Leaving unfulfilled blood oaths: way to evade final judgment for evil folks?

[Idhan]

An idea occurred to me. Dying with an abandoned Blood Oath leaves you trapped in the adjacent demi-plane (Eugene). The good guys -- or at least people who think of themselves as good guys -- regard this as a bad thing, since it stops them from getting into the real Celestia.

What about people whose afterlife fates are likely worse than being on the cloudy demi-plane, though? Could deliberately "trapping" themselves with Blood Oaths that they die without ever attempting to fulfill be a way of evading final judgment?

It probably wouldn't work -- or, if it did work, it'd have lots of unforseen complications -- but it might be a fun minor subplot in... some OotS book or another.

[Kish]

The Blood Oath prevented Eugene from getting past the deva at the entrance to Celestia.

I doubt it works that way if what you would need to "get past" is a demon. Or a devil. Or a daemon. Or, especially, a slaad.

[rgrekejin]

Well, presumably, this would only work for lawful folk anyway. And maybe not even them.

[NerfTW]

I doubt it would work.

The idea that an evil plane would avoid torturing you (or whatever happens in the OOTS evil afterlife) just because of the blood oath is unlikely. Most likely they'd just do it there.

Then again, one would wonder why anyone would be evil if there was a definitive evil place of torture that they have direct evidence of. Most likely the "final judgment" of an evil person would still be a good thing for the evil person. The idea that evil always has to be punished, even by evil gods that encourage evil, is a bit silly.

From the way Xykon describes avoiding it, I'd gather it's more of a "start off at the lowest rung, and work your way back up. But you're going against the most evil and powerful beings around, so someone is always going to be stomping on you."

Otherwise, everyone would just get a blood oath with an unobtainable goal.

[snikrept]

I thought the thing about D&D cosmology was that evil folks went to an afterlife that they wanted - for example, a plane of brutal hierarchy where they can scheme their way up the ranks and lord it over everyone else if they're ruthless enough.

Good example in comic is the hobgoblins, who see fighting in an endless, pointless war for all eternity on Acheron to be a good thing worth striving for.


So being stuck on a cloudy demiplane or the hellish equivalent is probably just as bad for them as it is for Eugene.

[Forikroder]

if your evil youd probably get sent somewhere worse as punishment just like eugene got sent somewhere worse thenw here he was going

plus i dont think theyd count it as a blood oath if you made it jsut to avoid your final destination

[DaveMcW]

The blood oath specifically states, "I shall not rest in this life or any other."

In Celestia, this means you can't get in.

In Baator, this means you can't get out!

[ti'esar]

Based on Xykon's comments about avoiding "the Big Fire Below", I think that there actually might be some kind of 'final judgment' for some evil characters, actually.

[Finagle]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure only Lawful characters can take oaths.

[Kish]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure only Lawful characters can take oaths.
...That's quite a claim.

Even guessing (hoping!) that you mean "Blood Oaths of Vengeance which follow them into the afterlife," the tattoo artist never asked Eugene his alignment.

[NerfTW]

Based on Xykon's comments about avoiding "the Big Fire Below", I think that there actually might be some kind of 'final judgment' for some evil characters, actually.

Actually, I take that comment to be like a fifth grader not wanting to go on to middle school, because he'll be at the bottom of the pile again. In fifth grade, he's the biggest and toughest, and in charge. In sixth grade (assuming American grade levels), he'd be back in the smallest and weakest group. He'd need to fight his way back up the ladder to the top.

Xykon likes being able to do what he wants, and he relies on most people NOT running around spamming fireballs on towns to do so. Going to the afterlife would mean an entire afterlife of people who do just that.

I say this because otherwise, as pointed out in the strip, this world is influenced by the fact that the afterlife is a known place that can be visited. The gods can be directly spoken to and questioned. If the evil afterlife was just a straight up punishment and eternity of torture, evil characters would know this for a fact and avoid it. Belkar wouldn't do whatever he wants if he didn't think that he could continue doing that after he dies.

The only explanation for why there would still be evil in the world would be that there is a way to still come out on top after death, the same way they did it in life. By taking out those above them.


Yeah, I'm pretty sure only Lawful characters can take oaths.

Being chaotic doesn't mean you break the rules all the time, consequences be damned. It just means you don't adhere to a strict code. A chaotic character can still make an oath and keep it if it benefits them.

[Forikroder]

...That's quite a claim.

Even guessing (hoping!) that you mean "Blood Oaths of Vengeance which follow them into the afterlife," the tattoo artist never asked Eugene his alignment.

i think the point is if one is Chaotic then the gods above/below wouldnt hold him to the oath since Chaotic people answer to chaotic gods while the lawful people answer to the lawful gods

[Steward]

I think the Jirix example is pretty solid evidence against the idea that evil beings are desperate to wriggle out of their final fate because they are afraid of it. Some, like Xykon, want to 'stay in the game' but most seem to relish the opportunities provided by Hell or the Abyss. They don't necessarily want it now but they don't want to stay in some demiplane forever either. I can't imagine either Redcloak or Belkar wanting to just hang out in the afterlife forever.

[Caivs]

I thought the thing about D&D cosmology was that evil folks went to an afterlife that they wanted - for example, a plane of brutal hierarchy where they can scheme their way up the ranks and lord it over everyone else if they're ruthless enough.

Good example in comic is the hobgoblins, who see fighting in an endless, pointless war for all eternity on Acheron to be a good thing worth striving for.


So being stuck on a cloudy demiplane or the hellish equivalent is probably just as bad for them as it is for Eugene.

Indeed, that's always how I saw the Afterlife in OotS , and how I'd prefer it to be anyway. I find the whole ''evil people end up tortured in hell'' thing pretty boring personally. I thought the only things that could make you end up in a very awful place is if you kinda had business with the devils or maybe tryed to cheat death and things like this. But if you take Tarquin per instance, I imagine him dying and ending up in a totalitarian dictatorship, a bit like the one he used to run, but now he has to work the way up the ladder slowly, or something like that. While someone like Belkar would end up in a lawless area where crime is rampant.

Of course, that'd leave the question of how it manages people dying IN the afterlife...

[Forikroder]

Indeed, that's always how I saw the Afterlife in OotS , and how I'd prefer it to be anyway. I find the whole ''evil people end up tortured in hell'' thing pretty boring personally. I thought the only things that could make you end up in a very awful place is if you kinda had business with the devils or maybe tryed to cheat death and things like this. But if you take Tarquin per instance, I imagine him dying and ending up in a totalitarian dictatorship, a bit like the one he used to run, but now he has to work the way up the ladder slowly, or something like that. While someone like Belkar would end up in a lawless area where crime is rampant.

Of course, that'd leave the question of how it manages people dying IN the afterlife...

if they die theyd probably just respawn in a different area

[Bulldog Psion]

Then again, one would wonder why anyone would be evil if there was a definitive evil place of torture that they have direct evidence of.


For power now, in exchange for some kind of doom later on? I can see that in some cases.

[factotum]

Based on Xykon's comments about avoiding "the Big Fire Below", I think that there actually might be some kind of 'final judgment' for some evil characters, actually.

Undoubtedly, but I reckon Xykon would actually be pretty safe--the devils and demons need all the troops they can get to fight the Blood War, and someone who was a high-level character in life would be very useful to them in death. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Belkar's "punishment" amounted to fighting and killing things for eternity, for example, and I don't think he'd be particularly saddened by that, do you?

[Winter]

An idea occurred to me.

I doubt an unfulfilled blood oath would keep you from any other afterlife. Surely not from the chaotic ones, probably not from the Neutral Something ones.
The LN might behave similar than the LG one, it is possible it could prevent you from entering LE, but I'd not bet on that.

Also, we have no idea what happens to lingering souls in OotS. Do they linger forever? Is that a fate that is better than whatever you "deserve"? Do lingering souls fade after hundreds and thousands of years? Can they enter a different afterlife after all? There seems to be a lot of "choice" in that as well (see Roy's judgment).

Entering the Blood War would something that both Xykon as well as Belkar would probably enjoy very much.

[factotum]

Entering the Blood War would something that both Xykon as well as Belkar would probably enjoy very much.

I'm not sure Xykon would like being under somebody else's orders...

[Cronos988]

Undoubtedly, but I reckon Xykon would actually be pretty safe--the devils and demons need all the troops they can get to fight the Blood War, and someone who was a high-level character in life would be very useful to them in death. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Belkar's "punishment" amounted to fighting and killing things for eternity, for example, and I don't think he'd be particularly saddened by that, do you?

Though the question is whether one keeps the power he had in life in all afterlifes. I remember reading that when send to one of the lower planes, a soul starts out as a Lemure, pretty much powerless.

It would make sense for the evil gods to strip you of most of the power you had in life in exchange for your power in life. You have to earn it back.

[Finagle]

...That's quite a claim.

Even guessing (hoping!) that you mean "Blood Oaths of Vengeance which follow them into the afterlife," the tattoo artist never asked Eugene his alignment.
Aren't you supposed to spoiler SoD events? Because everyone hasn't seen them yet?
The tattoo artist appeared unconcerned about anything other than showing proper ID. He didn't even put up much of a fight when an obviously inebriated customer wanted the Blood Oath of Vengeance.

[Kish]

What is the basis of your belief that only Lawful characters can take oaths?

[Winter]

I'm not sure Xykon would like being under somebody else's orders...

That very much depends on the someone.

We also have no idea at all if the Evil Afterlives are some sort of punishment or if they are just a place where "Evil People Are Happy", just like Mount Celestia is not that much "heaven" where you dissolve or something but where "Lawful Good People Are Happy" (and we have no idea what comes further up the mountain).

It could very well be that Xykon is in for etearnal torment (if the Chaotic Evil Afterlife is some sort of punishment) or he might be in (together with Belkar) for some Awesome Time (if the Evil Afterlife is a place where all souls like you go to become happy in their specific way).

Until we know that, making estimates is a tad hard. Possible would be both ways.

[ManuelSacha]

If you're Evil and don't fulfill your Blood Oath, it just means you won't be allowed anywhere near the LE afterlife.
The NE hell (which isn't in any way nicer) is probably more suited for you.

[Finagle]

What is the basis of your belief that only Lawful characters can take oaths?
Perhaps I didn't explain myself adequately. I realize this forum can be quite pedantic.

Sure, a Neutral or a Chaotic could take an oath. They might even take it seriously, who knows. But what N/C god would hold that against a worshiper, to the point of denying the rightful afterlife? An oath, yeah that and a sliver piece will get you a hunk of cheese. Perhaps an example:

Chaotic Evil PC: Well, crap, I'm dead.
Demon: Into the fires with you, mortal!
PC: No can do! I have an outstanding Blood Oath of Vengeance. I have to wait here until one of my heirs fulfills my duty before I can proceed.

SCENARIO 1
Demon: Oh, dear. Well, I guess you'll just have to wait here, then.

SCENARIO 2
Demon: Muhahahah, as if our kind even understands such a worthless promise! Into the fires!

[Gift Jeraff]

It's been said by the comic and the author that the OOTS afterlife is shaped by belief. For instance, Haley's soul wouldn't belong to Hel if she died dishonorably because she doesn't value that kind of stuff, whereas Durkon would. Thus, I think a blood oath would only keep you out of the afterlife if you genuinely feel you cannot rest until the oath is fulfilled, regardless of alignment.

Therefore, you can't just get a blood oath in order to keep you out of a certain afterlife, because you didn't take the oath genuinely. However, a powerful enough fiend that wants your soul could likely overcome whatever forces are keeping you a restless spirit.

[FujinAkari]

Though the question is whether one keeps the power he had in life in all afterlifes. I remember reading that when send to one of the lower planes, a soul starts out as a Lemure, pretty much powerless.

The existance of Haertia et all pretty much proves this incorrect.

Also, a lot of people are assuming that taking a blood oath only affects Lawful characters... why? Its a magical geas that -prevents your soul from resting-

The Deva didn't keep Eugene out because he didn't take an oath seriously (if that were all it was, bump him to NG and call it a day!), she kept him out because the magic was preventing him from achieving his afterlife and she saw no reason to consider his oath fulfilled.

[Kalrany]

... ... ...
Of course, that'd leave the question of how it manages people dying IN the afterlife...

Eh, I would think you would have to start over at the bottom of the heap. Kinda like going back to the last save point, which in this case would be death. Or maybe compelled to be subordinant to your"killer". Honestly, there are any number of ideas to that.

That would really tick off X -- not only would he go down to the bottom of the heap, but screwing up would repeatedly do it. *I* would find that annoying, to constantly have to work to advance only to utterly fail and lose everthing each time there is a slight overextension or just bad luck...

[JavaScribe]

The existance of Haertia et all pretty much proves this incorrect.

Also, a lot of people are assuming that taking a blood oath only affects Lawful characters... why? Its a magical geas that -prevents your soul from resting-

The Deva didn't keep Eugene out because he didn't take an oath seriously (if that were all it was, bump him to NG and call it a day!), she kept him out because the magic was preventing him from achieving his afterlife and she saw no reason to consider his oath fulfilled.

There is no definitive proof that it only affects Lawful characters, but I would imagine that that is probably the case. If magic is all there is to the oath, I don't see any reason the non-lawful afterlife guardians can't just dispell it. The astral deva mentions something about "we don't penalize people for ineffectiveness", so I am guessing that the cosmic forces of the universe have at least some role in how it works.

Chaotic Evil guardians would probably just ignore the oath and drag the souls into the abyss. Devils would abuse some loophole. Either way, the evil characters are still doomed.

[Winter]

The existance of Haertia et all pretty much proves this incorrect.

We do not know if those souls are some sort of special condition for extremely powerful characters/souls.

We do know from D&D that in hell some characters get transformed to Lemures or other lesser devils (which destroys the personality of the person the soul came from).
That we have one (or three or a hundred) cases does not proof that is what is always done.

[factotum]

We do not know if those souls are some sort of special condition for extremely powerful characters/souls.

By the standards of this world, Xykon is an extremely powerful character, so it's a moot point...if Haerta etc. are only kept because of their power level, Xykon would be kept for the same reason.

[HZ514]

Eh, I would think you would have to start over at the bottom of the heap. Kinda like going back to the last save point, which in this case would be death. Or maybe compelled to be subordinant to your"killer". Honestly, there are any number of ideas to that.

That would really tick off X -- not only would he go down to the bottom of the heap, but screwing up would repeatedly do it. *I* would find that annoying, to constantly have to work to advance only to utterly fail and lose everthing each time there is a slight overextension or just bad luck...

This isn't exactly what you said, but reading that made me picture the evil afterlife as one giant game of Call of Duty, only much more involved than just gunfighting. And with many more than two teams. And without the clearly defined rules. Alright, so nothing like CoD. But with respawns! And spawn camping. Like, a LOT of spawn camping. This is a plane full of evil jerks after all.

[ti'esar]

By the standards of this world, Xykon is an extremely powerful character, so it's a moot point...if Haerta etc. are only kept because of their power level, Xykon would be kept for the same reason.

Thing is, I sort of doubt being a soul splice is really a preferable option for most of the people who wind up as one - sure, you get to keep what you could do in life, but you can't use it for yourself or in any independent way. Instead, you just act as a support for the guy who was spliced, eternally playing second fiddle. I can't see Xykon really enjoying that.

[FujinAkari]

Chaotic Evil guardians would probably just ignore the oath and drag the souls into the abyss. Devils would abuse some loophole. Either way, the evil characters are still doomed.

Doomed, yes. But not because the oath was ignored, because the oath was followed. The Demons / Devils likely think of a lot more... creative... ways to ensure a soul does not find its final rest than the Deva's "Just wait here!" solution.

[JavaScribe]

Doomed, yes. But not because the oath was ignored, because the oath was followed. The Demons / Devils likely think of a lot more... creative... ways to ensure a soul does not find its final rest than the Deva's "Just wait here!" solution.

That is almost certainly the case for devils. But I don't see any reason for why Demons would be forced to abuse loopholes. If the oath is enforced entirely by magic, the Demons can just dispell it. If enforcement is derived from some cosmic law, Demons, being chaotic by their very nature, would just laugh at such silly restrictions.

[Winter]

By the standards of this world, Xykon is an extremely powerful character, so it's a moot point...if Haerta etc. are only kept because of their power level, Xykon would be kept for the same reason.

No, you do not know if it always works like that.

An engineer, a physicist and a mathatician sit in a train*. Outside are a lot of sheep, eating the grass. All sheep are white, but then they spot a black one.
The engineer says "Black sheep exist."
The physicist says "No, you are not correct. At least one black sheep exists."
Then the mathmatician sadly shakes his head. "At least one sheep exists that is black at least on one side."

The engineer makes the same mistake you just did. You conclude that one occurance would stand as proof for a general conclusion.
(The mathmaticial is technically correct, but in the end just a jerk. So ignore him :smallbiggrin:).

* The physicist likes trains, btw.

[FujinAkari]

No, you do not know if it always works like that.

An engineer, a physicist and a mathatician sit in a train*. Outside are a lot of sheep, eating the grass. All sheep are white, but then they spot a black one.
The engineer says "Black sheep exist."
The physicist says "No, you are not correct. At least one black sheep exists."
Then the mathmatician sadly shakes his head. "At least one sheep exists that is black at least on one side."

The engineer makes the same mistake you just did. You conclude that one occurance would stand as proof for a general conclusion.
(The mathmaticial is technically correct, but in the end just a jerk. So ignore him :smallbiggrin:).

* The physicist likes trains, btw.

While correct, this is rationally invalid.

We are given in-comic proof that fifteen people who go to the abyss keep their physical form. We are not given any indication whatsoever that there ever exists an occurance where people do not keep their physical form. Therefore, it is logically irresponsible to assume the later, with no evidence, is the norm. It is -especially- logically irresponsible to assume that a given epic level character would not follow the -only- example we have to go on.


That is almost certainly the case for devils. But I don't see any reason for why Demons would be forced to abuse loopholes. If the oath is enforced entirely by magic, the Demons can just dispell it. If enforcement is derived from some cosmic law, Demons, being chaotic by their very nature, would just laugh at such silly restrictions.

And then the HighGod smashes said demons into so much demonic paste. Cosmic Law implies a Cosmic Lawmaker, and thus Demons are not free to ignore it.

That said, there is no implication there is such a Cosmic Law. However, we DO know that the Being of Pure Law and Good is not allowing Eugene to go into the afterlife... and presuming she is doing that due to the oath instead of simply saying "Ok! Neutral Good, the oath isn't binding anymore" seems... less than purely good.

Actually, this brings up another point. For what reason are you assuming Demons EVER judge anyone? The Deva is responsible for judging all Good Characters, so it stands to reason that a Devil (Being of Pure Law and Evil) would be the ones judging Evil characters.

[skaddix]

Thing is, I sort of doubt being a soul splice is really a preferable option for most of the people who wind up as one - sure, you get to keep what you could do in life, but you can't use it for yourself or in any independent way. Instead, you just act as a support for the guy who was spliced, eternally playing second fiddle. I can't see Xykon really enjoying that.

Soul Splice raises a point though if the Lower Realms were horrible places where evil characters get tortured for all eternity. Why would are three epics try to break away when V loses concentration. If it sucked they would be in no rush to get back and therefore not trying to break it sure some might not want to play second fiddle but not everyone would try breaking. Although Epics might very well get special treatment.

I don't see any reason for evil demons. devils, etc torturing evil mortals. If anything Evil Epics and Dictators probably get rewarded. Especially since they want to storm Heavens Gates. I assume they tortre the ones that tried to cheat them on the Faustian bargains.


As for why they judge. I assume the Gods all got together and wrote some cosmic rules for the afterlife that everyone agrees to follow. After all even the IFCC still has to answer to the Dark God Tiamat.

[factotum]

Actually, this brings up another point. For what reason are you assuming Demons EVER judge anyone? The Deva is responsible for judging all Good Characters, so it stands to reason that a Devil (Being of Pure Law and Evil) would be the ones judging Evil characters.

The demons wouldn't trust the devils to allocate them their fair share of dead souls, and with good reason--a devil adjudicator would no doubt take every loophole and slight chance to send someone to Hell rather than the Abyss, because that directly improves their side's chances in the Blood War.

We also don't have any proof that the Deva is responsible for judging all Good characters. She definitely judges those that present as Lawful Good, but we haven't actually seen her judge anyone else, and the fact she can change the afterlife destination of a character who believes themselves to be LG doesn't prove otherwise; for all we know, if she sent Roy over to NG, there would be another being there who would have to judge him for appropriate inclusion.

[Kish]

We also don't have any proof that the Deva is responsible for judging all Good characters.

I'd go further than that. We have no indication of same and it's a baffling assertion. She talks about "kicking Roy's file over to the Neutral Good afterlife," meaning that it would land on some other celestial's desk, and be dealt with by him or her.

[Steward]

The demons wouldn't trust the devils to allocate them their fair share of dead souls, and with good reason--a devil adjudicator would no doubt take every loophole and slight chance to send someone to Hell rather than the Abyss, because that directly improves their side's chances in the Blood War.

Are you implying that a devil would manipulate the rules and abuse its position in order to secure for itself a strategic advantage in a war against its hated enemies? :smallwink:


Thing is, I sort of doubt being a soul splice is really a preferable option for most of the people who wind up as one - sure, you get to keep what you could do in life, but you can't use it for yourself or in any independent way. Instead, you just act as a support for the guy who was spliced, eternally playing second fiddle. I can't see Xykon really enjoying that.

Yeah, it's kind of like being a vestige from Tome of Magic. Being a vestige or a soul splice is strictly better than oblivion, since it lets you interact with the world, but you're doing it entirely at the behest of a mortal master.

[FujinAkari]

I'd go further than that. We have no indication of same and it's a baffling assertion. She talks about "kicking Roy's file over to the Neutral Good afterlife," meaning that it would land on some other celestial's desk, and be dealt with by him or her.

Really? Because it sure seems like the Deva is judging Recently Deceased Folks of Good Alignment (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0486.html) which sure seems to include Lawful, Neutral, and Chaotic Good.

Furthermore, there is an established system in place for said judgement to take place, one precided over by ACTUAL beings of Pure Law and Good. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0487.html)

Seems pretty clear-cut to me.

Additionally, the alternative is... frankly... stupid. "Hey mister Paladin! You lived a great life but I'm Chaotic so... have fun in Baator! Wheee!"

Edit: Additionally (again) saying "She talks about "kicking Roy's file over to the Neutral Good afterlife," meaning that it would land on some other celestial's desk, and be dealt with by him or her." seems to be a case of wishful thinking. That statement could just as easily mean that the Deva has the ability to decide afterlives and was putting Roy's file in the TN Afterlife. Presuming it means that she is sending him to a Being of Pure Law and Neutrality (does such a thing exist?) to decide is personal preference, not evidence.

[Steward]

It's important to note that, unlike archons (the main lawful good outsider), Astral Devas are angels (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/angel.htm), who may be of any good alignment. It's not quite analogous to putting a devil in charge of evaluating all evil souls because all devils are lawful evil and are guaranteed to be biased.

That doesn't mean that that one astral deva handles all the souls, only thtat it wouldn't be impossible for astral devas in general to be in charge of this, since they can be of any good alignment and are less likely to be biased than archons, guardinals, or eladrins.

[Kish]

Really? Because it sure seems like the Deva is judging Recently Deceased Folks of Good Alignment (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0486.html) which sure seems to include Lawful, Neutral, and Chaotic Good.
Look at your own (other) link. She flies up to them and says, "I'm the Bureaucratic Deva that's been assigned to your case." Not, "I'm in charge of determining where all the good souls go."


Additionally, the alternative is... frankly... stupid. "Hey mister Paladin! You lived a great life but I'm Chaotic so... have fun in Baator! Wheee!"
There are indeed many absurd things about that proposal as "the alternative." That the only alternatives are "all good souls have where they go determined by a single Lawful Good deva" or "a paladin getting where he goes determined by an...apparently Chaotic Evil deva." That a Chaotic celestial would send a paladin to Baator, despite being, presumably, fully as good as any other deva, because "I'm Chaotic." That unless a single Lawful Good deva presides over all good souls, it must follow that a Chaotic Good deva presides over some officially-Lawful souls, with the obvious indication in the comic--that Lawful Good devas preside over Lawful Good souls, Neutral Good devas over Neutral Good souls, and Chaotic Good devas preside over Chaotic Good souls--not being worth acknowledging at all. That the obvious and already-pointed-out fact that if a Lawful Evil devil presided over where all evil souls go then it would turn out that, oddly, nearly all evil souls are Lawful Evil is not worth even acknowledging. For that matter, having asserted that all good souls are presided over by a Lawful Good deva, why don't you go whole hog and say that she presides over where all souls go? It's no worse supported than your initial claim here.

[FujinAkari]

Look at your own (other) link. She flies up to them and says, "I'm the Bureaucratic Deva that's been assigned to your case." Not, "I'm in charge of determining where all the good souls go."

Yes... but she STILL describes the process as being one overseen by "Beings of Pure Law and Good." Its black and white. The fact that she happens to be the Deva that got Roy's case doesn't undermine or contradict this statement and is, frankly, irrelevant.

Are you perhaps arguing that Roy's Deva doesn't handle every judgement? Well... duh. Of course she doesn't.

[Kish]

Yes... but she STILL describes the process as being one overseen by "Beings of Pure Law and Good." Its black and white.
Now just scrape up a tiny scrap of support for your assertion that "the process" in question is "judgment of all good souls," not "judgment of Lawful Good oathspirits," and you'll be getting somewhere.

[FujinAkari]

Now just scrape up a tiny scrap of support for your assertion that "the process" in question is "judgment of all good souls," not "judgment of Lawful Good oathspirits," and you'll be getting somewhere.

I already did. Right here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0486.html). The plane is where Good aligned characters come to be judged, the judgement is done by beings of Pure Law and Good (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0487.html) and is rigorously done by the book (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0490.html)

I am not the one lacking evidence here. I am making the assumption that the process described in the second and third link is the process referenced in the first.

By contrast, you are assuming that the process described in the second and third link has an arbitrary alignment restriction due to the fact you'd really really like it to have an alignment restriction. This restriction is in no way referenced or evidenced anywhere, but apparently it is my job to prove it isn't present?

Uh... no. My argument is pretty firmly established already... you'll need to prove yours :)

[factotum]

There's no logical link between "this is the place where all Good souls are judged" and "this deva is the one who does all the judging". It's like saying that there is only ever one judge in an entire law court, which is ridiculous.

The other two links just prove that the judging of Eugene and Roy was done under a system of pure Law of Good. Well, whoop-de-do, what an amazing surprise that two Lawful Good characters would be judged by a Lawful Good deva. Bet no-one ever saw that coming!

[Winter]

We are given in-comic proof that fifteen people who go to the abyss keep their physical form.

What? How? Where?

Also: fifteen out of a million is still a bad quota. Anyway, please elaborate.

[Emanick]

What? How? Where?

Also: fifteen out of a million is still a bad quota. Anyway, please elaborate.
I think he's referring to the choir of dead pedophiles.

[ti'esar]

I think he's referring to the choir of dead pedophiles.

If so, then that's a fishy definition of 'physical', given that they're transparent.

[factotum]

If so, then that's a fishy definition of 'physical', given that they're transparent.

Haerta and the other soul splices were transparent as well. The point being made is that those people retained the appearance and presumably the memories of their life, rather than being turned into a 1st level lemure.

[FujinAkari]

What? How? Where?

Also: fifteen out of a million is still a bad quota. Anyway, please elaborate.

As mentioned, the three splices and the twelve members of the choir.

Also though, let me just mention how annoying this type of argument is. "Yeah, fifteen times in a row people seen after going to the abyss have retained their physical form... but millions and billions have died. Rich needs to show it tens of thousands more times before the comic means anything!"

Yeah... no. That is totally unreasonable. People who wish to posit that the comic's depiction of events need to actually provide evidence for their interpretation, not demand that OTHER people prove their opinion* wrong.

* Yes, opinion. Without any sort of evidence, all it can be is an opinion. It isn't even an argument until support can be demonstrated.

[zegram 33]

can i just point out:the in-comic afterlives arnt necessarily related in any way to the "normal" d+d ones.
for example, roy goes to a different place than the followers of the 12 gods.
i dont recall those strips exactly so i dont know if they mention it being the place for only lawful patrons of the nothern gods.
id assume not, because when roy asks the lantern archon about feeling guilty about sex it replies "our lawful patrons seem to expect that" implying that afterlives aren't ALWAYS determined by alignment (at least not on the lawful/chaotic axis)
on the other hand, malack does say that lizardpeople and humans "rest on the outer planes that match their alignment" when talking to durkon about death gods in http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html

so....im not sure what that means, really. it's rather contradictory.

[skaddix]

No Roy goes to the same place as 12 God Followers. They get processed on opposite sides of the mountain.

[Mike Havran]

can i just point out:the in-comic afterlives arnt necessarily related in any way to the "normal" d+d ones.
for example, roy goes to a different place than the followers of the 12 gods.
i dont recall those strips exactly so i dont know if they mention it being the place for only lawful patrons of the nothern gods.
id assume not, because when roy asks the lantern archon about feeling guilty about sex it replies "our lawful patrons seem to expect that" implying that afterlives aren't ALWAYS determined by alignment (at least not on the lawful/chaotic axis)
on the other hand, malack does say that lizardpeople and humans "rest on the outer planes that match their alignment" when talking to durkon about death gods in http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html

so....im not sure what that means, really. it's rather contradictory.


You are probably referring to these (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0492.html) two (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0493.html) strips.

And I don't think there is a contradiction there. I interpret what Roy's Archon says like this: "Our patrons are Lawful and therefore they prefer it this way." Not like "We have patrons of all allignments and only Lawful ones prefer it this way".

Also, I think Lawful Good characters of all religions go to the same place, we see in strip 493 a paladin of Sapphire Guard and an Azurite soldier, going roughly in the same direction as Roy. Only the judgement of their cases is separate.

[Winter]

As mentioned, the three splices and the twelve members of the choir.

The choir is a rather special case as well, kept for "special occasions". We have no idea if people in general keep their form.

But seeing you base your argument on the choir, which is basically a joke, and the three most powerful casters, I feel no problems with shoveling your argument out of the window and maintain my position that we still "do not know".

For for the argument's sake: Even if we you were correct then we still had no real insight how souls are judged, what might happen to them in the various afterlives, if the same happens to everyone or how is determined what happens.
So even if you were correct, then we still had not gained any information in regard to the things we need to decide.

[skaddix]

Well Belkar is about to die so assuming its not Snarl related, perhaps will get an answer.

[FujinAkari]

The choir is a rather special case as well, kept for "special occasions". We have no idea if people in general keep their form.

But seeing you base your argument on the choir, which is basically a joke, and the three most powerful casters, I feel no problems with shoveling your argument out of the window and maintain my position that we still "do not know".

Yep, more of "Until Rich shows tens of thousands of instances then the comic is irrelevant." Pretty sure I already covered this fallacy :P

Until your position is actually supported by anything other than personal wish-fulfillment, it will have no actual merit within the realm of debate.

Debate is pretty simple, two sides make opposing claims. They then present evidence to support their claim and discredit their opposition. Thus far, you have been able to demonstrate potential exceptions to the status quo that could possibly explain why your position isn't represented. What you have NOT been able to do is offer any justification whatsoever why your interpretation might be valid.

So yes, while you would be correct to say "We don't know for a certainty" you would be incorrect to conclude that both interpretations are therefore equally valid. One of them is supported by the comic, the other is not.

[Winter]

Yep, more of "Until Rich shows tens of thousands of instances then the comic is irrelevant." Pretty sure I already covered this fallacy :P

Actually, no. We need get insight into the process of how souls are judged in the various afterlives and, even more important, what the afterlives for evil souls actually are.
Seeing 10.000 instances would not help us at all in this regard.


Until your position is actually supported by anything other than personal wish-fulfillment, it will have no actual merit within the realm of debate.

Yes, it is. You say "Seeing a few instances lets us decide how souls are judged in all the alignments, what happens to them, what happens to them in all the cases, and what the LE, NE and CE afterlives are".
I say "You cannot determine all that based on your line of argument!", an assertion you do not seem to subscribe to. Your line of argument is completely wrong and you have no proof in regard to what we need to know at all, but you keep claiming you do and also keep claiming I would make a positive assertion how things are when I just want to argue that your proof is worth nothing in regard to determine the nature of the afterlives, their handling of souls and thus what happens with Blood-Oathers in the different setup.


Debate is pretty simple, two sides make opposing claims. They then present evidence to support their claim and discredit their opposition.
I assumed you would assume this is this. But it is not.
This is not a two-sided debate were different things are claimed and evidence then is brought forward.
This is a debate where you claimed something and I said your evidence is no good at all and we cannot decide what you want to decide based on your evidence.
So, the weight is on your shoulders to come up with facts that lets us decide what the nature of the various afterlives are or to follow my argument we cannot decide.

But as an excerise for your awesome evidence: What is the nature of the three evil afterlives (as in: What happens to the typical soul that goes there? What happens to exceptional souls that go there?) and also the evaluation process they use to decide who gets in?
Imagine what we know about the LG afterlive and you have a rough baseline what you need to provide based on the comic.
I would be very surprised if you could do the above (but please, try, I'm also interested).


So yes, while you would be correct to say "We don't know for a certainty" you would be incorrect to conclude that both interpretations are therefore equally valid. One of them is supported by the comic, the other is not.
Thank you for agreeing here. Yours interpretation is to 100% invalid (as you draw conclusions based on a too small data base) while mine ("we cannot draw conclusions") is the only logically supportable claim here.

The only thing we know for sure is that the xE afterlives can keep very powerful souls around (we have no idea if they were in some sort of hibernation, were tortured, had a somewhat free will) and that they also seem to keep souls of pedophiles (which was a joke by Rich and even factually wrong: castrating grown-ups does not make their voice go up again). About anything else we have no idea at all.
But for determining what happens to souls in those afterlives we really need more information.

[FujinAkari]

"We don't know" is not a valid argument in a debate. It is simply a waste of time. Debate, by its very nature, involves discussions of ideas that are not quantitative and will never have definitive answers.

So, I think I already said this, if you want to argue that we don't know the answer, you will have a technically correct but also a effectively irrelevant answer. We never know, and noting this fact neither reveals new information, affects conclusions, nor drives discussion. It is literally a waste of time.

So, as I said before... either suppor- well, MAKE an argument... or accept that my argument is the best one which currently exists.

[Kish]

"We don't know" is not a valid argument in a debate. It is simply a waste of time. Debate, by its very nature, involves discussions of ideas that are not quantitative and will never have definitive answers.
Utterly wrong. If you don't know, then the best thing you can possibly say is "I don't know." If you claim knowledge where you have none, then you're wrong.

Debate involves evidence. Making claims when you acknowledge that the evidence does not support the truth of those claims (i.e., you don't know) is...well, it's certainly not debate.

[lio45]

I already did. Right here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0486.html). The plane is where Good aligned characters come to be judged, the judgement is done by beings of Pure Law and Good (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0487.html) and is rigorously done by the book (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0490.html)

1) all Good characters go to that "coexistant demiplane where the denizens of the Upper Planes come to watch the mortals" where Eugene is sitting;

2) there, they're "processed" (judged) and then sent to the appropriate Upper Plane, depending on their alignment.

I would personally think the default assumption, given the facts shown in comics #486-#490, is that all Good-aligned deceased pile up in the same common heavenly "lobby" to wait in line for judgment, but are judged by celestials of their alignment (LG/NG/CG) before they can enter their afterlife.

That's what makes the most sense. The way I see it, from the point Roy's deva appears on, everything she says applies to the LG-specific process ("people being judged by beings of pure Law and Good", etc.) that has just begun with her arrival for Roy's particular case.

So far there's nothing you've brought up that contradicts this assumption... which I personally think is more likely than yours... even if only because for the Evil afterlifes, it would not make sense to have people not judged by beings of their own alignment. The symmetry criterion alone makes your assumption less appealing than the opposite one.

[FujinAkari]

2) there, they're "processed" (judged) and then sent to the appropriate Upper Plane, depending on their alignment.

I would personally think the default assumption, given the facts shown in comics #486-#490, is that all Good-aligned deceased pile up in the same common heavenly "lobby" to wait in line for judgment, but are judged by celestials of their alignment (LG/NG/CG) before they can enter their afterlife.

That's what makes the most sense. The way I see it, from the point Roy's deva appears on, everything she says applies to the LG-specific process ("people being judged by beings of pure Law and Good", etc.) that has just begun with her arrival for Roy's particular case.

There are two reasons I disagree with this:

1) The area where they are processed seems to be DIRECTLY OUTSIDE CELESTIA. As the forces of Law and Chaos don't get along... I really can't see Beings of Pure Good and Chaos being welcome there, and there is no indication of a planeshift prior to the judgement.

2) Any system which requires beings of Pure Chaos to be consistent from one chase to the next is a TERRIBLE system. Can a Being of Pure Law be trusted to assign Chaotic characters to Chaotic afterlives? Uh... yeah? They're beings of pure law. They are literally incapable of acting outside the protocols set up within the system.

Can a Being of Pure Chaos be trusted to assign Chaotic Characters to Chaotic Afterlives? No... not really...

[OrzhvoPatriarch]

Just read the thread, replying to some points and arguments

The blood oath specifically states, "I shall not rest in this life or any other."

In Celestia, this means you can't get in.

In Baator, this means you can't get out!

This is the best post in the thread, and what I feel is the correct answer.


I think the Jirix example is pretty solid evidence against the idea that evil beings are desperate to wriggle out of their final fate because they are afraid of it. Some, like Xykon, want to 'stay in the game' but most seem to relish the opportunities provided by Hell or the Abyss. They don't necessarily want it now but they don't want to stay in some demiplane forever either. I can't imagine either Redcloak or Belkar wanting to just hang out in the afterlife forever.

That proves that if you are the follower of a god and go to their own personal domain, that can be rewarding even if you were evil. Xykon's desire to stay out of hell and the eternally castrated choir leads evidence that for those who don't follow a god the evil afterlife is indeed a horrible place. This also happens to be the norm for most Dnd published settings.


As to the ongoing debate as to if Deva's judge all good souls, we don't have proof of that. The Celestial says "why don't we see if the Celestial Realms are right for you?" and then says "we have a process for this." This could mean "we have a process to see if you can get into the Celestial Realms" or "We have a process for seeing what good afterlife you get into." Both are equally valid, both have the same amount of evidence. I would say the "sending your file over to Neutral Good" implies that there are other, none lawful good outsiders involved, but its weak proof.

[Winter]

"We don't know" is not a valid argument in a debate. It is simply a waste of time. Debate, by its very nature, involves discussions of ideas that are not quantitative and will never have definitive answers.

You are dead wrong.

Claim: "I claim that apples falling from a tree fall upwards."
Conclusion: I now conclude on that a law of nature how gravity works upwards.

My claim is not supported by enough evidence, it is even false. Therefore, my conclusion is false (and a waste of time).

What I outlined above is what you are doing: You claim something, cannot proof it, and make conclusions based on that which are wrong.
I try to argue you cannot make the conclusions that you do based on the evidence you (do not) have and you reject that and maintain the position that you can make conclusions based on bad (or even none) evidence.

This is not a dabate about "this or that", this is a debate about me trying to explain to you what valid, in actual evidence grounded conclusions are.

You are the equivalent of someone living in a world of red apples who now has seen a tree that bears green ones (the few souls we saw) and is trying to base an argument about how apple trees grow, what their bark is, what sort of soil they need etc etc just on you haveing seen a dozen green apples.
Your base (a dozen green apples or the few evil souls we saw) simply does not allow you to draw the conclusions that you draw.

To be perfectly clear what I am talking about: Your line of argument is completely invalid independently of other positions other people might have. (And note I say invalid. Your argument is not only wrong, it's even completely invalid on how you came to it to begin with.)
So even if this was a debate like the one you demand (two sides make claims) then your side would still be wrong (no matter what the other side looks).

[Iranon]

My interpretation is that, barring special circumstances like bartering one's soul, everyone gets the afterlife that "feels right".

There are plenty of hints that I'd find the afterlife Roy went to objectionable. Some very tacky entertainment to let off steam, and on it is to purer pleasures.

Evil souls may prefer an environment where they can claw their way up, even if they start at the bottom of the heap. Real oppression, real thrills, real pain... both ways.

[Winter]

My interpretation is that, barring special circumstances like bartering one's soul, everyone gets the afterlife that "feels right".

Yes, that is mine as well. But we cannot "know" and then we do not know how the afterlives actually do look and what they are (especially the evil ones are interesting to learn about).

[FujinAkari]

You are dead wrong.

Claim: "I claim that apples falling from a tree fall upwards."
Conclusion: I now conclude on that a law of nature how gravity works upwards.

My claim is not supported by enough evidence, it is even false. Therefore, my conclusion is false (and a waste of time).

What I outlined above is what you are doing: You claim something, cannot proof it, and make conclusions based on that which are wrong.

Uh... wow?

No. If the claim was that apples fall upwards, that is readily dismissible. That is provable wrong. The appropriate response to that argument would be to present conflicting evidence, not to say "It is impossible to know whether the apples fall towards the earth or into the sky."


This is not a dabate about "this or that", this is a debate about me trying to explain to you what valid, in actual evidence grounded conclusions are.

I am certainly engaged in a debate, if you are not and are instead trying to engage me directly rather than the topic, then I would suggest PMing me as that doesn't seem relevant to the topic at hand.


You are the equivalent of someone living in a world of red apples who now has seen a tree that bears green ones (the few souls we saw) and is trying to base an argument about how apple trees grow, what their bark is, what sort of soil they need etc etc just on you haveing seen a dozen green apples.

No. If you are going to make an analogy, at least make it consistent. A correct analogy would be "You live in a world of red apples, but have only seen green ones. Therefore you are trying to argue that apples are not red based on the fact that you have never seen red apples." And, yes. I am. When all available evidence points to green apples, I am going to be arguing for green apples. As soon as you find one of your mythical red apples, do be sure to let me know :)

[OrzhvoPatriarch]

Just to be clear, your argument when reduced down to its most basic principle, is “We have only seen A, so always A”?

[FujinAkari]

Just to be clear, your argument when reduced down to its most basic principle, is “We have only seen A, so always A”?

I would say "We have only seen A, so we should assume A."

This particular tangent sparked with people claiming that the vast majority of souls who went to the evil afterlives became manes and lost their identity, and I am arguing that that isn't a valid assumption since every evil soul encountered thus far has retained their identity.

[Winter]

I rest my case.

[factotum]

I rest my case.

Really? I hadn't noticed that you'd made one so far. Fundamentally FujinAkari is right here--we have to assume that what we see in the comic holds true unless it's explicitly disproved, and since every single evil soul we've seen in the comic has *not* been turned into a mindless mane, we have to assume that's how it works in the Stickverse. It might not work that way in the Monster Manual, but then, there are plenty of other instances where OotS diverges from the source material.

If we were to follow your reasoning we'd have to say, for example, that goblins in the Stickverse are not normally Medium-sized creatures, despite the fact every single one that we've seen has been M and not S.

[OrzhvoPatriarch]

I actually thought the ongoing argument was over if Deva's judge the souls of all good creatures, which has not been shown at all, and not what form the damned take in the afterlife, which while not perhaps 100% prove is the most supported theory.....bit confused, I suppose.

[FujinAkari]

I actually thought the ongoing argument was over if Deva's judge the souls of all good creatures

That is also being discussed, but not debated. I do happen to think that my explaination is the most consistent with the internal logic of the piece, but there is certainly not enough evidence to be able to declare one position correct and another position incorrect.

[veti]

Wilfully breaking an oath is a fairly chaotic act.

Taking a solemn oath specifically for the purpose of breaking it... That's an extremely chaotic act, and may be enough in itself to get you transferred to the Abyss rather than Hell.


The demons wouldn't trust the devils to allocate them their fair share of dead souls, and with good reason--a devil adjudicator would no doubt take every loophole and slight chance to send someone to Hell rather than the Abyss, because that directly improves their side's chances in the Blood War.

You're assuming (a) that souls in hell somehow support that side in the War, (b) that whoever is on the gate is involved in the War, and (c) that the devils actually want to win it, rather than (as I've always imagined) seeing it as an Orwellian perpetual war whose purpose has nothing to do with victory, and everything to do with controlling your own people.

[Psyren]

I haven't read all the back-and-forth, but wanted to point out one thing:

Eugene's B.O. (heh-heh...) didn't come up until the end of his evaluation, right before he would have been let into Celestia. In other words, the BOoV didn't come into play until he was already judged to be Celestia material. Would it have been an issue if he had been damned to the Lowers instead? Or would the angel have simply added "oathbreaking" as a footnote before flipping open the trapdoor?

Also, I think this thread should be spoilered, since it's hard to discuss what little we know of such oaths without delving into SoD.

[factotum]

You're assuming (a) that souls in hell somehow support that side in the War, (b) that whoever is on the gate is involved in the War, and (c) that the devils actually want to win it, rather than (as I've always imagined) seeing it as an Orwellian perpetual war whose purpose has nothing to do with victory, and everything to do with controlling your own people.

(a) I don't think they get a choice in the matter! (b) the Blood War is between all devils and all demons--no exceptions, and (c) of course they want to win it. If they weren't being distracted by the endless Blood War they could get down to the real business of the day, which is destroying the forces of Good. This is the whole reason the IFCC exists in the first place, remember?

[Emanick]

I haven't read all the back-and-forth, but wanted to point out one thing:

Eugene's B.O. (heh-heh...) didn't come up until the end of his evaluation, right before he would have been let into Celestia. In other words, the BOoV didn't come into play until he was already judged to be Celestia material. Would it have been an issue if he had been damned to the Lowers instead? Or would the angel have simply added "oathbreaking" as a footnote before flipping open the trapdoor?

Also, I think this thread should be spoilered, since it's hard to discuss what little we know of such oaths without delving into SoD.

IIRC, the deva implied that he didn't even notice Eugene's outstanding oath until the end of the evaluation, so I don't think the timing of his refusal to allow Eugene entrance into Celestia is relevant. (It's possible I'm wrong. I lent out my copy of SoD years ago and never got it back, so I can't check the book to confirm this.)

[Winter]

Really? I hadn't noticed that you'd made one so far. Fundamentally FujinAkari is right here--

My case is that FujinAkari does not have one. But if you think the database allows the conclusions you both draw, then I do not know what else to say.

[veti]

(a) I don't think they get a choice in the matter! (b) the Blood War is between all devils and all demons--no exceptions, and (c) of course they want to win it. If they weren't being distracted by the endless Blood War they could get down to the real business of the day, which is destroying the forces of Good. This is the whole reason the IFCC exists in the first place, remember?

(a) is in the realm of speculation. As has been rehearsed at length in this thread, we know nothing about what becomes of souls in the lower planes in this world. (b) is demonstrably (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0632.html) not true. And (c) is just an assumption. Even if you take what the fiends say at face value, the IFCC isn't trying to "win" the blood war.

[factotum]

Even if you take what the fiends say at face value, the IFCC isn't trying to "win" the blood war.

I never said they were. What they're trying to do is END the Blood War so they can get down to the aforementioned slaughter of the forces of Good. The IFCC are trying to do that through co-operating; most other devils and demons are trying to do that through winning.

[Chessgeek]

Ah, a good argument. I'll be happy to jump on in.
So, for the damned souls debate:
Let's say a stranger walks up to you on the street, hands you a quarter, and tells you to flip it 15 times, taking note of each result. Naturally, you obey the stranger, and flip the coin 15 times. To your amazement it comes up "heads" all 15 times. The stranger chuckles and finally reveals, "Both sides are heads!"

While you were expecting that the coin had both a heads and a tails, you had no evidence that that coin had both.

While the rulebook may say that they become manes (or whatever, I'm interested in the rules, but I don't play), Rich's interpretation of the rules, i.e. his comic (his coin) has both heads, as far as evidence goes.

Now, had the stranger not said anything about the faces of the coin, and simply asked you to continue flipping the coin, it would still have come out heads, even though most coins (the rules) have tails.

Now, had this been a regular coin, it is possible that 15 heads in a row was just a fluke. But without knowing that it is double-sided, eventually one would have to come to the conclusion that both sides were heads, if the only evidence presented supports that result, and only that result.

Now, 15 is a small sampling size, but I'd rather say "It came up heads 15 times, so presumably, it will always come up heads," than say "Well, it came out heads 15 times, but there is no evidence to support the idea that it will continue, so I think the next 1 million flips will come up tails."

Sorry for the length, but I wanted to state my mind. My mind is long-winded.

[lio45]

There are two reasons I disagree with this:

1) The area where they are processed seems to be DIRECTLY OUTSIDE CELESTIA. As the forces of Law and Chaos don't get along... I really can't see Beings of Pure Good and Chaos being welcome there, and there is no indication of a planeshift prior to the judgement.

The processing area is the gateway/lobby to all the Upper Planes. It can be "directly outside" all of them. Also, you're sure that Pure Good beings would really want to make other Pure Good beings feel unwelcome? Seems a bit contrary to purpose.



2) Any system which requires beings of Pure Chaos to be consistent from one chase to the next is a TERRIBLE system. Can a Being of Pure Law be trusted to assign Chaotic characters to Chaotic afterlives? Uh... yeah? They're beings of pure law. They are literally incapable of acting outside the protocols set up within the system.

But still very capable of finding and using loopholes within these protocols.



Can a Being of Pure Chaos be trusted to assign Chaotic Characters to Chaotic Afterlives? No... not really...

I'd say "why not". Chaotic doesn't mean absolutely everything you do has to be random. Essentially, I believe that it's about making little to no long term plans, and taking spur-of-the-moment decisions...

If you're Chaotic, going to a Chaotic afterlife, then I don't see why the staff there, including the ones in charge of everything, including judgment, wouldn't all be Chaotic as well.






Ah, a good argument. I'll be happy to jump on in.
So, for the damned souls debate:
Let's say a stranger walks up to you on the street, hands you a quarter, and tells you to flip it 15 times, taking note of each result. Naturally, you obey the stranger, and flip the coin 15 times. To your amazement it comes up "heads" all 15 times. The stranger chuckles and finally reveals, "Both sides are heads!"

While you were expecting that the coin had both a heads and a tails, you had no evidence that that coin had both.

While the rulebook may say that they become manes (or whatever, I'm interested in the rules, but I don't play), Rich's interpretation of the rules, i.e. his comic (his coin) has both heads, as far as evidence goes.

Now, had the stranger not said anything about the faces of the coin, and simply asked you to continue flipping the coin, it would still have come out heads, even though most coins (the rules) have tails.

Now, had this been a regular coin, it is possible that 15 heads in a row was just a fluke. But without knowing that it is double-sided, eventually one would have to come to the conclusion that both sides were heads, if the only evidence presented supports that result, and only that result.

Now, 15 is a small sampling size, but I'd rather say "It came up heads 15 times, so presumably, it will always come up heads," than say "Well, it came out heads 15 times, but there is no evidence to support the idea that it will continue, so I think the next 1 million flips will come up tails."

Sorry for the length, but I wanted to state my mind. My mind is long-winded.

Those of you saying we've got a sample of 15 are wrong. The actual sample size isn't 15. It's 2.

We have as samples showing the souls "remain as they were" 1) the most powerful soul in the plane and 2) the pedophile choir.

Since both these sample types have a particular reason to be "kept as is" that the average soul damned to the Lower Plane hasn't... they're of little to no use as a (representative) sample. As Winter is saying.

[Kalrany]

...
Those of you saying we've got a sample of 15 are wrong. The actual sample size isn't 15. It's 2.

We have as samples showing the souls "remain as they were" 1) the most powerful soul in the plane and 2) the pedophile choir.

Since both these sample types have a particular reason to be "kept as is" that the average soul damned to the Lower Plane hasn't... they're of little to no use as a (representative) sample. As Winter is saying.

I have to disagree with your counting. The samples are defined as individual souls, not number of times that souls are shown. The definition of your sample sets the N, not the instances in which they occur.

You can have 10 samples in 1 experiment, or 10 experiments with 1 sample. The N=10 in both instances.

Now, this is ignoring the applicability of the sample population. Is 15 enough samples to have significant power to draw a conclusion? Since that is determined on a contextual bases (i.e., the design and inherent variability), you can and usually will have some disagreement between observers.

In this instance, it seems some are looking at the hypothesis as a coin flip, with 2 outcomes (keeping individuality -- yes or no) while others are looking at the entire possible population (millions of outcomes) that are totally independent. They are actually different questions depending on your initial assumptions.

*tosses two pennies on the table, walks away whistling*

[factotum]

Those of you saying we've got a sample of 15 are wrong. The actual sample size isn't 15. It's 2.


Even if that's correct, which I don't personally think it is, that's still 2 more samples than the other side of this argument possess... :smallwink:

[lio45]

I have to disagree with your counting. The samples are defined as individual souls, not number of times that souls are shown. The definition of your sample sets the N, not the instances in which they occur.

No, the right samples that we should be using here aren't the individual souls, they're the cases. We have only two different samples of a case in which a soul gets damned to the Lower Planes and we see the form it takes then.

Sample #1 is the case of an ultra-powerful soul;
Sample #2 is the case of a soul that's good for choir duty.

To help see this, consider that if you change the choir size, it has no effect on the strength of the actual sample. They happen to be 12, but they could be only 5, or they could be 100, or they could be 1,000 and there still wouldn't be any more info to be extracted from the existence of that choir.




...that's still 2 more samples than the other side of this argument possess...

Right, but the other side isn't claiming anything, simply saying "your two samples aren't enough to draw a conclusion".

[FujinAkari]

The processing area is the gateway/lobby to all the Upper Planes. It can be "directly outside" all of them. Also, you're sure that Pure Good beings would really want to make other Pure Good beings feel unwelcome? Seems a bit contrary to purpose.

Just as contrary as Pure Evil creatures fighting with Pure Evil creatures... which they have been doing since the dawn of creations.


But still very capable of finding and using loopholes within these protocols.

Assertion. Pure Law does not abuse loopholes, Pure Law is unerringly consistent, they are the standard of consistency. Abusing a loophole and undermining the system is not a lawful act and cannot be performed by a being of Pure Law.


I'd say "why not". Chaotic doesn't mean absolutely everything you do has to be random. Essentially, I believe that it's about making little to no long term plans, and taking spur-of-the-moment decisions...

We know that beings of pure chaos do not understand patterns (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0275.html), so claiming that they will follow any sort of code seems to be hard-negated.


If you're Chaotic, going to a Chaotic afterlife, then I don't see why the staff there, including the ones in charge of everything, including judgment, wouldn't all be Chaotic as well.

This is like saying that if your a criminal, going to a criminal area, then everything, including the ones in charge of your judgement, should be criminals as well. While Chaotic != Criminal, in terms of upholding a system they are absolutely the ones who represent the attempt to undermine said system.



Right, but the other side isn't claiming anything, simply saying "your two samples aren't enough to draw a conclusion".

Incorrect. Their contention is that evil souls are converted into Manes to serve in the great war. They have since been backpedalling hard from that initial argument, and arguing that no one truly knows, but it is still the counter-viewpoint.

As mentioned, the "we dunno!" stance has no qualitative value in a debate.


Though the question is whether one keeps the power he had in life in all afterlifes. I remember reading that when send to one of the lower planes, a soul starts out as a Lemure, pretty much powerless.

It would make sense for the evil gods to strip you of most of the power you had in life in exchange for your power in life. You have to earn it back.

[Kish]

As mentioned, the "we dunno!" stance has no qualitative value in a debate.
As mentioned, this is a preposterous idea that leads to claiming knowledge of all sorts of things you don't know.

I'm pretty sure there are at least three sides here--let me rephrase that.

I know there are at least three sides here. I just don't know if anyone in this thread but me comprises the, "It's better to make goofy claims than to admit you don't know, vs. we should assume D&D rules not in evidence unless Rich comes out and explicitly says he's not using them? A plague on both your houses!" side.

[OrzhvoPatriarch]

Just as contrary as Pure Evil creatures fighting with Pure Evil creatures... which they have been doing since the dawn of creations.

Evil fighting Evil is not contrary to the nature of Evil. Evil, as defined by dnd, is inherently selfish. Saying that "beings of Pure Good won't try to accommodate each other because beings of Pure Evil are fighting a war" is a non-sequitur.



Assertion. Pure Law does not abuse loopholes, Pure Law is unerringly consistent, they are the standard of consistency. Abusing a loophole and undermining the system is not a lawful act and cannot be performed by a being of Pure Law.

So you are asserting that a Devil, which according to the rules of the game is just as lawful as a Deva, can't use the wording of his contract to cheat someone because it is unlawful? You really need to back that claim up with evidence, because it is certainly not the norm in the Dnd universe. I'm not sure how much I can post due to Fair Use polices but if you have access to the books that deal with hell I suggest reading them, you will see plenty of "Lawful" beings manipulating loopholes.





We know that beings of pure chaos do not understand patterns (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0275.html), so claiming that they will follow any sort of code seems to be hard-negated.

We know that the Snarl did not understand a pattern. However, it would seem that Cedric, the Chaotic Evil director of the FICC is capable of understanding law as he made a verbal contract with V. It might not be in his nature but he can do it.




This is like saying that if your a criminal, going to a criminal area, then everything, including the ones in charge of your judgement, should be criminals as well. While Chaotic != Criminal, in terms of upholding a system they are absolutely the ones who represent the attempt to undermine said system.

I agree with this point. In fact, when I deal with the afterlife in my settings I either have one Lawful Neutral God of Judgement, such as is often seen in real world mythologies, or I have the dead's fate be mechanic with out need of arbitration. The universe itself deals with it.

However, we have no proof that only lawful beings judge the dead in -this- world. Its how I would do it, it would seem its how you would do it, but that doesn't mean that is how it is done here.






As mentioned, the "we dunno!" stance has no qualitative value in a debate.

Any book on rigorous debate or scientific inquiry would disagree with this position. If you don't know, you have to say 'I don't know". You might add "but I like to think x because of y" but you can't just assert. In fact, when people are saying opinions without really providing fact adding "We don't know" into the debate is the -most- valuable thing you can add.

That said, I do actually agree that the evidence makes it -very likely- that souls are not turned into manes. The pedophiles weren't, the soul splice souls weren't. Adding to the conversation some new data, it does seem that some souls are torn asunder and used as money in the lower plans as we have a bet of ten "soul pieces" done here http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0641.html.

[FujinAkari]

As mentioned, this is a preposterous idea that leads to claiming knowledge of all sorts of things you don't know.

This is a debate. Making arguments for things that are not known is sort of the entire point. This is why debates and facts are different.


Evil fighting Evil is not contrary to the nature of Evil. Evil, as defined by dnd, is inherently selfish. Saying that "beings of Pure Good won't try to accommodate each other because beings of Pure Evil are fighting a war" is a non-sequitur.

I am going to stop you there, because there seems to be a vast disconnect in our positions. Celestials are not beings of pure good. Devils and not beings of pure law. Both of them just happen to live in planes that represent good or lawful alignments, respectively. The rules explicitly (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#lawfulSubtype) state that both types of creatures are not necessarily LG or LE, and that their designation as Good or Lawful creatures represents their native plane.

While the vast majority of devils are LE, that doesn't make them beings of Pure Law and Pure Evil.

This is important, because it seems a lot of people are assuming that just some devil is judging, rather than a hellish embodiment of justice and tyranny (justice being the lawful trait, tyranny the evil).

Unlike the scheming defacto devil, a being of Pure Law cannot manipulate the system. They are the system.

Sorry to go off on a rant, but as I read your post it became more and more apparent to me that you weren't making the distinction between "LE Devil" and "Being of Pure Law and Evil" that I've continually been assuming.


Any book on rigorous debate or scientific inquiry would disagree with this position. If you don't know, you have to say 'I don't know". You might add "but I like to think x because of y" but you can't just assert. In fact, when people are saying opinions without really providing fact adding "We don't know" into the debate is the -most- valuable thing you can add.

But thats the whole thing, providing opinions backed by evidence is inherently superior than just yelling "They're all manes! For real! You just don't seeeeeee them! Trust me!"

Discrediting the other position is a valid tactic in debate, but it depends on reinforcing your own position as well, it cannot be your -only- tactic or it is irrelevant. The weakest position is more credible than a lack of position.

[Kish]

Discrediting the other position is a valid tactic in debate, but it depends on reinforcing your own position as well, it cannot be your -only- tactic or it is irrelevant. The weakest position is more credible than a lack of position.You've asserted this, with minor variations, many times. And it's been dead wrong every last one of them, as it will be dead wrong the next million times you assert it. If you don't know you should admit you don't know, you shouldn't scrape up a claim and demand people refute it. There is nothing positive about a failure to admit that one does not know when that is the truth.

Providing opinions backed by extremely weak evidence is inherently superior to making assertions based on no evidence, but admitting "I don't know" is far superior to either.


Sorry to go off on a rant, but as I read your post it became more and more apparent to me that you weren't making the distinction between "LE Devil" and "Being of Pure Law and Evil" that I've continually been assuming.
Your evidence that Rich is making any distinction between "LG Deva" and "the Actual Beings of Pure Law and Good the Deva refers to when she's sniping at Eugene" lacks a certain existence.

Correspondingly, your evidence that "a Being of Pure Law and Evil beyond the law and evil of a devil" exists theoretically or has any relevance at all to the comic lacks existence and I am mystified that the claim apparently doesn't lack inspiration.

[OrzhvoPatriarch]

I am going to stop you there, because there seems to be a vast disconnect in our positions. Celestials are not beings of pure good. Devils and not beings of pure law. Both of them just happen to live in planes that represent good or lawful alignments, respectively. The rules explicitly (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#lawfulSubtype) state that both types of creatures are not necessarily LG or LE, and that their designation as Good or Lawful creatures represents their native plane.

While the vast majority of devils are LE, that doesn't make them beings of Pure Law and Pure Evil.

This is important, because it seems a lot of people are assuming that just some devil is judging, rather than a hellish embodiment of justice and tyranny (justice being the lawful trait, tyranny the evil).

Unlike the scheming defacto devil, a being of Pure Law cannot manipulate the system. They are the system.

Sorry to go off on a rant, but as I read your post it became more and more apparent to me that you weren't making the distinction between "LE Devil" and "Being of Pure Law and Evil" that I've continually been assuming.

In short, what Kish said In Long...

Are you saying that the Deva who judged Roy is some kind of super celestial who -is- a pure being of a law and good instead of just a lawful good outsider? I would say that there is no solid evidence for that claim at all.The point I was getting at is that lawful outsiders can twist the the letter of the law. Even good outsiders can do this, if say they are called to defend someone in front of a kangroo court. I was using the term "being of Pure Law and Evil" because you were using the term "being of Pure Law and Good" to describe the Deva.

If you are making an argument that a theoretical being that was truly, perfectly Lawful couldn't use loopholes, I would say that depends on if this being embodied the "spirit" or the "letter" of the law.




But thats the whole thing, providing opinions backed by evidence is inherently superior than just yelling "They're all manes! For real! You just don't seeeeeee them! Trust me!"

Discrediting the other position is a valid tactic in debate, but it depends on reinforcing your own position as well, it cannot be your -only- tactic or it is irrelevant. The weakest position is more credible than a lack of position.

You will notice that I agreed with you in this case, that evil souls are likely not turned into manes. My problem is with the statement that "I don't know" has no place in a debate. It does, when the facts are not enough to reach a final conclusion.

[lio45]

Assertion. Pure Law does not abuse loopholes, Pure Law is unerringly consistent, they are the standard of consistency. Abusing a loophole and undermining the system is not a lawful act and cannot be performed by a being of Pure Law.

Disagree. By definition, using a loophole is following the law to the very letter.

If I grant you a wish, and you wish to be extremely rich and married to [girl you're in love with], then I can still make you a Colombian drug lord with an empire that'll crumble to ashes with one single mistake while your wife, the girl of the bargain, hates you and cheats on you... Pure Law (and Evil) can do that, no problem. (And yes, that's a cheap movie reference.)

If laws leave room for loopholes, then Pure Law might or might not use them, but it can definitely.





Incorrect. Their contention is that evil souls are converted into Manes to serve in the great war. They have since been backpedalling hard from that initial argument, and arguing that no one truly knows, but it is still the counter-viewpoint.

Not sure about that. There seems to be at least three positions:

1) the people yelling "They're all manes! For real! You just don't seeeeeee them! Trust me!";

2) the people saying that their "fifteen" [actually two] samples trump the "we don't know" position (that would be you);

3) the people saying that you can't draw any conclusions from what we've got.




The weakest position is more credible than a lack of position.

Definitely wrong. If the best position you can take is weak, then a lack of position is more credible (and should be the choice of the scientific mind).

[Kalrany]

I have a couple of questions that I genuinly want to answer to, becuase I cannot figure it out from re-reading the discussion/argument, and I think it would help my understanding of the issues in understanding what happends to the souls...

This is only with regards to evil characters, correct? I think so, but I want to confirm. Because there are a lot of individuals in Celestia... but that is, from what I can tell, irrelevant to the current discussion. Am I wrong?

Can evil characters be resurrected after death/judgment/whatever endpoint you want to use? And if so, how does it work if the soul is converted? And if not, why not? Because it seems like Jarix (is that the correct spelling?) was evil, judged, and returned, but I honestly don't know how to interpret this in light of the discussion.

Maybe he was a high level character, which leads to this question...

Are high level character treated in a different manor from low level characters? I cannot find anything in the strips that support it explicitly or indirectly, and seem to have missed that point of the conversation...

Because that seems to me to be backbone of the souls disagreement. (Maybe I am wrong, and I am sure that I will be told in detail why, but that is what I got out of reading the previous texts. My interpretation may be way off base.)

I am genuinely curious and really don't want to make the situation worse, but I am getting more confused as I keep reading the walls o' text on this subject...

[Chessgeek]

Disagree. By definition, using a loophole is following the law to the very letter.
If laws leave room for loopholes, then Pure Law might or might not use them, but it can definitely.

Agree


2) the people saying that their "fifteen" [actually two] samples trump the "we don't know" position (that would be you);

Disagree. If this were true, then the position of "they're all manes" would only be 1 sample, since it is just manes. Obviously, that is not the case.
(Here's an example: There are fifty states. by the "case" logic, each would cast the same number of votes in an election (this is as political as it will get, I won't go into further detail, I promise), meaning whoever won the most states would win. This is not so, as the number of votes states cast is based on population.)


If the best position you can take is weak, then a lack of position is more credible (and should be the choice of the scientific mind).

Sorta Agree. I think the issue is that the people saying we don't know are discrediting the only information completely. But I haven't read every post, and I can be wrong. My point is, on the surface, that group is right. We don't know. However, it is unfair to say "your 15 (or 2) examples are worthless, therefore there is no evidence from either side.

So that's my take.

[Chessgeek]

Can evil characters be resurrected after death/judgment/whatever endpoint you want to use?

Yes, since RC raised Jirix. I won't go searching for the exact comic, since you mentioned that you already saw it.


Are high level character treated in a different manor from low level characters?

Some people are saying that it was because Haerta and the other two were a high level, they were treated differently, and kept available for splicing, instead of
a) being turned into manes, or
b) having whatever happens to dead evil people happen to them (depending on which argument, since I think Kish is right, it is at least three sides now.)

However, Jirix was nothing unusual, since any character can be resurrected if they accept the summons. (But there is little point in resurrecting a level 2 commoner, while a level 15 rogue would be pretty handy to keep around.)

[OrzhvoPatriarch]

I think the issue is that the people saying we don't know are discrediting the only information completely. But I haven't read every post, and I can be wrong. My point is, on the surface, that group is right. We don't know. However, it is unfair to say "your 15 (or 2) examples are worthless, therefore there is no evidence from either side.

So that's my take.

This might be saying what I am trying to say better. I agree in this case that the evidence leans credence to the idea that manes are not used, and proves that they aren't always the case.

My problem is in blanket statements like "I don't know adds no value to a debate" or " the weakest position is always better then no position." These statements aren't correct.

[FujinAkari]

You've asserted this, with minor variations, many times. And it's been dead wrong every last one of them, as it will be dead wrong the next million times you assert it. If you don't know you should admit you don't know, you shouldn't scrape up a claim and demand people refute it. There is nothing positive about a failure to admit that one does not know when that is the truth.

You've asserted this, with minor variations, many times. And it's been dead wrong every last one of them, as it will be dead wrong the next million times you assert it. If something is not known but is being debates, simply saying that it is not known does not assist or enhanse the argument in any way, shape, or form. The evidence must be examined and weighed and counter evidence must be provided.

No one is arguing that the truth is known, or that their argument is definitive and eternal. What we are doing is attempting to research and discuss what is most likely to be true. Your continued statements that we don't know for sure what is true is about as relevant and helpful as continually telling us that Roy is a fighter.


Are you saying that the Deva who judged Roy is some kind of super celestial who -is- a pure being of a law and good instead of just a lawful good outsider?

Considering that Devas (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/angel.htm) are NOT of the Lawful subtype... yes. Very clearly that title means more than simply being of the Lawful and Good subtypes.


The point I was getting at is that lawful outsiders can twist the the letter of the law. Even good outsiders can do this, if say they are called to defend someone in front of a kangroo court. I was using the term "being of Pure Law and Evil" because you were using the term "being of Pure Law and Good" to describe the Deva.

Precisely, but Being of Pure Law and Good seems to have implications beyond that which you are using, seeing that Deva's are not inherently lawful, and even if that particular Deva happened to bg LG, that does not entitle her to be titled as a Being of Pure Law and Good anymore than Miko was (pre-fall)


My problem is with the statement that "I don't know" has no place in a debate. It does, when the facts are not enough to reach a final conclusion.

If we were attempting to reach a final conclusion, that would be correct. We aren't, we're still in the evidence processing stage. It is a foregone conclusion that, short of Rich himself posting, we will NEVER know for sure. We can't ever know. We can just weigh the most likely cause. Insisting that we can't know is simply a denial of the purpose of discussion in the first place.


If I grant you a wish, and you wish to be extremely rich and married to [girl you're in love with], then I can still make you a Colombian drug lord with an empire that'll crumble to ashes with one single mistake while your wife, the girl of the bargain, hates you and cheats on you... Pure Law (and Evil) can do that, no problem. (And yes, that's a cheap movie reference.)

Yes, but if the law is "People who have lived CE need to go to the abyss." a being of Pure Law (and Evil) cannot send them anywhere but to the abyss. They cannot decieve themselves, because that would undermine the law which cannot be done.


Not sure about that. There seems to be at least three positions:

1) the people yelling "They're all manes! For real! You just don't seeeeeee them! Trust me!";

2) the people saying that their "fifteen" [actually two] samples trump the "we don't know" position (that would be you);

3) the people saying that you can't draw any conclusions from what we've got.

And of the three positions, only one has any supporting evidence. The other two seem to be trying to get by on continual assertion.

As I said above: It is true that we do not and cannot know... it is also true that we do have evidence as to this question. The existence of fifteen (actually, fifteen... unless you care to argue that the twelve chior members lived the same life and their soul was split into twelve, thus making them a single judgement instead of twelve separate judgements :P) cases should make the probability higher that souls do not generally become manes than the probability that that is actually the default... but we still can't know for sure.

[OrzhvoPatriarch]

Considering that Devas (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/angel.htm) are NOT of the Lawful subtype... yes. Very clearly that title means more than simply being of the Lawful and Good subtypes.

I am sorry but no. A back handed remark putting Eugene in his place is in no way proof that the Deva is anything more then a normal celestial. And that link proves nothing. You had just finished arguing that outsiders can change their alignment, and if you read the second line there you will see that "Angels can be of any good alignment." There is nothing special about a lawful good deva.

[FujinAkari]

I am sorry but no. A back handed remark putting Eugene in his place is in no way proof that the Deva is anything more then a normal celestial. And that link proves nothing. You had just finished arguing that outsiders can change their alignment, and if you read the second line there you will see that "Angels can be of any good alignment." There is nothing special about a lawful good deva.

... correct, there is nothing special about a lawful good deva. But a lawful good deva isn't the same as a Being of Pure Law and Good.

If your argument is that a Devil (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/devil.htm) should be considered a Being of Pure Law and Evil due to having the Lawful and Evil subtypes, then that argument is flatly disproven since Deva DO NOT have the lawful subtype.

If your argument is that any character who is LG is automatically a being of Pure Law and Good... uh... then that's a really terrible argument.

So, we come back to my argument, the mantle "Being of Pure Law and Good" must have significance beyond simply being a Deva.

[lio45]

And of the three positions, only one has any supporting evidence. The other two seem to be trying to get by on continual assertion.

Of the three, there's one that does not need supporting evidence... it doesn't need anything more than a lack of good evidence for the upper two.



The existence of fifteen (actually, fifteen... unless you care to argue that the twelve chior members lived the same life and their soul was split into twelve, thus making them a single judgement instead of twelve separate judgements :P)

No. I'm saying that what the existence of the choir proves is that if you're damned to the Lower Planes and you're choir material, then you end up with choir duty (if there's a vacant position in the choir, presumably).

It's not twelve samples. It's one sample. The usable information on what happens to damned souls that we can extract from the fact the choir exists is one single soul treatment case, regardless of choir size. If you don't get this, you're not really familiar with statistics.

If you don't sing well, or the choir is already full, then who knows what happens.

But I've never denied that there is a more general conclusion to be pretty safely extrapolated beyond the choir and splices: from the facts we have seen in-comic, it's all but certain that you don't become a mane if you can be of some use down there and there happens to be a "vacant" position for you.

[OrzhvoPatriarch]

... correct, there is nothing special about a lawful good deva. But a lawful good deva isn't the same as a Being of Pure Law and Good.

If your argument is that a Devil (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/devil.htm) should be considered a Being of Pure Law and Evil due to having the Lawful and Evil subtypes, then that argument is flatly disproven since Deva DO NOT have the lawful subtype.

If your argument is that any character who is LG is automatically a being of Pure Law and Good... uh... then that's a really terrible argument.

So, we come back to my argument, the mantle "Being of Pure Law and Good" must have significance beyond simply being a Deva.

My argument is that there is no proof what so ever that the Deva is anything other then a Deva, and that the line "Being of Pure Law and Good" is her slamming Eugene, not a deceleration of vast cosmological importance. I further state that her being a Deva doesn't prove that "Being of Pure Law and Good" means anything more then a lawful aligned celestial, because all sorts of Devas are Lawful Good. You tried to counter this point by saying that not all celestial are pure, according to the monster manuel, and that they can change. The questions that then have to be asked are "Does this hold out in the Oots world?" and "do celestial think of themselves as being purely good, since the vast majority of them are, even if it isn't the 100% truth?"

In order to prove the point you are trying to make, you would have to prove a few things. One, that her remark was something more then a put down. And if one is proven, two, that she was referring to herself and not her bosses. If both of those are proven, you then have to prove her remark meant something other then just "Lawful Good Outsider". You also have to do it using things in I would like to point out the Onus of Proof is on you here. I don't have to prove the negative, you have to prove she is special.

Now, it is equally true that I don't think I can 100% prove that she isn't a super celestial, but it is very far from clear that she is anything other then just a Deva, and it seems far more likely that she isn't.

[Snails]

Skipping ahead...

The Powers that be are in no way required to honor any blood oath. The oath is binding on Eugene, not the celestials.

The celestials honor the oath, presumably, out of a sense of mercy and forgiveness for a very flawed man with some clear virtues to recommend him. They are giving him a second chance, in a roundabout way.

Devils are not required to honor the oath at all. But if a soul sent to Hell somehow manages to scrape his evil way out of the lowest dung pile of the Nine Hells to the second lowest dung pile, you can bet a devil will eventually remedy that progress by beating him back down with that very oath.

[NENAD]

The Evil planes are run by Evil gods who have absolutely no reason to punish people who do Evil things, particularly since those things often advance their own agenda. Ending up in the Nine Hells might suck because Devils are jerks and you are surrounded by them, but those Devils will not go out of their way to punish you for bad things you did in life. In fact, they will probably be trying to get you to do more bad things in the afterlife, specifically, to their enemies.

[FujinAkari]

The Evil planes are run by Evil gods who have absolutely no reason to punish people who do Evil things, particularly since those things often advance their own agenda. Ending up in the Nine Hells might suck because Devils are jerks and you are surrounded by them, but those Devils will not go out of their way to punish you for bad things you did in life. In fact, they will probably be trying to get you to do more bad things in the afterlife, specifically, to their enemies.

Then why exactly do they castrate child molesters on a daily basis?

[rifter]

Soul Splice raises a point though if the Lower Realms were horrible places where evil characters get tortured for all eternity. Why would are three epics try to break away when V loses concentration. If it sucked they would be in no rush to get back and therefore not trying to break it sure some might not want to play second fiddle but not everyone would try breaking. Although Epics might very well get special treatment.

Actually the epics "breaking away" shows that there is something that is not so great about their afterlife. When they break away from V, they run loose on the prime material plane, seeking NOT to return to the afterlife unless captured (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0641.html). And it is apparent that they are being placed under control of their evil masters, much as V will be when V has to fulfill the other end of the deal.

In regular D&D, the plane you go to is determined by alignment, although what part of the plane you end up on may be determined by other factors, such as what god you followed in life and how well. In general, Chaotic Evils end up in the Abyss with the demons and Lawful Evils in the Nine Hells with the devils, although some factors have changed. In both places, the stronger tend to torment the weaker or at least push them around. Hell being more regimented and the Abyss being more chaotic.

Why would people act evil even if they think they will have a bad time in the afterlife? Much for the same reason as in real life. For instance Bekar and Xykon are selfish and indulge their appetites without much care for the consequences, although they will do what they can to avoid them. Xykon probably would not end up the very bottom of the rung of the hell ladder, but he would not be on top, whereas in (un)life he is on his way to being master of the world. In The Abyss, he would likely have a higher trusted position, but he'd have a long way to go, And of course he would try to get there.

It is a question how like D&D OOTS is. I mean in general it does follow the "you go to the plane of your final alignment" model, and Xykon and Belkar do not relish the thought of where they might end up, but there is some creative license as to the details. Too, at least some evil characters seem as they would like to go to their afterlife, such as the goblins, who will fight in endless warfare with their god, much as the vikings of Valhalla. To some this would actually be a hellish fate, but Jirix and the hobgoblins were thrilled at the chance.

As to using a blood oath to avoid the afterlife, it seems to me that it is likely one of those lawful good things, and in any case doing it solely to avoid the afterlife would probably not work. If anything, the target of the oath being killed would be one way to end it. The comic strongly hints that Eugene is being held to his oath to teach him a lesson he refuses to learn, and that this is the real reason he is kept out by it. Roy owns up to his mistakes and seeks to atone, so he is let in.

[137beth]

Assertion. Pure Law does not abuse loopholes, Pure Law is unerringly consistent, they are the standard of consistency. Abusing a loophole and undermining the system is not a lawful act and cannot be performed by a being of Pure Law.
Abusing a loophole is completely lawful. However, it is usually done with an intent other than purely upholding the law. A purely lawful neutral creature, therefore, usually wouldn't do it. A LE or LG character, however, would naturally use loopholes to further the goals of the other component of their alignment.

[SoC175]

And then the HighGod smashes said demons into so much demonic paste. Cosmic Law implies a Cosmic Lawmaker, and thus Demons are not free to ignore it.Actually that's the whole point of the chaotic plane, there is no cosmic highgod that can enforce cosmic law.

Law and chaos are equally powerfull and eternally struggle against each other

Furthermore, there is an established system in place for said judgement to take place, one precided over by ACTUAL beings of Pure Law and Good. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0487.html) And there are equally powerfull beings of pure chaos and good and pure law and evil and ... that all think they are the only one that matter and don't give a #### about their rivals

Assertion. Pure Law does not abuse loopholes, Pure Law is unerringly consistent, they are the standard of consistency. Abusing a loophole and undermining the system is not a lawful act and cannot be performed by a being of Pure Law. Even assuming that this is true, chaos doesn't care. Chaos wants all the souls it can drag away, even souls normally belonging to law. The more they can steal, the better. They wouldn't abide any system presided over by law, even if the system is 100% following the agreed laws without cheating. Because chaos doesn't agree to any laws and thus "cheats"

While Chaotic != Criminal, in terms of upholding a system they are absolutely the ones who represent the attempt to undermine said system. And that's why they work against any attempt to uphold the system and not sit by while others are upholding it



And even if we assume that chaos would sit by why law is upholding the system, that would need to be done by LN beings, as beings of pure law and good (as they style themselves) are actually corrupted by good and thus can no longer be beings of pure law. Only the LN can rightfully claim to be beings of pure law uncorrupted by any second part of nature

... correct, there is nothing special about a lawful good deva. But a lawful good deva isn't the same as a Being of Pure Law and Good. Actually it would be (except for the LN and NG beings claiming that a mixed being can never be pure).

When the deva is refering to beings of actual [...] she's including herself there, since that's what she is (except that she's a being of pure good and not of pure law and pure good)

Abusing a loophole is completely lawful. However, it is usually done with an intent other than purely upholding the law. A purely lawful neutral creature, therefore, usually wouldn't do it. A LE or LG character, however, would naturally use loopholes to further the goals of the other component of their alignment.A purely LN creature absolutely would, just not without any intention of personal gain. It would interpret the most literal way possible, no matter who gains from this "violation of intent". In fact it wouldn't really perceive it as violating the intent, because how could the intent of a contract ever be anything but the most literal way written there? If that wasn't what all intended, they wouldn't have written it this way, would they?

Anything but the most literal way it's written simply would not being upholding the law but sullying it by interpreting what is clearly written

[Emanick]

Actually that's the whole point of the chaotic plane, there is no cosmic highgod that can enforce cosmic law.

Law and chaos are equally powerfull and eternally struggle against each other
And there are equally powerfull beings of pure chaos and good and pure law and evil and ... that all think they are the only one that matter and don't give a #### about their rivals
Even assuming that this is true, chaos doesn't care. Chaos wants all the souls it can drag away, even souls normally belonging to law. The more they can steal, the better. They wouldn't abide any system presided over by law, even if the system is 100% following the agreed laws without cheating. Because chaos doesn't agree to any laws and thus "cheats"
And that's why they work against any attempt to uphold the system and not sit by while others are upholding it



And even if we assume that chaos would sit by why law is upholding the system, that would need to be done by LN beings, as beings of pure law and good (as they style themselves) are actually corrupted by good and thus can no longer be beings of pure law. Only the LN can rightfully claim to be beings of pure law uncorrupted by any second part of nature
Actually it would be (except for the LN and NG beings claiming that a mixed being can never be pure).

When the deva is refering to beings of actual [...] she's including herself there, since that's what she is (except that she's a being of pure good and not of pure law and pure good)
A purely LN creature absolutely would, just not without any intention of personal gain. It would interpret the most literal way possible, no matter who gains from this "violation of intent". In fact it wouldn't really perceive it as violating the intent, because how could the intent of a contract ever be anything but the most literal way written there? If that wasn't what all intended, they wouldn't have written it this way, would they?

Anything but the most literal way it's written simply would not being upholding the law but sullying it by interpreting what is clearly written

You're making an awful lot of assumptions here.

How do you know that the gods haven't previously agreed to abide by some rules? Obviously the universe has some order and we know from fairly uncontroversial Scribble lore that the gods, both lawful and chaotic, are capable of keeping bargains with each other - witness the divine consensus on the Snarl and nearly everything related to it. So clearly the gods agree to play by some rules. Whether or not the system is "presided over by law" is irrelevant; the plain fact is that clearly systems may, and can, exist.

We have no evidence that chaotic deities agree to absolutely no laws. Chaotic deities are not "pure chaos" - as with normal beings, they are allowed to be anywhere on the spectrum that they please. (According to Deities and Demigods, for example, CE Loki is far from "pure evil.") Chaotic characters may agree to follow laws if they consider doing so to be reasonable and/or personally beneficial. We have no reason to believe that the Chaotic gods "work against any attempt to uphold the system."

Your idea of LG characters being "corrupted by good" is, so far as I know, unique. There is nothing either in mainstream D&D cosmology or in OOTS to suggest that LG characters/deities are "less lawful" than LN characters/deities. Law and Good do not inherently conflict any more than Law inherently conflicts with itself (which it does, for example, whenever the written law of the land forbids what a Lawful character considers to be hir duty). The Giant himself says in DSTP that he considers Neutrality to be a valid cause in and of itself, to the same extent as Good and Evil have always been considered to be "causes." Thus, there is no real reason to consider LN deities "less biased" when it comes to judging Law.

I'm also confused as to why you consider following the literal meaning of a law the only "lawful" way to interpret it. Many documents are misleading if read literally, due to the existence of rhetorical flourishes, metaphors, cultural distance, poorly-worded phrases, hyperbole, etc. etc. To think otherwise is not lawful so much as ignorant.

[factotum]

I'm also confused as to why you consider following the literal meaning of a law the only "lawful" way to interpret it.

Perfect real-life example of this: in Kansas once upon a time they actually introduced a law with the following wording:

"When two trains approach each other at a crossing, they shall both come to a complete stop, and neither shall start up until the other has gone."

Now, how is it possible to fulfil this law if you follow it to the letter? :smallsmile:

[FujinAkari]

Actually that's the whole point of the chaotic plane, there is no cosmic highgod that can enforce cosmic law.

There usually is, at least in both Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance, which are the two most prominent D&D universes as far as fiction goes. Additionally, as Emanick points out, the Gods all agreed to a lot of guidelines when the world was began, so it certainly seems that there is a cosmic law in place, one which all the Gods have agreed too.

[lio45]

Now, how is it possible to fulfil this law if you follow it to the letter? :smallsmile:

It's definitely possible to fulfill it, but it will eventually spell the end for the KS railroad network as the individual crossings become irreversibly clogged.

[SoC175]

There usually is, at least in both Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance, which are the two most prominent D&D universes as far as fiction goes.Actually no, both of these overdeities only oversee their respective backwater worlds and don't matter at real cosmic scale. The great wheel wouldn't even blink if they, their crystal spheres and their single-spheric deities would be gone. Their multi-spheric deities would shrug it off as the loss of yet another of many worlds and return to business as usual.

I'm also confused as to why you consider following the literal meaning of a law the only "lawful" way to interpret it. Many documents are misleading if read literally, due to the existence of rhetorical flourishes, metaphors, cultural distance, poorly-worded phrases, hyperbole, etc. etc.Too bad for these lesser beings doing such bad jobs on their laws and contracts. Better hope that no Inevitable ever gets spit out from Mechanus to enforce such a silly law.

Your idea of LG characters being "corrupted by good" is, so far as I know, unique. There is nothing either in mainstream D&D ] Actually it's shortly mentioned all over the place, especially in PS when mentioning the "pure" planes and critters (e.g. about the 'loth in Faces of Evil: "Purged of the twin strains of law and chaos" or in the PS campaign setting for example about Elysium: "because the driving force is goodness and goodness only" or the Gray Waste: "evil solely"

[Emanick]

Too bad for these lesser beings doing such bad jobs on their laws and contracts. Better hope that no Inevitable ever gets spit out from Mechanus to enforce such a silly law.
There's nothing incorrect, atypical or even sloppy about laws that cannot be read literally because of reasonable cultural distance, obvious metaphors or even a certain degree of obvious rhetoric.


Actually it's shortly mentioned all over the place, especially in PS when mentioning the "pure" planes and critters (e.g. about the 'loth in Faces of Evil: "Purged of the twin strains of law and chaos" or in the PS campaign setting for example about Elysium: "because the driving force is goodness and goodness only" or the Gray Waste: "evil solely"
Okay, fair enough. By "mainstream" I suppose I meant core (DMG, PH, MM, Epic Level Handbook, Deities and Demigods, etc.). I haven't read many of the more tangential sourcebooks.

That being said, my point stands. Lawful Good is not less lawful than Lawful Neutral, because Neutrality itself can be considered a valid moral outlook, just like Good and Evil. This is stated explicitly somewhere in core (Player's Handbook, I believer, though I'm not sure and I'm not going to check), and Rich says something very similar in his Therkla commentary in DSTP.

[FujinAkari]

Actually no, both of these overdeities only oversee their respective backwater worlds and don't matter at real cosmic scale. The great wheel wouldn't even blink if they, their crystal spheres and their single-spheric deities would be gone. Their multi-spheric deities would shrug it off as the loss of yet another of many worlds and return to business as usual.

Oh... of course... the truly important worlds are the ones no one has ever heard of, and the multimillion dollar IP's which contain all the D&D marketing and brand recognition are completely unimportant and fringe. How silly of me.

[ArlEammon]

I thought the thing about D&D cosmology was that evil folks went to an afterlife that they wanted - for example, a plane of brutal hierarchy where they can scheme their way up the ranks and lord it over everyone else if they're ruthless enough.

Good example in comic is the hobgoblins, who see fighting in an endless, pointless war for all eternity on Acheron to be a good thing worth striving for.


So being stuck on a cloudy demiplane or the hellish equivalent is probably just as bad for them as it is for Eugene.

I think that if an evil character wanted to reach Celestia, Arborea or other Higher Planes, it's possible they would have a change of heart and thus refuse to do some evil sort of task they had taken a blood-oath to fulfill, thus possibly becoming something greater and being spared their horrid fates.

[SoC175]

Oh... of course... the truly important worlds are the ones no one has ever heard of, and the multimillion dollar IP's which contain all the D&D marketing and brand recognition are completely unimportant and fringe. How silly of me.For the D&D cosmos as a whole they are. There they are just two worlds out of millions. They are actually outright called unimportant backwaters in PS supplements.

The real important pantheons wouldn't bat an eye if Toril and all it's single-spheric upstart powers who have no vote on cosmic matters would vanish overnight.

I think that if an evil character wanted to reach Celestia, Arborea or other Higher Planes, it's possible they would have a change of heart and thus refuse to do some evil sort of task they had taken a blood-oath to fulfill, thus possibly becoming something greater and being spared their horrid fates.That's not how the D&D cosmos works. Good isn't "higher" or "right" it's just one of the four fundamental forces that are equally right/wrong and all want complete supremacy.

Evil planes are not there to "reform" evil people so that they can become something "higher", they are there to form evil people into even purer versions of their respective evil and thus strengthen evil until it can overthrow all opposing forces

[ArlEammon]

For the D&D cosmos as a whole they are. There they are just two worlds out of millions. They are actually outright called unimportant backwaters in PS supplements.

The real important pantheons wouldn't bat an eye if Toril and all it's single-spheric upstart powers who have no vote on cosmic matters would vanish overnight.
That's not how the D&D cosmos works. Good isn't "higher" or "right" it's just one of the four fundamental forces that are equally right/wrong and all want complete supremacy.

Evil planes are not there to "reform" evil people so that they can become something "higher", they are there to form evil people into even purer versions of their respective evil and thus strengthen evil until it can overthrow all opposing forces

But that's not what I said.