Free Durkula

[Tock Zipporah]

Well, now that Malack is dusted, Durkon is no longer his thrall.

So, any theories as to what happens next? Does he regain full free will and rejoin the OotS (while still evil)?

[Arcanist]

He might not be dead yet. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/vampire.htm)

He still has the chance to get to his resting place and rejuvenate.

[Gift Jeraff]

He might not be dead yet. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/vampire.htm)

He still has the chance to get to his resting place and rejuvenate.

My interpretation is that getting slain by sunlight, running water, or stake = no rejuvenating.

[Tock Zipporah]

He might not be dead yet. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/vampire.htm)

He still has the chance to get to his resting place and rejuvenate.

No, that only applies if the vampire is "reduced to zero HP."

The part about sunlight reads: "Exposing any vampire to direct sunlight disorients it: It can take only a single move action or attack action and is destroyed utterly in the next round if it cannot escape."

We saw one round of Malack being disoriented, and on the next round he is "destroyed utterly." You can't regenerate from that.

[Shale]

And he can only take a move or attack action, not the standard action necessary to transform into gas.

[Codyage]

He might not be dead yet. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/vampire.htm)

He still has the chance to get to his resting place and rejuvenate.


Fast Healing (Ex)

A vampire heals 5 points of damage each round so long as it has at least 1 hit point. If reduced to 0 hit points in combat, it automatically assumes gaseous form and attempts to escape. It must reach its coffin home within 2 hours or be utterly destroyed.


Slaying a Vampire

Reducing a vampire’s hit points to 0 or lower incapacitates it but doesn’t always destroy it (see the note on fast healing). However, certain attacks can slay vampires. Exposing any vampire to direct sunlight disorients it: It can take only a single move action or attack action and is destroyed utterly in the next round if it cannot escape.

Since it states that they are utterly destroyed, I say he is gone for good.

[The Giant]

He's dead.

That's the main reason why I made sure to show him in gaseous form during the Durkon/Malack fight, because that showed that when a vampire is gaseous, they take their equipment with them. Malack's stuff is still there. Hence, he's ash.

[Bird]

edit: ninja'd by the Giant

[Tock Zipporah]

He's dead.

That's the main reason why I made sure to show him in gaseous form during the Durkon/Malack fight, because that showed that when a vampire is gaseous, they take their equipment with them. Malack's stuff is still there. Hence, he's ash.

Thank you for the clarification (and thus saving us from an endless debate on whether he would be considered dead or not by D&D rules).

[Sunken Valley]

Durkon's in trouble now. He has no coffin and no idea how to make one.

[Thomar_of_Uointer]

So here's my prediction...

It turns out that Nale's team is short one non-human cleric. And Durkon, if he remembers his betrayal, will probably be happy that Nale killed Malack. He might even promise Nale a favor out of gratitude. Now all Nale needs to do is tell him, "hey, I'm Lawful Evil, you're Lawful Evil, let's go get that next gate before Xykon does."

[RabidEel]

Gaaah!

I went to the forum before the Latest Strip title was changed (or that I saw it was), but apparently after it was posted. So I see a thread called "Free Durkula", and I assume it's more speculation on the future. And what do I find when I open the thread? Basically the whole next strip spoiled for me.

[Arcanist]

He's dead.

That's the main reason why I made sure to show him in gaseous form during the Durkon/Malack fight, because that showed that when a vampire is gaseous, they take their equipment with them. Malack's stuff is still there. Hence, he's ash.

I'd forgotten the difference between Malack's Gaseous Form and... Well this. I stand corrected.

[Tock Zipporah]

So here's my prediction...

It turns out that Nale's team is short one non-human cleric. And Durkon, if he remembers his betrayal, will probably be happy that Nale killed Malack. He might even promise Nale a favor out of gratitude. Now all Nale needs to do is tell him, "hey, I'm Lawful Evil, you're Lawful Evil, let's go get that next gate before Xykon does."

So you believe that Durkon, simply because he's evil now, will side with a man who has been a thorn in the Order's side for almost 900 strips?

[137beth]

Thank you for the clarification (and thus saving us from an endless debate on whether he would be considered dead or not by D&D rules).


So you believe that Durkon, simply because he's evil now, will side with a man who has been a thorn in the Order's side for almost 900 strips?

I'd say Durkon suddenly liking Nale is a heck of a lot more plausible than mere word-of-giant stopping people from arguing about D&D rules...:smalltongue:

[Tock Zipporah]

I'd say Durkon suddenly liking Nale is a heck of a lot more plausible than mere word-of-giant stopping people from arguing about D&D rules...:smalltongue:

*bows* I stand corrected. ;)

[Arcanist]

I'd say Durkon suddenly liking Nale is a heck of a lot more plausible than mere word-of-giant stopping people from arguing about D&D rules...:smalltongue:

I'm disappointed that I was wrong, but I am even more disappointed that my favorite character is now dead :smallsigh: *poors root beer on the floor for Malack* ... Ugh... Now I gotta get a mop... :smallannoyed:

[Psyren]

I liked Malack too - up until this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0875.html), so... *waves goodbye and salutes Nale*

[Amphiox]

What might Durkula do next? Hmm...

1. "Hold person"
2. "Hold person"
3. SLLUURRRPPP (x2)
4. Taps with Malack's staff, twice.
5. "Arise, my new Vampire thralls!"

We shall call them Nalula and Z'zula.

No, I don't actually think that will happen....

[Arcanist]

I liked Malack too - up until this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0875.html), so... *waves goodbye and salutes Nale*

I still liked Malack even after all of that. From the looks of the character he just seemed very angry and lonely from losing his children, so when he got to know Durkon, he didn't want to kill him so he turned him into a Vampire so that he might enjoy existence with him forever... Or at least as long as they both could.

Something that bothers me though, is that if the Staff that Malack held had the spell in it, why didn't he just use the staff to cast the spell on Durkon so he would still have the prepared version on himself? Maybe Malack planned for his own eventual demise and wanted an excuse to force Nale to let his guard down after Durkon regains sentience... Highly unlikely, but I can dream, right? :smalltongue:

Also, I hope Malack was smart enough to make it be a Runestaff of Protection from Sunlight instead of just a Staff of Protection from Sunlight :smalltongue:

[Amphiox]

I still liked Malack even after all of that. From the looks of the character he just seemed very angry and lonely from losing his children, so when he got to know Durkon, he didn't want to kill him so he turned him into a Vampire so that he might enjoy existence with him forever... Or at least as long as they both could.

Something that bothers me though, is that if the Staff that Malack held had the spell in it, why didn't he just use the staff to cast the spell on Durkon so he would still have the prepared version on himself? Maybe Malack planned for his own eventual demise and wanted an excuse to force Nale to let his guard down after Durkon regains sentience... Highly unlikely, but I can dream, right? :smalltongue:

Also, I hope Malack was smart enough to make it be a Runestaff of Protection from Sunlight instead of just a Staff of Protection from Sunlight :smalltongue:

I do not know if this fits D&D rules, but one possibility is that the Malack designed the staff so that it could only cast Protection from Sunlight on himself, ie the staff autotargets whoever is holding it, possibly because he didn't want someone to take the staff from him and use its powers against him. (Some items in Final Fantasy, for example, work like this - the regular spell can target anyone, but the item that casts spell can only target the wearer/user of the item).

In which case, his end was even more karmically fitting.

[Thokk_Smash]

I still liked Malack even after all of that. From the looks of the character he just seemed very angry and lonely from losing his children, so when he got to know Durkon, he didn't want to kill him so he turned him into a Vampire so that he might enjoy existence with him forever... Or at least as long as they both could.

Something that bothers me though, is that if the Staff that Malack held had the spell in it, why didn't he just use the staff to cast the spell on Durkon so he would still have the prepared version on himself? Maybe Malack planned for his own eventual demise and wanted an excuse to force Nale to let his guard down after Durkon regains sentience... Highly unlikely, but I can dream, right? :smalltongue:

Also, I hope Malack was smart enough to make it be a Runestaff of Protection from Sunlight instead of just a Staff of Protection from Sunlight :smalltongue:

He might've wanted to save the charge in the staff. I forget how one recharges a staff, but casting it himself might've just been easier to his mind. Also, doing it himself gives a little more of an intimate feel to it, and he was treating the newborn Durkula as...well, a newborn.

[Arcanist]

I do not know if this fits D&D rules, but one possibility is that the Malack designed the staff so that it could only cast Protection from Sunlight on himself, ie the staff autotargets whoever is holding it, possibly because he didn't want someone to take the staff from him and use its powers against him. (Some items in Final Fantasy, for example, work like this - the regular spell can target anyone, but the item that casts spell can only target the wearer/user of the item).

In which case, his end was even more karmically fitting.

If this was the case, I cannot see why he can't just order Durkon to hold the staff and activate it on himself. I'd also like to inquire about the possibility of Durkon becoming a Cleric of Loki :smalltongue:

Also, I'm curious why the popular consensus is that Malack got what he deserved. :smallconfused:

[Thokk_Smash]

If this was the case, I cannot see why he can't just order Durkon to hold the staff and activate it on himself. I'd also like to inquire about the possibility of Durkon becoming a Cleric of Loki :smalltongue:

Also, I'm curious why the popular consensus is that Malack got what he deserved. :smallconfused:

Killing a well-liked main character, notwithstanding that he gave him a semblance of life directly after, tends to put people off of a character. He killed someone we've come to know and love over the past 10 years or however long one has been reading. It's not that surprising.

[thatSeniorGuy]

Durkon's in trouble now. He has no coffin and no idea how to make one.

You know what, I seem to recall a coffin playing a significant role in the last few strips ... :smallbiggrin:

ETA:
OF course, I remember now that it's lid is broken, so it might not be of use.

[Arcanist]

He might've wanted to save the charge in the staff. I forget how one recharges a staff, but casting it himself might've just been easier to his mind. Also, doing it himself gives a little more of an intimate feel to it, and he was treating the newborn Durkula as...well, a newborn.

There are no rules for recharging a staff and I sincerely doubt Malack would have been THAT sentimental as to think that using a Staff would be more impersonal.


Killing a well-liked main character, notwithstanding that he gave him a semblance of life directly after, tends to put people off of a character. He killed someone we've come to know and love over the past 10 years or however long one has been reading. It's not that surprising.

Durkon never died though, he merely became a Vampire (undeath). There is a distinct difference between dying and undying. Besides, it was a well known fact that Durkon was going to die in some form or another so I don't understand why this came as a shock to people when it occurred.


You know what, I seem to recall a coffin playing a significant role in the last few strips ... :smallbiggrin:

You stop that right now! :smallamused:

[ti'esar]

Also, I'm curious why the popular consensus is that Malack got what he deserved. :smallconfused:

Not really sure this is a good path for the thread to go down... but there was that thing about how he was planning to turn the entire Western Continent into a vampiric feeding ground in the name of an evil death god. Or killing and then reanimating Durkon. Or the part where he was implied to have killed his own mortal tribe and family. The fact that Nale is evil in his own right, or the question of which one had the ultimate responsibility for their conflict, is essentially besides the point. I liked Malack as a villain, but from a Watsonian standpoint the Stickverse is unquestionably better off without him.

[Psyren]

Also, I'm curious why the popular consensus is that Malack got what he deserved. :smallconfused:

...Because he's an evil git? Did you somehow miss his line about sacrificing a thousand people to Nergal's glory each day?

As for why he didn't use the staff to buff up, we have no evidence that staves can be recharged after use in OotS. Allowing it is possible in D&D, but as a variant rule - in core, they cannot be. Burning charges from his staff for such pedestrian tasks would be a waste.

[Gift Jeraff]

Also, I'm curious why the popular consensus is that Malack got what he deserved. :smallconfused:

You mean besides planning daily mass sacrifices, enjoying the taste of his brothers' blood, killing one of the main characters, and associating with a bride-torturing slave burner?

[Amphiox]

If this was the case, I cannot see why he can't just order Durkon to hold the staff and activate it on himself. I'd also like to inquire about the possibility of Durkon becoming a Cleric of Loki :smalltongue:

Also, I'm curious why the popular consensus is that Malack got what he deserved. :smallconfused:

Perhaps he could have done so, but didn't think to do it. Perhaps learning to use the staff properly takes some time, and he didn't want to spend that time with Durkula at that moment.

Or he was just being arrogant, and thinking himself not at risk from Nale, whom he thought of as a buffoon.

A fitting, fitting end.

[Thokk_Smash]

There are no rules for recharging a staff and I sincerely doubt Malack would have been THAT sentimental as to think that using a Staff would be more impersonal.

What the guy above me (Psyren) said. If the staff can't be recharged, then it's best to save the charge for when he doesn't have any that he can cast himself.


Durkon never died though, he merely became a Vampire (undeath). There is a distinct difference between dying and undying. Besides, it was a well known fact that Durkon was going to die in some form or another so I don't understand why this came as a shock to people when it occurred.



You stop that right now! :smallamused:
Durkon did die; he had the Xs in his eyes and everything. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0877.html) The fact that Malack subsequently reanimated his corpse does not change that fact. In order to become a vampire, you have to die.

And knowing something will happen does not mean that one has to be okay with it happening. If he had died in bed then no one would have said a thing except sorrow; but he didn't die of natural causes.

[Quild]

Wow, this was impressive. Not sure I would have use the :smallfurious: smiley.
Nale did... adequately. He managed to pick the best time to destroy Malack. To size the best moment for this very precise goal. But for everything else, I'm not sure it was the best moment since that may save the Order's life.
There again, it may save his own life, sooo...



He's dead.

That's the main reason why I made sure to show him in gaseous form during the Durkon/Malack fight, because that showed that when a vampire is gaseous, they take their equipment with them. Malack's stuff is still there. Hence, he's ash.

Yeah of course he's dead, an alive vampire makes no sense. But is he destroyed?

Yeah okay, I'm out :(.


Edit : Eyh, I wasn't posting on this thread :smallfurious:

[Arkhosia]

He might've wanted to save the charge in the staff. I forget how one recharges a staff, but casting it himself might've just been easier to his mind. Also, doing it himself gives a little more of an intimate feel to it, and he was treating the newborn Durkula as...well, a newborn.

Also, I don't think it's enchantment was mentioned before. Maybe it was a secret contingency plan if someone cast dispel magic on him? Happy Nale knew this slightly: I liked Malack, but I am actually happy Nale is starting to actually not be a comic villain as much.

[Arcanist]

Not really sure this is a good path for the thread to go down... but there was that thing about how he was planning to turn the entire Western Continent into a vampiric feeding ground in the name of an evil death god. Or killing and then reanimating Durkon. Or the part where he was implied to have killed his own mortal tribe and family. The fact that Nale is evil in his own right, or the question of which one had the ultimate responsibility for their conflict, is essentially besides the point. I liked Malack as a villain, but from a Watsonian standpoint the Stickverse is unquestionably better off without him.

And Tarquin has been conquering nations, enslaving people and having them die just so he can eventually conquer the continent and yet he is viewed as a fantastic character. Regardless, I've rendered my own argument invalid... Or at least I will after I respond to Psyren.


...Because he's an evil git? Did you somehow miss his line about sacrificing a thousand people to Nergal's glory each day?

So I assume there will be an equal reaction when Tarquin dies? I'd imagine that Xykon dying will be met with much dread (it's kind of a marker for the series ending :smallfrown:). Nale? Any non-Kobold, non-Cleric from the Linear guild?


As for why he didn't use the staff to buff up, we have no evidence that staves can be recharged after use in OotS. Allowing it is possible in D&D, but as a variant rule - in core, they cannot be. Burning charges from his staff for such pedestrian tasks would be a waste.

Why even have the staff, if you're not even going to use it? That is like buying food to watch it in your cabinet.


You mean besides planning daily mass sacrifices, enjoying the taste of his brothers' blood, killing one of the main characters, and associating with a bride-torturing slave burner?

The will of an Evil God, He's a Vampire, He's not dead, Malack is not guilty of Tarquin's crimes.

Regardless, I drop this argument as, in all honesty, cannot form a logical argument against the consensus of him "deserving what he gets". Sure, I wanted Malack to die, but not like this... Never like this... I'd imagine getting burned in the Sun is the physical equivalent of getting burned alive. I'd have prefer Roy seeking vengeance and freeing Durkon himself, but it was not in the stars (would have been far more dramatic). :smallsigh:

[Gift Jeraff]

Xykon is my favorite character, yet I still think he deserves an unimaginably painful and/or humiliating end.

[Thokk_Smash]

And Tarquin has been conquering nations, enslaving people and having them die just so he can eventually conquer the continent and yet he is viewed as a fantastic character. Regardless, I've rendered my own argument invalid... Or at least I will after I respond to Psyren.



So I assume there will be an equal reaction when Tarquin dies? I'd imagine that Xykon dying will be met with much dread (it's kind of a marker for the series ending :smallfrown:). Nale? Any non-Kobold, non-Cleric from the Linear guild?



Why even have the staff, if you're not even going to use it? That is like buying food to watch it in your cabinet.



The will of an Evil God, He's a Vampire, He's not dead, Malack is not guilty of Tarquin's crimes.

Regardless, I drop this argument as, in all honesty, cannot form a logical argument against the consensus of him "deserving what he gets". Sure, I wanted Malack to die, but not like this... Never like this... I'd imagine getting burned in the Sun is the physical equivalent of getting burned alive. I'd have prefer Roy seeking vengeance and freeing Durkon himself, but it was not in the stars (would have been far more dramatic). :smallsigh:

Just responding to the bolded: a staff with limited charges should be used only when he has to. If he was, for whatever reason, unable to renew his spells the next day, he could use the staff to cast the protection spell. But a staff only has so many charges, and who knows how many charges it has left? Granted, he probably does, but he hadn't expected that he'd need to be able to cast the spell without the staff.

Trust me, I was confused at first about it, but I think it does make sense. And I won't get into the other argument, I promise.

[Psyren]

So I assume there will be an equal reaction when Tarquin dies? I'd imagine that Xykon dying will be met with much dread (it's kind of a marker for the series ending :smallfrown:). Nale? Any non-Kobold, non-Cleric from the Linear guild?

Yes to all. I'm not sure where you remember me supporting Tarquin from, but I can assure you you're mistaken. Not only do I want Tarquin dead and to fail, I want him to die in the most ignominious and anticlimactic way possible; a forgotten failure, opposite in every way than his hopes and dreams.



Why even have the staff, if you're not even going to use it? That is like buying food to watch it in your cabinet.

It's more like buying canned goods, when you've got fresh food that will spoil much more quickly. You can eat the canned food, but the stuff in the fridge will go to waste; better to eat the stuff in the fridge, while the canned stuff keeps. If you eat everything in the fridge and find yourself still hungry, or unexpected company comes over, then you bust out the can opener and everyone wins.

Nale waited till his larder was empty, tossed his can opener, Z made him hungry, and he starved to death.



Sure, I wanted Malack to die, but not like this... Never like this... I'd imagine getting burned in the Sun is the physical equivalent of getting burned alive.

Oh, I'm sure. And it was glorious :smallbiggrin:

[ti'esar]

And Tarquin has been conquering nations, enslaving people and having them die just so he can eventually conquer the continent and yet he is viewed as a fantastic character.

Those aren't mutually exclusive, you know. I think Tarquin is almost always entertaining when he appears, and I also think he is a horrible monster who needs to die. Like I said, I liked Malack; doesn't mean I thought he was even remotely a "good guy" (heck, I was leaning towards him being evil before the big reveal ever occurred).

[Arcanist]

A staff with limited charges should be used only when he has to. If he was, for whatever reason, unable to renew his spells the next day, he could use the staff to cast the protection spell. But a staff only has so many charges, and who knows how many charges it has left? Granted, he probably does, but he hadn't expected that he'd need to be able to cast the spell without the staff.

Trust me, I was confused at first about it, but I think it does make sense. And I won't get into the other argument, I promise.

Well if it's Game Theory, I've no problem discussing my thoughts on that. :smallsmile:

But wouldn't Malack have extra staffs for those just in case scenarios? I mean, he's enough Gold and XP that he could have obtained from numerous sacrifices that he's made. Of course that is just speculation, I am just of the philosophy that items are meant to be used and food is meant to be eaten.

Anyone know what level spell Protection from Sunlight is? If it has been mentioned before. If possible, he might have even held it on a Wand :smallconfused:

[Thokk_Smash]

Well if it's Game Theory, I've no problem discussing my thoughts on that. :smallsmile:

But wouldn't Malack have extra staffs for those just in case scenarios? I mean, he's enough Gold and XP that he could have obtained from numerous sacrifices that he's made. Of course that is just speculation, I am just of the philosophy that items are meant to be used and food is meant to be eaten.

Anyone know what level spell Protection from Sunlight is? If it has been mentioned before. If possible, he might have even held it on a Wand :smallconfused:

Psyren put it much better than I probably would have (and he even used your metaphor, too). Protection from Sunlight is a homebrew spell that Malack created personally, I believe, and I doubt Rich thought up a specific level for it. Giving the benefit of the doubt, I'll say I think it's higher than 4th level, to explain why Malack didn't have a wand of it.

[Psyren]

Malack's got plenty of gold, sure, but XP is another matter entirely. Very, very little can come around to challenge a character of Malack's EL, especially in the rigid and orderly environment of the Empire; the chances of him having gained any XP in the past year even are pretty slim.

Without XP, further crafting is impossible, regardless of his wealth. And given that the spell in question is a custom spell that nobody but him in the entire region would have had reason to research, it's unlikely anyone else would be able to help him with it - even if he weren't keeping his vampirism a secret from the world.

[Arcanist]

Yes to all. I'm not sure where you remember me supporting Tarquin from, but I can assure you you're mistaken. Not only do I want Tarquin dead and to fail, I want him to die in the most ignominious and anticlimactic way possible; a forgotten failure, opposite in every way than his hopes and dreams.

I don't think I accused you of supporting Tarquin (if I did, I either did so unintentionally or am just being dumb). I did, however accuse you of holding a double standard for the two characters.

I can imagine that you're are the type of person that prefers to defeat his enemies ironically. :smalltongue:


It's more like buying canned goods, when you've got fresh food that will spoil much more quickly. You can eat the canned food, but the stuff in the fridge will go to waste; better to eat the stuff in the fridge, while the canned stuff keeps. If you eat everything in the fridge and find yourself still hungry, or unexpected company comes over, then you bust out the can opener and everyone wins.

Nale waited till his larder was empty, tossed his can opener, Z made him hungry, and he starved to death.

This is a good example, however it does not fit the scenario; Using a spell slot vs using an item are two very different scenarios. With using a spell slot you've got a non-conditional tool that can be used without relying upon an item that you may or may not have at the time, where as with a staff you've got the same tool, but you need to carry around a staff at all times otherwise you can't access it.


Oh, I'm sure. And it was glorious :smallbiggrin:

... You... You're evil :smalleek:

EDIT:


Malack's got plenty of gold, sure, but XP is another matter entirely. Very, very little can come around to challenge a character of Malack's EL, especially in the rigid and orderly environment of the Empire; the chances of him having gained any XP in the past year even are pretty slim.

Without XP, further crafting is impossible, regardless of his wealth. And given that the spell in question is a custom spell that nobody but him in the entire region would have had reason to research, it's unlikely anyone else would be able to help him with it - even if he weren't keeping his vampirism a secret from the world.

The Sacrifice rules listed in the BoVD allow you to obtain XP as well as Gold, which is where I was assuming where Malack was obtaining the Gold as well, however he could just use standard GP. :smalltongue:

[Seabyrn]

This might be tangential to the current discussion, but given the Giant's comment that Durkon's vampirism was planned from day 2, for me it suddenly puts his fear of trees in an entirely new light.

[Thokk_Smash]

This might be tangential to the current discussion, but given the Giant's comment that Durkon's vampirism was planned from day 2, for me it suddenly puts his fear of trees in an entirely new light.

Forgive me for explaining the joke, but to make sure I'm reading it right: every tree was about a billion stakes just waiting to stab him in the heart, right?:smallbiggrin:

[pjie2]

I think you're being too literal about the staff "holding" the spell. If I were Malack, I wouldn't put a single charge (or even several) in the staff, I'd have it be a permanent aura affecting the wielder. Not so coincidentally, that would means Durkula is safe so long as he has the staff, even if takes him a while to learn the spell himself. Otherwise, what happens tomorrow morning when Durkula's protection's worn off?

[Cisturn]

A little off topic, but as far as a free Durkula goes, I'm very much hoping that he won't attack the order out of loyalty basef from his Lawfulness. I mean, one of Durkon's (admittedly few) character traits is that he's incredibly lawful, I'm hoping that that lawfulness will really come into play for the next few strips, and allow our dwarf to rejoin the order.

[Talvereaux]

But wouldn't Malack have extra staffs for those just in case scenarios? I mean, he's enough Gold and XP that he could have obtained from numerous sacrifices that he's made. Of course that is just speculation, I am just of the philosophy that items are meant to be used and food is meant to be eaten.

He already had two contingencies in both the staff and the second spell slot. I think he can only put up so many more before it's devoting an inordinate amount of resources to countering only one highly specific nightmare scenario. It's not as though other things can't kill him, and he needs the inventory and spell slots to prepare for those as well!

[Halaku]

I don't know if anyone has thought about that, but with Malack gone, there is nobody to recast the Protection from sunlight spell on Durkon, since he doesn't know it (or so I think).

How do you think this will be solved??

[RMS Oceanic]

I don't know if anyone has thought about that, but with Malack gone, there is nobody to recast the Protection from sunlight spell on Durkon, since he doesn't know it (or so I think).

How do you think this will be solved??

That staff he's holding can cast the spell. Should give him at least a few days.

[Skarn]

Durkon never died though, he merely became a Vampire (undeath). There is a distinct difference between dying and undying.
Being turned into an undead thrall is arguably a worse fate than dying in the first place.

If this was the case, I cannot see why he can't just order Durkon to hold the staff and activate it on himself. He should be able to, but he didn't. At the time, it probably didn't seem like a major, life changing decision. To be fair, for him to do that he would have first had to wait for durkon to take his next turn to move out of the sunlight again.


I'd also like to inquire about the possibility of Durkon becoming a Cleric of Loki :smalltongue: I don't think so. Loki is probably Chaotic Neutral, whereas Durkon is now Lawful Evil. That's three steps off. It's possible (in my opinion) that Thor is Lawful Neutral, if so he may be able to retake Thor as his patron deity.


Also, I'm curious why the popular consensus is that Malack got what he deserved. :smallconfused:
I'm curious of why that surprises you, to be honest. :smallbiggrin:

I didn't see him as a particularly likeable villain. As contrasted to Nale or Tarquin, who at least do things for their own benefit, followers of evil religions tend to annoy me. Especially when said religion doesn't seem to extend at all beyond "make tons of human sacrifices".

Anyway, Durkula will probably want to rejoin the Order. Even if evil, if he has memories from his past life, he should be loyal to Roy. As I understand it they have a history that goes back to before the Order. That said, Roy will probably want to resurrect him, which could create a conflict somewhere down the line.

As for what he'll do with Nale, it just depends. At the end of the day, did Durkula actually see Malack as a father figure, or was he only acting that way because he was a Thrall? If it's the former he might seek revenge, if the latter he might even thank him. Given that Nale doesn't seem concerned about him, it's probably the latter.

[Tebryn]

Durkon never died though, he merely became a Vampire (undeath). There is a distinct difference between dying and undying. Besides, it was a well known fact that Durkon was going to die in some form or another so I don't understand why this came as a shock to people when it occurred.

Ya, that difference is that the undead were formally dead and aren't anymore. That's the difference. You have to die to become undead. You can't make a vampire out of a living being. They've got to shuck the mortal coil first.

[Trixie]

You know what, I seem to recall a coffin playing a significant role in the last few strips ... :smallbiggrin:

Sarcophagus. Coffin is what you put in it :smallsigh::smalltongue:

[Bedinsis]

Durkon had all the reason in the world to attack Nale(since he is an enemy of the Order).

Durkula has all the reason in the world to attack Nale(since he killed his master).

So I believe we'll see a battle.

[RMS Oceanic]

Durkon had all the reason in the world to attack Nale(since he is an enemy of the Order).

Durkula has all the reason in the world to attack Nale(since he killed his master).

So I believe we'll see a battle.

If he's Durkon again, I think his priority will be to help the Order, so at most he might sling a Hold Person or two before doing that. If he's still Durkula, he may fight them.

[Arcanist]

He already had two contingencies in both the staff and the second spell slot. I think he can only put up so many more before it's devoting an inordinate amount of resources to countering only one highly specific nightmare scenario. It's not as though other things can't kill him, and he needs the inventory and spell slots to prepare for those as well!

A contingency can hardly be considered as such when it can be so easily removed as an obstacle. Other things can indeed kill him, but not so easily as the Sun can kill him (2 rounds). Spell slots are a renewable and flexible resource that will indeed save a spellcasters life and while a magical item can do the same, a healthy understanding between the two is necessary to ensure survival. A Wand with 50 changes might be pricy, but when that Wand is the difference between life and death, that Wand is looking pretty darn affordable :smalltongue:


Ya, that difference is that the undead were formally dead and aren't anymore. That's the difference. You have to die to become undead. You can't make a vampire out of a living being. They've got to shuck the mortal coil first.

Splitting hairs. Would you say that Xykon, as a Lich, died at one point therefore fulfilling Roy's Father's Oath? Of course not, life in D&D is defined as anything that doesn't have the dead (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#dead) condition. If anything, we should thank Malack since he bought Durkon back from the dead. :smalltongue:

[Skarn]

A contingency can hardly be considered as such when it can be so easily removed as an obstacle. I think you're underestimating what had to go into this for it to happen. The spell slot had to be consumed by an outside factor, and then he had to be disarmed and dispelled at the same time before getting a turn, with no support getting in the way, all of this done in one of the few cases where he's actually far enough out in the open during the daytime that he can't get away. Basically, everything had to go perfectly according to plan, and even then he'd be a dead man if Malack had decided to change his spells or strategies appropriately in the two years they hadn't seen each other.




Splitting hairs. Would you say that Xykon, as a Lich, died at one point therefore fulfilling Roy's Father's Oath? Of course not, life in D&D is defined as anything that doesn't have the dead (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#dead) condition. If anything, we should thank Malack since he bought Durkon back from the dead. :smalltongue:
That's assuming that Durkon and vampire Durkon are the same person, and they aren't, even if they do share memories.

Also, not everything in D&D can have the dead condition. Namely, undead, spirits and constructs can only be destroyed.

[luc258]

I really wonder what Durkula will do next.
On the one hand Nale is a traditional enemy of the OOTS and a mass-murderer, on the other he freed Durkula from Malack.
To be honest, Durkula owes Nale for destroying Malack.

I wonder if Durkon's dying wish for Malack to spare the OOTS was a fore-shadowing that Durkula's loyalty to the OOTS will prevail over whatever evil influence his condition has on him.

[Xervous]

Why has no one suggested a runestaff? Or am I just being horrendously lazy in overlooking one little fact that laughs "What are you, stupid? Of course this couldn't be a runestaff!"

[RMS Oceanic]

Why has no one suggested a runestaff? Or am I just being horrendously lazy in overlooking one little fact that laughs "What are you, stupid? Of course this couldn't be a runestaff!"

Malack talked about expending charges from it when he made those mummies.

[stardawg]

For what it is worth, Durkula's armor shifted from Black to Grey during the strip.

[RMS Oceanic]

For what it is worth, Durkula's armor shifted from Black to Grey during the strip.

Look again, that's just the sand that Nale and Malack's struggle kicked up.

[SlyJohnny]

I was just thinking about this scenario, specifically about what a huge tactical blunder it was to send Durkula away to get the staff. Malack had one round to live, so no matter what happened, Durkon wasn't going to acquire the staff fast enough to make a difference to Malack's fate. And Durkon had more spell levels: he could have ordered him to do something to save Malack, just yelled "save me! shield me from the sun!" and then prayed Durkon had Wall of Stone or something memorized. Hell, at the very least, they could've both attacked Nale and increased Malack's chance of securing his vengeance?

But then I realized. Malack wasn't sending Durkon away to retrieve the staff in order to protect himself. He was sending Durkon away in order to protect Durkon. He wanted Durkon to have ready access to the spell so they can't pull the same one-two combo on him. He gave up whatever fleeting chance of survival he had through Durkon's protection in order to ensure Durkon's safety.

I know he was a horrific, malign entity that talked about organizing death camps in the same offhand way that we'd talk about needing to go pick up more milk... but he died protecting his friend and kinsmate. Poor, lonely vampire :(

[sam79]

But then I realized. Malack wasn't sending Durkon away to retrieve the staff in order to protect himself. He was sending Durkon away in order to protect Durkon. He wanted Durkon to have ready access to the spell so they can't pull the same one-two combo on him. He gave up whatever fleeting chance of survival he had through Durkon's protection in order to ensure Durkon's safety.

That's an interesting interpretation. I'll admit its possible, but I think it is more likely that Malack DID want Durkon to protect him (i.e. Malack), but simply did not think of a more optimal strategy than "get my staff back".

So, thrall without master=free-willed DurkonVamp? If so, tables have just turned decsively in OotS favour.

[Tock Zipporah]

Why even have the staff, if you're not even going to use it? That is like buying food to watch it in your cabinet.



When I play D&D, all my scrolls, wands, and staves gets saved for last. My reasoning us always that my daily spell slots get replenished, for free, tomorrow. Whereas the staff, when the charges run out, costs me money to replace. So if I have a spell memorized and charges in a staff as well, I use the memorized first and save the staff as backup.

[Psyren]

I did, however accuse you of holding a double standard for the two characters.

Based on...?

I want(ed) them both dead equally. Hopefully that's plain enough.



This is a good example, however it does not fit the scenario; Using a spell slot vs using an item are two very different scenarios. With using a spell slot you've got a non-conditional tool that can be used without relying upon an item that you may or may not have at the time, where as with a staff you've got the same tool, but you need to carry around a staff at all times otherwise you can't access it.

The point of the staff is to have both, on the off-chance that you need {ability} more than 2/day, but without tying up valuable spell slots in it.




The Sacrifice rules listed in the BoVD allow you to obtain XP as well as Gold, which is where I was assuming where Malack was obtaining the Gold as well, however he could just use standard GP. :smalltongue:

Thing is, we have no idea whether those rules apply to OotS. Anything non-core is subject to Giant approval. And even if he could gain XP that way, the rules for recharging staves would require yet another non-core book.


I think you're being too literal about the staff "holding" the spell. If I were Malack, I wouldn't put a single charge (or even several) in the staff, I'd have it be a permanent aura affecting the wielder. Not so coincidentally, that would means Durkula is safe so long as he has the staff, even if takes him a while to learn the spell himself. Otherwise, what happens tomorrow morning when Durkula's protection's worn off?

That's not how staves work, actually. It's not that he has a stick with "Pro: Sunlight 1/day" or "Pro: Sunlight 3/day." The staff always has a pool of 50 charges at creation, and every spell in it uses a different number of those charges. So every casting of Pro: Sunlight that he did from his staff would be bleeding charges away from any other spells he had in there, such as his "Malack's Instant Spawn" spell. This contributes to Malack being reasonably loathe to cast from the staff when slots are available.

They're also not capable of constant effects while being held - you're thinking of a wondrous item (or a rod), and a custom one at that.

[Estelindis]

Nale waited till his larder was empty, tossed his can opener, Z made him hungry, and he starved to death.
That's a very clever and apt analogy.

[luc258]

Look again, that's just the sand that Nale and Malack's struggle kicked up.

I personally fully expect Durkon's transition from Thrall to free-willed vampire to get a strip of its own. It's a big plot point for a main character.

[RMS Oceanic]

I personally fully expect Durkon's transition from Thrall to free-willed vampire to get a strip of its own. It's a big plot point for a main character.

I disagree. If you see his face in the last panel, it's blank. The other significant time I recall such a thing happening was Miko discovering Shojo's treachery (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0405.html), and that was a similar "we don't know how they're going to react" situation. Any look into Durkon's train of thought may come later.

[Skarn]

Forgive me for explaining the joke, but to make sure I'm reading it right: every tree was about a billion stakes just waiting to stab him in the heart, right?:smallbiggrin:
That or the fact that Thor was busy during his battle due to arguing over a girl who died from an infection she got from a tree splinter, and couldn't offer any help or advice. So, if you think about it, that tree actually killed two people! :smallbiggrin:

[Lossoth]

I personally fully expect Durkon's transition from Thrall to free-willed vampire to get a strip of its own. It's a big plot point for a main character.

Looking forward to this. We might even see Malack saying goodbye as an implanted message, like a cross between Shojo's giant head and Scorpius/Harvey.

"You're free now. Consider worshipping Nergal from now on."

[Jay R]

I'd also like to inquire about the possibility of Durkon becoming a Cleric of Loki :smalltongue:

No chance. He did not become Chaotic.


Also, I'm curious why the popular consensus is that Malack got what he deserved. :smallconfused:

Because he's an evil, murderous, blood-sucking genocidal abomination, who was planning to betray and kill the person who betrayed and killed him? No, that can't be it.

[Fish]

Malack can be a fascinating character, and still deserve a horrible or humiliating death. See also: Emperor Palpatine, Hans Gruber, Gollum.

[SandboxPenguin]

Durkon might even have his own thralls...

[Zelkon]

Yes to all. I'm not sure where you remember me supporting Tarquin from, but I can assure you you're mistaken. Not only do I want Tarquin dead and to fail, I want him to die in the most ignominious and anticlimactic way possible; a forgotten failure, opposite in every way than his hopes and dreams.



It's more like buying canned goods, when you've got fresh food that will spoil much more quickly. You can eat the canned food, but the stuff in the fridge will go to waste; better to eat the stuff in the fridge, while the canned stuff keeps. If you eat everything in the fridge and find yourself still hungry, or unexpected company comes over, then you bust out the can opener and everyone wins.

Nale waited till his larder was empty, tossed his can opener, Z made him hungry, and he starved to death.



Oh, I'm sure. And it was glorious :smallbiggrin:

I want Tarquin dead in a crowning moment of awesome...for Elan. Elan should humiliate his father, disgrace his reputation, and turn him from an interesting villain to a pathetic disgrace.

[littlebum2002]

You mean besides planning daily mass sacrifices, enjoying the taste of his brothers' blood, killing one of the main characters, and associating with a bride-torturing slave burner?

But he was so nice about it! He's like Hannibal Lector. He's one of the worst bad guys imaginable, but he's such a gentleman you have to root for him a little.



I do not know if this fits D&D rules, but one possibility is that the Malack designed the staff so that it could only cast Protection from Sunlight on himself, ie the staff autotargets whoever is holding it, possibly because he didn't want someone to take the staff from him and use its powers against him. (Some items in Final Fantasy, for example, work like this - the regular spell can target anyone, but the item that casts spell can only target the wearer/user of the item).

In which case, his end was even more karmically fitting.


This can't be the case, because he specifically used the staff's power on Durkon to raise him quickly





Durkon never died though, he merely became a Vampire (undeath). There is a distinct difference between dying and undying. Besides, it was a well known fact that Durkon was going to die in some form or another so I don't understand why this came as a shock to people when it occurred.




No, Durkon is dead. There is a negative energy spirit (or something, I'm not a D&D player) inhabiting his body giving an imitation of life. Remember what Malack says here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0874.html). He died hundreds of years ago. The person who inhabited his body then and the vampire who has inhabited it since are two completely different individuals. In the same way, the old Durkon is dead and has been replaced with a different creature who just happens to be using his old body.

[Ustauk]

Assuming that Durkon's soul still resides in his body, and has not been swapped out for that of an evil spirit/demon (ie Buffyverse vampires), then I think there's a good chance Durkon will be come a cleric of Hel (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Hel_%283.5e_Deity%29). According to D&D alignment (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050329a) even if Durkon remains lawful good in alignment despite the vampirism, he can be the cleric of a lawful neutral god. I doubt Thor will take him back in his current condition, but I'm sure Hel would welcome him.

The Giant may borrow an idea from the vampires of Terry Pratchett's Discworld (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undead_%28Discworld%29#Vampires).



The craving for human blood appears to be more an addiction like alcoholism than a strict dietary requirement. Vampires are reported to have some need for extra "haemo-goblins" and must consume blood to survive, but this blood need not be fresh, or even human. The addiction to fresh, human blood is one which a growing number of vampires are beating, with help from support groups like the Überwald League of Temperance (the "Black Ribboners"). They refer to this change in diet as "going cold bat" (cf. cold turkey). Many get jobs at butcher shops or slaughterhouses in order to obtain their sustenance without harming human beings. In giving up human blood, most vampires sublimate their desire into a secondary, more socially acceptable addiction such as coffee, photography (which on the Discworld utilizes salamanders that store and release sunlight), or even politics. Due to their wish for vampires to become accepted as just another minority group in Ankh-Morpork, resident "Black Ribboners" deal with rogue vampires who attempt to prey on other Ankh-Morpork citizens with extreme prejudice.


I could see Durkon being a vampire of the above persuasion. Being a cleric, he'd have a high will score, and could have the will to follow in this path. Just because his sire was an evil bastard, doesn't mean he has to be :)

[Sir_Leorik]

Also, I'm curious why the popular consensus is that Malack got what he deserved. :smallconfused:


He murdered his Lizardfolk brothers, centuries ago.
He's helped Team Tarquin spread misery across the Western Continent.
He fed on the blood of prisoners sentenced by the Empire of Blood's kangaroo courts.
He planned to transform Tarquin's Empire into a smorgasborg for Vampires, where humans and Lizardfolk would be treated like cattle, slaughtered to provide blood for Vampires, and their bodies turned into burnt offerings for Nergal.
He killed Durkon, and then sired him as a Vampire.
He treated Durkon as a slave.


Malack's virtues (his friendship with Durkon and his desire not to harm Durkon or the OotS) are outweighed by his sins.

[Occasional Sage]

Malack's got plenty of gold, sure, but XP is another matter entirely. Very, very little can come around to challenge a character of Malack's EL, especially in the rigid and orderly environment of the Empire; the chances of him having gained any XP in the past year even are pretty slim.

Without XP, further crafting is impossible, regardless of his wealth. And given that the spell in question is a custom spell that nobody but him in the entire region would have had reason to research, it's unlikely anyone else would be able to help him with it - even if he weren't keeping his vampirism a secret from the world.

There are few-to-no combat encounters to threaten him, sure, but other challenges can earn XP. He's been running a fair portion of a continent for years now, he must find SOMEthing in that difficult. He can even cast the problem away, as long as it burns more than a handful of spell slots.

[Sir_Leorik]

So I assume there will be an equal reaction when Tarquin dies?

Hey, I like Tarquin and Malack. They're great villains. Notice what word I used: villains. So I'm especially glad that Malack got his comeuppance at the hands of Nale (whom Malack derided as a buffoon). I will be cheering when Tarquin is defeated, hopefully by Elan this time.

They are terrible people, so I cheer their defeat. They are wonderful villains, so I want their defeat to be dramatic and eventful. Nale has clearly been planning this for years, and for once Nale's planning has paid off. By smoking Malack, Nale shakes off years of villain decay, so that when Elan defeats him it will also be very satisfying, as satisfying as Nale's defeat in Azure City was.

[RMS Oceanic]

No, Durkon is dead. There is a negative energy spirit (or something, I'm not a D&D player) inhabiting his body giving an imitation of life. Remember what Malack says here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0874.html). He died hundreds of years ago. The person who inhabited his body then and the vampire who has inhabited it since are two completely different individuals. In the same way, the old Durkon is dead and has been replaced with a different creature who just happens to be using his old body.

That's Malack's point of view, after centuries of reflecting on it. Maybe newly vamped Malack thought differently about the matter. Also, there is precedent for Intelligent Undead to contain the soul of its former self (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0639.html). Durkon being replaced with a new being is not character development, just a replacement character.

[Sir_Leorik]

When I play D&D, all my scrolls, wands, and staves gets saved for last. My reasoning us always that my daily spell slots get replenished, for free, tomorrow. Whereas the staff, when the charges run out, costs me money to replace. So if I have a spell memorized and charges in a staff as well, I use the memorized first and save the staff as backup.

It really depends on a bunch of factors. At low levels, when spellcasters can prepare at most two to five spells of first and second level spells (or only know two to four different spells of first and second level spells for Sorcerers) scrolls, potions and wands are needed to supplement the meagre spell slots of the casters. Having a scroll of detect secret doors frees the Wizard to prepare enlarge person to cast on the BDF during combat.

As the casters gain levels, it becomes less necessary to rely on scrolls, potions or wands, especially if those items are of a much lower caster level than the spellcaster. Still, you never waste an item if you can prepare a spell. If you know in advance that you will need detect secret doors you should prepare it. If you aren't sure if you'll be in a building with secret doors, it's better to have a scroll handy.

[Sir_Leorik]

No, Durkon is dead. There is a negative energy spirit (or something, I'm not a D&D player) inhabiting his body giving an imitation of life. Remember what Malack says here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0874.html). He died hundreds of years ago. The person who inhabited his body then and the vampire who has inhabited it since are two completely different individuals. In the same way, the old Durkon is dead and has been replaced with a different creature who just happens to be using his old body.

Here's how it works: Durkon was murdered by Malack via Blood Drain. That meant that he would have risen as a Vampire in 1d3 nights, but Malack was in a rush so he used greater create undead to speed the process up. Vampires, as undead creatures, are sustained by Negative Energy from the Plane of Negative Energy in the Inner Planes. That Negative Energy doesn't replace a Vampire's soul, it replaces the Positive Energy that sustains living things in (A)D&D. Durkon still has his soul, just like Xykon does, but Durkon's Alignment has shifted to Evil, and he is Wiser and more Intelligent and Charismatic than before, so his personality may have been affected.

There is one way that the old Durkon is dead: he is no longer a Cleric of Thor. He is a non-theistic Vampire Cleric now, and given how much Durkon's relationship with Thor meant to him, I can't imagine that he'll be a little bitter about that.

[Psyren]

There are few-to-no combat encounters to threaten him, sure, but other challenges can earn XP. He's been running a fair portion of a continent for years now, he must find SOMEthing in that difficult. He can even cast the problem away, as long as it burns more than a handful of spell slots.

The problem is that there is nothing challenging about that either. These same people have been rigging the entire game for a decade specifically to make sure no challenges to their authority can possibly arise.

But it's moot anyway - as I said earlier, using core rules he could only create more staffs, not recharge the one he has. So opting to use his spell slots is reasonable.

[Hatchet]

I doubt Thor will take him back in his current condition


I've been thinking about this too. I'm sure this was answered before and I just missed it, but where does he get his spells from right now? Could Thor still be granting him spells, for whatever divine reason? Does he get it from Nergal, like his master did? When he summoned that devil, who granted him the spell? On one hand you could say he still had a summoning spell prepared from when he was alive, but we've seen that in OOTSverse divine spells are like requests that the gods grant. Who let him summon the devil?

Either way, I'm very interested to see where this is going. What will he think of himself, or the OOTS? I guess it'll depend on how much of the old Durkon is in there.

[Sir_Leorik]

I've been thinking about this too. I'm sure this was answered before and I just missed it, but where does he get his spells from right now? Could Thor still be granting him spells, for whatever divine reason? Does he get it from Nergal, like his master did? When he summoned that devil, who granted him the spell? On one hand you could say he still had a summoning spell prepared from when he was alive, but we've seen that in OOTSverse divine spells are like requests that the gods grant. Who let him summon the devil?

Either way, I'm very interested to see where this is going. What will he think of himself, or the OOTS? I guess it'll depend on how much of the old Durkon is in there.

Cleric PCs who become Vampires, also become non-Theistic Clerics, and must choose two different Domains from either the Chaos, Destruction, Evil or Trickery Domains.

Any Domain spells Durkon had from the Good Domain (or his other, unspecified Domain from Thor) are gone, but they may have been replaced with Domain spells from his two new Domains.

[Fish]

No chance [of worshiping Loki]. He did not become Chaotic.
How about Hel? I presume that is why Durkon and Malack had the conversation here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html).

[Quild]

I was just thinking about this scenario, specifically about what a huge tactical blunder it was to send Durkula away to get the staff. Malack had one round to live, so no matter what happened, Durkon wasn't going to acquire the staff fast enough to make a difference to Malack's fate. And Durkon had more spell levels: he could have ordered him to do something to save Malack, just yelled "save me! shield me from the sun!" and then prayed Durkon had Wall of Stone or something memorized. Hell, at the very least, they could've both attacked Nale and increased Malack's chance of securing his vengeance?

But then I realized. Malack wasn't sending Durkon away to retrieve the staff in order to protect himself. He was sending Durkon away in order to protect Durkon. He wanted Durkon to have ready access to the spell so they can't pull the same one-two combo on him. He gave up whatever fleeting chance of survival he had through Durkon's protection in order to ensure Durkon's safety.

I know he was a horrific, malign entity that talked about organizing death camps in the same offhand way that we'd talk about needing to go pick up more milk... but he died protecting his friend and kinsmate. Poor, lonely vampire :(

Hardly. To me Malack has shown his true nature in complete panick.
He calls Durkon "Thrall" in stead of "Brother".
He thinks afterwards he can find shelter, while he obviously can't.
Then, he craves only for revenge.
Finally, he dies.

[Sir_Leorik]

How about Hel? I presume that is why Durkon and Malack had the conversation here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html).

He could, since Hela's Neutral Evil.

[Psyren]

I was just thinking about this scenario, specifically about what a huge tactical blunder it was to send Durkula away to get the staff. Malack had one round to live, so no matter what happened, Durkon wasn't going to acquire the staff fast enough to make a difference to Malack's fate. And Durkon had more spell levels: he could have ordered him to do something to save Malack, just yelled "save me! shield me from the sun!" and then prayed Durkon had Wall of Stone or something memorized. Hell, at the very least, they could've both attacked Nale and increased Malack's chance of securing his vengeance?

But then I realized. Malack wasn't sending Durkon away to retrieve the staff in order to protect himself. He was sending Durkon away in order to protect Durkon. He wanted Durkon to have ready access to the spell so they can't pull the same one-two combo on him. He gave up whatever fleeting chance of survival he had through Durkon's protection in order to ensure Durkon's safety.

I know he was a horrific, malign entity that talked about organizing death camps in the same offhand way that we'd talk about needing to go pick up more milk... but he died protecting his friend and kinsmate. Poor, lonely vampire :(

I do like this interpretation. And we do know that Malack honored Durkon's final request too, i.e. not blowing the whistle on the Order when he saw them (which, amusingly enough, directly led to his own demise.)

[BrometheusJones]

Poor Malack :smallfrown:

Look at that face on Durkon...

Now not under any control, and Im guessing remaining freed of his lawful good over the top dogmatic zealotry, hes going to start thinking, and have an examination of conscience now that Malack is dead. Hes going to think about how he actually threw the first punch, and that Malack really was a good friend who tried all he reasonably could to salvage the friendship. He will harken back to their conversation in 737 and consider that Malack might not have been evil at all. But even if he was, he will be ashamed of himself for acting foolishly and fanatical, and will think that his actions may have strongly though indirectly resulted in his good friends death; a friend that he rejected in haste due to his own deeply ingrained prejudices of what Malack was.

I dont know what spells he has left, I dont really pay attention to that... but Durkon is going to be infuriated, and there is a heavily damaged Nale standing right in front of him; a Nale who killed the friend he rejected that he is now coming to regret having done so.

Someone else is going to die. Probably not Nale, yet. Maybe the drow. Definitely the elemental. Durkon will rejoin the OOTS party and Nale will be his sworn enemy now, and eventually, Durkon will be the one who kills him, in epic, vengeful badass fashion, avenging his rejected friend, and doing what it can to ease his own regretful spirit.

Thats how Id like it to work :smalltongue:

[Joe the Rat]

How about Hel? I presume that is why Durkon and Malack had the conversation here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html).
I could see this one working thematically and mechanically. The possibility of Death and Destruction as Helite Domains aside, Hel would be quite accepting and appreciative of a cleric who puts great effort into keeping others from dying in battle. Much better that they die of illness or old age...

[Anteros]

Wasn't the prophecy that he'd bring Death and Destruction to his home? Aren't those Nergal's domains? I imagine he'll return home as a cleric of Nergal.

[fwiffo]

Malack's virtues (his friendship with Durkon and his desire not to harm Durkon or the OotS) are outweighed by his sins.

Sure. But he had virtues. He protected Order when he didn't have to. His relationship with Durkon was genuine. Heck, he tried to avoid conflict until Durkon forced it on him. And anyone doubts that whatever the circumstances of initial conflict with Nale, that Nale was the aggressor and that Malack's desire for revenge on him was just?

Heck, if he died fighting Order, I'd be OK with his death. But Nale? What virtues does Nale have? They are both evil, but Nale is capriciously so, and has no redeeming qualities. In a fight between two of them, I would certainly be rooting for Malack, so his loss is a sad event for me.

[Gnoman]

If the vampire version of Durkon has even the slightest trace of the original Durkon in him, his chances of regretting the attack on Malack are ZERO. Malack's plans were so Evil, that allowing him to stay alive would itself be a major Evil act. Plus the little detail that Malack was in the process of eating one of Durkon's companions at the time, no matter what transparent, self-serving smokescreens he may have thrown up. If there's even the slightest hint of regret, then that's not Durkon.

[Psyren]

Wasn't the prophecy that he'd bring Death and Destruction to his home? Aren't those Nergal's domains? I imagine he'll return home as a cleric of Nergal.

Those could easily be Hel's as well. Certainly she has Death.

And right now, she has no clerics - he would be the first. (Reminds me of the whole "bring balance to the Force" loophole for Vader.)

[veti]

I do like this interpretation. And we do know that Malack honored Durkon's final request too, i.e. not blowing the whistle on the Order when he saw them (which, amusingly enough, directly led to his own demise.)

I also read the strip as Malack protecting Durkon. We know he thinks of his spawn as "children", and I find it hard to imagine any parent who wouldn't do that for their child.

But I think the reason he didn't reveal the Order in the pyramid had more to do with spiting Nale than protecting them. Remember, he hated Nale and wanted, badly, to see his mission fail. Helping Nale to take out his bitterest rivals, at a moment when they were at their weakest, was no part of his agenda.

[Sir_Leorik]

Sure. But he had virtues. He protected Order when he didn't have to. His relationship with Durkon was genuine. Heck, he tried to avoid conflict until Durkon forced it on him. And anyone doubts that whatever the circumstances of initial conflict with Nale, that Nale was the aggressor and that Malack's desire for revenge on him was just?

Heck, if he died fighting Order, I'd be OK with his death. But Nale? What virtues does Nale have? They are both evil, but Nale is capriciously so, and has no redeeming qualities. In a fight between two of them, I would certainly be rooting for Malack, so his loss is a sad event for me.

Nale has a few redeeming values. He treats Thog nicely, he's in love with Sabine, and he isn't willing to torture anyone by forcing them to listen to Celine Dion. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0258.html) Other than that Nale's pretty much scum, but given what Malack has done, I feel that Malack was the greater of two Evils.

[veti]

Nale is an interesting character. He has daddy issues, sibling issues, relationship issues, he has his own development arc, he's in love with a tramp who is most definitely going to betray him at some point. He has a lot of story still to go.

Malack, on the other hand, was done. He had backstory, but no forward-story - nothing more to contribute.

[Warren Dew]

Also, I'm curious why the popular consensus is that Malack got what he deserved. :smallconfused:
He was evil aligned. Of course he deserved to be destroyed.

[Anteros]

Sure. But he had virtues. He protected Order when he didn't have to. His relationship with Durkon was genuine. Heck, he tried to avoid conflict until Durkon forced it on him. And anyone doubts that whatever the circumstances of initial conflict with Nale, that Nale was the aggressor and that Malack's desire for revenge on him was just?

Heck, if he died fighting Order, I'd be OK with his death. But Nale? What virtues does Nale have? They are both evil, but Nale is capriciously so, and has no redeeming qualities. In a fight between two of them, I would certainly be rooting for Malack, so his loss is a sad event for me.

That's like rooting for a serial killer against a jaywalker and claiming they're both villains. Nale's evil is a drop in the bucket compared to the guy with plans to murder 1000 people a day.

[Psyren]

He was evil aligned. Of course he deserved to be destroyed.

It's not just alignment. He basically said "I'm going to murder a thousand people a day and I believe this to be perfectly right and acceptable. Also, my evil overlord best friend rigs every trial in the city so that I never want for nourishment, regardless of the defendant's actual guilt/innocence or the severity of his/her crime,"

Whatever virtues Malack may have possessed, the world is better off without someone like that.

[BrometheusJones]

It's not just alignment. He basically said "I'm going to murder a thousand people a day and I believe this to be perfectly right and acceptable. Also, my evil overlord best friend rigs every trial in the city so that I never want for nourishment, regardless of the defendant's actual guilt/innocence or the severity of his/her crime,"

Whatever virtues Malack may have possessed, the world is better off without someone like that.

What if those 1000 people a day were evil people though?

Is the world really better off :smallconfused:

[Psyren]

What if those 1000 people a day were evil people though?

Is the world really better off :smallconfused:

Assuming you're not joking:

1) Even if they were, merely being evil is not reason enough for the death penalty and especially not wholesale slaughter.
2) If the Empire's trials are any indication, Malack doesn't care about actual guilt or innocence anyway.
3) Malack has no authority to be making that kind of judgment on even one person per day, let alone 1000.

[Toper]

Also, my evil overlord best friend rigs every trial in the city so that I never want for nourishment

Nah, the Empire just rigs the trials as a matter of course, not for Malack's benefit -- Malack takes his nourishment from those the Empire executes in the course of its regular business, and even then a great deal goes to waste (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0871.html).

[Psyren]

Nah, the Empire just rigs the trials as a matter of course, not for Malack's benefit -- Malack takes his nourishment from those the Empire executes in the course of its regular business, and even then a great deal goes to waste (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0871.html).

Those trials are the "regular business" I was referring to.

"The conviction rate is 114%, and that doesn't even make sense!" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0734.html)

[BrometheusJones]

Assuming you're not joking:

1) Even if they were, merely being evil is not reason enough for the death penalty and especially not wholesale slaughter.
2) If the Empire's trials are any indication, Malack doesn't care about actual guilt or innocence anyway.
3) Malack has no authority to be making that kind of judgment on even one person per day, let alone 1000.

I kind of was... Im not sure what the people are on that continent, in terms of alignment.

But if they are evil, or mostly evil... Malack eliminating 1000 per day, minimum, youd have to agree would be awfully convenient for the "good" guys, and would produce a "better" world on average, with there being less evil in it, and all.

[Psyren]

I kind of was... Im not sure what the people are on that continent, in terms of alignment.

But if they are evil, or mostly evil... Malack eliminating 1000 per day, minimum, youd have to agree would be awfully convenient for the "good" guys, and would produce a "better" world on average, with there being less evil in it, and all.

Even if you can weigh evil by the pound like this (you can't), and even if every single person to die under Malack's regime turned out to be a horrible person - something you can pretty much guarantee Malack himself wouldn't lose sleep over - the simple fact would remain that Malack has no right to make that judgment. It's the exact same conclusion V came to concerning Familicide. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0866.html)

[Sir_Leorik]

That's like rooting for a serial killer against a jaywalker and claiming they're both villains. Nale's evil is a drop in the bucket compared to the guy with plans to murder 1000 people a day.

It's more like rooting for Dr. Doom in a fight with Galactus. Doom has plenty of blood on his hands, but he's never committed genocide, certainly not on the scale that Galactus sometimes does for breakfast.

(The difference between Galactus and Malack is that Galactus only eats inhabited planets when he has no uninhabited planets available, while Malack snacked on prisoners on a daily basis, and hoped to someday turn the Empire into a deli for Vampires.)

[Sir_Leorik]

I kind of was... Im not sure what the people are on that continent, in terms of alignment.

But if they are evil, or mostly evil... Malack eliminating 1000 per day, minimum, youd have to agree would be awfully convenient for the "good" guys, and would produce a "better" world on average, with there being less evil in it, and all.

Their Alignment isn't the issue, it's their guilt or innocence. Their is a higher chance of being found not guilty in a Quintesson courtroom (http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Quintesson) than in the Empire of Blood's kangaroo courts. The fact that Malack was feasting on the blood of those found guilty says more about Malack than about the convicts.

[BrometheusJones]

Even if you can weigh evil by the pound like this (you can't), and even if every single person to die under Malack's regime turned out to be a horrible person - something you can pretty much guarantee Malack himself wouldn't lose sleep over - the simple fact would remain that Malack has no right to make that judgment. It's the exact same conclusion V came to concerning Familicide. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0866.html)

I dont disagree. But the question wasnt whether Malack killing those people was justified or not or if he had the right to do it, it was whether the world as a whole would really have been better off with him dead if those people he was going to kill were in fact all evil.

I dunno... but to me, "the world is better off" usually implies that the ratio of good:evil has shifted in the direction of good.

(edit: and, I might add, saying malack dying makes the world a better place kind of concurs)

So wouldnt reducing the quantity of evil in a morally objective world in fact make the world a "better" place, no matter who was doing the reducing :smallconfused:

[deworde]

...Are we asking if *Nale* killing *Malack* was "morally justified"? Because I think that misses the point so wildly it requires warp engines to get back to it.


Anyway, I suspect that Frurkula will kneel in homage to his liberator, then turn him because he can't bear worship a non-vampire. And then Z'zdtri will explode into stardust which will cause the silicon elemental to become a computer that calculates the 99 billion names of God, which causes the end of the strip.

[BrometheusJones]

Their Alignment isn't the issue, it's their guilt or innocence. Their is a higher chance of being found not guilty in a Quintesson courtroom (http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Quintesson) than in the Empire of Blood's kangaroo courts. The fact that Malack was feasting on the blood of those found guilty says more about Malack than about the convicts.

Perhaps.

But its all dodging the original question....

[Porthos]

So wouldnt reducing the quantity of evil in a morally objective world in fact make the world a "better" place, no matter who was doing the reducing :smallconfused:

Good tends to take the view that if it takes Evil to promote Good then Evil still wins.

In a kinda Moorcockian sort of way.

[deworde]

Perhaps.

But its all dodging the original question....

The original question was what will happen to Frurkula. I suspect that's not the question you mean.

[BrometheusJones]

The original question was what will happen to Frurkula. I suspect that's not the question you mean.

And a great question it is. I answered what I think will happen at post 90.

But the original question I was referring to that we are talking about is at post 102.

[Sir_Leorik]

...Are we asking if *Nale* killing *Malack* was "morally justified"? Because I think that misses the point so wildly it requires warp engines to get back to it.

I've noticed more than one poster who expressed dissatisfaction with the fact that Nale was the one to take out Malack, since they either feel that it cheapens Malack's destruction or that Nale is not worthy of such an honor. Personally I see no problem with anyone slaying Malack, especially such a long-time, recurring villain as Nale.

So I guess the debate is over whether Nale was "narratively qualified" to destroy Malack. :smallbiggrin:

[BrometheusJones]

Good tends to take the view that if it takes Evil to promote Good then Evil still wins.

In a kinda Moorcockian sort of way.

Hmm... again I do not disagree. But is evil really promoting good? In my view, evil would just be destroying itself. Good would be neither promoted nor demoted; in fact it would not be impacted directly at all. It would remain static in its quantity so to speak, but still its ratio to evil would increase since evil itself was decreasing, leaving the world "better off".

Im not sure what you mean by the second line.

[Sir_Leorik]

And a great question it is. I answered what I think will happen at post 90.

But the original question I was referring to that we are talking about is at post 102.

Malack's argument is that he's feasting on prisoners scheduled to die in the arena anyway. But by drinking their blood (and thus draining their Constitution scores permanently) Malack is making it more likely they'll die in the arena.

Say what you will about the Quintessons, when they throw a 'Bot into the Sharkticon pool they at least deactivate the force-binders preventing them from using their hands and Transforming. :smallwink:

[Sir_Leorik]

Im not sure what you mean by the second line.

The author Michael Moorcock, of the "Elric" cycle, who developed an Alignment system (Law vs. Chaos) that Gary Gygax ripped off adapted into the OD&D Alignment system.

[BrometheusJones]

The author Michael Moorcock, of the "Elric" cycle, who developed an Alignment system (Law vs. Chaos) that Gary Gygax ripped off adapted into the OD&D Alignment system.

Ahh ok.

Getting a little off topic and Ill only ask one question of that nature, but did Gary Gygax really nick the whole system or just come up with something similar? I mean those who respect authority and law and those who just dont is a polarity as old as anything.

[Porthos]

Hmm... again I do not disagree. But is evil really promoting good? In my view, evil would just be destroying itself. Good would be neither promoted nor demoted; in fact it would not be impacted directly at all. It would remain static in its quantity so to speak, but still its ratio to evil would increase since evil itself was decreasing, leaving the world "better off".

It's all pretty irrelevant though since Malack hasn't given the single indication that he would only kill evil people.

Furthermore talking about whether or not it would be a good idea gets WAY to close to 'morally justified' talk for me. It's frowned upon in these parts for a reason. :smallwink:


Im not sure what you mean by the second line.

In many of Michael Moorcock's books there was a literal war between Law and Chaos. If the forces of Law started to used Chaotic methods to get their goals achieved, the Forces of Chaos get strengthen by that very act. Even if it might appear on the surface that Law was the one being helped.

I was drawing an analogy by saying that sitting around and letting someone use Evil acts in the hope that it will somehow strengthen Good, isn't really going to work out in the long run.

A D&D example has the Book of Exalted Deeds flat out saying that sacrificing your soul to Evil in an attempt to do Good (Sell my soul to save a million lives or something like that) will help Evil more in the long run no matter how much it might seem otherwise from a mortal perspective. And the main way that works is to draw on that analogy I made with Michael Moorcock (where, as an aside, a lot of the alignment stuff started in D&D).

And if one disagrees, take it up with the folks who write D&D, not me. :smalltongue:

[Oko and Qailee]

Durkon never died though, he merely became a Vampire (undeath). There is a distinct difference between dying and undying. Besides, it was a well known fact that Durkon was going to die in some form or another so I don't understand why this came as a shock to people when it occurred.




It wasn't a shock, but why does it have to be a shock for people to not like the person who killed the character we liked?

"Durkon never died though"
Actually, technically he did. Even if you didn't go by technicality, the character, Durkon, isn't there. Unless you're willing to tell me that Durkula is behaving just like old Durkon was, in which case I'd tell you to notice the differences in intelligence and speech habits.

[BrometheusJones]

It's all pretty irrelevant though since Malack hasn't given the single indication that he would only kill evil people.

Absolutely irrelevant at this junction, yes. But it led to some interesting points.


Furthermore talking about whether or not it would be a good idea gets WAY to close to 'morally justified' talk for me. It's frowned upon in these parts for a reason. :smallwink:

Is there some back story to this :smallconfused:


In many of Michael Moorcock's books...

Great explanation, thank you.

[Porthos]

Is there some back story to this :smallconfused:

Yes. :smalltongue:

...

OK, thanks to many many many flamewars discussions that got eventually locked, talking about whether or not an action is morally justified is a topic that isn't allowed on this board.

At all.

As I understand it, talking about whether something is evil or good in the context of D&D? That's OK. Talking whether or not someone is morally in the right to do something? Not OK since that's a subjective Real World opinion.

Anything else I could say on this really gets into the purview of the Mods, so I'll shut up and let them say more if needed. :smallsmile:

[137beth]

It's possible (in my opinion) that Thor is Lawful Neutral, if so he may be able to retake Thor as his patron deity.
This was awhile ago, but I don't think it is likely: based on Durkon's comment to the orcs about them needing to atone for evil deeds, I would guess that Thor is Good, not Neutral. However, while the standard assumption is that clerics have to be within one step of their deity's alignment, there are examples in D&D of gods with more or less stringent alignment requirements, and Thor may be one of those.

Wasn't the prophecy that he'd bring Death and Destruction to his home? Aren't those Nergal's domains? I imagine he'll return home as a cleric of Nergal. No, the prophecy was that his return would signal/be accompanied by (I can't remember the exact wording) death and destruction, which could simply mean that he returns home at the same time Xykon decides to exterminate all the dwarves.

[Sir_Leorik]

Getting a little off topic and Ill only ask one question of that nature, but did Gary Gygax really nick the whole system or just come up with something similar? I mean those who respect authority and law and those who just dont is a polarity as old as anything.

The answer is that it's complicated. Gygax borrowed from a lot of sources, such as Jack Vance (memorizing spells), Tolkien (to the point where TSR was sued because of references to Ents, Hobbits and the Balrog), Lovecraft (the Cthulhu mythos appeared in an early printing of Gods, Demigods and Heroes, before threats of legal action from Chaosium, who had the rights to the Cthulhu Mythos, led to their removal) and Fritz Lieber (who also threatened legal action over the "Nehwon" gods from "Fafrhd and the Grey Mouser" stories appearing in, you guessed it, Gods, Demigods and Heroes). On the other hand, Alignment was modified by Gygax, to add another element (Good vs. Evil) to produce the Nine Alignment system, and the concept was further refined in later editions.

Like Porthos says, Good Characters should not seek to use Evil methods to promote Good, Lawful Characters should not seek to use Chaotic methods to promote Law, and vice versa.

Getting back on topic:


"Durkon never died though"
Actually, technically he did. Even if you didn't go by technicality, the character, Durkon, isn't there. Unless you're willing to tell me that Durkula is behaving just like old Durkon was, in which case I'd tell you to notice the differences in intelligence and speech habits.

We won't know what impact becoming a Vampire has had on Durkon until next strip, at the earliest. (For all we know we'll be cutting to V and Sabine, or the party fighting the Silicon Elemental, or to O-Chul and Lien. Oh wait, the Demon Roaches hinted that they won't appear in Book Five! :smallamused:) Up until know Vampire!Durkon has been Malack's Thrall, so we don't know how much of his personality is intact. Next time he'll be free-willed, and we'll be able to judge for ourselves.

[Porthos]

No, the prophecy was that his return would signal/be accompanied by (I can't remember the exact wording) death and destruction, which could simply mean that he returns home at the same time Xykon decides to exterminate all the dwarves.

Origins Spoilers:

You have a young cleric named Durkon Thundershield in your temple. When next he returns home, he will bring death and destruction for us all.

Some thought that since Malack had Death and Destruction as his domians on his mind, Malack entering the Dwarven lands would cover it. Especially if he was pursuing Durkon in an attempt to get him back as a member of Team Tarquin. A spurned parent type deal.

Apparently that interpetation is now off the table. :smalltongue: However the Xykon one is still good to go. As is a upset Durkon one, for that matter. :smallwink:

[Sir_Leorik]

This was awhile ago, but I don't think it is likely: based on Durkon's comment to the orcs about them needing to atone for evil deeds, I would guess that Thor is Good, not Neutral. However, while the standard assumption is that clerics have to be within one step of their deity's alignment, there are examples in D&D of gods with more or less stringent alignment requirements, and Thor may be one of those.

The Thor from the D&D 3.0 sourcebook, Deities & Demigods is Chaotic Good. It is possible that OotS Thor is Neutral Good instead, allowing him to have Lawful Good, Neutral Good and Chaotic Good clerics. A major reason for OotS-Thor to be Good, is that one of pre-Vampire Durkon's Domains was the Good Domain.

[137beth]

Origins Spoilers:

You have a young cleric named Durkon Thundershield in your temple. When next he returns home, he will bring death and destruction for us all.

Some thought that since Malack had Death and Destruction as his domians on his mind, Malack entering the Dwarven lands would cover it. Especially if he was pursuing Durkon in an attempt to get him back as a member of Team Tarquin. A spurned parent type deal.

Apparently that interpetation is now off the table. :smalltongue: However the Xykon one is still good to go. As is a upset Durkon one, for that matter. :smallwink:

I stand corrected, I misremembered the wording:smalleek:

[Oko and Qailee]

We won't know what impact becoming a Vampire has had on Durkon until next strip, at the earliest. (For all we know we'll be cutting to V and Sabine, or the party fighting the Silicon Elemental, or to O-Chul and Lien. Oh wait, the Demon Roaches hinted that they won't appear in Book Five! :smallamused:) Up until know Vampire!Durkon has been Malack's Thrall, so we don't know how much of his personality is intact. Next time he'll be free-willed, and we'll be able to judge for ourselves.

You're right, but to say "he didn't kill Durkon" is wrong, especially on the basis of "Durkon is still up and about", especially when we don't know if he will ever be his regular self.

Also, this comic needs way more O-Chul :smalltongue:

[Sir_Leorik]

You're right, but to say "he didn't kill Durkon" is wrong, especially on the basis of "Durkon is still up and about", especially when we don't know if he will ever be his regular self.

Malack literally killed Durkon, but we need to wait and see if he also figuratively killed Durkon.


Also, this comic needs way more O-Chul :smalltongue:

Agreed. :smallbiggrin:

[Psyren]

I dunno... but to me, "the world is better off" usually implies that the ratio of good:evil has shifted in the direction of good.

(edit: and, I might add, saying malack dying makes the world a better place kind of concurs)

So wouldnt reducing the quantity of evil in a morally objective world in fact make the world a "better" place, no matter who was doing the reducing :smallconfused:

You're still measuring evil by the pound and it makes it very hard for me to take you seriously. Even if you could quantify evil by mass, Malack by himself is going to outweigh any number of the thousand evil commoners being thrown into his juicer. With great power, etc.

[Angel Bob]

I was just thinking about this scenario, specifically about what a huge tactical blunder it was to send Durkula away to get the staff. Malack had one round to live, so no matter what happened, Durkon wasn't going to acquire the staff fast enough to make a difference to Malack's fate. And Durkon had more spell levels: he could have ordered him to do something to save Malack, just yelled "save me! shield me from the sun!" and then prayed Durkon had Wall of Stone or something memorized. Hell, at the very least, they could've both attacked Nale and increased Malack's chance of securing his vengeance?

But then I realized. Malack wasn't sending Durkon away to retrieve the staff in order to protect himself. He was sending Durkon away in order to protect Durkon. He wanted Durkon to have ready access to the spell so they can't pull the same one-two combo on him. He gave up whatever fleeting chance of survival he had through Durkon's protection in order to ensure Durkon's safety.

I know he was a horrific, malign entity that talked about organizing death camps in the same offhand way that we'd talk about needing to go pick up more milk... but he died protecting his friend and kinsmate. Poor, lonely vampire :(

Headcanon! This makes #906 much more bearable to read.

[Porthos]

I was just thinking about this scenario, specifically about what a huge tactical blunder it was to send Durkula away to get the staff. Malack had one round to live, so no matter what happened, Durkon wasn't going to acquire the staff fast enough to make a difference to Malack's fate. And Durkon had more spell levels: he could have ordered him to do something to save Malack, just yelled "save me! shield me from the sun!" and then prayed Durkon had Wall of Stone or something memorized. Hell, at the very least, they could've both attacked Nale and increased Malack's chance of securing his vengeance?

But then I realized. Malack wasn't sending Durkon away to retrieve the staff in order to protect himself. He was sending Durkon away in order to protect Durkon. He wanted Durkon to have ready access to the spell so they can't pull the same one-two combo on him. He gave up whatever fleeting chance of survival he had through Durkon's protection in order to ensure Durkon's safety.

I know he was a horrific, malign entity that talked about organizing death camps in the same offhand way that we'd talk about needing to go pick up more milk... but he died protecting his friend and kinsmate. Poor, lonely vampire :(

Yes, he loved his new Childe so much that he yelled out THRALL as he did it. :smallconfused:

Sigh. :smallsmile:

[tomandtish]

The answer is that it's complicated. Gygax borrowed from a lot of sources, such as Jack Vance (memorizing spells), Tolkien (to the point where TSR was sued because of references to Ents, Hobbits and the Balrog), Lovecraft (the Cthulhu mythos appeared in an early printing of Gods, Demigods and Heroes, before threats of legal action from Chaosium, who had the rights to the Cthulhu Mythos, led to their removal) and Fritz Lieber (who also threatened legal action over the "Nehwon" gods from "Fafrhd and the Grey Mouser" stories appearing in, you guessed it, Gods, Demigods and Heroes). On the other hand, Alignment was modified by Gygax, to add another element (Good vs. Evil) to produce the Nine Alignment system, and the concept was further refined in later editions.

Like Porthos says, Good Characters should not seek to use Evil methods to promote Good, Lawful Characters should not seek to use Chaotic methods to promote Law, and vice versa.

Actually they showed up in Dieties and Demigods (D&D first edition, first printing). I still have my copy. They did have to drop them because of copyright issues though.

it's going to be interesting to see what we get now that Malack is dead. Do we get Durkon? A full blown Durkula (total evil)? Some combination of the two?

[ooknabah]

As an aside (and sorry if this has been addressed elsewhere) but how can Durkon still cast spells? Wouldn't switching alignments (in his transformation into a Vampire) count as a "gross violation of the code of conduct" required by Thor?

[Cat Dungeon]

Pretty sure he's going back home up north (like his prophecy said).

[Porthos]

As an aside (and sorry if this has been addressed elsewhere) but how can Durkon still cast spells? Wouldn't switching alignments (in his transformation into a Vampire) count as a "gross violation of the code of conduct" required by Thor?

This has been gone over quite a bit. It would be a problem if he was still a cleric of Thor. But if he isn't, and is instead a generic vampire cleric of whatever the Cause of Vampires is that grants them their domains (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/vampire.htm) (the cause of Negative Energy??), then it's much less so.

The only debate was, did he get to keep the spells he had previously memorized. The answer is: Yes.

Why? Consider the granting of spells akin to withdrawing funds from the Great Cosmic Mana Fund in the Sky. Durkon's already withdrew his funds. It's his to play with however he wishes. And if he was still a member of the Bank of Thor, Thor could try to strip him of the ability to use his ATM card to make purchases (i.e. cast spells).

But since Durkon ripped up his old ATM card and got a new one (Cleric of a Cause), that's the card he now uses to cast spells. And thanks to a legal technicality, he gets to use the mana that he had already drafted from the Bank of Thor.

The upshot is: If you are a Bad Customer, the Bank can close you down. But if you decide to go to a different bank, they can't do anything to you.

Doesn't make sense? Welcome to D&D. :smalltongue:

====

ETA:::: Another way to put it is that 'ex-Cleric' does NOT mean 'no longer a worshiper of said deity'. Instead it means fallen Cleric like a Fallen Paladin. They are still, technically, a Cleric of Deity Foo. But Deity Foo is pissed at them and won't grant them any more spells or other class features.

Ironically to no longer be an ex-Cleric (i.e. Fallen) all one has to do is become an ex-cleric of the Deity (i.e. no longer worship said Deity) and go and worship one more to your liking.

If said Deity welcomes new clerics easily, BANG you got your spells back.

Now, RP wise it usually isn't supposed to be that easy to shop around for deities. But RAW? It most certainly can be. Especially once the idea of Clerics of a Cause comes in to play.

Doesn't make sense? Again: Welcome to D&D. :smalltongue:

[Skarn]

Poor Malack :smallfrown:

Look at that face on Durkon...

Now not under any control, and Im guessing remaining freed of his lawful good over the top dogmatic zealotry, hes going to start thinking, and have an examination of conscience now that Malack is dead. Hes going to think about how he actually threw the first punch, and that Malack really was a good friend who tried all he reasonably could to salvage the friendship. He will harken back to their conversation in 737 and consider that Malack might not have been evil at all. But even if he was, he will be ashamed of himself for acting foolishly and fanatical, and will think that his actions may have strongly though indirectly resulted in his good friends death; a friend that he rejected in haste due to his own deeply ingrained prejudices of what Malack was.

I dont know what spells he has left, I dont really pay attention to that... but Durkon is going to be infuriated, and there is a heavily damaged Nale standing right in front of him; a Nale who killed the friend he rejected that he is now coming to regret having done so.
I have to say, Rich is a fantastic writer to make people say things like this about someone like Malack. :smallbiggrin:

The thing about Vampires is, they're seducers. They know just the right words to use to make you think you might be able to get along with them, no matter who you are. But it's all just an act, they don't even see the living as people. That's how they stalk their prey after all, like wolves in sheep's clothing.

You might call it a dogma, but that's a small price to pay if it saves lives. In the end, Durkon was right not to trust him, he just didn't realize how far the deception went. I can only assume that Malack knew they would fight someday; he wasn't born yesterday after all, he knows that someone like Durkon is basically his natural enemy to begin with. I suppose you could say that he was playing with his food :smalltongue:

By the way, a vampire thrall is essentially dominated, they can send commands telepathically, there's no need to speak them aloud. Knowing that, I'm not sure any of their 'conversations' were even real, or if Malack was just playing puppeteer. In particular, I doubt Durkula would've wanted to send his summon after the Order, at least not if there's anything left of Durkon inside of him.

I kind of was... Im not sure what the people are on that continent, in terms of alignment.

But if they are evil, or mostly evil... Malack eliminating 1000 per day, minimum, youd have to agree would be awfully convenient for the "good" guys, and would produce a "better" world on average, with there being less evil in it, and all.
They'd all be fed to vampires and sacrificed to Nergal, making them more powerful and causing evil to spread to the rest of the world as well. And that's even in the long-shot scenario where 100% of the victims were irredeemably evil.

[nyjastul69]

Lovecraft (the Cthulhu mythos appeared in an early printing of Gods, Demigods and Heroes, before threats of legal action from Chaosium, who had the rights to the Cthulhu Mythos, led to their removal) and Fritz Lieber (who also threatened legal action over the "Nehwon" gods from "Fafrhd and the Grey Mouser" stories appearing in, you guessed it, Gods, Demigods and Heroes).

The Melnibonean mythos was included in Gods, Demi-Gods and Heroes(OD&D), but the Cthulhu mythos was not. I don't think this particular publication caused any legal ramifications. The inclusion of both mythoi in Deities & Demigods(AD&D) did however lead to some legal wrangling. See here (http://www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/setpages/supplements.html) and here (http://www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/setpages/deities.html) for further clarification. The Lankhmar material has always been under license to my knowledge.

[Malacandra]

The Cthulhu mythos was in early editions of Deities and Demigods, though (not the edition I own, sadly). I particularly remember why it was a bad idea to mention Hastur's name - every time you mentioned him there was a 25% chance he'd send some byakhee to fix your wagon, and if you beat them, there was a further 25% chance he'd come and apply the old principle about what to do if you want a thing done.

[Komatik]

By the way, a vampire thrall is essentially dominated, they can send commands telepathically, there's no need to speak them aloud. Knowing that, I'm not sure any of their 'conversations' were even real, or if Malack was just playing puppeteer. In particular, I doubt Durkula would've wanted to send his summon after the Order, at least not if there's anything left of Durkon inside of him.

I doubt Rich would go with "evil spirit in Durkon's body" style of vampire because it kills character development. A far more likely thing is something along the lines of Warhammer - the original soul is there, bound to the body, personality and all, but more selfish and prone to baser urges / giving in to the beast within.

Vampire thralls are, IIRC, "slavishly devoted to their masters" or somesuch. Free-willed when not actively commanded, but very monotone in personality.

[nyjastul69]

The Cthulhu mythos was in early editions of Deities and Demigods, though (not the edition I own, sadly). I particularly remember why it was a bad idea to mention Hastur's name - every time you mentioned him there was a 25% chance he'd send some byakhee to fix your wagon, and if you beat them, there was a further 25% chance he'd come and apply the old principle about what to do if you want a thing done.

Your memory is accurate as 1-4 Byakhee are sent to slay the speaker. Should they fail there is a 25% that Hastur will show up to slay the blasphemer. YAY AD&D. All editions of D&D are weird and broken.

[Sir_Leorik]

Actually they showed up in Dieties and Demigods (D&D first edition, first printing). I still have my copy. They did have to drop them because of copyright issues though.

it's going to be interesting to see what we get now that Malack is dead. Do we get Durkon? A full blown Durkula (total evil)? Some combination of the two?


The Melnibonean mythos was included in Gods, Demi-Gods and Heroes(OD&D), but the Cthulhu mythos was not. I don't think this particular publication caused any legal ramifications. The inclusion of both mythoi in Deities & Demigods(AD&D) did however lead to some legal wrangling. See here (http://www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/setpages/supplements.html) and here (http://www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/setpages/deities.html) for further clarification. The Lankhmar material has always been under license to my knowledge.


The Cthulhu mythos was in early editions of Deities and Demigods, though (not the edition I own, sadly). I particularly remember why it was a bad idea to mention Hastur's name - every time you mentioned him there was a 25% chance he'd send some byakhee to fix your wagon, and if you beat them, there was a further 25% chance he'd come and apply the old principle about what to do if you want a thing done.

Mea culpa, I got the titles mixed up (and I was wrong that the Lankhmar gods were also removed from the reprinting).

So yeah, it was Deities and Demigods (for AD&D) not Gods, Demigods and Heroes (for OD&D) that had the Cthulhu mythos. Chaosium had already licensed the Mythos and had either already released "Call of Cthulhu" or was about to release it, and they sent a cease and desist order to TSR.

For some reason I remember that there was another fictional pantheon in Deities and Demigods that was included without permission, and was also removed in the reprinting after a cease and desist order. Maybe it was material from the "Elric" stories or from "Conan" stories? Anyone remember if this is correct?

[Sir_Leorik]

This has been gone over quite a bit. It would be a problem if he was still a cleric of Thor. But if he isn't, and is instead a generic vampire cleric of whatever the Cause of Vampires is that grants them their domains (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/vampire.htm) (the cause of Negative Energy??), then it's much less so.

I think the technical term for Durkon's new calling is that he's a non-theistic Vampire Cleric. He doesn't seek to further the cause of Vampirism, he's simply a Vampire Cleric he can't worship his old god and hasn't found a new one yet.

[Komatik]

I'm eagerly awaiting some Thor's Might clearout sale beatdown on Nale. Either that, or delightful, Redcloak-esque badassery. Either one is fine. I would probably even prefer Redcloak-esque badassery.

[SlyJohnny]

Yes, he loved his new Childe so much that he yelled out THRALL as he did it. :smallconfused:

Sigh. :smallsmile:

*Thrall is quicker said than Durkon or "Brother Thundershield".

*Pretty sure Rich chose that phrasing just to remind us that Durkon is a vampire spawn, and the fact that he's just become a free-willed undead is a Thing that's going to be addressed.

*One of the themes that the Giant is determined to aggressively promote and explore in this work is that Always Chaotic Evil is a horrible concept, and that even the worst villains have some kind of redeeming or humanizing feature, even if they're still objectively terrible people. People still get confused by Nale and Sabine's relationship, assuming there's no way they can genuinely care about one another. It's inane.

Malack is an awful person on the face of things, but just because he's Evil doesn't mean that he's incapable of occasional acts of kindness or sentimentality. Why do people have this difficulty accepting that the villains of the strip are anything but blandly always selfishly malicious all the time?

[Sir_Leorik]

*Thrall is quicker said than Durkon or "Brother Thundershield".

*Pretty sure Rich chose that phrasing just to remind us that Durkon is a vampire spawn, and the fact that he's just become a free-willed undead is a Thing that's going to be addressed.

*One of the themes that the Giant is determined to aggressively promote and explore in this work is that Always Chaotic Evil is a horrible concept, and that even the worst villains have some kind of redeeming or humanizing feature, even if they're still objectively terrible people. People still get confused by Nale and Sabine's relationship, assuming there's no way they can genuinely care about one another. It's inane.

Malack is an awful person on the face of things, but just because he's Evil doesn't mean that he's incapable of occasional acts of kindness or sentimentality. Why do people have this difficulty accepting that the villains of the strip are anything but blandly always selfishly malicious all the time?

Because at the moment of his death, Malack revealed himself to be a hypocrite in two ways:

1) He refers to Durkon as "Thrall", i.e., slave. Not Durkon, not Brother Thundershield, not Childe, not Beloved, or any of the gazillion terms of endearment that pop up in "Vampire: the Masquerade", "Vampire: the Requiem", or in any of Ann Rice's "Vampire Chronicles" novels. For all his pretty words to Durkon during their duel, and for all his rage at Nale, at the end of the day Malack views his "children" as slaves to order around. His impending death has ripped the facade away, and we can see how cruel Malack really is.

2) Malack, for all his sermons about Nergal and Death being something that is natural and not to be feared, cries out for Nergal to save him from death. He refuses to accept that he's beaten, unlike Durkon, (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0877.html) who once he realized that Thor wasn't going to save him with a last minute Deus ex Machina, accepted his fate, and spent his last seconds begging Malack to spare his friends' lives.

Malack could have accepted his defeat with a fraction of the grace and dignity that Durkon showed.

[Porthos]

*Thrall is quicker said than Durkon or "Brother Thundershield".

While I dislike the canard that Talking is a Free Action, it really is when it comes to Thrall v Durkon. We're talking a split second at most.

Anyway. I've gone over my reasoning on why I was disappointed on the word choice in the main thread. A lot. A lot a lot. :smalltongue: Thus I feel no real need to rehash them here. I will simply state my basic point and leave it at that:

I was disappointed that Malack, in his moment of panic, referred to Durkon as little more than his slave. I would have thought better of him if he had referred to him as 'Durkon'.

Whether or not it was technically accurate to call Durkon a Thrall means exceedingly little to me.

Nothing more, nothing less. :smallsmile:

[Sir_Leorik]

Anyway. I've gone over my reasoning on why I was disappointed on the word choice in the main thread. A lot. A lot a lot. :smalltongue: Thus I feel no real need to rehash them here. I will simply state my basic point and leave it at that:

I was disappointed that Malack, in his moment of panic, referred to Durkon as little more than his slave. I would have thought better of him if he had referred to him as 'Durkon'.

Whether or not it was technically accurate to call Durkon a Thrall means exceedingly little to me.

Nothing more, nothing less. :smallsmile:

The moments before their deaths both brought out the true natures of Durkon and Malack. Durkon was resigned to his fate, happy that he would go to Valhalla, and his body interred in his ancestral crypt. Durkon's only concern was for his friends, and he expressed love and admiration for them, while begging Malack not to hurt them.

Malack shows his true colors: Durkon is just a slave to him, and he is terrified of dying. I guess the whole "Evil Opposites" theme is still going strong for the Linear Guild: Durkon loves his friends, and while he doesn't want to die, he accepts his death like a hero. Malack has no friends, only allies, rivals and slaves, and for all his preaching about how cool Death is, he is afraid of his own impending death. See: Opposites!

[Porthos]

The moments before their deaths both brought out the true natures of Durkon and Malack. Durkon was resigned to his fate, happy that he would go to Valhalla, and his body interred in his ancestral crypt. Durkon's only concern was for his friends, and he expressed love and admiration for them, while begging Malack not to hurt them.

Malack shows his true colors: Durkon is just a slave to him, and he is terrified of dying. I guess the whole "Evil Opposites" theme is still going strong for the Linear Guild: Durkon loves his friends, and while he doesn't want to die, he accepts his death like a hero. Malack has no friends, only allies, rivals and slaves, and for all his preaching about how cool Death is, he is afraid of his own impending death. See: Opposites!
While I agree 100% on the how they both faced their death (and even Rich sardonically commented on it), I am willing to cut Malack the tiniest slightest amount of slack when it comes to his already mentioned children.

If there were eventually released from thralldom (and we have no idea if they were, but I'll presume yes) and if one of them were in the exact same spot Durkon was, I'm going to presume Malack wouldn't have quite acted in the same way. If only because there was a chance that Malack would have viewed the power dynamic differently in seeing the supposed vampire as more an equal.

Never mind the emotional attachment he might have to someone he spent a long time with and didn't have a master/slave dynamic. Malack does tend to go on about such things. Place in the universe and all that. We are all slaves to someone. Et Etc.

No, what I really think this scene showed is that while Malack did indeed have affection for the Durkon That Was (see his letting the OotS live and being conflicted about letting the Called help attack them) he didn't see his Thrall as being the Durkon He Knew quite yet on a very important and instinctual level.

That is what says volumes to me. He didn't see the person walking around with him as Durkon and thus treated him as a slave in his final moments. I can't say I particularly care that he had his reasons. He should have treated Durkon better. Call if the Blackwing lesson if one wishes.

Would things have been different if Durkon had been free-willed? If they had been together for years?

I guess we'll never know for sure. :smallsmile:


ETA::

*realizes he was roped into discussing this whole scene yet again*
*shakes fist at Sir Leorik in a mock angry/exasperated manner* :smalltongue::smalltongue::smalltongue:

[Fish]

To me, the issue is one of sympathy. Malack was a villain. So is Nale. They fought as villains do. Rich may have chosen "thrall" to prevent any undue sympathy for the blood-drinking abomination with continent-slaughtering designs. Had Makack said, "O my paws and whiskers! Durkon, I am so sorry to have caused this awful mess! Save yourself -- get the staff!" then we, the readers, would be left with sadness and pity, when that wasn't the proper tone. Similarly, Nale did not say, "I'm destroying you for the good of the people, you monster!" because Nale is not Good.

[Klear]

Malack shows his true colors: Durkon is just a slave to him, and he is terrified of dying. I guess the whole "Evil Opposites" theme is still going strong for the Linear Guild: Durkon loves his friends, and while he doesn't want to die, he accepts his death like a hero. Malack has no friends, only allies, rivals and slaves, and for all his preaching about how cool Death is, he is afraid of his own impending death. See: Opposites!

Isn't it because the creature without free will standing next to him isn't really Durkon*, and won't be until Malack releases him?

* I don't know how this thing works with regards to souls and such, I mean that in the "I don't even know him anymore" kinda sense.

[Sir_Leorik]

Isn't it because the creature without free will standing next to him isn't really Durkon*, and won't be until Malack releases him?

* I don't know how this thing works with regards to souls and such, I mean that in the "I don't even know him anymore" kinda sense.

There is evidence from "Forgotten Realms" and "Ravenloft" fiction set during AD&D 2E, that Vampire Thralls are aware of their predicament, but can't do anything unless their Sire lets them. Their personalities are intact (but not their Alignments), but unless the Sire lets them display those personalities, they are essentially suppressed. They are aware of everything they do, but have no control of their actions. In rare cases a Vampire Thrall with strong will power can fight their Sire's domination, and subtly rebel, but even then they can't actively harm their Sire. It is possible for the Sire to give the Thrall limited autonomy, without actually freeing them, but this is incredibly rare, and has been known to backfire (e.g. Jander Sunstar, who betrayed his Sire to a town militia).

Finally, according to Van Richten's Guide to Vampires, it is possible for a Vampire to create a "Bride" or "Groom", who is tied to them like a Thrall, but has complete free will. This requires a difficult ritual, during which the Sire becomes weakened for several nights.

[Porthos]

Isn't it because the creature without free will standing next to him isn't really Durkon*, and won't be until Malack releases him?

Sure. Doesn't matter to me though. In vino veritas comes to mind. :smallamused:

The phrase "In wine, there is truth" means that when someone's guard has been let down and all of their defenses are gone (usually by being drunk) we get to see what a person is REALLY like. And it goes double for when someone is facing the specter of death.

If he had cried out Durkon, I would have thought better of him.

Because it would have shown that while, technically, Durkon really was a thrall at the time and not fully Durkon yet, Malack still on his most basic deep level still viewed what was beside him as his friend.

And if he had actually said "Grab the Staff so we can save ourselves" my estimation would have been even higher.

Sadly, he did neither.

[JSSheridan]

I've got two ideas

First, I think Durkon will finish up the story with the Order, but when it's over, Tarquin will offer him the High Priest job.

Then Durkon will go on to be an antagonist against Elan, Haley, and whoever else joins them to overthrow them. Of course he'll probably be killed by them.

Second, he finishes the story with the Order, and then ask Roy to kill him.

[pendell]

I realize this is a tangent to the rest of the topic, but is there a lawful neutral god in the northern pantheon the living Durkon worships? If he is now lawful evil alignment now through no wish of his own, he could become the cleric of a lawful neutral deity. Then pursue his original ideals as closely as his current condition permits, until resurrection allows him to resume his original alignment.

I'm not saying that's what will happen, but it might be plausible.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Porthos]

I realize this is a tangent to the rest of the topic, but is there a lawful neutral god in the northern pantheon the living Durkon worships? If he is now lawful evil alignment now through no wish of his own, he could become the cleric of a lawful neutral deity. Then pursue his original ideals as closely as his current condition permits, until resurrection allows him to resume his original alignment.

I'm not saying that's what will happen, but it might be plausible.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Beyond the G/E tag, I don't believe we know any of the alignments of the Northen Pantheon since Rich is on record as saying they don't necessarily follow whatever X splatbook says the Norse Gods might be (or at least that's the case with Thor).

At most, we might make an educated guess at them by looking at what prior D&D books have said. But pretty much only as a guide.

[Tock Zipporah]

You're right, but to say "he didn't kill Durkon" is wrong, especially on the basis of "Durkon is still up and about", especially when we don't know if he will ever be his regular self.

Also, this comic needs way more O-Chul :smalltongue:

I have a FEVER! And the only PRESCRIPTION! Is MORE O-CHUL!

[Fish]

We know the dwarves have the goddess Hel, because Durkon and Malack conveniently discussed the idea some time ago. She's the goddess of death; we don't know her alignment.

[Sir_Leorik]

We know the dwarves have the goddess Hel, because Durkon and Malack conveniently discussed the idea some time ago. She's the goddess of death; we don't know her alignment.

The (A)D&D version of Hel(a) is Neutral Evil; however Durkon has said that none of the Dwarves actually worship her, so much as try to placate her. I don't think she has a Clergy.

[Fish]

Yet.

Padding.

[Porthos]

The (A)D&D version of Hel(a) is Neutral Evil; however Durkon has said that none of the Dwarves actually worship her, so much as try to placate her. I don't think she has a Clergy.


Yet.

Padding.

That also could have been Durkon stretching the truth to mean no 'reputable' Dwarf worships her. Durkon thinking that if someone worships Hel, that person is No True Scotsman Dwarf. It's not as if we haven't seen such contortions from him before. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0264.html) :smallwink:

Besides, Durkon has shown he isn't as up on his own pantheon as he should be. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0052.html) Maybe he just hasn't heard of the enclave of Dwarves that worship Hel. :smalltongue:

[The Pilgrim]

Now that Durkon is free, his first move will be to return to the Order and help them. He may be Evil now, but he is still lawful, and nothing prevents an evil beign from being loyal to friends - well, as long as it suits his plans.

There is one spell Durkon hasn't cast yet - his signature Thor's Might. Guess what spell will cast to defeat the Elemental? Nergal's Might. :smallbiggrin:

Then there is the question if Durkon will reveal his new self to his allies. Malack could disguise his vampire self, so why not Durkon? The only party member who really witnessed the transformation was Belkar, who isn't reliable to Roy. If Durkon says he is not a vampire, Roy will belive him. I see coming a panel in which Durkon will tell Belkar to better stay quiet and, in fact, appreciate the new evil party member he can ally with. Just imagine, a vicious little bastard like Belkar being guided by a lawful wise big bastard like Durkon. Maybe we will see vampire Belkar after all.

Then they travel to dwarven lands, where Durkon attemps to seize control of his Clan and turn it into a Vampiric County. Welcome to Durkonvania.

[BrometheusJones]

I have to say, Rich is a fantastic writer to make people say things like this about someone like Malack. :smallbiggrin:

He didnt make me; I chose to write it all by myself :smallsmile:


The thing about Vampires is, they're seducers. They know just the right words to use to make you think you might be able to get along with them, no matter who you are. But it's all just an act, they don't even see the living as people. That's how they stalk their prey after all, like wolves in sheep's clothing.

You might call it a dogma, but that's a small price to pay if it saves lives. In the end, Durkon was right not to trust him, he just didn't realize how far the deception went. I can only assume that Malack knew they would fight someday; he wasn't born yesterday after all, he knows that someone like Durkon is basically his natural enemy to begin with. I suppose you could say that he was playing with his food :smalltongue:

Thats a lot of stereotyping. Its what caused Durkon to reject a close friend, and led to his ignominious death.

Not everything is so clean and black and white, I think is an overarching theme in OOTS.

Durkon is still going to be Durkon, and hes still going to have Durkons heart and mind. Durkons heart is good, even if his technical alignment is arbitrarily shifted against his consent. A good heart coupled with a mind filled with wisdom is going to have Durkon soul searching, so to speak.

Durkon is also the type, to me, who dwells on things he might have affected positively but did not for whatever reason. Hes going to see that friendship he rejected, and wonder what might have happened if he wasnt so hasty and fanatical. He'll wonder if he might have even been able to change Malacks alignment, regardless of how probable or not that would actually be.

-

Durkon has some serious character development potential right now. I do not expect Rich to let it go to waste.

Whatever occurs next with Durkon, I think it will be complicated, rich, and deep.

My post at 90 and here is what I think would likely in my own mind, knowing what I do about Durkon :smallsmile:

[Reddish Mage]

Beyond the G/E tag, I don't believe we know any of the alignments of the Northen Pantheon since Rich is on record as saying they don't necessarily follow whatever X splatbook says the Norse Gods might be (or at least that's the case with Thor).

At most, we might make an educated guess at them by looking at what prior D&D books have said. But pretty much only as a guide.

I seem to recall a diety that had demihumans followers regardless of being two steps out of alignment in one book.

[Taelas]

Thats a lot of stereotyping. Its what caused Durkon to reject a close friend, and led to his ignominious death.
It's also the unvarnished truth. It's certainly possible for someone to be a vampire and not be Evil, but Malack is not that someone.

Durkon did stereotype vampires... but he was not wrong.


Not everything is so clean and black and white, I think is an overarching theme in OOTS.
Shades of grey can still have black and white elements. Malack is about as black as OOTS gets, aside from Xykon--an Evil being with redeemable aspects, but still very much a monster.


Durkon is still going to be Durkon, and hes still going to have Durkons heart and mind. Durkons heart is good, even if his technical alignment is arbitrarily shifted against his consent. A good heart coupled with a mind filled with wisdom is going to have Durkon soul searching, so to speak.
We do not know precisely how Durkon's going to be affected. We know for certain that his alignment is now Evil; it's what happens when you become a vampire, and it's further backed up by him summoning a devil via planar ally.

We cannot speak for his heart at present. Prior to his vampirism, absolutely; he had a good heart. Now that Malack is gone, he may very well revert to a semblance of his previous personality, but I doubt very much if he's going to be "Good". He may think of himself as a Good being forced to do unspeakable Evil by his circumstances, but that would simply be an excuse--the alignment would still say Evil.


Durkon is also the type, to me, who dwells on things he might have affected positively but did not for whatever reason. Hes going to see that friendship he rejected, and wonder what might have happened if he wasnt so hasty and fanatical. He'll wonder if he might have even been able to change Malacks alignment, regardless of how probable or not that would actually be.
Honestly, I doubt it. If his personality reasserts itself somewhat, he will likely hate Malack for turning him into the monstrosity he has become.


Durkon has some serious character development potential right now. I do not expect Rich to let it go to waste.

Whatever occurs next with Durkon, I think it will be complicated, rich, and deep.
This, I can agree with. I just do not think his relationship with Malack is in any way involved.

[Reddish Mage]

He didnt make me; I chose to write it all by myself :smallsmile:



Thats a lot of stereotyping. Its what caused Durkon to reject a close friend, and led to his ignominious death.

Not everything is so clean and black and white, I think is an overarching theme in OOTS.

Durkon is still going to be Durkon, and hes still going to have Durkons heart and mind. Durkons heart is good, even if his technical alignment is arbitrarily shifted against his consent. A good heart coupled with a mind filled with wisdom is going to have Durkon soul searching, so to speak.

Durkon is also the type, to me, who dwells on things he might have affected positively but did not for whatever reason. Hes going to see that friendship he rejected, and wonder what might have happened if he wasnt so hasty and fanatical. He'll wonder if he might have even been able to change Malacks alignment, regardless of how probable or not that would actually be.

-

Durkon has some serious character development potential right now. I do not expect Rich to let it go to waste.

Whatever occurs next with Durkon, I think it will be complicated, rich, and deep.

My post at 90 and here is what I think would likely in my own mind, knowing what I do about Durkon :smallsmile:

The notion of "evil" as just a arbitrary grouping or a technical label has not arisen in OOTS. Tarquin refers to it, and I keep expecting some villain to make a Merchant of Venice speech: "am I not (sorta-)human," "if you bypass my damage reduction will I not bleed" but we have yet to see an evil character that isn't really, well, evil:

Redcloak is a religious fantastic willing to sacrifice anything and anyone for his goal. Tarquin is a ruthless dictator. Malack wants to institute a regime of human sacrifice. Belkar had trouble with the notion that not everything can be killed for his amusement.

If Durkon would only be technically evil that would be something of a shift. Struggling or even confused about evil seems more likely.

[Perseus]

I seem to recall a diety that had demihumans followers regardless of being two steps out of alignment in one book.

Funny enough... Pelor has clerics that cast evil spells...

Look up "Pelor the burning hate".

Essentially even WoTC says all bets are off.

Edit... Also do note that Malack was burning unalive while screaming thrall... When you are burning unalive you may have a Freudian slip.

[Sir_Leorik]

The notion of "evil" as just a arbitrary grouping or a technical label has not arisen in OOTS. Tarquin refers to it, and I keep expecting some villain to make a Merchant of Venice speech: "am I not (sorta-)human," "if you bypass my damage reduction will I not bleed" but we have yet to see an evil character that isn't really, well, evil:


Right-Eye would be highly insulted by that comment. :smallmad:

[Sir_Leorik]

Funny enough... Pelor has clerics that cast evil spells...

Look up "Pelor the burning hate".

Essentially even WoTC says all bets are off.

Edit... Also do note that Malack was burning unalive while screaming thrall... When you are burning unalive you may have a Freudian slip.

That was a result of poor editing. Kind of like the reference to "Attack Actions" (a 3.0 concept) showing up in the 3.5 Monster Manual's "Vampire" entry. :smallannoyed:

[Porthos]

Look up "Pelor the burning hate".

*googles*

*reads first link*

*snickers*

Thanks. I needed that. :smallsmile:

[Belwynn]

Yes to all. I'm not sure where you remember me supporting Tarquin from, but I can assure you you're mistaken. Not only do I want Tarquin dead and to fail, I want him to die in the most ignominious and anticlimactic way possible; a forgotten failure, opposite in every way than his hopes and dreams.

I've thought quite a while on what Elan might have figured out on how to defeat his father and not give him the everlasting legacy. It could work for what you're looking for. It might be this:

Given how well-versed Elan is in storybook, I could see him defeating his father somewhere secluded, explaining his plan to his father before he died (death since I don't think Tarquin will walk willingly into the sunset, explanation because it's bardically appropriate), and ... disguise himself as Tarquin to assume control of the kingdoms. Why? Maybe in an effort to bring them down, maybe in an effort to lead them to democracy, definitely to try to ensure that the population is freed from tyranny. And maybe, just maybe to ensure his father's legacy ends up as nothing more than a footnote in history. Because that sort of thing is important to Elan. And hey, it makes Haley a queen in a land where the spas have magical treatments - bonus.

[Taelas]

Right-Eye would be highly insulted by that comment. :smallmad:

Right-Eye was True Neutral (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15667889&postcount=57), not Evil.

[Reddish Mage]

Right-Eye would be highly insulted by that comment. :smallmad:

Right-eye is officially neutral.


Lawful Neutral: Mr. Jones, The CPPD, Kilkil.
Chaotic Neutral: Julio Scoundrél, Jenny, Ian Starshine.
True Neutral: Gannji, Enor, Julia Greenhilt, Vaarsuvius, Mr. Scruffy, Therkla, Right-eye, The Oracle, Hank.
Neutral Evil: Tsukikko, Leeky Windstaff, Pompey, Zz'dtri, Bozzok, Crystal, Grubwiggler, the Snail.
Neutral Good: Lirain, Dorkuan, Kazumi & Daigo.

I'm sure there are others, and some I'm specifically not mentioning.

[Sir_Leorik]

Right-Eye was True Neutral (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15667889&postcount=57), not Evil.


Right-eye is officially neutral.

Spoilers for SoD:Right-Eye was originally Evil (probably Neutral Evil). He only became True Neutral after the diner scene with Eugene Greenhilt, and his decision to abandon the plan. Right-Eye's Alignment then shifted to True Neutral, which is the Alignment he had when he was killed.

[Taelas]

Spoilers for SoD:Right-Eye was originally Evil (probably Neutral Evil). He only became True Neutral after the diner scene with Eugene Greenhilt, and his decision to abandon the plan. Right-Eye's Alignment then shifted to True Neutral, which is the Alignment he had when he was killed.

Admittedly it's been a while since I read SoD, but...

... I can recall no evidence of an alignment change taking place, and no indication at all that Right-Eye was at any point any flavor of Evil.

Unless you have evidence to the contrary, this is nothing but speculation.

[Reddish Mage]

Spoilers for SoD:Right-Eye was originally Evil (probably Neutral Evil). He only became True Neutral after the diner scene with Eugene Greenhilt, and his decision to abandon the plan. Right-Eye's Alignment then shifted to True Neutral, which is the Alignment he had when he was killed.

Spoilers about what's not in SoD:
Not necessarily, Right-Eye really doesn't DO anything all that inconsistent with being neutral even before abandoning the cause, other than align himself with his evil brother and aid him and his cause. However, we know from the numerous characters on the Giant's list, that mere association is not enough. Therkla and Kilkil are both joined to such causes, and the Oracle follows an evil deity.

[Psyren]

I've thought quite a while on what Elan might have figured out on how to defeat his father and not give him the everlasting legacy. It could work for what you're looking for. It might be this:

Given how well-versed Elan is in storybook, I could see him defeating his father somewhere secluded, explaining his plan to his father before he died (death since I don't think Tarquin will walk willingly into the sunset, explanation because it's bardically appropriate), and ... disguise himself as Tarquin to assume control of the kingdoms. Why? Maybe in an effort to bring them down, maybe in an effort to lead them to democracy, definitely to try to ensure that the population is freed from tyranny. And maybe, just maybe to ensure his father's legacy ends up as nothing more than a footnote in history. Because that sort of thing is important to Elan. And hey, it makes Haley a queen in a land where the spas have magical treatments - bonus.

I don't think so - becoming Tarquin, even a benevolent Tarquin, would still accomplish the goal of making Tarquin a legend (even if it's a different Tarquin.)

[Perseus]

That was a result of poor editing. Kind of like the reference to "Attack Actions" (a 3.0 concept) showing up in the 3.5 Monster Manual's "Vampire" entry. :smallannoyed:

Normally I would agree but with something this big... It isn't an editing problem when you have pieces going to the same conclusion.

Plus you must admit that wotc doing it on purpose makes more sense than them making the greatest conspiracy in D&D by accident.

sarcasm Plus when is the last time they had an editing problem /sarcasm

[Kish]

Thats a lot of stereotyping. Its what caused Durkon to reject a close friend, and led to his ignominious death.
That's not what Rich said. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=14785214&postcount=197)

[pendell]

I've decided to stay out of most of the argument here, but I wanted to interject one thing: If I recall the Giant's writing from long ago -- search engine is broke so I can't find the specific one -- The Giant said once that he doesn't read Terry Pratchett deliberately so as to avoid being influenced by his work. He doesn't want to appear more derivative than he has to. So whatever Durkula does or does not do, it will not be borrowed from the Black Ribbon Society. The Giant has never heard of it save as a comment on his web boards. Doesn't mean that Durkula could not try to be a repentant vampire , or to be as lawful good as his condition allows. It's not like the whole "don't judge a book by it's cover" idea is foreign to OOTS :smallwink:.

Thing is, whatever Durkula is or does, he's going to be a different person. The closest real-world analogy I can think of is puberty. A person who's been through puberty just isn't going to view the world the same way as a preadolescent, even if the person is committed to being completely celibate. There are drives and desires and ways of relating to people that our preadolescent selves would have found incomprehensible or just plain gross.

I'm told it's common for preadolescents to swear never to get married or have anything to do with the opposite sex. It's easy to say that sort of thing when the hormones haven't hit yet. Continuing to say so when there's an overwhelming biological urge in your system the other way is a different story.

And that's the situation Durkon is in now. He now has an entirely new set of drives, urges, and biology which are more alien to living Durkon than adult Durkon's view is different from child Durkon's. Finding a way to reconcile those urges with normal society and the teachings of his god are hard enough in the best of times, doubly so because there's no one to help him. Most "good" people in the world will attempt to destroy him on the spot if they can. So it's small wonder most vampires don't even try. They simply succumb to their urges and live their lives as vampires do without concern for the sensibilities of the living. "I thought as a dwarf, I spoke as a dwarf , I reasoned as a dwarf; but when I became a vampire I put away dwarvish things."

Overcoming that, especially with no help from anyone save (possibly) his friends, is going to be tough.

For all the grief Malack gets, Malack can serve as a sort of role model for Durkon. Because Malack was evil but he was NOT a ravening monster. He did NOT prey on whomever he pleased but only on those already found guilty and sentenced to death in criminal court. And I'll wager he must not have drained them dry, or there would be a great deal more vampires wandering around Bleedingham than actually were.

So Durkula can start by imitating his "sire". If he wants to be lawful good or lawful neutral, he can't stop there, but it at least gives him a first goal in the baby steps towards redemption. The first step to being a good being is being a being with self-control who does NOT blindly succumb to his body's urges. Malack modeled that. So that's a first step. From there he will need to graduate to other role models or become one himself.

It'd be nice if there was some god who would take him under tutelage and help him to live in a good, or at least neutral, way in his current condition.

And if that thing doesn't exist yet in this world, and Durkon is the very first, then it is at the remote edge of plausibility that Durkula might very well refuse resurrection and remain a vampire, just so he can continue his new undeath's work in setting up a new religion by and for vampires so they can be more than ravening beasts. Black sheep with fangs will need a shepherd after all. And who knows, if there isn't a lawful good/lawful neutral god for the undead, he just might ascend and become that, just as the Dark One became god of goblins.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[RMS Oceanic]

I have to admit, Puberty is a very interesting metaphor for the new driving forces on Durkon. The caveat to this is that Durkon will have much more experience adhering to his duty/loyalty/etc than most teenagers, so if he's inclined to cling on to his old ways, he might fare better than those who make childhood promises. At least at first.

[pendell]

Saw this , seemed relevant (http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2013/07/kitten-fed-strict-vegan-diet-by-owners-nearly-dies.html) for a concept I had not yet encountered, the 'Obligate carnivore' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivore#Obligate_carnivores) (which cats are , but humans aren't). Durkon was an omnivore, and now he's an obligate sanguivore. That doesn't mean he has to be a ravening monster, but I sincerely hope people in-comic recognize this and make allowance for his needs, rather than condemn him for something he can't help. Condemning a vampire for living on blood makes no more sense than condemning a kitten for needing meat. But no one hates kittens or considers them evil even though they are literally born killers -- maybe if Durkula puts on a furry suit with whiskers? :)

BTW, the word 'sanguivore' comes from this link (http://phrontistery.info/feed.html).

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[RMS Oceanic]

I'm not saying Durkon will never drink blood - tangentially, there are no rules in the core SRD that compel a vampire to drink blood, but Rich has already said that blood is sustenance for vampires in Stickworld - but if he's inclined by inertia of his previous personality he would most likely find "vegetarian" means to slake his thirst: Monsters he fights, animals he can grab, etc. I believe sapient meals will be his last resort.

[Rakoa]

Durkon is a cleric, come on now. Assuming he rejoins the Order he could just feed on Roy (if Roy is willing) and get rid of the effects with Restoration or something.

[happycrow]

Pendell,

Valid point. An obligate sanguivore with an active connection to the negative energy plane, on the other hand, isn't quite the same thing as Mister Scruffy, no matter how one dices it.

re: the long discussion of Malack. Yeah, gigantic villain gets what's coming, suiting the needs of the narrative and allowing a brilliant expose on Nale. The villain had a few soft points and virtues -- most do, as real life aptly demonstrates.

[Shining Wrath]

He might not be dead yet. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/vampire.htm)

He still has the chance to get to his resting place and rejuvenate.


Exposing any vampire to direct sunlight disorients it: It can take only a single move action or attack action and is destroyed utterly in the next round if it cannot escape.

I don't think "utterly" leaves much wiggle room.


There are no rules for recharging a staff and I sincerely doubt Malack would have been THAT sentimental as to think that using a Staff would be more impersonal.



Durkon never died though, he merely became a Vampire (undeath). There is a distinct difference between dying and undying. Besides, it was a well known fact that Durkon was going to die in some form or another so I don't understand why this came as a shock to people when it occurred.



You stop that right now! :smallamused:

Putting myself in Durkon's shoes (sollerets), as a LG Dwarf Cleric, I would rather die 10,000 times for good and all, and be entombed next to my ancestors, than die once and come back as an evil undead thrall of an evil undead.

From Durkon's perspective, what Malack did to him was far worse than death. And yet, at the end, Durkon's thoughts were of his friends, rather than a pathetic scream for Thor to save him.

Durkon rules, now and forever. And Malack sucks, now and forever. So say I; so let it be written, so let it be inscribed upon the Order of the Stick banner.

[Psyren]

I don't think "utterly" leaves much wiggle room.

If you scrolled down a bit you'd see where Arcanist stood corrected.

[Sir_Leorik]

Saw this , seemed relevant (http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2013/07/kitten-fed-strict-vegan-diet-by-owners-nearly-dies.html) for a concept I had not yet encountered, the 'Obligate carnivore' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivore#Obligate_carnivores) (which cats are , but humans aren't). Durkon was an omnivore, and now he's an obligate sanguivore. That doesn't mean he has to be a ravening monster, but I sincerely hope people in-comic recognize this and make allowance for his needs, rather than condemn him for something he can't help. Condemning a vampire for living on blood makes no more sense than condemning a kitten for needing meat. But no one hates kittens or considers them evil even though they are literally born killers -- maybe if Durkula puts on a furry suit with whiskers? :)

BTW, the word 'sanguivore' comes from this link (http://phrontistery.info/feed.html).

Respectfully,

Brian P.


I'm not saying Durkon will never drink blood - tangentially, there are no rules in the core SRD that compel a vampire to drink blood, but Rich has already said that blood is sustenance for vampires in Stickworld - but if he's inclined by inertia of his previous personality he would most likely find "vegetarian" means to slake his thirst: Monsters he fights, animals he can grab, etc. I believe sapient meals will be his last resort.


Durkon is a cleric, come on now. Assuming he rejoins the Order he could just feed on Roy (if Roy is willing) and get rid of the effects with Restoration or something.

There's no reason Durkon would need to feed on the blood of sapient beings; he could Drain blood from rats he summons with his Children of the Night ability, sheep or chickens he purchases, or non-sapient magical beasts that he fights. He could also drain blood from a willing person and then cast restoration on them. However, Durkon may not be willing to do that if his Alignment has shifted to Evil.

[SavageWombat]

I want to see a scene of Durkon looking around at the other characters and seeing them all as beer mugs with legs. Because that's how it's going to feel for him.

[RMS Oceanic]

I want to see a scene of Durkon looking around at the other characters and seeing them all as beer mugs with legs. Because that's how it's going to feel for him.

Hey kids! See what the blood-sucking abomination is thinking! (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0031.html)

:belkar:: [Empty glass] Already drunk this...
:haley: [Orange juice] Too tangy and sweet.
:elan: [Flask of coffee] Too energetic.
:vaarsuvius:: [Antique wine] Now we're getting somewhere...
:roy:: [Fine ale] Mmmmm...

:smalltongue:

[pendell]

There's no reason Durkon would need to feed on the blood of sapient beings; he could Drain blood from rats he summons with his Children of the Night ability, sheep or chickens he purchases, or non-sapient magical beasts that he fights. He could also drain blood from a willing person and then cast restoration on them. However, Durkon may not be willing to do that if his Alignment has shifted to Evil.


Point of order: We haven't yet established that vampires in OOTSverse can survive on nonsapient blood. We HAVE established, in the scene where he fed on Belkar, that he does not need to drain his victim to death to gain nourishment from him.

So while we don't know yet if Durkon can survive without dining on sapient beings, we DO know he can live without being a killer.

*Ponders* I wonder if Create Food And Water could be modified to create a vampire's nourishment? That would solve many problems, yet in some ways it seems cheap.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[RMS Oceanic]

Point of order: We haven't yet established that vampires in OOTSverse can survive on nonsapient blood. We HAVE established, in the scene where he fed on Belkar, that he does not need to drain his victim to death to gain nourishment from him.

That's fair, although I don't think being limited to sapient blood - a blood elemental? :smalltongue: - for sustenance is nearly as universal among vampires as the need for sunscreen is, so I'll admit that I don't think that will be part of the dilemma. I am open to being proven wrong however.

[SavageWombat]

Hey kids! See what the blood-sucking abomination is thinking! (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0031.html)

:belkar:: [Empty glass] Already drunk this...
:haley: [Orange juice] Too tangy and sweet.
:elan: [Flask of coffee] Too energetic.
:vaarsuvius:: [Antique wine] Now we're getting somewhere...
:roy:: [Fine ale] Mmmmm...

:smalltongue:

Precisely, and thanks for the elaboration.

[sam79]

Hey kids! See what the blood-sucking abomination is thinking! (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0031.html)

:belkar:: [Empty glass] Already drunk this...
:haley: [Orange juice] Too tangy and sweet.
:elan: [Flask of coffee] Too energetic.
:vaarsuvius:: [Antique wine] Now we're getting somewhere...
:roy:: [Fine ale] Mmmmm...

:smalltongue:

And also, you win.

[Sir_Leorik]

Point of order: We haven't yet established that vampires in OOTSverse can survive on nonsapient blood. We HAVE established, in the scene where he fed on Belkar, that he does not need to drain his victim to death to gain nourishment from him.

So while we don't know yet if Durkon can survive without dining on sapient beings, we DO know he can live without being a killer.

*Ponders* I wonder if Create Food And Water could be modified to create a vampire's nourishment? That would solve many problems, yet in some ways it seems cheap.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Since the "OotS"-verse isn't The Demiplane of Dread, and the Dark Powers aren't secretly manipulating the fabric of reality to deprive the nutrition that Vampires would otherwise get from non-sapient beings in order to force them to drink the blood of intelligent creatures, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that "OotS" Vampires can drink the blood of animals and non-sapient magical beasts. I think Malack just prefered the taste of humans and Lizardfolk. :smallbiggrin:

[ArlEammon]

He's dead.

That's the main reason why I made sure to show him in gaseous form during the Durkon/Malack fight, because that showed that when a vampire is gaseous, they take their equipment with them. Malack's stuff is still there. Hence, he's ash.

Rats. I was hoping he had some other trick up his sleeve.

[Shale]

Also, when you live in a barely-habitable desert where Create Food And Water is the key to survival, it's a lot easier to find intelligent (and thus magic-using) creatures than nonsapient animals.

[SavageWombat]

Rings of Sustenance are also quite cheap, as magic items go. Though most DMs would consider this a cop-out.

[Magesmiley]

Well, now that Malack is dusted, Durkon is no longer his thrall.

So, any theories as to what happens next? Does he regain full free will and rejoin the OotS (while still evil)?

My money is no. I'm betting that he heads back to his homeland and brings doom and destruction.

Most likely his alignment shift is going to make Durkon view the priest's order to leave, and the priest's 'ignoring' of the letter Durkon sent while at Azure City in a most unfavorable light. Probably enough to make him go on a bitter rampage through his homeland.

[Shale]

Bear in mind that the OOTS' northward path to Kraagor's gate likely goes straight through the dwarven lands. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

[pendell]

Yeah, like being a bloodthirsty monster without a conscience is some sort of disqualification for being in the OOTS. I think the biggest danger is that Belkar will be constantly after Durkula to vamp him as well until Durkula uses Dominating Gaze to shut him up. :smallamused:

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[pendell]

Actually, that'd be a challenge for any artists -- a pinup of the OOTS as an all-vampire party. We already have Roy as Vampire (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0474.html), Goth Haley (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0093.html), Vampire Belkar (someone has an avatar of that) and Darth V (looks like a vampire with the fangs). So all we need is Vampire Elan and we're set!

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[theNater]

My money is no. I'm betting that he heads back to his homeland and brings doom and destruction.

Most likely his alignment shift is going to make Durkon view the priest's order to leave, and the priest's 'ignoring' of the letter Durkon sent while at Azure City in a most unfavorable light. Probably enough to make him go on a bitter rampage through his homeland.
I don't see Durkon as the rampage type, even if he goes evil. I figure he just wants to go home and find a nice, deep, dark, quiet hole to live in. Maybe sire a few offspring, maybe entertain the occasional guest who can provide civil and stimulating conversation.

And may the gods have mercy on any who stand in his way. He sure won't have any reason to.

[JBiddles]

I, for one, hope that he is still Durkon, but having to deal with Thor rejecting him and being connected to the Negative Energy Plane, constantly having to will himself not to drink blood (the Giant will find some way to make it original). Turning Evil" by force makes the alignment system pointless, if one can be Evil through pure bad luck. Perhaps it could be interesting if vampirism removed Durkon's sense of empathy, rather than just flatly "making him Evil". Durkon would have to logically reason out his morality, and most vampires weren't Good enough in life even to bother enough to try, but not the tree-hating wonder.

[Balmas]

Hmm. I can't help but note that Nale's group is down a cleric. And that with the staff full of protection spells, Durkon wouldn't need to research it.

[RMS Oceanic]

Hmm. I can't help but note that Nale's group is down a cleric. And that with the staff full of protection spells, Durkon wouldn't need to research it.

Staffs don't last forever. If he depends on it without making other preparations he has roughly six weeks of sunlight at most left.

[Bird]

Staffs don't last forever. If he depends on it without making other preparations he has roughly six weeks of sunlight at most left.
Sure, though OotS could be wrapped up in six in-story weeks, and Durkula has much longer to work with than that if he can avoid sunglight altogether some days.

[Jay R]

Staffs don't last forever. If he depends on it without making other preparations he has roughly six weeks of sunlight at most left.

It's worth remembering that the quest they are on involves defeating a group of people who have an Umbrella of Darkness.

[Sir_Leorik]

Staffs don't last forever. If he depends on it without making other preparations he has roughly six weeks of sunlight at most left.

Maybe that's why he'll be heading back to the Dwarven Homelands: there isn't much direct sunlight under a mountain. :smalltongue:

[Fish]

It's worth remembering that the quest they are on involves defeating a group of people who have an Umbrella of Darkness.
And wants to bask in the light. Could be bad.

[veti]

Actually, that'd be a challenge for any artists -- a pinup of the OOTS as an all-vampire party. We already have Roy as Vampire (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0474.html), Goth Haley (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0093.html), Vampire Belkar (someone has an avatar of that) and Darth V (looks like a vampire with the fangs). So all we need is Vampire Elan and we're set!

I can see Elan dressing up for the occasion, with leather and eyeliner...

[Bedinsis]

Durkon had all the reason in the world to attack Nale(since he is an enemy of the Order).

Durkula has all the reason in the world to attack Nale(since he killed his master).

So I believe we'll see a battle.

Ha! Called it!