What Tarquin's real problem is

[Lord]

So I was reading over the latest comic, and I just came to an interesting realization regarding Tarquin, and the real reason why he is such a bad person. It's not that he's a sociopath.

It's that he sees his world like an RPG.

He doesn't see people when he meets them. He sees CHARACTERS. Malack may well have been his best friend, and he probably feels genuine sadness at his death. But he is sad in way someone who is watching a depressing movie gets when their favorite character dies, not as one who has lost a life long friend.

In turn this perfectly explains why he hasn't thought to the afterlife, as some people would. The game he is playing is classic fantasy, not planescape. So he doesn't concern himself with the afterlife, because he genuinely has not thought beyond the end of the game.

Tarquin defines himself and those around him by their roles in a 'story'. He may see them as people, and he might feel sad when they die, but it's ultimately the sadness of a gamer playing through an RPG with no save points.

What do you think?

[wingnutx]

He sees the world as a stage, and everyone on it merely players.

[AlaskaOOTSFan]

He sees the world as a stage, and everyone on it merely players.

Thread closed, you win.

+ Infinity

[Girl Wonder]

I'm not sure that's really a 'problem' for him, given where he lives.

If Tarquin sees the world as an RPG, it may be an asset, since the setting in which he lives is a world whose underpinning mechanics/themes/etc. mirror an RPG (and has more or less been stated as such by the world's creator).

If Tarquin is a character that sees the world as an RPG in a world that (while not an RPG) acts like one in almost every important respect, that may be why he is so effective in it. Certainly, what effectiveness Elan has demonstrated is largely based on a similar ability to recognize the 'meta' of the world as a story, rather than being too firmly anchored in reality.

[Fishnet]

I love it, especially given the Giant's focus on the RPG-as-story-telling.

A minor, technical quibble: I'd say seeing the world through R(ose)PG colored glasses is the same as being a sociopath - that's exactly what you described when you compared the perception of People vs. Characters. Remember that for most characters in the OOTS world, it's real, not just a piece of fiction.

Maybe Tarquin has thought to the afterlife, but he probably subscribes the cliche "entering the next chapter" expression some people use re: death, so he'll cross that proverbial bridge when he comes to it (and has left his indelible mark on all the lands behind him).

Otherwise, you totally nailed it. Tarquin is the post-modern villain to a T.

[EDIT] and like 4 people ninja'd me, all way more succinct and to the point. Kudos, Wingnutz

[Vaylon]

Tarquin is rather fortunate that he lives in a universe so governed by narrative structure that agents of Chaos -- and even Chaos itself -- must, by definition, follow the narrative. He would not seem nearly as frightening in an actual chaotic universe (like ours, for instance).

It is probably too poetic for Tarquin to fail at the hands of his over-reliance on storytelling conventions. I can't see him being laid low by a mere petard hoist. The only real way to hurt someone like Tarquin is to threaten to somehow destroy narrative as an element of his existence -- or to remove him from the narrative completely.

[snikrept]

The way players treat NPCs in a roleplaying game is a pretty good example of how a high-functioning psychopath behaves, yes.

[ti'esar]

It's not that he's a sociopath.

It's that he sees his world like an RPG.

You know, the more I think about this, the more I wonder what the difference really is.

(Really good analysis, by the way).


The way players treat NPCs in a roleplaying game is a pretty good example of how a high-functioning psychopath behaves, yes.

I'd qualify this to "most players". Which actually segues nicely into another point: Girl Wonder's post about how this isn't really a disadvantage for Tarquin only makes sense if we assume this is an RPG where it's considered okay to treat everyone you encounter like the stereotypical player treats NPCs. This is manifestly not the case, and I'm almost certain that's somehow going to be what destroys Tarquin in the long run. (One possibility might be Sabine killing him to avenge the death of "inconvenient plot element" Nale).

[The Oni]

...This...makes so much sense it's not even funny.

But, then again, I've always operated under the assumption that Tarquin *chooses* to see the world this way. If he's literally incapable of seeing it otherwise, it means that

A) He is both more dangerous, and more tragic, as a result.
B) He *is* an actual sociopath.
C) Elan inherited elements of it, too.

[Mike Havran]

I think he's too theatrical to see it like a mere game. More likely he sees it like he is in some kind of a heroic story that takes place in a RPG-based world.

[SaintRidley]

I think he's too theatrical to see it like a mere game. More likely he sees it like he is in some kind of a heroic story that takes place in a RPG-based world.

Yeah.

And he's seeing a story that's vastly different from the one he's actually in (which, incidentally, is vastly more indifferent than his narcissism will allow him to believe the story could be).

Tarquin's problem isn't that he thinks he's in a story. He's right about that. His problem is that he thinks he's in a specific kind of story, a specific kind of story which the real story in no way resembles (kickstarter backers, see Haleo and Julelan for further evidence of this in Tarquin's personality and that Elan has been aware of it since meeting him). There are similarities like the hero vs. villain, epic quest, father and son separated and reunited, sure, but Tarquin's using scant evidence to argue that he's the big bad in a Campbellian Hero's Journey narrative when he's really in a postmodern interpretation of a roleplaying game that pokes repeatedly at the staid structuralism of Tarquin's preferred interpretive mode. Tarquin is much like the old guard of the English departments, some few fossils still hanging around but mostly gone, clinging to his structuralism and rigidly defined canon while the Order is the new postmodernist drive, infused with cultural studies and feminism and queer theory and Derridean deconstruction that just plain makes the old guard uncomfortable.

Tarquin's in the wrong type of story for his interpretive-critical apparatus, and he's outdated and old news. It's only a matter of time before Elan forces that realization upon him so he can fade away with some dignity, because if not he's going to keep treading his current path and he'll be little more than a laughingstock.

[The Pilgrim]

He sees the world as a stage, and everyone on it merely players.

Add that he sees himself as the center of the play, and you'll have defined Tarquin perfectly in one stance.

[Math_Mage]

Tarquin doesn't acknowledge alignment. So if it's an RPG, I guess it's not D&D. I like the theater analogy better--it's closer to what Tarquin himself claims about his outlook.

[Kish]

Tarquin doesn't acknowledge alignment. So if it's an RPG, I guess it's not D&D.
I don't know about that. It's not like D&D players who insist the alignment system is limiting and unrealistic and doesn't apply to their characters are hard to find.

[Daimbert]

Add that he sees himself as the center of the play, and you'll have defined Tarquin perfectly in one stance.

Tarquin is always very explicit that he doesn't think that he's the center of the play. He's very well aware that the story is the story of the OotS. What he's trying to do is place himself, at least, in position to play the largest role he can in their story. And it's reasonable to think that a lot of his problems with Nale was because he was trying to get Nale the largest role possible for him, but Nale kept screwing it up.

Heck, this might even carry over to Elan; by trying to elevate himself, he's also trying to make Elan the main protagonist over Roy, and the way the latest scenes have been playing out it seems to be working.

[DolGrenn]

He sees the world as a stage, and everyone on it merely players.

He believes that everyone will have their entrances and their exits, and that each man in their time will play many parts.

[The Pilgrim]

Tarquin is always very explicit that he doesn't think that he's the center of the play.

On the contrary, Tarquin has always been vert explicit in believing himself the center of the Play. "The audience always thinks that the villiain is cooler than the hero".

I mean, that other thing his Son has to care about? Just a diversion so that Elan can level up enough to become a credible threat and he, Tarquin, has enough time to finish his imperial schemes.

There is no way Tarquin really believes himself a secondary character in a bigger story. The Haleo and Julelan PDF provides a heavy hint about Tarquin's delusions of grandeur in that matter.

[Reverent-One]

On the contrary, Tarquin has always been vert explicit in believing himself the center of the Play. "The audience always thinks that the villiain is cooler than the hero".

"The audience thinks he's cooler" != "center of the play". Boba Fett in the original trilogy is an example of a villian that a lot of people thought was totally awesome, but no one could argue he was the center of the play with a straight face.

[Daimbert]

On the contrary, Tarquin has always been vert explicit in believing himself the center of the Play. "The audience always thinks that the villiain is cooler than the hero".

That kinda supports my point, as the hero is always the center of the play ... but the villain is the one people remember. Tarquin wants to be the one remembered, and he's very well aware that in order to do that he has to insert himself into the right role in the heroes' story ... and, as I said, part of that is making the story about Elan and not about Roy, so that then he can be the main villain instead of Xykon.


There is no way Tarquin really believes himself a secondary character in a bigger story. The Haleo and Julelan PDF provides a heavy hint about Tarquin's delusions of grandeur in that matter.

I don't have it and have never read that, so I don't really know what hint it gives.

[Math_Mage]

"The audience thinks he's cooler" != "center of the play". Boba Fett in the original trilogy is an example of a villian that a lot of people thought was totally awesome, but no one could argue he was the center of the play with a straight face.
Don't forget the part where Tarquin described the whole Gate quest as a side plot with some scenery-chewing villain.


That kinda supports my point, as the hero is always the center of the play ... but the villain is the one people remember. Tarquin wants to be the one remembered, and he's very well aware that in order to do that he has to insert himself into the right role in the heroes' story ... and, as I said, part of that is making the story about Elan and not about Roy, so that then he can be the main villain instead of Xykon.
It's not just that he's trying to insert himself appropriately into the heroes' story. He wants to believe the story is about him and his family--the legend of Tarquin.

[Daimbert]

It's not just that he's trying to insert himself appropriately into the heroes' story. He wants to believe the story is about him and his family--the legend of Tarquin.

I'll concede this, at least to a point. From Tarquin's perspective -- and totally consistent with everything he's said in the past -- Elan coming back looks like part of a main storyline to end with the destruction of the Empires. And that certainly would be true if it was Elan's story, although it really isn't. The only questions are how much he understands about the Gate plot. From the last comments, he doesn't seem to understand the importance of the Gate and the Snarl, or else he'd be trying to insert himself into that far more than he is.

But I still say that, underneath it all, Tarquin is simlpy trying to put himself into the best role that he, as a villain, can be, and is using all of his genre-savvy to do so. I think he's wrong about what story it is, but he understands that the story is that of the heroes, not the villains, which is one reason why he's so insistent on sending Elan after the last gate and not going there himself. And in a sense his positioning is going to work: he's going to have to be dealt with, and for maximum narrative and trope fulfillment that's going to have to be by Elan, which means by the OotS, and will have to be AFTER the issue with the gates. He'll get the last scene.

(Of course, his biggest mistake might be that he's not aware that he has an author who loves to subvert tropes ...)

[Reverent-One]

Don't forget the part where Tarquin described the whole Gate quest as a side plot with some scenery-chewing villain.

He didn't call it a side plot, his words were:

"If a hero of your caliber on a quest of such significance that you can't spare more than three days for your old man, than logic dictates it probably involves trouncing some cliched, scenery-chewing villian bent on world conquest." (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0762.html)

He acknowledges it's importance and scale.

[F.Harr]

So I was reading over the latest comic, and I just came to an interesting realization regarding Tarquin, and the real reason why he is such a bad person. It's not that he's a sociopath.

It's that he sees his world like an RPG.

He doesn't see people when he meets them. He sees CHARACTERS. Malack may well have been his best friend, and he probably feels genuine sadness at his death. But he is sad in way someone who is watching a depressing movie gets when their favorite character dies, not as one who has lost a life long friend.

In turn this perfectly explains why he hasn't thought to the afterlife, as some people would. The game he is playing is classic fantasy, not planescape. So he doesn't concern himself with the afterlife, because he genuinely has not thought beyond the end of the game.

Tarquin defines himself and those around him by their roles in a 'story'. He may see them as people, and he might feel sad when they die, but it's ultimately the sadness of a gamer playing through an RPG with no save points.

What do you think?

It's entirely possible.

[sun_tzu]

My personal impression is that Tarqin, ultimately, has no empathy, and can't actually understand how people who do actually think.

He burned slaves alive as a gift to Elan, and the idea that it would upset him might not even have occurred to him. Same when he killed Nale.
He thought he could manipulate the situation so that Malak would accept to let Nale live. Given everything we've seen of Malak's hatred for Nale, that was...pretty unlikely.
And he couldn't figure out that Nale wanted to live outside his control.

Tarqin cannot empathize with people. So he does the next best thing: He learns to understand storytelling instead. That's why he relies on tropes so much - not just because of the power of drama, but because it's the closest he can get to understanding other people.

At least, that's my guess.

[The Pilgrim]

"The audience thinks he's cooler" != "center of the play". Boba Fett in the original trilogy is an example of a villian that a lot of people thought was totally awesome, but no one could argue he was the center of the play with a straight face.

Last time I checked the villiain of the original triology was Darth Vader, not Boba Fett. But it's funny that you mention Star Wars, were de Villiain (Darth Vader) was cooler than the Hero (Luke) and later it's creator (George Lucas) stated in the prequels that the whole story is about Anakin Skywalker and not Luke.

And guess what, impersonating Darth Vader (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0723.html) was one of the first things Tarquin did in this story.

[Vaylon]

None of you seem to understand something: the story is about Tarquin. He has already appeared on the stage. Even if he died in the very next strip, even if he died in the most ignoble way possible, he still wins: he's played his villainous part, he's long since a part of the story, and we are going to remember him.

The only way to stop Tarquin from winning is to stop telling the story altogether -- and even then, it may already be too late.

[BlackDragonKing]

None of you seem to understand something: the story is about Tarquin. He has already appeared on the stage. Even if he died in the very next strip, even if he died in the most ignoble way possible, he still wins: he's played his villainous part, he's long since a part of the story, and we are going to remember him.

The only way to stop Tarquin from winning is to stop telling the story altogether -- and even then, it may already be too late.

Honestly, this sort of goes with my theory that "X person will get rid of Tarquin behind the scenes" doesn't mean a damn thing compared to Tarquin being outsmarted and getting his comeuppance from Elan. Elan won't kill him, which means it's likely Elan came up with a way to let his father go out a different route; not dead, and not victorious, but something he's not satisfied with and can't do anything about.

I hesitate to suggest that karma getting a guy as dangerous and brutal as Tarquin ought to be played for comedy, but really, all of these melodramatic revenge killings make a huge impact, and reinforce Tarquin's view of a tragic, epic story with cool death scenes for the villain that doesn't get to rule the roost. He's not aware this comic is a postmodern dramedy, and Elan defeating him might well mean that he's not a king or a legend at the end, he's still alive and the butt of a joke. That strikes me as a much more meaningful defeat for Tarquin than Sabine ripping his head off or something.

[Reverent-One]

Last time I checked the villiain of the original triology was Darth Vader, not Boba Fett. But it's funny that you mention Star Wars, were de Villiain (Darth Vader) was cooler than the Hero (Luke) and later it's creator (George Lucas) stated in the prequels that the whole story is about Anakin Skywalker and not Luke.

Last time I checked, Boba Fett was still a villian. A more personal foe to one of the main characters and not really related to the main plot. Hmmm, that sounds fairly familiar...

[Eulalios]

Tarquin's in the wrong type of story for his interpretive-critical apparatus, and he's outdated and old news. It's only a matter of time before Elan forces that realization upon him so he can fade away with some dignity, because if not he's going to keep treading his current path and he'll be little more than a laughingstock.

Oh dear goodness. The comic itself is worth reading, but the forum threads add about six dimensions ...


He sees the world as a stage, and everyone on it merely players.

So does he then search for his Macduff? And how weird is it that his temptress lady abandoned him for his own son?

[Math_Mage]

Last time I checked, Boba Fett was still a villian. A more personal foe to one of the main characters and not really related to the main plot. Hmmm, that sounds fairly familiar...
Last I checked, Boba Fett was the hired help and Jabba was the personal foe.

[masamune1]

He didn't call it a side plot, his words were:

"If a hero of your caliber on a quest of such significance that you can't spare more than three days for your old man, than logic dictates it probably involves trouncing some cliched, scenery-chewing villian bent on world conquest." (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0762.html)

He acknowledges it's importance and scale.

But he thinks its just the warm-up act to the real story- Elan v Tarquin. Plus he seems to deride Xykon by calling him "clichéd".

Basically he sees Xykon as the Arc Villain, and himself as the main villain of the whole story. Or maybe the villain of the epic sequels and finale. Xykon is Tarkin (ironically), while Tarquin is Palpatine and Vader, rolled into one. Xykon is the villain Elan and his friends must defeat so that the real story can begin.

[The Pilgrim]

So, basically, Tarquin believes himself Darth Vader when he is, in fact, Jabba the Hutt.

Ouch, that's gotta hurt him a lot. :smallbiggrin:

[Reverent-One]

Last I checked, Boba Fett was the hired help and Jabba was the personal foe.

*Shrugs* Boba Fett was a villain that had business with Han specifically, close enough for what I was trying to say. A villain thought to be cool, but not the central player by any means.


But he thinks its just the warm-up act to the real story- Elan v Tarquin. Plus he seems to deride Xykon by calling him "clichéd".

And how is deriding Xkyon's style relevant?


Basically he sees Xykon as the Arc Villain, and himself as the main villain of the whole story. Or maybe the villain of the epic sequels and finale. Xykon is Tarkin (ironically), while Tarquin is Palpatine and Vader, rolled into one. Xykon is the villain Elan and his friends must defeat so that the real story can begin.

And now Tarquin has been compared to every villain in Star Wars. I guess I should have picked a different example, because that line of thought went far beyond all relevancy. :smallsigh:

Still, this whole distinction between arc villain and main villain of the whole story goes beyond what Tarquin's really talked about.

[CowardlyPaladin]

So I was reading over the latest comic, and I just came to an interesting realization regarding Tarquin, and the real reason why he is such a bad person. It's not that he's a sociopath.

It's that he sees his world like an RPG.

He doesn't see people when he meets them. He sees CHARACTERS. Malack may well have been his best friend, and he probably feels genuine sadness at his death. But he is sad in way someone who is watching a depressing movie gets when their favorite character dies, not as one who has lost a life long friend.

In turn this perfectly explains why he hasn't thought to the afterlife, as some people would. The game he is playing is classic fantasy, not planescape. So he doesn't concern himself with the afterlife, because he genuinely has not thought beyond the end of the game.

Tarquin defines himself and those around him by their roles in a 'story'. He may see them as people, and he might feel sad when they die, but it's ultimately the sadness of a gamer playing through an RPG with no save points.

What do you think?

Oh nice I approve

[maxi]

So I was reading over the latest comic, and I just came to an interesting realization regarding Tarquin, and the real reason why he is such a bad person. It's not that he's a sociopath.

It's that he sees his world like an RPG.

He doesn't see people when he meets them. He sees CHARACTERS. Malack may well have been his best friend, and he probably feels genuine sadness at his death. But he is sad in way someone who is watching a depressing movie gets when their favorite character dies, not as one who has lost a life long friend.

In turn this perfectly explains why he hasn't thought to the afterlife, as some people would. The game he is playing is classic fantasy, not planescape. So he doesn't concern himself with the afterlife, because he genuinely has not thought beyond the end of the game.

Tarquin defines himself and those around him by their roles in a 'story'. He may see them as people, and he might feel sad when they die, but it's ultimately the sadness of a gamer playing through an RPG with no save points.

What do you think?
I think that this right here is pretty much a definition of "evil". Specifically, you turn to evil alignment once you start treating people as objects, governed by external rules above everything else. Tarquin's flavour of evil is that the objects he treat people as are governed by rules of storytelling.

Not sure if it is correct to call it a "problem", much less "Tarquin's problem".