Did Roy cause Durkon's Death? (Not Really)

[Sunken Valley]

In 865, Roy discusses his plan to get Durkon to summon Katy and friends. But as Elan says, plans work best when not explained. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0836.html) By explaining his plan, Roy doomed Durkon. Although I doubt it would work anyway as Rich doesn't like the calling spells in a story.

[Killer Angel]

:smallsigh:
If we're going by the "not really" route, then I'll say that the blame for durkon's death, falls on the oracle.
The profecy (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0331.html) of the "posthumous return to dwarven land", was to too hard to bear for Durkon, he was inconsciously searching death to come back home, it was a self-fulfilling prophecy.

[blueblade]

Roy is an intelligent LG team leader, of course he'll blame himself for Durkon's death. Really.

Lawful Good folks prefer it that way. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0492.html)

There are any of a dozen things Roy could have done differently to prevent this situation, but didn't. Where they reasonable, or the correct course of action? Probably not. But it won't matter to Roy.

[Red Lantern]

Roy is an intelligent LG team leader, of course he'll blame himself for Durkon's death. Really.

Lawful Good folks prefer it that way. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0492.html)

There are any of a dozen things Roy could have done differently to prevent this situation, but didn't. Where they reasonable, or the correct course of action? Probably not. But it won't matter to Roy.

Looking at that cartoon didn't it occur to roy that he could have one night stands at the woman's house?

[R-Group]

In 865, Roy discusses his plan to get Durkon to summon Katy and friends. But as Elan says, plans work best when not explained. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0836.html) By explaining his plan, Roy doomed Durkon. Although I doubt it would work anyway as Rich doesn't like the calling spells in a story.

I'm afraid I don't follow. This is just a joke, right? Otherwise I can't make head's or tails of it.

[NerdyKris]

Looking at that cartoon didn't it occur to roy that he could have one night stands at the woman's house?

Yes, but your mother is still going to know you had a one night stand because you're not coming home.

Except there's no day/night cycle in heaven, so really, it was just a joke, not an actual statement of the Lawful Good code. For starters, nothing about Lawful Good says you have to consider sexuality an embarassment. And parents that think their adult, thirty year old son isn't having sex would have to be completely ignoring reality.

[Raimun]

Yes. It was completely Roy's fault. Shame on you, Roy. I'm disappointed in you.

[JackRose]

I'm afraid I don't follow. This is just a joke, right? Otherwise I can't make head's or tails of it.

In an earlier strip, Elan made mention of the dramatic convention that a plan discussed beforehand onscreen/page/panel will fail (because otherwise there's no tension) whereas one hinted at but not explained will be more likely to succeed, because it will allow for dramatic and (to the viewer/reader) unexpected revelations during the execution of the plan.

Sunken Valley appears to be suggesting (tongue in cheek, I assume) that because Roy explained his plan (to have Durkon summon Celestials to defend the gate) that plan had to fail, and therefore that Roy caused Durkon's death.

[martianmister]

Roy said it (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0880.html) best:

:roy: "I know I shouldn't have let him go when he asked. Now we have to go look for him, too."

[Jay R]

For starters, nothing about Lawful Good says you have to consider sexuality an embarassment.

"We've found our Lawful clients generally expect it that way."

[wrybread]

I'd expect we'll see some pretty deep guilt from Roy as part of the grieving process over the next few strips. That's a major difference between Roy's death and Durkon's; while with Roy the OoTS had to bury their grief in order to keep fighting the battle, unless someone interrupts them here they're going to have the time to process their grief right away.

It just occurred to me that while Roy will likely painfully blame himself for what happened to Durkon, what about Vaarsuvius? Given the guilt spiral (s)he's been in lately, it will probably occur to hir that things would have happened differently had the Draketooth clan still been alive to greet the Order when they arrived at the pyramid, and Durkon may not have died. In Hir mind, Durkon's blood will be on her hands as well, thus pushing hir guilt to hit rock bottom.

[Katuko]

It just occurred to me that while Roy will likely painfully blame himself for what happened to Durkon, what about Vaarsuvius? Given the guilt spiral (s)he's been in lately, it will probably occur to hir that things would have happened differently had the Draketooth clan still been alive to greet the Order when they arrived at the pyramid, and Durkon may not have died. In Hir mind, Durkon's blood will be on her hands as well, thus pushing hir guilt to hit rock bottom.

Even if V gets over the Draketooth clan in time to hear about Durkon, it might still trigger the guilt trip of not having been there to apply arcane magic to the battle. If V felt it like such a failure due to having run out of spells in Azure City, imagine what the reaction would be to finding out that he simply ran off like a sissy with a (half) full tank of magic that could have turned the tide.

[R-Group]

In an earlier strip, Elan made mention of the dramatic convention that a plan discussed beforehand onscreen/page/panel will fail (because otherwise there's no tension) whereas one hinted at but not explained will be more likely to succeed, because it will allow for dramatic and (to the viewer/reader) unexpected revelations during the execution of the plan.

Sunken Valley appears to be suggesting (tongue in cheek, I assume) that because Roy explained his plan (to have Durkon summon Celestials to defend the gate) that plan had to fail, and therefore that Roy caused Durkon's death.

Uh, yeah, I understood all that. I was at a impasse as to the nature of the theory's seriousness vs. its comedic effect, i.e. I couldn't be sure whether it was a joke or not. I guess I didn't phrase my initial response correctly. It should have read: this is theory is just too asinine to not be a joke. Taken as a serious theory, it's just silly. Taken as a joke, it's actually pretty funny. Either way, I think the "(Not Really)" explains it to us. I didn't see that at first.

In retrospect, it is also quite likely that tradition alone killed Durkon. After all, in the ancient (traditional) Dwarven war-cries, his doom was prophesied in the scripture of the elders:

The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands
To fight the horde and sing and cry, Valhalla, I am coming.

Rest in peace, Brother Thundershield, you're climbing the Stairway to Heaven now.

[Lamech]

No there was nothing Roy could have done better. I mean, he technically could have abandoned Belkar and told Durkon not to go, but he had no way of knowing that Belkar ran into Malack, and Malack was a vampire. He could have made Durkon wait to go and went with him, but then the whole Order would have probably died with Durkon.

Basically Roy could not have predicted that Belkar walked into a TPK.

[Necris Omega]

Malack or no, this is still a place loaded with enough traps to almost kill off the Linear Guild with a little prodding. Sending Durkon off alone for the sake of a character he openly wants killed in this environment was stupid.

Now, did Roy cause it -directly-? No.

Will the angst be more unstoppable than a Tarrasque with the runs looking for the bathroom? ...