Could Durkon ressurect himself?

[somethingrandom]

We know that Durkon can cast raise dead and Roy's comments in 911 imply that he can cast resurrection so could be resurrect himself and stop being a vampire?

[Porthos]

We know that Durkon can cast raise dead and Roy's comments in 911 imply that he can cast resurrection so could be resurrect himself and stop being a vampire?

No. Resurrection doesn't work on undead. The undead has to be, well, dead for the spell to work.

[Kish]

On the other hand, if he has the Scribe Scroll feat, he could make a scroll which would permit Haley or--in the unlikely event that Haley lacks sufficient Use Magic Device skill--any novice cleric to resurrect him after he stakes himself.

[137beth]

On the other hand, if he has the Scribe Scroll feat, he could make a scroll which would permit Haley or--in the unlikely event that Haley lacks sufficient Use Magic Device skill--any novice cleric to resurrect him after he stakes himself.

On the other hand, this would not be very good for the plot--it would nullify Durkon's dramatic death.

[SinsI]

Not with the standard spells, but he can scribe a scroll for others to use on him or try and research something functionally equivalent to Contingent Resurrection and destroy himself afterward for it to activate.

[Thousandface]

I'm actually pretty sure you can resurrect a willing undead back into mortal form. Its just that, being sentient, standard rules apply. Durkon has to want to be raised from the dead. I doubt they have to destroy him. I could be wrong, and since I'm posting from work, I can't comb through the Monster Manual to check, but I'm almost positive that's how it works. It might even work on himself too.

[hamishspence]

The spell description says you can resurrect a being that's been turned into an undead creature and then destroyed:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/resurrection.htm

with the implication that you can't resurrect it while it's still an undead creature.

[Katuko]

Since Cure spells harm undead, I've just assumed that casting Resurrection upon an undead creature will likewise harm it; possibly force its destruction right there. In video game RPGs that use the cure-hurt-undead rule, low-level undead can sometimes be killed by casting a revive spell on them.

[littlebum2002]

Since Cure spells harm undead, I've just assumed that casting Resurrection upon an undead creature will likewise harm it; possibly force its destruction right there. In video game RPGs that use the cure-hurt-undead rule, low-level undead can sometimes be killed by casting a revive spell on them.

Wasn't there a really powerful boss in FFX you could kill that way?

EDIT:
Nevermind. I'm thinking of one of the Seymour bosses who would use that strategy on YOU.

[Masema]

The spell description says you can resurrect a being that's been turned into an undead creature and then destroyed:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/resurrection.htm

with the implication that you can't resurrect it while it's still an undead creature.

Furthermore, It also states clearly that
Constructs, elementals, outsiders, and undead creatures can’t be resurrected.Ergo, you would need to kill it again to raise it.

[Markozeta]

Wasn't there a really powerful boss in FFX you could kill that way?

EDIT:
Nevermind. I'm thinking of one of the Seymour bosses who would use that strategy on YOU.

The last one. Final form of Yu Yevon, after you defeat all of the summons, then you throw a phoenix down on it and it dies is defeated.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Wasn't there a really powerful boss in FFX you could kill that way?

EDIT:
Nevermind. I'm thinking of one of the Seymour bosses who would use that strategy on YOU.

There's been a couple of bosses like that in the series - most of the Undead ones, actually. The Phantom Train in Final Fantasy VI (the Giant's own favorite, if memory serves) is one of the best remembered, but there's also folks like Siren in FFV (if you're willing to waste a Phoenix Down that early) and the doppelganger President Deling in FFVIII (also the boss of a train level).

This still isn't how it works in D&D, though. You want to (nearly) one-shot an Undead-type, smack it with Heal.

[Snails]

Since Cure spells harm undead, I've just assumed that casting Resurrection upon an undead creature will likewise harm it; possibly force its destruction right there. In video game RPGs that use the cure-hurt-undead rule, low-level undead can sometimes be killed by casting a revive spell on them.

Your reasoning is sound enough, but 3e works slightly differently to keep it simpler.

In earlier edition of D&D, a Resurrection spell cast on an undead creature had the effect of destroying (killing) the undead creature, if it failed its save.

In 3e, you can just use the Destruction spell on nearly anything to get the usual result, including undead.

[Snails]

On the other hand, if he has the Scribe Scroll feat, he could make a scroll which would permit Haley or--in the unlikely event that Haley lacks sufficient Use Magic Device skill--any novice cleric to resurrect him after he stakes himself.

That would work.

Not that this is a big deal, but I would rate it a bit of an "oversight" that Roy and V did not recognize this possibility, as I think they had the knowledge to figure out this sequence of actions was logically available, assuming the vampire was willing.

It would not have changed anything. But raising the possibility could have been a useful discussion, to prove out whether the vampire was genuinely sincere. Under the scenario on hand, Greg would have argued that would be a fine backup plan, but the godsmoot was the straightforward way to fix things quickly.

[durron597]

We know that Durkon can cast raise dead and Roy's comments in 911 imply that he can cast resurrection so could be resurrect himself and stop being a vampire?

It's been pretty explicit that Durkon's soul is trapped in Durkula's body. Seems like that would make it impossible to resurrect Durkon until Durkula is dead.

[NerdyKris]

It's been pretty explicit that Durkon's soul is trapped in Durkula's body. Seems like that would make it impossible to resurrect Durkon until Durkula is dead.

The post you're responding to was made months before that was revealed. In 911, there wasn't any indication that Vampire Durkon was anything other than Durkon but with an evil alignment.

[Peelee]

The real question is, can this thread resurrect itself?

[Anteros]

Gosh, has Durkon really been undead for 3 years? It doesn't feel like the plot has moved at all since then.

[Quebbster]

Gosh, has Durkon really been undead for 3 years? It doesn't feel like the plot has moved at all since then.

I started Reading around Three years ago, just Before Belkar started posing for Heavy metal covers I Believe. It took around 25-30 strips to finish up on the Western continent. The next 50 strips or so was spent on the airship and in Tinkertown, giving exposition, setting up future storylines (see: All the discussion about a potential Mechane mutiny) and resolving the storyline of Crystal and Bozzok. Then Another 30-35 strips at the Godsmoot. Then a dozen strips detailing what Team Evil is up to, and now we are trying to get through Passage Pass. Quite a bit has happened I would say.

[BaronOfHell]

Constructs, elementals, outsiders, and undead creatures can’t be resurrected.Furthermore, It also states clearly that Ergo, you would need to kill it again to raise it.

I understand the d20 srd quote to mean that using rez on a slain construct, elemental, outsider or undead won't return that unit to the form it had before, assuming the spell even will have an effect such as in Durkon's case.

[Dragonexx]

I started Reading around Three years ago, just Before Belkar started posing for Heavy metal covers I Believe. It took around 25-30 strips to finish up on the Western continent. The next 50 strips or so was spent on the airship and in Tinkertown, giving exposition, setting up future storylines (see: All the discussion about a potential Mechane mutiny) and resolving the storyline of Crystal and Bozzok. Then Another 30-35 strips at the Godsmoot. Then a dozen strips detailing what Team Evil is up to, and now we are trying to get through Passage Pass. Quite a bit has happened I would say.

It really feels like a lot of filler though. Not much has happened to advance either the characters or the plot really.

[Kish]

If you can say that seriously, I have no idea what you think the plot is--unless it's as simple as "the Order throwing down with Xykon is the plot, everything else is filler," in which case, a tiny fraction of the plot is what you're thinking of as "the plot" and this isn't an especially good place to start complaining about it.

Greg--not Xykon--is the villain of the current book. My advice is to either accept it, or check back in two years to see if the things going up on the website then "advance the plot" in your eyes.

[TheNecrocomicon]

Essentially, the whole book is a sidequest on steroids, and I get that.

I also get that people are frustrated because, as well-paced and compelling as the first 50-or-so strips of this book were, it then (going by the Publishing Dates thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?496011-Publishing-dates/page2)) took roughly eight months across 35 strips to resolve the Godsmoot, which basically had four conclusive outcomes in the narrative: (1) the world is really at stake, as if it wasn't before, (2) the party realizes Lurkon is not Durkon anymore, (3) Roy learned a little more about his greatsword, and (4) the party has to continue pursuing Lurkon & Associates to the dwarven lands. It gave more of a sense of urgency, and gave Roy and maybe Belkar a whole bunch of XP, but what else?

Subsequently, the party has now been fighting their way through the mountain pass for a dozen strips across four months. As far as the narrative structure of the book goes, this is not the main villain (Lurkon) and his lackeys, this is an outside force looking to impede their journey. Sure, this is a narrative aftershock of the Godsmoot, but tough as this encounter is, there is no way their story ends here.

I get that the end goal is to assemble compelling books at a future date, but at the same time, it's the present readers here and now who are the first wave of people likely to buy said books if they enjoy the story in webcomic form. Also, the current readers are the most likely to spread word-of-mouth to their buddies to read OOTS and buy the books (or to give them as gifts, etc.). If the answer to current readers is "Well, come back in two years and see if the next hundred strips make story progress that you like", then a lot of them are going to forget it and not come back.

I hate to take this further off-topic and I hate to be the voice of impatience, but that's how I see the story lately.

[littlebum2002]

It really feels like a lot of filler though. Not much has happened to advance either the characters or the plot really.


Essentially, the whole book is a sidequest on steroids, and I get that.

I mean, not any more than No Cure For the Paladin Blues or Don't Split the Party

[Lord Torath]

Well, in 2E AD&D or BX/BECMI/RC, casting resurrection on an undead creature "killed" the undead. So Durkula Greg (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1030.html) could cast it on himself (Resurrection had a range of Touch), but would then need someone else to cast it on his remains to bring Durkon back to life.

[Cizak]

Essentially, the whole book is a sidequest on steroids, and I get that.

I don't think I will ever understand people who chooses to go "I have decided what the plot is, and so when the author is writing about something that is not exactly that, it's not the main plot" over "So this is what the author is writing about now, that means this must be part of the main plot". The Giant had a good quote somewhere about yelling at him for not putting his square peg in the reader's round hole.

[Jasdoif]

As far as the narrative structure of the book goes, this is not the main villain (Lurkon) and his lackeys, this is an outside force looking to impede their journey.I believe the term is "threshold guardians". Showing/Reinforcing that while the Order of the Stick needs the crew of the Mechane to move forward in their quest, the crew of the Mechane aren't capable of moving forward without the Order of the Stick.


The Giant had a good quote somewhere about yelling at him for not putting his square peg in the reader's round hole.It's kind of a big one:


The MacGuffin is not the antagonist. The MacGuffin is the object sought by the antagonist. Narratively speaking, it does not matter what it does—only that the antagonist is willing to kill the protagonist to get it. That is the source of the conflict. It does not matter what is in the rift, it matters who is willing to kill whom to get it, even if they are mistaken about its usefulness. What is in the rift is only important insofar as it may, at some point, change who is willing to kill whom and why. And that IS important, because those details will change the shape of what happens, but not as the source of conflict. The Snarl is not the threat; Xykon is the threat. The Snarl's powers have as much relevance to the quest to get the Snarl as the exact properties of the glowing briefcase have on the plot of Pulp Fiction, or the exact dollar value of the statue in The Maltese Falcon.

Likewise, the setting is not the protagonist. What happens to the world is only important because the protagonists are the sort of people who care about what happens to the world. If Team Evil or the Linear Guild kills the entire Order of the Stick and then takes the Gate only to find that it does not do what they thought it did...how does that help the Order of the Stick? They will still be dead, and the story is about them. The Linear Guild is not a threat because they will do something bad with the Gate; they are a threat because they will kill the Order of the Stick to do it. At the end of Star Wars, one does not care that the Death Star is about to blow up Yavin 4; one cares that the Death Star is about to kill the protagonists, some of whom happen to be on Yavin 4.

If one does not care about the protagonists or antagonists and is not emotionally invested in their struggles—whether those struggles are external or internal, relevant to the MacGuffin plot or not—and all one cares about is the resolution of the MacGuffin chase, then you will almost certainly be bored with a lot of the material I'm producing. And more importantly, I won't care. The Snarl plot is part of the armature upon which I hang the characters' conflicts; it is not the whole of the story. The strip is titled The Order of the Stick, not The Chase for the Snarl or even Saving the World. Ultimately, it seems like you want the story to be about things it is not going to be about, so it's unlikely you are ever going to enjoy it.

[Ruck]

A necro thread with complaints about the plot... what's not to love?

[Cizak]

It's kind of a big one:

Yeah, that one pretty much sums it up, though I think there's another one where he explicitly uses the "peg and hole" analogy.

[137beth]

I don't think I will ever understand people who chooses to go "I have decided what the plot is, and so when the author is writing about something that is not exactly that, it's not the main plot" over "So this is what the author is writing about now, that means this must be part of the main plot". The Giant had a good quote somewhere about yelling at him for not putting his square peg in the reader's round hole.


I believe the term is "threshold guardians". Showing/Reinforcing that while the Order of the Stick needs the crew of the Mechane to move forward in their quest, the crew of the Mechane aren't capable of moving forward without the Order of the Stick.

It's kind of a big one:


Yeah, that one pretty much sums it up, though I think there's another one where he explicitly uses the "peg and hole" analogy.

I believe you are referring to another post in the same thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?273656-The-current-main-plot-is-boring&p=14839129&highlight=type#post14839129).

How does it not occur to you that it is far more likely that you are miscategorizing OOTS than that I am making an elaborate series of mistakes in telling my own story?

This is me, the author, telling you that you are wrong. It's the second kind. It has been for a long time, certainly since the "Haley's Aphasia" plotline. You're looking at my Type #2 story and complaining that I haven't made it Type #1 enough. Mind you, I don't actually agree that those are the only two types of story, but within the context that you have set up? You're jamming a square peg into a round hole and then blaming the peg maker for it not being round enough.

[Kish]

yelling at him for not putting his square peg in the reader's round hole.
:smallredface::smallredface::smallredface:

[TheNecrocomicon]

I don't think I will ever understand people who chooses to go "I have decided what the plot is, and so when the author is writing about something that is not exactly that, it's not the main plot" over "So this is what the author is writing about now, that means this must be part of the main plot". The Giant had a good quote somewhere about yelling at him for not putting his square peg in the reader's round hole.

When it comes to the current book, sure, stopping Lurkon and hopefully resurrecting Durkon is the immediate and present main plot.

When it comes to the webcomic as a whole, the overarching plotline has been stopping Xykon, intertwined with resolving the existential threat of the Snarl.

In every D&D campaign, there are things that are integral to the main quest and there are sidequests which may or may not have a bearing on the central plot line. We will see in due course whether or not the living Durkon is integral to the quest to stop Xykon and remove the threat of the Snarl. Maybe he is critical enough to be saved, maybe he's expendable, but either way this book seems to be more about developing the characters' relations with one another instead of with the rest of the world.

---------------

Anyways, Durkon most likely cannot resurrect himself, primarily because by all indications he really is powerless to stop or even impede Lurkon, who has essentially taken total control at this point. Maybe there are things that could give Durkon the willpower to resist, as a prisoner in his own mind, but short of encountering his mother or other family members, I cannot imagine what that might be.

And if Lurkon and the shared physical body are destroyed to set up a conventional Resurrection, after this ordeal and with a happy afterlife earned by a death in battle, it will be quite a longshot convincing Durkon's spirit to come back to a mortal existence. Unless he then meets his father in the afterlife, who convinces him to go back to finish the quest at hand, but then that seems like a total retread of Roy's character arc post-Azure-City.

[Cizak]

When it comes to the current book, sure, stopping Lurkon and hopefully resurrecting Durkon is the immediate and present main plot.

When it comes to the webcomic as a whole, the overarching plotline has been stopping Xykon, intertwined with resolving the existential threat of the Snarl.


Should I just quote, myself, or...? I'll try to rephrase.

I don't think I will ever understand people who chooses to go "I have decided which overarching plotline represents the work as a whole, and so when the author is writing about something that is not exactly that, it's not part of the overarching plot" over "So this is what the author is writing about now, that must mean it's part of their overarching plot".

Did... did I do it?


In every D&D campaign,

Since OotS is not a DnD campaign, this set of words has no place in any post claiming to be analytical of the story.

[Jasdoif]

Maybe he is critical enough to be saved, maybe he's expendable, but either way this book seems to be more about developing the characters' relations with one another instead of with the rest of the world.This book does more obviously focus on the actual story being told than the Xykon/Gate/Snarl scaffolding that story is loosely built on, yes.

[TheNecrocomicon]

Should I just quote, myself, or...? I'll try to rephrase.

I don't think I will ever understand people who chooses to go "I have decided which overarching plotline represents the work as a whole, and so when the author is writing about something that is not exactly that, it's not part of the overarching plot" over "So this is what the author is writing about now, that must mean it's part of their overarching plot".

Did... did I do it?

...

Since OotS is not a DnD campaign, this set of words has no place in any post claiming to be analytical of the story.

You seriously think I'm so dense that I didn't read you the first time? Way to patronize, thanks.

I do think that readers are intelligent enough to analyze 1061 strips of a webcomic (plus bonus material) and determine, in general terms, what the central plotline or "quest" tends to be in the context given to them. Sure, so the plot meanders, and with good reasons, but it still generally points in the same direction. I'll use the analogy of a river -- it divides and recombines, it has tributaries, it meanders and winds, it has rocks and islands and rapids and marshes in its course, but it still inexorably flows down towards the sea.

You've made your point; obviously, the outcomes of the efforts to stop Lurkon in this book will have great ramifications for the final struggle against Xykon. What frustrates me is your insistence on building this black-and-white strawman argument that people must either fall into Neat Little Box A of "I think this is totally irrelevant to the plot" or Neat Little Box B of "I think this is absolutely integral to the plot". Believe it or not, there are those of us who are still trying to decide what opinions to hold about ongoing storyline events.

Is something critical? Is it padding? Is an arc simply meant to wow us with neat artwork and badass action? Is this setting up other small(er) spinoff events? Something else? It takes quite a long time to know, and I get why that frustrates some people while others are fine with it.

Also, OotS is intentionally based on and parodying D&D, which is generally built around campaign storylines (unless one-off sessions are your thing). So yes, what we're reading is essentially a D&D campaign for the characters involved, and the author is (or equates to) the DM.

[Kish]

You seriously think I'm so dense that I didn't read you the first time? Way to patronize, thanks.

I do think that readers are intelligent enough to analyze 1061 strips of a webcomic (plus bonus material) and determine, in general terms, what the central plotline or "quest" tends to be in the context given to them.
No need to speculate. We can observe that readers regularly post some variation on "when do we get past this filler and back to the plot?" which generally means "when does the Order clash with Xykon again?" (though, a while ago, at least one person did use it to mean when the Order would again clash with the Linear Guild, "the bad guys" of the comic, not whatshisname the lich).


You've made your point; obviously, the outcomes of the efforts to stop Lurkon in this book will have great ramifications for the final struggle against Xykon.
See, no. That's you jamming his point (the main plot is the story of the Order, whether they're fighting Xykon or Bozzok) into the greater framework of the assumption which you made and which he's challenging (that if it doesn't involve Xykon it's a side plot). That is not getting, or even acknowledging, his point; it's just trying to co-opt it.

[littlebum2002]

A necro thread with complaints about the plot... what's not to love?

Tell me about it. I've been on the edge of my seat for 3 years trying to figure out what FF boss I was talking about.

[Cizak]

You seriously think I'm so dense that I didn't read you the first time?

You quoted me and wrote a post that completely missed (or ignored) the point I was making. So... I dunno... what answer do you want me to give to that question?


You've made your point; obviously, the outcomes of the efforts to stop Lurkon in this book will have great ramifications for the final struggle against Xykon.

Claiming someone's made their point immediately followed by a sentence that proves you don't get their point. usually doesn't work as an argument.


What frustrates me is your insistence on building this black-and-white strawman argument that people must either fall into Neat Little Box A of "I think this is totally irrelevant to the plot" or Neat Little Box B of "I think this is absolutely integral to the plot".

Claiming someone made a strawman argument immediately followed by a false representation of the options they have previously set up usually doesn't work as an argument, either.

But, to clear out any confusion and potential misunderstandings, when you stated:

Essentially, the whole book is a sidequest on steroids, and I get that.
You were claiming that the current storyline is a sidequest because it doesn't involve the immediate conflict between the Order and Xykon, correct?

And when you stated:

When it comes to the current book, sure, stopping Lurkon and hopefully resurrecting Durkon is the immediate and present main plot.

When it comes to the webcomic as a whole, the overarching plotline has been stopping Xykon, intertwined with resolving the existential threat of the Snarl.
You were reinforcing your viewpoint that the current storyline is a sidequest from the main storyline, because it's not about the immediate conflict between the Order and Xykon, correct?

If my understandings of your posts are not correct, then there has been various miscommunications from various sides, and the ongoing argument is deeply flawed.

If they are correct, you do fit within my neat little box of people who choose to go "I have decided which overarching plotline represents the work as a whole, and so when the author is writing about something that is not exactly that, it's not part of the overarching plot" over "So this is what the author is writing about now, that must mean it's part of their overarching plot". Which is something I don't think I will ever understand.


Also, OotS is intentionally based on and parodying D&D, which is generally built around campaign storylines (unless one-off sessions are your thing).

*Game show (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0606.html) buzzer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?282328-Class-and-Level-Geekery-X-deals-1d6-thread-damage/page5&p=15200597#post15200597) noise.* (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?211840-Slight-Confusion&p=11664910#post11664910)

Played campaigns are only one part of DnD, and just so happens to be a part that Rich has no interest in commenting on. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?431127-Subtle-dig-at-godless-clerics&p=19608137#post19608137)

Another part would be the rules, which he has shown interest in commenting on, at least in the past.

These days, I would say the parts of DnD that Rich has interesting in commenting on are the story telling aspects, and more broadly story telling aspects as a whole, beyond DnD. I base this on more recent statements from Rich and the general tone of the comic thus far. I might be proved wrong with added evidence in the future, but as it stands I can't see how it's supposed to represent a DnD campaign.


So yes, what we're reading is essentially a D&D campaign for the characters involved, and the author is (or equates to) the DM.

An author of a story is a vastly different role than the DM of a story. As one example out of thousands, the DM has to work together with other people to create their story, while the author is able to do it alone; Rich is the author to OotS, not the DM.

There's also the fact that they way OotS has played out as a story would make it nigh unplayable as a campaign. But I suppose that would part of the underlying message if you subscribe to the notion that the story is a DnD campaign? Seems to me, though, that such a message would be wearing thin incredibly fast. I can only stomach the joke "I'm satirizing X by showing only the worst ways X can be used" for so long.

[NerdyKris]

Tell me about it. I've been on the edge of my seat for 3 years trying to figure out what FF boss I was talking about.

Gi Nattak (http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Gi_Nattak) from FF7 or Soulcage (http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Soulcage) from FF9? The former dies instantly, the latter is reduced to one hitpoint.

[Jasdoif]

You were reinforcing your viewpoint that the current storyline is a sidequest from the main storyline, because it's not about the immediate conflict between the Order and Xykon, correct?Huh. Even in that light, I don't think the arc would qualify as a sidequest.

OOTS is off to prevent the world from being destroyed, by preventing HPoH from rigging a vote. A HPoH that only got involved because Durkon was vampirized, and a voting that only came up because Roy destroyed Girard's Gate.

The arc stems directly from Durkon's defeat and Roy's decision (which arose in opposition to Xykon), and the destruction of the world would directly obviate the Xykon conflict (since it removes the world they're trying to keep him from taking over). A sidequest is defined by its detachment from more primary quests; there's simply too much interdependency for this to be a sidequest. A parallel or secondary arc, maybe.


Of course, if Order of the Stick's plot is viewed as following Roy and the Order of the Stick around, and how they deal with various internal and external conflicts, this book is still a secondary arc; one about how they deal with a scenario of their own unintentional making. Just like Blood Runs in Family is a secondary arc about how they deal with groups whose motives appear to conflict, and Don't Split the Party is a secondary arc about how they deal with the loss of Roy, and War and XPs is a secondary arc about how they deal with problems they'll ill-equipped to handle, and No Cure for the Paladin Blues is a secondary arc about how they deal with problems they can't ignore, and Dungeon Crawlin' Fools is a secondary arc about how they deal with a mission they set out to achieve.

Why, it's almost as though the whole thing is an episodic series, with a consistent episode structure and intertwined plot elements!

[Darth V]

... main plot...

... side quest...

... filler...




You keep using these words.
I dont't think the main plot is what you think the main plot is. :smallsigh:






[...] this book seems to be more about developing the characters' relations with one another instead of with the rest of the world.




Yes, exactly! Which is incidentally the same as for Blood Runs In The Family, Don't Split The Party, War And XPs, No Cure For The Paladin Blues and Dungeon Crawlin' Fools. Do you sense a pattern here? :smallwink:

[Spellbreaker26]

I'm not sure how anyone could look at the story and see it as anything other than a main plot about protecting the gates.

With the exception of the various times the group is attacked by Nale (whose story gradually combines with that of the main plot) and the incident at the inn, the plot is related either directly or tangentally to the gates. That's not to say that other things happening is just filler, just that it provides a think trunk around which the many smaller branches of the story takes place.

I don't know why they're fighting a bunch of Giants. At a guess, it's a way of filling out how their powers have changed and gearing us up for the confrontation with Darkon. (And possibily might lead to them being abandoned by the Mechane) But some of the best moments of the story haven't advanced the main plot much at all (Bandit battle, Elan's escape from prison, just mucking about in Azure City).

At the same time, there is such a thing as Arc Fatigue, but I don't think that this particular fight has hit that yet.

[hroþila]

The gods are worried that the Gate situation is out of control and many of them want to nuke the world and start over. Hel wants to rig the vote, the Order of the Stick wants to prevent that so that the gods give them another chance to deal with the problem. Thrym, one of Hel's allies, wants to stop them. It has more to do with the Gates plot than, say, DStP.

[Jasdoif]

I'm not sure how anyone could look at the story and see it as anything other than a main plot about protecting the gates.

With the exception of the various times the group is attacked by Nale (whose story gradually combines with that of the main plot) and the incident at the inn, the plot is related either directly or tangentally to the gates. That's not to say that other things happening is just filler, just that it provides a think trunk around which the many smaller branches of the story takes place.

I don't know why they're fighting a bunch of Giants. At a guess, it's a way of filling out how their powers have changed and gearing us up for the confrontation with Darkon. (And possibily might lead to them being abandoned by the Mechane) But some of the best moments of the story haven't advanced the main plot much at all (Bandit battle, Elan's escape from prison, just mucking about in Azure City).Right, the gates are what the story takes place around. They're only important because of the various groups willing to annihilate each other over them. The Order of the Stick is one such group, and their difficulties and how they overcome them, or succumb to them, is what the story is. (I think I can trust the Giant's evaluation of how he writes his own comic.)

The various conflicts of the Order of the Stick relate directly to Nale, and Xykon, and Miko, and Crystal, and Tarquin, and HPoH....Even the incident at the inn only had the chance of occurring because Roy and Miko were willing to agree enough to stay at an inn in the first place, a sense of agreement Roy abandoned as a result of working through the incident (which is what gives it any significance).


Now, I do understand what you're saying: External conflicts are much easier to identify even in character-driven works; and if I had to choose the single most significant source of external conflict in the story, I'd say the Gates too. But the members of the Order of the Stick are rather clearly the POV characters here, and with the number of exceptions and tangential connections to the Gate storyline that entails (Dungeon Crawlin' Fools they don't even know a Gate exists until near the end, No Cure for the Paladin Blues they don't understand why the Gates are important until near the end, Don't Split the Party has them as a background detail); it's really hard for me to buy that it could be the "main plot".

[Spellbreaker26]

Now, I do understand what you're saying: External conflicts are much easier to identify even in character-driven works; and if I had to choose the single most significant source of external conflict in the story, I'd say the Gates too. But the members of the Order of the Stick are rather clearly the POV characters here, and with the number of exceptions and tangential connections to the Gate storyline that entails (Dungeon Crawlin' Fools they don't even know a Gate exists until near the end, No Cure for the Paladin Blues they don't understand why the Gates are important until near the end, Don't Split the Party has them as a background detail); it's really hard for me to buy that it could be the "main plot".

Are we working off of different definitions of plot? A plot, as far as I am aware, isn't what the story is *about*. It's just what happens. Sometimes they're not the same thing. The story is not a purely episodic-character driven narrative (that is, it cannot solely be described as "the adventures of the order, wherever they go"). Think of it like Cowboy Bebop - there is a main arc in terms of Spike against Vicious, but it does not dominate every, or even most of the episodes, nor is it what the series is about, yet it is the main plot arc. OoTS is significantly more focused on its main plot in that regard compared to Bebop.

The gates were affecting the path of the Group's adventures since strip 1. Xykon could have simply dropped a couple of Meteor Swarms on them the second that they met him if he didn't need them, and Roy wouldn't have had a way to kill him without it anyway.

There are two prequel books, are there not? (Sadly I have yet to read either) One deals with the origins of our major players. The other handles the story of Xykon and Redcloak - that should tell us that they are not simply big villains, but also the main drivers of the most important part of the main plot. Just because the Order don't know about it at the start of the series doesn't make it not the main plot - there are dozens of stories where the heroes are unaware of what they're really getting caught up in.

[Emanick]

Right, the gates are what the story takes place around. They're only important because of the various groups willing to annihilate each other over them. The Order of the Stick is one such group, and their difficulties and how they overcome them, or succumb to them, is what the story is. (I think I can trust the Giant's evaluation of how he writes his own comic.)

The various conflicts of the Order of the Stick relate directly to Nale, and Xykon, and Miko, and Crystal, and Tarquin, and HPoH....Even the incident at the inn only had the chance of occurring because Roy and Miko were willing to agree enough to stay at an inn in the first place, a sense of agreement Roy abandoned as a result of working through the incident (which is what gives it any significance).


Now, I do understand what you're saying: External conflicts are much easier to identify even in character-driven works; and if I had to choose the single most significant source of external conflict in the story, I'd say the Gates too. But the members of the Order of the Stick are rather clearly the POV characters here, and with the number of exceptions and tangential connections to the Gate storyline that entails (Dungeon Crawlin' Fools they don't even know a Gate exists until near the end, No Cure for the Paladin Blues they don't understand why the Gates are important until near the end, Don't Split the Party has them as a background detail); it's really hard for me to buy that it could be the "main plot".

For me, it's the "main plot" because it's the overarching goal that the protagonists are working towards. Rich may be more interested in the protagonists' interactions with one another and the world around them than he is in the Gates, but the protagonists themselves are driven primarily by their quest to defeat Xykon and save the world. It's the glue that binds the plot together and provides the forward motion for most of the books' events. Even in DSTP the characters are trying to get together primarily so that they can continue their quest, not just so that they can resume hanging out.

I suspect that a lot of the debate here is due to the fact that people are defining "main plot" differently. For me, it's the overall focus and goal(s) of the protagonists, and the objective that most of their energy and effort is directed towards achieving - in other words, the basic purpose that ultimately guides their actions. But I can imagine many other definitions that would make similar amounts of sense.

[Dragonexx]

Yeah, I take offense to that. You're saying that I shouldn't judge a story until it's complete because I can't see where it's going to go. However, this is a story released in incremental bits, thus I have to judge it from where it is now, and I feel that the pacing is bad. It's not that subplots and filler can't be fun and entertaining, it's just that the current ones (godsmoot and frost giants) really aren't.

[Jasdoif]

Are we working off of different definitions of plot? A plot, as far as I am aware, isn't what the story is *about*. It's just what happens. Sometimes they're not the same thing.Possibly...but I think when we start talking about a "main plot", we're at least close to where the sequence of events and the focus of the story overlap.


The story is not a purely episodic-character driven narrative (that is, it cannot solely be described as "the adventures of the order, wherever they go"). Think of it like Cowboy Bebop - there is a main arc in terms of Spike against Vicious, but it does not dominate every, or even most of the episodes, nor is it what the series is about, yet it is the main plot arc. OoTS is significantly more focused on its main plot in that regard compared to Bebop.Ah, main arc I could buy.

(I'd actually argue about it not being an episodic character-driven narrative at its core, as I already noted each book focuses on different types of conflict the Order or Roy has, but I could be here all day on that note :smalltongue: )


The other handles the story of Xykon and Redcloak - that should tell us that they are not simply big villains, but also the main drivers of the most important part of the main plot.This would apply to the opposition to Xykon directly, as well as it would to protecting the Gates.

Because I see a considerable chance that the nature of the Snarl isn't what we've been led to believe, and once Kraagor's Gate stops working the tenor of the conflict is going to change drastically, but the conflict itself is going to remain.


Of course, viewing the opposition to Xykon as the main focus is what leads to threads like this one: The current book has had little to do with them, as had the last book; and the events in the last book that led to this book only considered Xykon in an ancillary role (Roy destroyed the Gate preemptively so Xykon couldn't have it). The degree of separation in Xykon->OrderOfTheStick->VectorLegion->Hel->Thrym->FrostGiants is enough to prompt "wait, what's going on again?" in connection to the current battle.

Viewing it with regards to the Gates isn't obvious either; there we have Gates->Godsmoot->Dvalin->DwarvenElders->Vampires, then Vampires->Hel, then Hel->Thrym->FrostGiants. The smaller pieces are more manageable, to be sure, but it's still kind of out there at first glance.

Viewing it as OOTS dealing with the consequences of Roy's decision, though...comes out to OrderOfTheStick->Vampires, then Vampires->Hel, then Hel->Thrym->FrostGiants. Which...OK, is still not the clearest in the world. But "OOTS is going where the vampires are, and the frost giants' demigod is in league with the vampires' master" is easier to connect than "the vampires are going to manipulate the Dwarven elders, to manipulate Dvalin's vote, to manipulate the Godsmoot, which only came up because of the Gates; and the frost giants' demigod is in league with the vampires' master".