk the entire unmaking of the world if it meant the recreated Goblinoid races of the Third World would have a better life. It wouldn't matter what Xykon did to him or even what he tried to do to the Goblin people as a whole if the Dark One gains control over a gate. Assuming the Gods yielded, they could probably get Xykon to cut it out as part of the negotiations.

While Redcloak's own fate might be immaterial to him, I'd say that leaving an enraged epic-level lich behind would still be a problem. It's entirely possible that Xykon's reaction to finding out the true nature of the Plan would entail an attempt to single-handedly raze Gobbotopia to the ground, and he could most likely do it.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

While Redcloak's own fate might be immaterial to him, I'd say that leaving an enraged epic-level lich behind would still be a problem. It's entirely possible that Xykon's reaction to finding out the true nature of the Plan would entail an attempt to single-handedly raze Gobbotopia to the ground, and he could most likely do it.
That is most definitely true. He expressed that exact sentiment in SoD when…
Right-eye suggested that if his assassination attempt against Xykon failed, Redcloak could regenerate Right-eye’s missing eye to allow him to hide among the other goblins. Redcloak pointed out that rather than let Right-eye get away, Xykon would be more likely to just kill all the goblins just to be sure of getting his attacker.

[theNater]

While Redcloak's own fate might be immaterial to him, I'd say that leaving an enraged epic-level lich behind would still be a problem. It's entirely possible that Xykon's reaction to finding out the true nature of the Plan would entail an attempt to single-handedly raze Gobbotopia to the ground, and he could most likely do it.
I suspect that the Dark One would step in personally if Xykon tried to raze Gobbotopia at that point. We've seen that one of the checks on the power of the gods is the other gods, and the plan removes that check from the Dark One.

[RMS Oceanic]

I suspect that the Dark One would step in personally if Xykon tried to raze Gobbotopia at that point. We've seen that one of the checks on the power of the gods is the other gods, and the plan removes that check from the Dark One.

That's what I was saying. The Dark One could either personally step in to stop Xykon, or strongarm one of the other Gods into doing it.

[AceOfFools]

What everyone seems to forget about SoD is that it's an incredibly biased account: It explains how Redcloak, an openly evil tyrant, views what he's doing as morally right. How he can view his actions that way.

Redcloak is Evil, the Dark One is Evil, their goals are to set up a utopia for evil people.

Double checking my copy of SoD, Redcloak doesn't actually say he just want's an even footing, he says... ...that to create a goblin utopia, where goblins are not killed for XP, an equal footing is all that would be required (and that if they can't build a world where goblins aren't killed for XP from an even starting point, the deserve what they do get).

SoD is a very good book, but it seems to have given a large portion of the fandom serious misconceptions about Redcloak's character.

His ultimate goal, the whole point of the Plan, Redcloak's driving motivation, is obviously evil, and will cause countless suffering.

Rich has shown this repeatedly:

He deliberately attempts to murder an ally because of her race.
The citizens of Gobotopia beat the elderly and infirm for fun, expecting it to accomplish nothing else.
Redcloak's successor, Gobotopia's monarch, is shown enjoying a man's physical and emotional torture.
No one (but the monster in the darkness) bats an eye at the use of "bural murder without proof of guilt" to dispose of rivals.

The important part of that last statement is that Redcloak was lying. Tsukiko was innocent of the crimes Redcloak claims she needed to be executed for, and trials exist to, at the very least, make it difficult for people to destroy their political rivals on a whim. If Redcloak had thought to use a potion of glibness, he could have done the exact same things months ago.

Redcloak is not the most evil character in OotS, and has realistic and believable motivations, but he is Evil enough that he doesn't need Xykon to be a threat to world.

tl;dr: Redcloak is very evil and you are mistaken if you think that his goals or Plan are anything but evil.

[factotum]

What everyone seems to forget about SoD is that it's an incredibly biased account: It explains how Redcloak, an openly evil tyrant, views what he's doing as morally right. How he can view his actions that way.

The Giant has gone on record as saying that the only part of SoD which is actually told from Redcloak's viewpoint is the crayon part in the middle--everything else is what actually happened back then.

[AceOfFools]

The Giant has gone on record as saying that the only part of SoD which is actually told from Redcloak's viewpoint is the crayon part in the middle--everything else is what actually happened back then.
I never meant to imply that we see anything other than what happens.

It's a matter of context.

Hypothetically (if you forgive the hyperbole): if you see a cartoon of a soldier shooting a teenager apropos of nothing, you'd think ill of the soldier. If you'd seen the proceeding 40 minutes of animation where the teen butchers travelers ala Children of the Corn, including a scene where the child pretends to be unarmed to get close enough to murder someone with a hidden knife, the solder comes off more "brutally pragmatic" than "homicidal freak".

A more spoilery example:
he paladin's slaughter of Redcloak's people is a lot more palatable when you consider the fact that goblins were a group of brigands.

Evidence: Right-Eye explicitly describes his peaceful settlement as NOT raiding human settlements, as distinct from other goblin settlements.

So, while the paladins' actions are obviously over zealous to a fault (the killed children for Pete's sake), and are pointed out as such in the commentary, they are not as black and white as the narative would have you believe.

We don't have the full context of any one's actions, except for those of the book's three main protaganists, so they we are forced to judge the characters the same way Redcloak does.

It's a great way to do a Start of Darkness-style book that explains the why of a villain.

[Cavenskull]

I never meant to imply that we see anything other than what happens.

It's a matter of context.

Hypothetically (if you forgive the hyperbole): if you see a cartoon of a soldier shooting a teenager apropos of nothing, you'd think ill of the soldier. If you'd seen the proceeding 40 minutes of animation where the teen butchers travelers ala Children of the Corn, including a scene where the child pretends to be unarmed to get close enough to murder someone with a hidden knife, the solder comes off more "brutally pragmatic" than "homicidal freak".

A more spoilery example:
he paladin's slaughter of Redcloak's people is a lot more palatable when you consider the fact that goblins were a group of brigands.

Evidence: Right-Eye explicitly describes his peaceful settlement as NOT raiding human settlements, as distinct from other goblin settlements.

So, while the paladins' actions are obviously over zealous to a fault (the killed children for Pete's sake), and are pointed out as such in the commentary, they are not as black and white as the narative would have you believe.

We don't have the full context of any one's actions, except for those of the book's three main protaganists, so they we are forced to judge the characters the same way Redcloak does.

It's a great way to do a Start of Darkness-style book that explains the why of a villain.
That reminds me of Strip 648 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0648.html). Imagine getting started on OOTS and reading this strip first, without knowing any of Haley's backstory.

[Sutremaine]

If Redcloak actually succeeds, I think he'd be okay with dying as a result. Might be welcome, IMO.
Heck, given what Xykon's been known to do with defeated enemies, Redcloak might even kill himself rather than get stuck dealing with a ballistic lich.

[TheZenMaster]

Getting his soul trapped?

[Kish]

At this point, Redcloak might count on Xykon Soul Binding him.

Not on a conscious level, I'm sure. But if he spends eternity stuck in a gem after achieving the Plan, he never has to face his brother, and he can always believe that he's given up more for the Plan than he forced any other goblin to give up.


he paladin's slaughter of Redcloak's people is a lot more palatable when you consider the fact that goblins were a group of brigands.

Evidence: Right-Eye explicitly describes his peaceful settlement as NOT raiding human settlements, as distinct from other goblin settlements.
You're basing an assertion that the peaceful goblin settlement we see at the beginning of Start of Darkness, with children and a new acolyte of the Dark One who is mystified that humans would show up and attack them, was actually a "group of brigands," on Redcloak's brother saying that the village he founded later wasn't raiding human settlements, claiming an explicit "unlike every other goblin settlement" indication which is nowhere to be found in the book.

Yeah, I see bias, all right.

[AceOfFools]

You're basing an assertion that the peaceful goblin settlement we see at the beginning of Start of Darkness, with children and a new acolyte of the Dark One who is mystified that humans would show up and attack them, was actually a "group of brigands," on Redcloak's brother saying that the village he founded later wasn't raiding human settlements, claiming an explicit "unlike every other goblin settlement" indication which is nowhere to be found in the book.

Yeah, I see bias, all right.

That's the clue that started this line of thinking, yes, but there's a bit more too it than that.
The full logic, tangentially related to the thread at hand, involves a number of other clues. Here's my logicThe high priest of an evil deity whose portfolio is the village's race is either the leader or a highly influential member.
The influence of said cleric leads to some members of the tribe to do evil things.
Members of this evil group include several moderately high level, i.e. experienced, combatants. What is somethint that warriors can do to gain experience in an evil culture?
Evil, in DnD, means something. If someone, or some group, is evil, they will do evil things.
The goblins did not live in a resource rich area, they had to struggle to survive, potentially not even able to support their children through peaceful means alone.
Redcloak's line about not understanding the paladin's attack is that they didn't do anything, and I quote "to them"

This thought didn't strike me till my third reading of the book, when I was looking over some comments on this forum, actually. Specifically, how could Paladins who did the things in the early sections of the book keep their alignments after that slaughter? When the pieces fell into place, it makes sense, but only if you see things as I see them, and the goblins were a lot worse than a potential threat.

Sure, the goblin warriors come across as noble in the books. They actually died fairly noble deaths, protecting their families. But I wouldn't assume that they were, good, just and noble people based on the fact that they make the "best" decision in the worst possible situation.

"Pack of brigands" was intended to be how they were viewed by their (projected) victims, in direct contrast to how they are viewed by themselves, and in what is the most noble moments of their short lives.

I'm honestly not interested in (and not going to) debate my logic with anyone, for two reasons.

Firstly, I am biased. I have such a negative view of Redcloak and where he comes from at this point that my mental image of Redcloak isn't even the same character as anyone who doesn't view him as a very bad person. We wouldn't have enough common ground to have a reasoned debate.

Secondly, just because it's the only way I interpret the facts presented doesn't mean it's the only valid way. There actually is enough evidence in the text to support a "the paladin's were completely unjustified" reading. Since support exists for both interpretations you should hold the one that gives you the most enjoyment.

[Kish]

Firstly, I am biased. I have such a negative view of Redcloak and where he comes from at this point that my mental image of Redcloak isn't even the same character as anyone who doesn't view him as a very bad person. We wouldn't have enough common ground to have a reasoned debate.
Do you recognize that "Redcloak isn't a very bad person" is not synonymous with "the goblins in proto-Redcloak's village were the more-or-less innocent villagers they appeared to be, not a band of brigands"?

[suzaliscious]

@Ace: You say that SoD gives readers a serious misconception of RedCloak's character?

i.e. The book thatestablishes his character and gives us crucial context to RedCloak's actions, as well as his motivations, is inaccurate?

Okay. Guess you know RedCloak's characterization better than the Giant, who conceptualized, created and wrote him a certain way.

[hamishspence]

Hypothetically (if you forgive the hyperbole): if you see a cartoon of a soldier shooting a teenager apropos of nothing, you'd think ill of the soldier. If you'd seen the proceeding 40 minutes of animation where the teen butchers travelers ala Children of the Corn, including a scene where the child pretends to be unarmed to get close enough to murder someone with a hidden knife, the solder comes off more "brutally pragmatic" than "homicidal freak".

There is a scene in Start of Darkness like the "soldier shooting a teenager with no obvious justification:

the killing of Redcloak's little sister.

However, the last time it was argued that we should presume something like your above description unless proven otherwise, this is what The Giant said:


She had not committed an Evil act.

And it's ridiculous to think that any given six-year-old may have committed a horrible act worthy of being executed unless the text says otherwise, just because that six-year-old has green skin and her parents bring her to their church services. That right there is enough reason for the story to be the way it is. No author should have to take the time to say, "This little girl ISN'T evil, folks!" in order for the reader to understand that. It should be assumed that no first graders are irredeemably Evil unless the text tells you they are.

[ti'esar]

There is a scene in Start of Darkness like the "soldier shooting a teenager with no obvious justification:

the killing of Redcloak's little sister.

However, the last time it was argued that we should presume something like your above description unless proven otherwise, this is what The Giant said:



For the sake of argument, I'd note that the claim that the goblins of Redcloak's village were a band of brigands and not a largely innocent bunch of civilians still doesn't mean that the Sapphire Guard should have dealt with them by slaughtering the entire population down to the last child. AceOfFools himself says this.

[hamishspence]

He does say "overzealous to a fault" about their child-killing.

Still- the providing of a reason for it to be merely "brutally pragmatic" was what caught my attention.

[suzaliscious]

I'd like to formally assert that I've found the answer to my own question in the OP.

Before announcing the founding of Gobbotopia, Redcloak DOES look in the mirror. "It'll all be worth it. You'll see."

:-/ When Redcloak dies in the comic, I know I'll cry.