Belkar's death - D&D rules-based speculation

[torugo]

Ok, lots of post already made about Belkar's profecy but I will try to keep this one inside D&D rules, even knowing that Giant tends to bend this rules as he see fits.

So here comes the basic idea. We have a god dragon which gives the oracle to power to see the future. I am basing this entire argument in the idea that the god has to respect D&D 3.5 rules, therefore it uses the foreseed epic divination seed for granting its sight into the future:

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Foresee_(Epic_Spell_Seed)
It has 90% chance to be truthful or to receive an answer to any question. This means the oracle can be wrong about some questions.


Now it is my speculation the spells predict the future based on facts on the present and thats why there is 90% chance of fail, because sometimes the present dont lead to a clear future.

I think in Belkar's case the future was changed by his epiphany. He was sure to die if he continued the path he was following, but the epiphany clearly changed the way Belkar is acting towards his companions and others. Belkar may have a chance to live through a failure on the oracle's prediction...its at least 10% chance.

[Incom]

Dear Giant: if you read this, could we please have an "Official Death-of-Belkar" thread? It'd clean up the forum some. Thanks.

On to the topic at hand. Statistically, the Oracle has made, what, seven or eight or so official predictions on-camera? And how many of them have failed? At 10% failure rate, there should still be a decent chance that one of them should have failed--provided that the spell follows the rules. We also don't know that Tiamat is incapable of checking multiple times, or other such ways of circumventing that limitation.

I know, gambler's fallacy and :vaarsuvius: "copper-piece harlot" and whatnot, but still.

Furthermore:
a specific spell using the foresee seed can only be cast once every five weeks, suggesting that Tiamat or the Oracle has some way of getting around this limitation -- suggesting in turn that they would have some way of getting around the 90% rule.

Furthermore again, the Oracle was responsible for triggering the Mark of Justice, which he could probably easily tell would cause that revelation. So if something changed Belkar's fate, it wasn't that.

[torugo]

Divination can never be fail proof. If Tiamat had the power to see the future with 100% probability of sucess and full understanding of what was going on, he would have foreseen the death of millions of black dragons exactly when V had her revelation and acted uppon it, for instance, preventing that particular black dragon to attack V. Even Tiamat dont see all.

Divinations are not fail proof and Belkars epiphany could not be predicted just because the mark of justice was triggered.

[FujinAkari]

Ok, lots of post already made about Belkar's profecy but I will try to keep this one inside D&D rules, even knowing that Giant tends to bend this rules as he see fits.

So here comes the basic idea. We have a god dragon which gives the oracle to power to see the future. I am basing this entire argument in the idea that the god has to respect D&D 3.5 rules, therefore it uses the foreseed epic divination seed for granting its sight into the future:

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Foresee_(Epic_Spell_Seed)

Uhh... seeing as the Oracle is explicitly NOT Epic Level, trying to use Epic Spell Seed on him is an exercise in futility.

[Forikroder]

Ok, lots of post already made about Belkar's profecy but I will try to keep this one inside D&D rules, even knowing that Giant tends to bend this rules as he see fits.

So here comes the basic idea. We have a god dragon which gives the oracle to power to see the future. I am basing this entire argument in the idea that the god has to respect D&D 3.5 rules, therefore it uses the foreseed epic divination seed for granting its sight into the future:

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Foresee_(Epic_Spell_Seed)
It has 90% chance to be truthful or to receive an answer to any question. This means the oracle can be wrong about some questions.


Now it is my speculation the spells predict the future based on facts on the present and thats why there is 90% chance of fail, because sometimes the present dont lead to a clear future.

I think in Belkar's case the future was changed by his epiphany. He was sure to die if he continued the path he was following, but the epiphany clearly changed the way Belkar is acting towards his companions and others. Belkar may have a chance to live through a failure on the oracle's prediction...its at least 10% chance.

except he gets it straight from Tiamat who gave the oracle his own special class to see the future


Divination can never be fail proof. If Tiamat had the power to see the future with 100% probability of sucess and full understanding of what was going on, he would have foreseen the death of millions of black dragons exactly when V had her revelation and acted uppon it, for instance, preventing that particular black dragon to attack V. Even Tiamat dont see all.

Divinations are not fail proof and Belkars epiphany could not be predicted just because the mark of justice was triggered.

that means Tiamat is not omnipotent and omniscient which is obvious, the gods arent allowed to smite people they dont like whenever they want to they have rules set up from the other gods to prevent chaos and the unmaking of the universe

just becuase Tiamat can look into the future with 100% accuracy doesnt mean Tiamat knows everything thats going to happen and can move to prevent it

belkar
will
die

every argument thats trying to show how Belkar will survive is all backed up by assuming for some reason Rich wants him to survive, his death was planned a long time ago hes not changing his plan

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0352.html

also the gods dont care about the Rules

On to the topic at hand. Statistically, the Oracle has made, what, seven or eight or so official predictions on-camera? And how many of them have failed? At 10% failure rate, there should still be a decent chance that one of them should have failed--provided that the spell follows the rules. We also don't know that Tiamat is incapable of checking multiple times, or other such ways of circumventing that limitation.

and thats probably not counting knowing to have the proper wand handy and being able to give the 2 lizardfolk a detailed list with the exact time they need to apear to ressurect him and tell them exactly how hes going to die so they have the right spell prepared

[ti'esar]

belkar
will
die

every argument thats trying to show how Belkar will survive is all backed up by assuming for some reason Rich wants him to survive, his death was planned a long time ago hes not changing his plan

This. This this this this. I will never, ever, ever understand why so many people seem to think Rich wants to find a "loophole" to save Belkar with. I just won't.

Also, this as well:


Dear Giant: if you read this, could we please have an "Official Death-of-Belkar" thread? It'd clean up the forum some. Thanks.

[Kish]

I'm not even going to try to debate the latest "the Oracle is wrong!" argument.

Just...

...please...

...don't call female characters (Tiamat, in this case) "he."

[Jay R]

Boredboredboredboredboredboredbored...

All evidence indicates that Belkar will die. The only way for Belkar not to die is Rich not agreeing with the person who came up with the prediction, who is Rich.

Even so, let's assume that there is some way that Rich has come up with for Belkar to live - some brilliant, delightful twist in the wording or the setup.

If that is true ...

I don't want to hear about it until it's time.

Really. Anybody trying to predict how Belkar will cheat death, please stop posting those ideas.

Either the Oracle is correct as always, and Belkar will die on schedule, in which case you are wrong from the beginning...

... Or you are trying to reduce the enjoyment of the comic for others.

I'm serious. If there is any way that Belkar will wiggle his way around the prophecy, Rich will come up with the best way for us to see it. You won't.

I hereby pledge to avoid reading any thread that threatens to reduce my future enjoyment - including this one.

[Forikroder]

Boredboredboredboredboredboredbored...

All evidence indicates that Belkar will die. The only way for Belkar not to die is Rich not agreeing with the person who came up with the prediction, who is Rich.

Even so, let's assume that there is some way that Rich has come up with for Belkar to live - some brilliant, delightful twist in the wording or the setup.

If that is true ...

I don't want to hear about it until it's time.

Really. Anybody trying to predict how Belkar will cheat death, please stop posting those ideas.

Either the Oracle is correct as always, and Belkar will die on schedule, in which case you are wrong from the beginning...

... Or you are trying to reduce the enjoyment of the comic for others.

I'm serious. If there is any way that Belkar will wiggle his way around the prophecy, Rich will come up with the best way for us to see it. You won't.

I hereby pledge to avoid reading any thread that threatens to reduce my future enjoyment - including this one.

noones going to guess it right and even if someone does it would be buried by so many other theories that noone would realise its right

[factotum]

Basing the success or otherwise of the Oracle's predictions on D&D rules doesn't seem worthwhile, to be honest--we know Rich ignores the rules when necessary for plot. In addition, if he did not want Belkar to die, you know what would have happened? He wouldn't have included a solid prophecy that he would do so!

If, on the other hand, you're implying that Rich might want to save Belkar after all because he's a popular character--well, I give him a lot more credit as a writer than that. Changing your story partway through to follow what you believe the audience want will rarely produce a good story.

[Winter]

In regard to "what the audience wants": The part of the audience that is constituted by me at least wants Belkar to die (before the end of the story).

In addition I consider Belkar (as character in this telling) has jumped the shark since his kitty litter scene, so the sooner the prophecy (that was made in-comic several times in very clear words!) comes to pass the better.

[Acanous]

This thread is about the Mechanical, rules-based possibility of Belkar's death. Please keep it that way.

Personally, I'd put money on a failed will save. Belkar's fallen victim to will-based spells in the past, and given that he's a Ranger/Barbarian, neither of which has a good will save (The latter's boost to will only applying while raging) and Belkar doesn't seem to have a good wisdom score (supported by his inability to track), any will-based Save or Die seems like the perfect foil.

[BaronOfHell]

Divination can never be fail proof. If Tiamat had the power to see the future with 100% probability of sucess and full understanding of what was going on, he would have foreseen the death of millions of black dragons exactly when V had her revelation and acted uppon it, for instance, preventing that particular black dragon to attack V. Even Tiamat dont see all.

Well there's also the point that Tiamat is not the only player in the game. The gods, I believe, have clauses that prevents them from interacting in very obvious ways. In a way, I imagine it's like you make your own little sims town with your friends. You've made some characters, they've made some characters and then you just let the game run without interacting too much and see what happens. Now the game runs on "simple" mechanics, so you can from all known conditions calculate what happens in the future, given some of the other players don't interfere somehow. But it does not mean you calculate for all posibilities and even when you realise maybe 50% of your sims are going to get destroyed in the near future, you're not going to act upon it before consulting the other players, so you don't get into trouble with your friends.

So basicly, even if Tiamat knew, she might still had been prevented from doing anything against it, or maybe she knows the fiends will succeed, so she allowed it to happen on purpose to get a deal with the fiends.


On to the topic at hand. Statistically, the Oracle has made, what, seven or eight or so official predictions on-camera? And how many of them have failed? At 10% failure rate, there should still be a decent chance that one of them should have failed--provided that the spell follows the rules.

90% chance of success, means that that eight attempts succeeding have 0.9^8 chance of success and at least 1 failing have 1-0.9^8 % chance = 43% chance of at least 1 failing. In other words, from the low amount of chances it's still more than 50% chance that all would have succeeded, so it's too few attempts to start saying something about.


We also don't know that Tiamat is incapable of checking multiple times
The OP states the reason for 10% fail was that some futures are simply unpredictable. It means that if you have failed once, you'll always fail. Which also means it depends a lot on the question, as such the Oracle always had 100% guarantee to be correct so far.



I think in Belkar's case the future was changed by his epiphany. He was sure to die if he continued the path he was following, but the epiphany clearly changed the way Belkar is acting towards his companions and others. Belkar may have a chance to live through a failure on the oracle's prediction...its at least 10% chance.

I think it has to be some kind of divine intervention, if anything is going to go beyond Tiamat's ability to foresee the future. The mark of justice was activated when Roy got the prophecy and that Celia would go to Gresky and lose Roy's body, Pete would betray them, they'd get corneded with Pete's friend who had remove curse, the mechanics of the mark, all this kinda seems "obvious" if you already had the knowledge the Oracle could gain. So I too doubt it has anything to do with the mark of justice and the changed behaviour.

Beside, I'm pretty confident Rich already have told in some commentary somewhere that Belkar is going to bite the bucket.

[Yora]

My standpoint on the whole Belkar dies issue:

- It's an oracle that makes prophecies. Prophecies made by oracles always come true, but the outcome is always something completely different than anyone had expected. Apart from original greel myth and tragedies, name one modern story in which a prophecy actually tells the audience what will happen.
- Rich loves to play with the standard stereotypes of modern stories, and has the great ability to mock them and come up with completely unexpected things, which are funny, because he's always show us how foolish we were in expeting the obvious thing to happen.
- It's a D&D world. People die and come back all the time.

So I don't have any idea what will happen. All I know is, that it will be something nobody of us would have anticipated.

Additionally:
- Rich loves Belkar. If the character would have lost his appeal to him, he would not have made all these brilliant storylines about him in the long time since the prophecy. Some people don't like him, but you can clearly see that Rich loves him a lot, so he does not want to get rid of him.
- And even if he wanted Belkar to be removed from the comic, he would not have announced it and then waited for a couple of more years to actually do it.

So I can't see Belkar leaving the cast of the comic, unless there's a final Ultimate Showdown ending, after which the comic is over. But we won't have OotS without Belkar.

[Kish]

My standpoint on the whole Belkar dies issue:

- It's an oracle that makes prophecies. Prophecies made by oracles always come true, but the outcome is always something completely different than anyone had expected. Apart from original greel myth and tragedies, name one modern story in which a prophecy actually tells the audience what will happen.
The Order of the Stick.

What? This argument of yours has always been one that seems to hinge on the bizarre idea that we haven't seen other prophecies made by the same Oracle come true already. The addition of "apart from original [G]ree[k] myths and tragedies" just takes this paragraph from wrong to downright goofy--there is no reason to be discounting Greek myths and tragedies, so your claim here amounts to, "Apart from those stories in which what I'm saying is not true, and apart from the specific story under discussion, what I'm saying is always true! Always!"

[Roland Itiative]

Ignoring how Tiamat can't possibly be omniscient, and how the divination spells to foresee the future in in RAW are not perfect, and looking at the problem from a different angle, it would be a huge letdown to have an event being heavily foreshadowed, at many different moments, over the course of years, just for it to end with what would be, at most, a punchline ("oh, looks like the Oracle is not always right, haha, let's buy Belkar's second birthday cake since he made that prediction"). So, drama demands Belkar either dies and leaves the story forever*, or somehow fulfils all of the prediction conditions while somehow keeping the ability to influence events in the story. Anything else would just be underwhelming.

*Eventual insight into his afterlife excused.

[Winter]

It's a D&D world. People die and come back all the time.

That actually depends on your DM. There are DMs who think "Death is too cheap" and thus make resurrections harder and to be exceptional, not just Cheap Candy your cleric-friend dishes out when you need one.

And OootS did play the Afterlife both as Revolving Door but also as Serious Mojo That Is Not To Be Taken Lightly, so it's very possible (and I think likely) Belkar's Death will swing towards the second.

[FujinAkari]

It's a D&D world. People die and come back all the time.

In addition to the excellent points above, allow me to add that Roy has already stated that Belkar will NOTbe being brought back, when he dies.

[Steward]

Not unless someone finds him and turns him into some kind of undead warrior, the most powerful anyone has ever seen. Free-willed, and evil, and mean, with cool black and red armor...

As far as the actual point of this thread, I really think it's a moot point. The Oracle is not technically a spellcaster anyway. He receives his predictions from Tiamat in some way that probably isn't codified in the rules. He's not casting anything, with spell seeds or not.

[Forikroder]

In addition to the excellent points above, allow me to add that Roy has already stated that Belkar will NOTbe being brought back, when he dies.

Roy and Haley were talking about the hypothetical scenario where they cant control him

[FujinAkari]

Roy and Haley were talking about the hypothetical scenario where they cant control him

Ummm... no.

Pretty soon, Belkar's fate will be someone else's problem. Until then, we do what we can to keep him pointed at the bad guys." (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0666.html) Nothing in that says "Only if he goes off the leash" in fact, keeping him on the leash is explicitly PART of the plan.

If they were talking abouta hypothetical scenario, why is Haley's response "That may be easier than before, since he's been employee of the month lately!"

Sure sounds like their talking about actual events.

[Bulldog Psion]

He's going to die and stay dead, 100% chance.

[Forikroder]

Ummm... no.

Pretty soon, Belkar's fate will be someone else's problem. Until then, we do what we can to keep him pointed at the bad guys." (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0666.html) Nothing in that says "Only if he goes off the leash" in fact, keeping him on the leash is explicitly PART of the plan.

If they were talking abouta hypothetical scenario, why is Haley's response "That may be easier than before, since he's been employee of the month lately!"

Sure sounds like their talking about actual events.

no she asks what do we do if we cant control him, and roy responds they can just wait for him to die then haley lets him know about his change

Roy knows that Belkar is eventually going to die however when he does die its not like its going to be as simple as him doing as hes always does and randomly getting ganked then them jsut leaving him to rot unless its something like Roy not ressing him because he assumes it wouldnt work or belkar jsut refusing the rez

for some reason hell either be impossible to res or hell do something to make them not want to rez him

[FujinAkari]

no she asks what do we do if we cant control him, and roy responds they can just wait for him to die then haley lets him know about his change

Roy knows that Belkar is eventually going to die however when he does die its not like its going to be as simple as him doing as hes always does and randomly getting ganked then them jsut leaving him to rot unless its something like Roy not ressing him because he assumes it wouldnt work or belkar jsut refusing the rez

for some reason hell either be impossible to res or hell do something to make them not want to rez him


If they were talking abouta hypothetical scenario, why is Haley's response "That may be easier than before, since he's been employee of the month lately!"

I already disproved this interpretation. But let me clairify.

If your theory is that they are strictly discussing a scenario where they cannot control Belkar, Haley's response that Belkar has been remarkably well-controled as of late makes no sense. The presense of this response proves that they are NOT talking about the hypothetical scenario you posit.

To put it yet another way, which of these coversations make sense?

Your Theory
:haley: What are we going to do if we can't control Belkar?
:roy: If we lose control of Belkar, we'll have to make sure to keep Belkar under control for another few weeks.
:haley: Well, Belkar has been very well behaved lately, so if we lose control of Belkar it should be reletively easy not to lose control of Belkar.

My Theory
:haley: What are we going to do if we can't control Belkar?
:roy: We just have to maintain control for another few weeks, after that his fate is out of our hands.
:haley: He has been very well behaved lately, so we should be able to hold on for a few more weeks.

[Forikroder]

If your theory is that they are strictly discussing a scenario where they cannot control Belkar, Haley's response that Belkar has been remarkably well-controled as of late makes no sense. The presense of this response proves that they are NOT talking about the hypothetical scenario you posit.

they were talking about what happened whle Roy was gone which was mainly Belkar since his actions were the only really important thing that happened around Haley his loss of the mark and his change in attitude


Your Theory
What are we going to do if we can't control Belkar?
If we lose control of Belkar, we'll have to make sure to keep Belkar under control for another few weeks.
Well, Belkar has been very well behaved lately, so if we lose control of Belkar it should be reletively easy not to lose control of Belkar.

and that doesnt make sense as an actual conversation, generally people dont go into such huge detail, it would be like asking someone what they did last night and them going

"well i went to the movie theater located at XXX and met up with Tom whos last name is george is 23 and lives on XXX drive, where we saw a movie whos main character was XXX, who also played XXX in XXX, and then i drove home, in my 2010 ford XXX"

people dont go into such detail in every sentence Roy saying "if we lose control of belkar" is unnecesary since the only person hes talking to is the one who asked and haleys " so if we lose control of Belkar it should be reletively easy not to lose control of belkar" is also irrelevant

if there had been a third person who jsut joined the conversation or they were talking to someone like elan then it might make sense but theres no reason to try to pump so much info into every sentence when its obvious what everyones talking about

[Loreni333]

When do you guys ever learn? Belkar will die, and then be reincarnated as a sexy shoeless god of war.

He'll die as in his life shall be taken from him- he shall enter a new body. The body of a hobbit god. A sexy, shoeless, hobbit god of war.

[veti]

On to the topic at hand. Statistically, the Oracle has made, what, seven or eight or so official predictions on-camera? And how many of them have failed? At 10% failure rate, there should still be a decent chance that one of them should have failed--provided that the spell follows the rules. We also don't know that Tiamat is incapable of checking multiple times, or other such ways of circumventing that limitation.

What's the Oracle's track record? Let us count the prophecies. Official, on-panel prophecies only:

"posthumously" - not fulfilled
"right four words" - check
"gift horse" - yo
"for you, at least" - nope
"yes" - done
"Girard's Gate" - nuh uh
"Try ginko biloba" - has no meaningful truth value, so can't be assessed. I'm discounting this one on the grounds that it can't come true.
"last breath - ever" - sez you.


That's 7 actual prophecies, of which 3 have so far come true, leaving 4 outstanding. Any or all of these could be falsified. It's hard to see how doing so would make for a more satisfying story, but the Giant has surprised us many times before so we shouldn't be too surprised if he does it again. If you see what I mean.

[Forikroder]

"Girard's Gate" - nuh uh

we have it straight from Redcloak and Xykon that they were going to the desert next so we can say correct to this one also you missed

knew Roy would be visiting to prepare a wand
knew Belkar would kill him so set up a town beforehand
knew the exact time they would leave to have the wizard cleric duo pop up right at the right time
knew when Xykon would show up so he could avoid him

[Gift Jeraff]

There's also "Who is the sorcerer that killed my master, Fyron Pucebuckle?" "He is called 'Xykon'." (True)

Off-panel "on-the-record" prophecies:
-:roy: "Where is Xykon?" "In his throne room." (True)
-:durkon: <unknown question> <unknown answer>
-:roy: <unknown question> <detailed answer including a description of the Dungeon of Dorukan> (True)
-<unknown question, presumably "Who killed my son?" or something along those lines> <unknown answer; possibly a detailed description about V (since he's biased towards reptiles)> (True)

Off-the-record:
-Knowing that Eugene would become both a ghost and a dad. (Fulfilled)
-Knowing that he would get to second-based with a kobold chick.
-"...the halfling shouldn't both funding his IRA..."
-"...he should savor his next birthday cake..."
-Looking into to the future to read the printed version of WaXP. (True)
-"...the two of you are running late for a pair of family reunions." (Fulfilled)
-Knowing that Xykon is heading for Soon's Gate first. (True)
-Knowing that a druid's wife will be cheating on him with his bear companion.
-Knowing that he will be killed by said druid on March 26, 1187.
-Knowing exactly when Xykon will arrive. (Fulfilled)

Unknown:
-"You're going to have a heart attack right after I finish telling you you're going to have a heart attack." (Fulfilled)

So if you include off-panel and off-the-record stuff (plus the about-to-be-fulfilled Girard's Gate prophecy, since Redcloak said they're going to Windy Canyon), that's 14 by my count.

[veti]

we have it straight from Redcloak and Xykon that they were going to the desert next so we can say correct to this one also you missed

The Oracle is a stickler for wording, and by the wording of that prophecy, it doesn't appear to have been fulfilled yet. (I'm pretty sure it will be, but "pretty sure" isn't fact.)

None of your other examples are on-panel prophecies. For all we know, Tiamat could've turned up in person and told him to do all those things, so she's the real Oracle.


There's also "Who is the sorcerer that killed my master, Fyron Pucebuckle?" "He is called 'Xykon'." (True)

Check. +1 true.


Off-panel "on-the-record" prophecies:
-:roy: "Where is Xykon?" "In his throne room." (True)

I don't think we can grant that. It's either meaningless (because any room in which Xykon happens to be could be defined as "his throne room" for as long as he chooses to be there), or if it's meaningful, then we don't know whether it's true or not (we have no independent information on what specific room Xykon was in at the moment when Roy asked his question).


-:durkon: <unknown question> <unknown answer>

Another unknown.


-:roy: <unknown question> <detailed answer including a description of the Dungeon of Dorukan> (True)

OK.


-<unknown question, presumably "Who killed my son?" or something along those lines> <unknown answer; possibly a detailed description about V (since he's biased towards reptiles)> (True)

The rest of your examples - OK, if we include off-the-record prophecies, I count 6 fulfilled, 6 yet to be fulfilled, so it doesn't greatly change his percentages.

Please note, I'm not saying the Oracle is a fraud. I'm not even saying he's fallible (although I strongly believe he is). I'm saying not all his prophecies have come true, so any reasoning along the lines of "the Oracle can't be/is never wrong" is basically groundless.

[dps]

The Order of the Stick.

What? This argument of yours has always been one that seems to hinge on the bizarre idea that we haven't seen other prophecies made by the same Oracle come true already. The addition of "apart from original [G]ree[k] myths and tragedies" just takes this paragraph from wrong to downright goofy--there is no reason to be discounting Greek myths and tragedies, so your claim here amounts to, "Apart from those stories in which what I'm saying is not true, and apart from the specific story under discussion, what I'm saying is always true! Always!"

Aside from that, I can also think of some other exceptions. NuWho has had a couple of prophecies come true, for example (I have some major problems with there being prophecies in Doctor Who at all, but that's a different issue).

[Forikroder]

None of your other examples are on-panel prophecies. For all we know, Tiamat could've turned up in person and told him to do all those things, so she's the real Oracle.

no duh who do you think GAVE him the ability in the first place? i mean did you even read the chapter where he goes in his special trance?

[Goosefeather]

Please note, I'm not saying the Oracle is a fraud. I'm not even saying he's fallible (although I strongly believe he is). I'm saying not all his prophecies have come true, so any reasoning along the lines of "the Oracle can't be/is never wrong" is basically groundless.

Yet. Not all his prophecies have come true yet.

Saying 'not all his prophecies have come true' implies some have explicitly failed to come true, which simply isn't the case - dude's maintaining a pretty impressive 100% success rate so far...

Besides, if the Oracle could be mistaken 10% of the time, this would presumably have been noticed in-universe, and taken into account by Roy.


Why did Belkar kill the Oracle? Because his 'weasel' answers were cheap and unsatisfying. Even the Oracle admitted as much. Rich is hardly going to try to pull the same thing with the readers as the Oracle attempted with Belkar - it's explicitly acknowledged in-comic that such workarounds are cheap, unsatisfying resolutions. Narrative impetus requires Belkar's death, and any attempt to get around the prophecy would be enormously anti-climactic at this point. And, as others have said, if Rich so desperately wanted to keep Belkar alive, why write in the prophecy in the first place? It's not like it wasn't under his control.

[ti'esar]

Why did Belkar kill the Oracle? Because his 'weasel' answers were cheap and unsatisfying. Even the Oracle admitted as much. Rich is hardly going to try to pull the same thing with the readers as the Oracle attempted with Belkar - it's explicitly acknowledged in-comic that such workarounds are cheap, unsatisfying resolutions. Narrative impetus requires Belkar's death, and any attempt to get around the prophecy would be enormously anti-climactic at this point. And, as others have said, if Rich so desperately wanted to keep Belkar alive, why write in the prophecy in the first place? It's not like it wasn't under his control.

It's also explicitly stated out-of-comic as well that Rich doesn't like "sneaky" fantasy prophecies. I think that the idea that Belkar's prophecy was always mean to be subverted is pretty well sunk, which leaves only the possibility that he's changed his mind - and that is doing a serious disservice to him as an author.

[Winter]

Btw, this has slipped from D&D-rules-based into "Yet another General-Belkar-will(-not-)die-thread". So, does someone have a new "rule" aspect of this up his or her sleeve or can I safely move back to the other thread again?

[Forikroder]

Btw, this has slipped from D&D-rules-based into "Yet another General-Belkar-will(-not-)die-thread". So, does someone have a new "rule" aspect of this up his or her sleeve or can I safely move back to the other thread again?

it really wasnt ever rules based since there wasnt really anything rules based to discuss since the OP was trying to compare mortal magic to god level magic

[isoriveil]

*Eventual insight into his afterlife excused.

Suddenly, this phrase has brought to me some jolly good idea. When Belkar dies, he will be soulspliced on V, after all, they've formed some twisted kind of a bond already.

[kickassfrog]

Suddenly, this phrase has brought to me some jolly good idea. When Belkar dies, he will be soulspliced on V, after all, they've formed some twisted kind of a bond already.

But Belkar isn't a spellcaster. Soul splicing to v would have no effect.

Also, I don't think v actually achieved ultimate arcane power yet. Because V lost to Xykon. See also Xykon's rant on the nature of power.
Also, the four words weren't obvious. "I... I must succeed" is a little ambiguous, since it was touching the blue orb that was the actual trigger for v gaining the power.

[Math_Mage]

But Belkar isn't a spellcaster. Soul splicing to v would have no effect.

Also, I don't think v actually achieved ultimate arcane power yet. Because V lost to Xykon. See also Xykon's rant on the nature of power.
Also, the four words weren't obvious. "I... I must succeed" is a little ambiguous, since it was touching the blue orb that was the actual trigger for v gaining the power.

Not this discussion again. It's even deader than the "Will Belkar survive?" discussion.

V didn't lose to Xykon because her arcane power was less. She lost to Xykon because her grip on that power was fragile. Not to mention she'd lost Haerta by that point. Xykon's a bad dude, but he doesn't have the oomph to create Epic Teleport or Familicide.

[Bulldog Psion]

But Belkar isn't a spellcaster. Soul splicing to v would have no effect.

Also, I don't think v actually achieved ultimate arcane power yet. Because V lost to Xykon. See also Xykon's rant on the nature of power.
Also, the four words weren't obvious. "I... I must succeed" is a little ambiguous, since it was touching the blue orb that was the actual trigger for v gaining the power.

Though I consider that prophecy and its outcome to be probably the sole piece of painfully bad writing in an otherwise excellent story, there's not one jot of chance that the prophecy hasn't been fulfilled. It's a done deed -- V's been at the peak of his power and you're not going to see him reach that level again, let alone exceed it.

[BaronOfHell]

@kickassfrog
Your points are valid, but I believe Rich went out of his way to state that those were the 4 words intended. Though I can't reference it sadly.:smallsmile:

Further more, you can have ultimate arcane[/b] power and still lose. After all, it's only the [u]arcane power V had. Like Xykon, I believe, tried to teach V, power is power. Only looking at one side of power (arcane) is limiting yourself.

I do too believe V would have won (if we look away from the rules of storytelling, etc., or at least gives the Giant credit enough to think he could still make a good story despite V winning), if V had Hearta at the time, but even then, I think V would still lose to, e.g., the 3 archfiends, despite having more arcane flexibility and strength than they would.

[FujinAkari]

Also, I don't think v actually achieved ultimate arcane power yet. Because V lost to Xykon.

Having the ultimate gun does not prevent one from being shot.

And yes, the Giant has explicitly said that that prophesy has been fulfilled.

[BaronOfHell]

Gun does however not give the quality of being able to take hits.

Does power? Like Xykon said, power comes in many forms. Power among one thing can be a defensive quality and V certainly did think about defenses, e.g. when fighting the black dragon.

I'm just saying I think your analogy is badly choosen and doesn't fit well, but it's just my opinion, please be so kind not to take offense.:smallredface:

[Forikroder]

@kickassfrog
Your points are valid, but I believe Rich went out of his way to state that those were the 4 words intended. Though I can't reference it sadly.:smallsmile:

Further more, you can have ultimate arcane[/b] power and still lose. After all, it's only the [u]arcane power V had. Like Xykon, I believe, tried to teach V, power is power. Only looking at one side of power (arcane) is limiting yourself.

I do too believe V would have won (if we look away from the rules of storytelling, etc., or at least gives the Giant credit enough to think he could still make a good story despite V winning), if V had Hearta at the time, but even then, I think V would still lose to, e.g., the 3 archfiends, despite having more arcane flexibility and strength than they would.
plus since the archfiends kinda owned Vs soul it would be hard to fight them


Gun does however not give the quality of being able to take hits.

Does power? Like Xykon said, power comes in many forms. Power among one thing can be a defensive quality and V certainly did think about defenses, e.g. when fighting the black dragon.

I'm just saying I think your analogy is badly choosen and doesn't fit well, but it's just my opinion, please be so kind not to take offense.

you can have the most badass tank ever, if someone chucks a grenade inside it your still dead

[Winter]

Ok, better analogy: Sitting in a massively armoured and super-fast tank (with swim-ability) that has 1200 mm of steel all around which controls the Laser-Sattelites, the Nukes, has laser cannons and lots of auto guns (Darth Vaarsuvius) does not prevent you from getting killed by a anti-tank tungston rod travelling at many times the speed of sound (in air) made to penetrate 1400 mm of armour.

What sort of analogy you pick does not matter, the gun one was actually quite simple and fitting.

Vaarsuvius "had it all" (a "once in the lifetime of the universe deal") and got squished by someone who might have had less power but understood power better.
That was the point. Having "Ultimate <any> Power" does not enable you to win.

Look at Daenerys Targaryan of Song of Ice and Fire (mild spoiler, as it only affects a book that came out months ago): She basically has nuclear weapons and as such has more power than anyone else in the world - but without the right application (or control of) her dragons she is lost and cannot accomplish anything. She has "Ultimate Destruction Power", but still...

[BaronOfHell]

That was the point. Having "Ultimate <any> Power" does not enable you to win.

Well, it depends...:smallsmile:

If "Ultimate <any> power" = literal immortality and winning is defined by literally "not dying", then it doesn't matter what your opponent has. Unless you want to go into some kind of unstopable force versus unmoveable object discussion, but I would not appreciate that.

Good post, btw.:smallsmile:

[Kish]

Well, it depends...:smallsmile:

If "Ultimate <any> power" = literal immortality and winning is defined by literally "not dying", then it doesn't matter what your opponent has.
Until you get buried alive and, a century or two in*, you're forced to reevaluate your definition of "winning."

*Not literal. I'm pretty sure it would actually be a few minutes in. Fifteen minutes at the outside.

[BaronOfHell]

You're entitled to your opinion on what makes life bearable, but please don't make assumptions on others behalf.:smallwink::smalltongue:

In any case, I made the definition the way I did on purpose to avoid arguments regarding quality of life.:smallsmile: For all we know this guy could live in his/her personal matrix, but comeon it'd be going into too much details.:smallbiggrin:

[Jayabalard]

On to the topic at hand. Statistically, the Oracle has made, what, seven or eight or so official predictions on-camera? And how many of them have failed? At 10% failure rate, there should still be a decent chance that one of them should have failed--provided that the spell follows the rules.about a 57% chance in fact.

[Hydra Druid]

The Oracle is a stickler for wording, and by the wording of that prophecy, it doesn't appear to have been fulfilled yet. (I'm pretty sure it will be, but "pretty sure" isn't fact.)

None of your other examples are on-panel prophecies. For all we know, Tiamat could've turned up in person and told him to do all those things, so she's the real Oracle.



Check. +1 true.



I don't think we can grant that. It's either meaningless (because any room in which Xykon happens to be could be defined as "his throne room" for as long as he chooses to be there), or if it's meaningful, then we don't know whether it's true or not (we have no independent information on what specific room Xykon was in at the moment when Roy asked his question).



Another unknown.



OK.



The rest of your examples - OK, if we include off-the-record prophecies, I count 6 fulfilled, 6 yet to be fulfilled, so it doesn't greatly change his percentages.

Please note, I'm not saying the Oracle is a fraud. I'm not even saying he's fallible (although I strongly believe he is). I'm saying not all his prophecies have come true, so any reasoning along the lines of "the Oracle can't be/is never wrong" is basically groundless.

The problem I have with this is that anyone who is paid to see the future will ALWAYS have predictions that haven't come true.
Q: If every week I make 1 prediction about what is going to happen 5 weeks from now, then how long will it be before all of the predictions that I have made have come true?
A: 5 weeks after I stop making predictions!

In this case all of the predictions that have been made have been shown to be fulfilled, are about to be fulfilled, or can be fulfilled. So far none of them have been shown to be false, or unable to come true. (so long as we say that he was in his thrown room at the time Roy asked the question.)

[Soylent Dave]

Please note, I'm not saying the Oracle is a fraud. I'm not even saying he's fallible (although I strongly believe he is). I'm saying not all his prophecies have come true, so any reasoning along the lines of "the Oracle can't be/is never wrong" is basically groundless.

That's argumentum ex silentio.

All the Oracle's prophecies that can come true, have come true - you can't therefore prove him inaccurate by listing the times he may, in the future, be wrong.

We either have evidence for him being accurate, or no evidence.

The best we can therefore logically say is:


Yet. Not all his prophecies have come true yet.

or that while the Oracle has so far been 100% accurate; we can't be certain this will be maintained (but nor is there any evidence that it will not).

Then again, this is applying real world logic to story logic; story logic dictates that the Oracle will always be 100% correct, but misleading (and that he may also lie for his own ends).

-

(as a side point, Belkar is obviously going to die - the amoral character who fights on the side of good cannot ever survive the story (he might be able to redeem himself in the manner of his death, or his death may merely be just punishment for his crimes - but he has to die; it's the only ending he can get). It's not like Belkar would be satisfied with saving the world...)

[Winter]

You're entitled to your opinion on what makes life bearable, but please don't make assumptions on others behalf.

So, you seriously claim that when you have Ultimate <any> Power (exclkuding interplantetary teleport) but are forced to life out the rest of eternity alone on Pluto, you'd consider that a "win"?*

(* If you wish to teleport, assume some locked-in dimension devoid of anything)

[BaronOfHell]

No. No I am not.

[Winter]

No. No I am not.

Good, as within your smiley-heavy posting and the contribution before that it became a tad unclear to me what you actually tried to claim.

So, we can bury the Power-of-Vaarsuvius-aspect of this discussion?

[BaronOfHell]

Good, as within your smiley-heavy posting and the contribution before that it became a tad unclear to me what you actually tried to claim.
That happens.:smallsmile:

Basicly my point is the following. If winning is defined by X, there may exist X's so some versions of the "Ultimate <any> Power" guarantees winning independent of any possible 'opposition'.
The X (win=not die) and,
"Ultimate <any> Power"=immortality,
was an example of such.

You can then change the X or the "Ultimate <any> Power" as you please, but that'd just be changing my statement to something it's not.:smallsmile:

Having "Ultimate <any> Power" does not enable you to win.

[Winter]

Yes, but I think (and I assume this is what Kish wanted to express this as well) that defining "Win = not to lose in the most final way" is a bit... besides the point.

The definition of "winning" is that you usally gain something you had not before in a struggle - and the gain is actually significant.
Yes, there are situations where you "win" by not "losing everything" (as in you get in a fight with a few very nasty people or are trapped in a burning house (that is not yours); then you "win" by just getting away).

So I state: In theory you are correct that you can define "winning" as "not losing your life" but in regard to this discussion, this contribution is very pointless.
If you have Ultimate <any> Power then coming out with +-0 (or even a lot of minus, but just not your life) is far, far from any definition of "winning" that should constitute a "win" in this context.

And right now I ask myself into what sort of devoid-of-any-relevance meta-discussion I have gotten myself involved in? :smallbiggrin:

[BaronOfHell]

but in regard to this discussion, this contribution is very pointless.

Did you not read the print in big letters when you signed up here?:smallbiggrin:

Redundant cumbersome aggravating discussion is what we do best. In any case, since I'm replying anyway, I'd just like to point out that in "the game of life", "not-dying" is typically thought to be the winning criteria.:smallsmile: (Which many believes translates to have offspring, for us, but it in principle it doesn't have to). But yeah, in a game like oots, that would probably be epicly boring. Though I am certain there can exist many other types of win, which would be independent of your opposition given sufficient amount of the right type of power.

[Peelee]

Hey! Everyone! Look over there! It's the original point of this thread!

The Oracle does not necessarily cast a spell to divine the future. As we have seen, he is very talkative and spouts off predictions offhandedly all the time. The spell that he casts is likely (not necessarily as it is never stated) a memory spell, directed at the specific people who asked for the prophecy, so that they remember it when they leave the valley.

[Kish]

Redundant cumbersome aggravating discussion is what we do best. In any case, since I'm replying anyway, I'd just like to point out that in "the game of life", "not-dying" is typically thought to be the winning criteria.
You're using passive voice to make an assertion that would be overtly preposterous if rephrased in active voice. "Is typically thought"? Show me this consensus of people who think the evil queen in The Magician of Karakosk* "wins," instead of "really really losing and what a horrible thing to happen to someone."

*Pretty sure anyone reading this can figure it out from context, if they don't know.

[Peelee]

You're using passive voice to make an assertion that would be overtly preposterous if rephrased in active voice. "Is typically thought"? Show me this consensus of people who think the evil queen in The Magician of Karakosk* "wins," instead of "really really losing and what a horrible thing to happen to someone."

*Pretty sure anyone reading this can figure it out from context, if they don't know.

Just in case anyone can't, Prometheus would probably work as a substitute (not sure, don't know the Karakosk source) for that very good analogy. In any event, let's relate all this somehow to Belkar's death by the rules! That sounds like a fun option for cool and attractive people!

Sorry. Belkar Death threads annoy the crap out of me, but this is the first one I've seen to have something original and different about it, so I'd like to see if it goes anywhere and not have it shut down by (cool and attractive) mods.

[Peelee]

You're using passive voice to make an assertion that would be overtly preposterous if rephrased in active voice. "Is typically thought"? Show me this consensus of people who think the evil queen in The Magician of Karakosk* "wins," instead of "really really losing and what a horrible thing to happen to someone."

*Pretty sure anyone reading this can figure it out from context, if they don't know.

Just in case anyone can't, Prometheus would probably work as a substitute (not sure, don't know the Karakosk source) for that very good analogy. In any event, let's relate all this somehow to Belkar's death by the rules! That sounds like a fun option for cool and attractive people!

Sorry. Belkar Death threads annoy the crap out of me, but this is the first one I've seen to have something original and different about it, so I'd like to see if it goes anywhere and not have it shut down by (cool and attractive) mods.

[BaronOfHell]

You're using passive voice to make an assertion that would be overtly preposterous if rephrased in active voice. "Is typically thought"? Show me this consensus of people who think the evil queen in The Magician of Karakosk* "wins," instead of "really really losing and what a horrible thing to happen to someone."

*Pretty sure anyone reading this can figure it out from context, if they don't know.

wut? I'm unfamiliar with The Magician of Karakosk and it may be laziness, but I'm not willing to find out what happened to the queen by myself.

In any case. If what I was talking about was not clear. I was merely refering to the mechanics of evolution. The one which survive long enough to mate wins (the heriatage survives), and for an immortal it'd merely be surviving.
I don't think that's "overtly preposterous" or "preposterous" for that matter.:smallsmile:

I mean, of course it's, basicly, something obvious. When we talk about the success of life, we refere to life still being around despite what it has been exposed to. In that sense, the success will always be related to survival. But that was also my point, in "the game of life", i.e. the real world, winning is usually defined by ones ability to survive.:smallsmile: (And then there's the mating stuff I mentioned before as well, but I don't want to repeat).

[Steward]

Hey! Everyone! Look over there! It's the original point of this thread!

The Oracle does not necessarily cast a spell to divine the future. As we have seen, he is very talkative and spouts off predictions offhandedly all the time. The spell that he casts is likely (not necessarily as it is never stated) a memory spell, directed at the specific people who asked for the prophecy, so that they remember it when they leave the valley.

The Oracle isn't a spellcaster at all though, right? He is an Expert (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0571.html), a non-spellcasting NPC class. He can use scrolls though, but we never see him holding one, so he probably doesn't use a spell for the memory effect too. That part is probably a side effect of his natural gift (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0566.html) or a spell cast on his behalf by another reptilian rather than something he manipulates personally.

[Kish]

I mean, of course it's, basicly, something obvious.
No. It's not. You're claiming a consensus for a mystifying opinion--that if you live, no matter the quality of that life, you've "won" at "the real world."

Looking at this in D&D terms, your claim would mean that every adventurer should aspire to be on the receiving end of an Imprisonment spell. And yet, if you get affected by Imprisonment and not rescued, you've lost. Not won.

[BaronOfHell]

No, I am not.

[Winter]

No. It's not. You're claiming a consensus for a mystifying opinion--that if you live, no matter the quality of that life, you've "won" at "the real world."

... also no matter where you came from, what you set out to do, what abilities you had... as soon as you "live" you have "won", in any case, in any circumstance.

While that is probably true for most (!) cases from a philosophical point of view, I still fail to see how that contributes to any specific (non-purely-philosophical) discussion.


No, I am not.

Then I'm really not getting it.

Could you please explain what you actually do claim (and this time without lots of "not serious and smiley laden" ways)?

[BaronOfHell]

Could you please explain what you actually do claim
Sure.

The relevant part of original quote Kish disagreed with:

I'd just like to point out that in "the game of life", "not-dying" is typically thought to be the winning criteria.

The success of life on Earth == "game of life"
Surviving == "not-dying"
Success == "wining criteria"

The success of life on our planet is a reference to the fact life is still existing despite all the hinderance. Therefore, the success of life as a whole will always be related to the survival of each given part of life.

A very basic example. Those humans who did not live for ~20 years to get children, their heritage did not survive, i.e. they lost. While those who did grow old (survived) and got children, meant that life (in particular the life that defined their functions) could continue. They survived, they were a success, that's how the game of life is.

It's not meant to be something deep, and it's not meant to be understood as me saying you've to live in a certain way. Heck I even mentioned this in the first post kish quoted. I'm merely pointing out the criteria for us to even be here today.

[Talya]

The prophecy doesn't even say Belkar will die.

The actual prophecy says "Belkar will draw his last breath - ever - before the end of the year."

A couple points on this:
-This precludes Belkar dying and being resurrected, because he'll then draw more breaths.
-There are lots of ways to fulfill the wording of that prophecy without Belkar dying.
-Belkar actually dying doesn't necessarily remove him from the story, or even the Order. This is D&D. Dead is a relative thing.

Rich may actually kill Belkar off, but if he does, it will either be at the end of the comic, or he'll kill Belkar off in a way in which he is still regularly influencing the story and providing his input. Why? Because without Belkar, it's crap. He's the black, shrivelled heart and tainted, wicked soul of the OotS. He's its primary source of humor, and it is, more than anything else, a comedy.

As for why so many people are so positive that Belkar will be gone from the comic around every turn?

Haters gonna hate. /shrug

[hamishspence]

The prophecy doesn't even say Belkar will die.

The actual prophecy says "Belkar will draw his last breath - ever - before the end of the year."

There's also nonprophetic (at least, in the sense that there's no coloured text) statements that are foreshadowing- a bit like the one about Elan and Roy being late for a pair of family reunions.


In Belkar's case, they were "needn't bother funding his IRA" "not long for this world" and "he'd better savour his next birthday cake".

[Peelee]

The Oracle isn't a spellcaster at all though, right? He is an Expert (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0571.html), a non-spellcasting NPC class. He can use scrolls though, but we never see him holding one, so he probably doesn't use a spell for the memory effect too. That part is probably a side effect of his natural gift (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0566.html) or a spell cast on his behalf by another reptilian rather than something he manipulates personally.

I'm not certain on his class, but he definitely casts a spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0331.html). i don't think that spell is a spell of prophecy, though, as he throws prophecies around left and right without it. I think that spell is to allow the seeker of the prophecy to remember what it was.

There's also nonprophetic (at least, in the sense that there's no coloured text) statements that are foreshadowing- a bit like the one about Elan and Roy being late for a pair of family reunions.


In Belkar's case, they were "needn't bother funding his IRA" "not long for this world" and "he'd better savour his next birthday cake".

There was also "late for a couple of family reunions," which also helps my theory that he can make prophecies any time he wants to, he just needs the spell and the spotlight for anyone to remember what they are. Granted, as there are no rules for this and it's never explained in comic, it's only a theory, but I think it's a pretty strong one.

[ti'esar]

I'm not certain on his class, but he definitely casts a spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0331.html). i don't think that spell is a spell of prophecy, though, as he throws prophecies around left and right without it. I think that spell is to allow the seeker of the prophecy to remember what it was.

Is it him casting the spell, though? I don't really see any indication that it is.

[Steward]

He explicitly says that he is an Expert in the comic I linked to, doesn't he? Your theory about needing to glow for people to remember his prophecies makes sense, but I wonder if he wouldn't need that if the spell over his territory that wipes the memories of people leaving it was gone.

[Peelee]

Is it him casting the spell, though? I don't really see any indication that it is.

A good point. All he says is that there is a spell.


He explicitly says that he is an Expert in the comic I linked to, doesn't he? Your theory about needing to glow for people to remember his prophecies makes sense, but I wonder if he wouldn't need that if the spell over his territory that wipes the memories of people leaving it was gone.

I don't know how I missed that link, especially since I saw the second. Which furthers the thought that he isn't casting the spell himself. And in all likelihood, assuming my theory is correct, the glowing spotlight spell would simply a counterpart to the memory charm spell over the valley.

[Hydra Druid]

Sure.

The relevant part of original quote Kish disagreed with:


The success of life on Earth == "game of life"
Surviving == "not-dying"
Success == "wining criteria"

The success of life on our planet is a reference to the fact life is still existing despite all the hinderance. Therefore, the success of life as a whole will always be related to the survival of each given part of life.

A very basic example. Those humans who did not live for ~20 years to get children, their heritage did not survive, i.e. they lost. While those who did grow old (survived) and got children, meant that life (in particular the life that defined their functions) could continue. They survived, they were a success, that's how the game of life is.

It's not meant to be something deep, and it's not meant to be understood as me saying you've to live in a certain way. Heck I even mentioned this in the first post kish quoted. I'm merely pointing out the criteria for us to even be here today.
I was reading that there are 4 things that every human needs, these are love, hope, a sense of purpose, and forgiveness.
There have been many stories I have read where the hero sacrifices him or herself for 'the greater good' or for the life of somebody that they care for.
In many of these stories the hero ends up with a wound that will kill them, but they have just enough life life in them for a few last words. In these cases the hero will often say that they feel like they have won because they were able to save the day or the person that they care about.
This hero does not survive, they die, and they don't come back, however they feel like they have won because they have fulfilled their sense of purpose, by showing great love to someone by sacrificing themselves, and even though they will not live anymore they have great hope for the future because the people they saved will get to live on.
In this sense, 'winning the game of life' might not just mean living a long time and passing your DNA on the the next generation.

[Lucid Inebriate]

I was reading that there are 4 things that every human needs, these are love, hope, a sense of purpose, and forgiveness.


More like food, water, air and their vital organs.

[Acanous]

I was thinking more like
1: To crush your enemies
2: To see them Driven before you
3: To hear the lamentations of their women
4: BY CROM!!!

[skaddix]

More like food, water, air and their vital organs.

Indeed. On a purely precise level.

[Bulldog Psion]

The prophecy doesn't even say Belkar will die.

The actual prophecy says "Belkar will draw his last breath - ever - before the end of the year."

A couple points on this:
-This precludes Belkar dying and being resurrected, because he'll then draw more breaths.
-There are lots of ways to fulfill the wording of that prophecy without Belkar dying.
-Belkar actually dying doesn't necessarily remove him from the story, or even the Order. This is D&D. Dead is a relative thing.

Rich may actually kill Belkar off, but if he does, it will either be at the end of the comic, or he'll kill Belkar off in a way in which he is still regularly influencing the story and providing his input. Why? Because without Belkar, it's crap. He's the black, shrivelled heart and tainted, wicked soul of the OotS. He's its primary source of humor, and it is, more than anything else, a comedy.

As for why so many people are so positive that Belkar will be gone from the comic around every turn?

Haters gonna hate. /shrug

Yes, I noticed this also and that the actual prophetic speech states nothing more and nothing less than that he will cease breathing before the end of the year.

The last time I brought this up, I was jumped on as clutching at straws to keep Belkar in the story. Which is hilarious, because I would actually prefer him to die permanently and soon and never be seen again in the comic. :smallamused: It's just that logic is telling me that the only certain thing is that he won't breathe again after the end of the year.

He could die permanently and not come back in any form, and that's certainly possible. But the only infallible part of the prophecy is that he will stop breathing permanently, which doesn't rule out the undead theories, etc.

Now watch -- I'm going to be characterized as wanting Belkar to live when I actually want him dead. :smallamused:

[Kish]

Now watch -- I'm going to be characterized as wanting Belkar to live when I actually want him dead. :smallamused:
No, you're going to be characterized as claiming without support that the Oracle's prophecies don't count unless they're in the green glowies. (Which, I suspect, is what actually happened the time you're complainin' about.)

Watch:

*clears throat*

You are claiming without support that the Oracle's prophecies don't count unless they're in the green glowies.

[Bulldog Psion]

No, you're going to be characterized as claiming without support that the Oracle's prophecies don't count unless they're in the green glowies. (Which, I suspect, is what actually happened the time you're complainin' about.)

Watch:

*clears throat*

You are claiming without support that the Oracle's prophecies don't count unless they're in the green glowies.

And you're claiming without support that they DO count without being in the green glowies. Even though he patently comes out with ridiculous stuff all the time like the things trying to deflect Belkar from killing him.

So I guess we're even. :smallamused:

[Peelee]

And you're claiming without support that they DO count without being in the green glowies. Even though he patently comes out with ridiculous stuff all the time like the things trying to deflect Belkar from killing him.

So I guess we're even. :smallamused:


without support


Panels six and seven (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0571.html) disagree with you there, along with I believe several other instances (that was just the first I thought of off the top of my head). Also, keep in mind the only reason he has the memory charm on the canyon is because he sometimes rambles on, letting the odd prophecy slip. The green glowies can be reasonably inferred to simply bypass the effects of the memory charm cast on the area.

EDIT: Also, the things he told Belkar before he was killed were why Belkar killed him. He wasn't trying to deflect Belkar from killing him, he was completing the prophecy. It's like the test of heart. It was designed after someone had a heart attack after hearing the oracle say he was going to have a heart attack. The heart attack was caused by the oracle telling him he would have a heart attack after he finished telling him he would have a heart attack. The oracle said Belkar would kill any of a list of people including the oracle (knowing it would be the oracle himself) and knew that he would be killed because Belkar was dissatisfied with the "explanations" given for killing the others listed. If the oracle had refunded the money, he would not have died. You're trying to argue that because the oracle does things that fulfill the prophecy that he cannot prophesize outside of the green glowies, which are unrelated.

[Bulldog Psion]

You're trying to argue that because the oracle does things that fulfill the prophecy that he cannot prophesize outside of the green glowies, which are unrelated.

Nope, that's not what I'm arguing at all. I'm not arguing he cannot prophesy outside of the green glowies, I'm only arguing that the green glowies are the only spot that he MUST prophesy accurately.

My argument isn't that the stuff about Belkar not being long for this world is false or inaccurate.

My argument is solely that we have no proof that statements without green glowies must be 100% accurate, and that therefore, they cannot, IMO, be used as absolute proof that the "Belkar as undead" scenario is impossible.

Personally, I think Belkar will die permanently and not be raised as undead. But I don't view his statements outside the oracular trance as inevitably accurate, and therefore object to their being cited as Infallible Predictions (tm). They may be accurate; they may not. We simply don't know if these statements were prophesies, or were just him blowing hot air and trash talking, after his fashion.

[factotum]

My argument is solely that we have no proof that statements without green glowies must be 100% accurate, and that therefore, they cannot, IMO, be used as absolute proof that the "Belkar as undead" scenario is impossible.


I personally think that the only reason we *got* the green glowy "Belkar will die" prophecy was because people kept insisting there was some sort of loophole that meant he wouldn't, and yet we're still arguing about it! Oh, and if we take your argument to its ultimate conclusion, we don't have in-comic proof that the green glowy prophecies are 100% accurate either--Durkon's and Elan's prophecies have not yet come true, so we can't be sure that they *will*.

We do have some proof that non-green-glowy prophecies come true, though--remember the Oracle saying Roy and Elan were running late for a pair of family reunions? So we have about the same level of proof for both type of prophecy about their accuracy, IMHO.

[Kish]

Nope, that's not what I'm arguing at all. I'm not arguing he cannot prophesy outside of the green glowies, I'm only arguing that the green glowies are the only spot that he MUST prophesy accurately.

More asserting than arguing, I'm afraid.

[...]
My argument is solely that we have no proof that statements without green glowies must be 100% accurate,

We also have no proof that statements with green glowies must be 100% accurate.

And, as I said last time we went around about this, it should be immediately obvious that statements with green glowies have no more need to be 100% accurate than statements without them. Even if we saw a scene which we haven't yet where Durkon says, "Thor assured me personally off camera that when the Oracle uses that power that makes him float in the air and be surrounded by green light, he can't say anything untrue," if Rich wanted to have the in-the-green-glowies prophecy be a lie, it would be as simple as, "Oh, I wasn't floating. I was standing on the ground. It just looked to you like I was floating and in the green glowies because I had another wand--a minor illusion wand--in my other pocket."

You're making an arbitrary, and fundamentally meaningless, distinction. The Oracle has misrepresented past events but never lied about a prediction; that is a distinction that might matter. The Oracle has lied to troll but will, judging by his description of his next death, not lie (and, knowing him, probably amplify the truth with condescending snark) when the lie would save his life and the truth will get him torn apart by an angry druid; I'd say that's a distinction that does matter.

[Peelee]

Nope, that's not what I'm arguing at all. I'm not arguing he cannot prophesy outside of the green glowies, I'm only arguing that the green glowies are the only spot that he MUST prophesy accurately.

My argument isn't that the stuff about Belkar not being long for this world is false or inaccurate.

My argument is solely that we have no proof that statements without green glowies must be 100% accurate, and that therefore, they cannot, IMO, be used as absolute proof that the "Belkar as undead" scenario is impossible.

Personally, I think Belkar will die permanently and not be raised as undead. But I don't view his statements outside the oracular trance as inevitably accurate, and therefore object to their being cited as Infallible Predictions (tm). They may be accurate; they may not. We simply don't know if these statements were prophesies, or were just him blowing hot air and trash talking, after his fashion.

Well, as Factotum has mentioned, we have proof that non-green-glowies do come true. If you want to argue that they are not bound to be 100% accurate, the same can be argued of the green-glowie prophecies, as until everything mentioned has come to pass, there is a chance that one of them will not come true (and with Blackwing's question being unknown, unless he says "hey, I tried ginko balboa, and the oracle was right!" that will never happen. So by that reasoning, we also have no proof that statements with green glowies must be 100% accurate.

I feel like I'm arguing a point nobody else is, but here's the thing. The entire point of the memory charm is to prevent people from remembering when he rambles on, as he is wont to do. Now, normal long-windedness would be pretty silly to want people to not remember, and he spouts off that Belkar will die as a perfect example of a prophecy he just throws out that nobody asked or paid for and got anyway. This is detrimental to his business. To me, this clearly says he can prophesize outside of the green glowies.

Now, he does blow hot air, trash talk, hyberolize, etc. However, again, if we just view it reasonably, there isn't a problem here. We can all pretty easily figure out that "hurt me if you must, but let the ducky go (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0329.html)" is not a prophecy, while "the halfling shouldn't bother funding his IRA (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0329.html)" clearly is.

When the green glowies spell is cast, the Oracle does not say "now I can see the future," he says "these answers will be all that you remember of your visit here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0331.html)" Note that he DOES say "grant me the power to see the future" while in said green glowies, he also says he can look into the future to decode what Haley is saying (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0330.html). Now, yes, he could potentially have done that previously when he was last in the green glowies and simply committed his responses to memory, but that is a bit farfetched, and Occam's Razor can be applied here to say he probably just looked into the future and read what she was saying on the spot.

Now, when he makes the "official prediction" of Belkar's demise, he continues to assert the prediction outside of green glowies beforehand. In fact, his actual words preceding the spell are "The same thing I said last time you were here, only you forgot. Here, you want it on the record? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0572.html)"

While you could interpret this to mean "The same thing I said last time you were here, only you forgot. Here, you want it to be officially accurate?" it makes far more sense to mean "the same thing I said last time you were here, only you forgot. Here, you want to remember it this time?" Especially since he doesn't finish with, "there, that was on the house, now it will guaranteed happen," but instead with, "there, that was on the house, now you can remember it."

I apologize for this being long-winded, but everything screams to me that green glowies have no bearing on accuracy of prophecy, and only effect what the prophecy seeker can remember, and I'm trying to make as good a case for it as I can.

[Bulldog Psion]

You're making an arbitrary, and fundamentally meaningless, distinction. The Oracle has misrepresented past events but never lied about a prediction; that is a distinction that might matter. The Oracle has lied to troll but will, judging by his description of his next death, not lie (and, knowing him, probably amplify the truth with condescending snark) when the lie would save his life and the truth will get him torn apart by an angry druid; I'd say that's a distinction that does matter.

Well, from my perspective, we're just talking past each other with no comprehension (your characterization of it as a "meaningless distinction" makes absolutely no sense to me at all, I'm afraid), and since I'm not really interested in pursuing it and repeating myself endlessly, I'll just say that I've stated my position, and you of course are free to make whatever want of it. Thanks for the interesting discussion.

[SowZ]

Uhh... seeing as the Oracle is explicitly NOT Epic Level, trying to use Epic Spell Seed on him is an exercise in futility.

Well, he IS a kobold...

[weeping eagle]

The comic is written for people reading the books, not for people reading the forums. To someone reading the books, repeatedly making a prophecy, then eventually subverting it for no obvious reason, would be... strange, at best. Terribly storytelling, at worst.

Not gonna happen.

[Bulldog Psion]

All right, you win. Everything the Oracle says is 100% true all of the time and absolutely destined to happen, and his Oracular Trance means nothing and is just for effect. Even his flatulence rings with the inexorable chords of Fate, and Tiamat has nothing to do with his powers so he doesn't need to invoke her in order to predict stuff. There. Sound good?

[Kish]

All right, you win. Everything the Oracle says is 100% true all of the time and absolutely destined to happen, and his Oracular Trance means nothing and is just for effect. There. Sound good?
No.

Because the Oracle obviously can lie, though he's never been observed to lie about a future event or to lie for a purpose other than to troll Belkar; and the "Oracular Trance" has a stated effect, of making the things he says while in the green glowies not be affected by the Memory Charm. He clearly does not need to invoke Tiamat whenever he makes a prediction, but he stated that Tiamat is the source of his power. So the truth lies somewhere in the excluded middle between your serious assertions on the subject and the strawman you're now sarcastically championing.

[Gift Jeraff]

As a matter of fact, the meta reason for the Oracular Trance pretty much validates what the Oracle says outside of it: it exists so the Giant could foreshadow things for the reader without having it affect the way the characters would behave. If the things outside of the trance are potentially false, what's the point of the trance/memory charm in the first place? To cover up a minor plot hole (Origins implying that the Oracle was a female wooed by Roy)?

Heck, the Giant specifically cites Belkar's reaction to his impending death as a reason for the Memory Charm in WaXP.

[Peelee]

If the things outside of the trance are potentially false, what's the point of the trance/memory charm in the first place?

I think that's the most clear-cut, logical thing that's been said in this argument so far.

[Bulldog Psion]

I think that's the most clear-cut, logical thing that's been said in this argument so far.

Yeah, well, I agree now. Everything he says is fated to come to pass, regardless of whether it's in the trance or not. So, no undeath for Belkar. He's going to be unmade by the Snarl, probably, though it's possible that death and eternal damnation will ensue, too.

May he find it soon and in as anticlimactic a manner as possible. :smallcool: