Why is V constantly benched? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

DiamondHooHaMan

2013-09-03, 09:45 AM

The answer is:

It doesn't

Deus Ex Machinas are plot devices whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly resolved, with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object. The only way such a thing would be possible would be if V(not Darth V) suddenly began casting spells that were decidedly way beyond her ability to cast with seemingly no explanation.

An example of a Deus Ex Machina would be along the lines of watching The Dark Knight and then at the end Superman suddenly appears and Bonks the Joker in the face with no explanation.

I apologize if i sound a little exasperated, i just get so frustrated when i hear someone use the term "Deus Ex Machina" used so casually. It is, by definition, an unexpected and spontaneous act that has no foreshadowing or explanation that appears and solves the problem at hand.

i conceed the point. let me try again.

"at what point are they just a cheep 'solve all the problems' tool for when the writer gets stuck in a corner."

to use your setting as an example, at the beginning of the dark knight, Superman gets locked in a prison of kryptonite by the joker. Batman has no idea this happens until just at the end he conveniently happens to find the prison. free superman who instantly saves the day with no problem.

same result but just because "it couldn't have happened until now for cheep plot reason" is just as a disappointing event.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-03, 09:49 AM

actually its surprising V hasn't been Worfed at any point. (Darth V doesn't count because Dath V was off his/her meds.)
This is the first time anyone in the thread brought up the Worf Effect (though I suppose it's your prerogative as OP). There is a substantive difference between that and getting benched. That said, V's been Worfed a number of times: both duels with Zz'dtri, the duel with the Death Knight, and the first duel with the Ancient Black Dragon are examples of her getting smacked around, in part, to show the magnitude of the threat.

o.O but V IS interesting..... (matter of opinion, but V has more personality then :durkon: as much as i adore our fave little bearded man.)
I too, once thought as you do.

V certainly is "too powerful" now. But, if she kept getting experience, she will one day have access to 9th level spells like "Wish" and basically end the story right there.
You say this like it's a given. It ain't so. V, remember, has to research her spells, even the ones she gains "for free" via leveling up. If the Giant doesn't want her to have wish, but still wants to give her level 9 spells, all he needs to do is have her research something else, something less story-breaking. Crushing hand and meteor swarm come to mind. Stronger, not quite story-breaking spells she might conceivably learn include disjunction and time stop.

There's even precedent for this. Even with months of research, a very strong motivation, and the requisite spell levels, V never researched limited wish.

EDIT: ninja'd on this point by Kish. I blame intermittent train-internet.

Henry the 57th

2013-09-03, 09:53 AM

Because for all how V's prattling on about the glory of wizards is meant to seem like petty ego-stroking, objectively speaking, s/he's completely correct. In D&D 3.5, as the levels go up, wizards outshine and outclass everyone more and more. At around this point, even terribly optimized wizards like V effectively start becoming nigh-untouchable gods in combat, compared to everyone else. A decently prepared, trigger happy wizard like V is capable of winning just about any fight with a non wizard around or below their level by themselves. For example, had V been around when "Thog" attacked, Tarquin would have been easily crushed and humiliated by even a mildly intelligent combo of spells.

Alysar

2013-09-03, 09:54 AM

In this case, I think it's so V can come to the rescue at the beginning of 917 with some kind of shield spell, or at least a Wind Wall.

Kornaki

2013-09-03, 09:56 AM

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-03, 09:57 AM

In this case, I think it's so V can come to the rescue at the beginning of 917 with some kind of shield spell, or at least a Wind Wall.
Neither V nor Durkon prepared wind-controlling spells today.

Rogar Demonblud

2013-09-03, 10:03 AM

Well, in-story part of the reason is that one of the main points for (Limited) Wish is giving an arcane caster the opportunity to use divine magic, and V is on record as disdaining divine magic as 'not real magic'.

littlebum2002

2013-09-03, 10:07 AM

You say this like it's a given. It ain't so. V, remember, has to research her spells, even the ones she gains "for free" via leveling up. If the Giant doesn't want her to have wish, but still wants to give her level 9 spells, all he needs to do is have her research something else, something less story-breaking. Crushing hand and meteor swarm come to mind. Stronger, not quite story-breaking spells she might conceivably learn include disjunction and time stop.

There's even precedent for this. Even with months of research, a very strong motivation, and the requisite spell levels, V never researched limited wish.

EDIT: ninja'd on this point by Kish. I blame intermittent train-internet.

Good point. Rich is using fluff in a pretty inventive way. The way it looks in D&D, all 7th level spells are equally hard to research. But this doesn't have to be the case. Since some spells are more powerful than others, it makes sense that they should be harder to figure out than others. So while Plane Shift is a rather benign spell that you can learn pretty quickly after getting access to it, something like Limited Wish would probably takes years of research to figure out how to bend reality to your will. SO maybe V will reach that level after all, but just not have access to game-breaking spells.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-03, 10:14 AM

It's also a hidden part of V's character development (that V doesn't even realize is happening). V's whole schtick is ultimate arcane power, but then V keeps getting knocked out of doing things for reasons that have nothing to do with the level of V's arcane power. V relying on others instead of V's arcane power isn't just a personal taste change, it's something V needs to do in order to improve as an adventurer because it's painfully obvious at this point there are tons of situations where the solution is not "more magic"
If this is the case, what is the added value in keeping V in the story? Think about it: if a character needs others to solve their problems for her, and cannot meaningfully help them with their problems in return, then that character is only a millstone around the others' necks and as a matter of efficiency (which could be trumped by considerations like friendship and loyalty that are in turn trumped by V's debt to the IFCC which makes her a straight-up liability) they ought to be rid of her. What does V bring to the table in this story? She brings her personal baggage and arc, which arc leads logically to her having no place on the team or in the narrative. She brings dry humor that the Giant way back in the commentary to Dungeon Crawling Fools said could easily be given to Roy. The only reason to keep her around would be to pander to her fans, and the Giant is better than that.

Kornaki

2013-09-03, 10:25 AM

If this is the case, what is the added value in keeping V in the story? Think about it: if a character needs others to solve their problems for her, and cannot meaningfully help them with their problems in return,

Are you claiming that there has never been a situation where V has helped the order? Because I didn't say that, I just said that there have been situations where that is the case. But everyone has that problem - Roy forgot to bring a sword on their starmetal adventure and then died for six(?) months - geez, could he have been any more useless during that time? But obviously he didn't get written out of the story because a more interesting story was Roy getting to a place where he was more useful to the party (both by becoming alive and learning his new mageslayer feat). And Elan was the most worthless party member possibly in the world for something like 400 strips and yet the comic would have been lesser for not including him.

Psyren

2013-09-03, 10:32 AM

Rich talked about this in one of the books' commentary, actually.

Short answer: Because s/he is too powerful.

Interesting - which book was it? What did he say about V precisely?

Kish

2013-09-03, 10:34 AM

If I remembered I would have said, sorry. :smalltongue:

Reddish Mage

2013-09-03, 10:35 AM

One point no one has mentioned yet:

V certainly is "too powerful" now. But, if she kept getting experience, she will one day have access to 9th level spells like "Wish" and basically end the story right there. Since Rich has mentioned his dislike of these types of spells, I'd bet that V will never reach 17th level by the end of the strip, probably because she keeps getting left out of experience-granting battles.

Xykon has been epic for quite some time and Red Cloak has 9th level spells. The IFCC are epic archfiends on a scale that most certainly dwarfs Xykon. The Snarl, as the story goes, is a God-killing abomination that took out a pantheon. Even with 9th level spells V can hardly "end the story right there."

V will get his moment to shine again.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-03, 10:39 AM

Are you claiming that there has never been a situation where V has helped the order? Because I didn't say that
I am, but the fact that I am has nothing to do with you. It happens to be one of my pet arguments and is very closely related to the premise of this thread.

Interesting - which book was it? What did he say about V precisely?
The relevant commentary may be found in War and XPs, either before or during the section that covers the Battle of Azure City. I'd give you a cite but I'm AFB.

Deliverance

2013-09-03, 11:03 AM

You say this like it's a given. It ain't so. V, remember, has to research her spells, even the ones she gains "for free" via leveling up. If the Giant doesn't want her to have wish, but still wants to give her level 9 spells, all he needs to do is have her research something else, something less story-breaking. Crushing hand and meteor swarm come to mind. Stronger, not quite story-breaking spells she might conceivably learn include disjunction and time stop.

Personally, I'm betting us on seeing a combination of spells such that we get both:
Something to show that he's learned from the Darth V episode
Something to show that he's still an invoker at heart
In other words, something that mirrors V's current character development arc.

As you say, Meter Swarm is an obvious candidate, but something really sneaky and potentially awesome would be for V to pick up Chain Contingency and using it in combination with e.g Spellstrike, Spell Trap, and/or other useful anti-magic user spells to its full potential in the final battle with Xykon, offering himself as a willing target/sacrifice while the rest of the order takes down Xykon.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-03, 11:09 AM

something really sneaky and potentially awesome would be for V to pick up Chain Contingency and using it in combination with e.g Spellstrike or Spell Trap to its full potential in the final battle with Xykon
Chain contingency is, AFAIK, a 3.0 spell, and I've got no idea where those other spells are even printed. This tells me that unless their effects are incredibly obvious like Laurin's wormhole or Tsukiko's electric orb, which doesn't jive with a "really sneaky" strategy, they're probably not well-known enough for the Giant to put in a comic whose audience mostly doesn't even play, let alone research, D&D.

Reddish Mage

2013-09-03, 11:17 AM

I am, but the fact that I am has nothing to do with you. It happens to be one of my pet arguments and is very closely related to the premise of this thread.

Never a situation where V helped the order? I thought the one where V defeated the young black dragon was clear. He also has the lawyers drag Z away and defeats Z in the second match. I would notice that in every situation off the top of my head, it isn't by use of magic that V helps out. Just about every situation where V deals out damage, its a case of overkill.

Come to think of it though, helping Ochul's jailbreak really does help the order quite a bit, as did the phylactery theft (the rest of the Darth V arc, maybe not so much).

Deliverance

2013-09-03, 11:23 AM

Chain contingency is, AFAIK, a 3.0 spell, and I've got no idea where those other spells are even printed. This tells me that unless their effects are incredibly obvious like Laurin's wormhole or Tsukiko's electric orb, which doesn't jive with a "really sneaky" strategy, they're probably not well-known enough for the Giant to put in a comic whose audience mostly doesn't even play, let alone research, D&D.
You are probably right, though the possibility of explicitly explaining it during a party tactics discussion on how to negate Xykon's advantages, just like was done with Durkon and his Mass Death Ward, is a possibility.

I was just trying to dig my way through level 9 evocation spells that would fit V's new more deliberate approach rather than providing overkill, and there are remarkably few of those. :smallbiggrin:

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-03, 11:24 AM

I thought the one where V defeated the young black dragon was clear.
You mean the time when she threatened to sic the dragon on the party if they didn't cater to her every whim, then executed it while it was helpless thus beginning the arc that culminated in familicide? Some help.

He also has the lawyers drag Z away
Which didn't matter to anyone but V. Both elves were out of spells and despite packing scimitars Z was probably less of a melee threat than Elan to anyone but V.

and defeats Z in the second match.
See, the way I read that scene, Z toyed with V, then put her down when the situation got serious. V had her bacon saved by Qarr.

Come to think of it though, helping Ochul's jailbreak really does help the order quite a bit, as did the phylactery theft (the rest of the Darth V arc, maybe not so much).
V's and O-Chul's not being present at Girard's Gate gave Xykon a reason to teleport immediately to Kraggor's Tomb, giving Team Evil a massive head start and probably letting them blindside O-Chul and Lien.

Porthos

2013-09-03, 01:21 PM

I will point out something else when it comes to V. In the last book he was the center of the narrative attention for a good long while.

It's only natural for the spotlight to shift elsewhere for a while as other characters stand in it.

I have little doubt that V will return soon.

...

No matter how much some posters may wish otherwise. :smalltongue:

JSSheridan

2013-09-03, 01:32 PM

V could actually win this with one two spells right now if the party were together.

Disintegrating the wall of the crater right now would cause the entire thing to collapse. She could cast a forcecage on the party to protect them.

NihhusHuotAliro

2013-09-03, 01:34 PM

V could win any fight by simply casting Disintigrate at the ground. The earth disintegrates, everyone dies, V gets all the experience in the world.

ChaosArchon

2013-09-03, 01:44 PM

V could win any fight by simply casting Disintigrate at the ground. The earth disintegrates, everyone dies, V gets all the experience in the world.

Obviously Rich wouldn't let V do that but can any D&D players tell me if thats even viable (as in what the limits of disintegrate are) and/or if someone has done this and what happened afterwards?

ti'esar

2013-09-03, 01:47 PM

The only reason to keep her around would be to pander to her fans, and the Giant is better than that.

Then what is your argument for why V is still in the story?

skaddix

2013-09-03, 01:51 PM

Well its good s/he is missing otherwise Xykon and Team Evil would have killed the OOTS.

As for the current problem, V has no chance against Tarquin and 2 higher level spellcasters.

ranagrande

2013-09-03, 01:52 PM

V could win any fight by simply casting Disintigrate at the ground. The earth disintegrates, everyone dies, V gets all the experience in the world.

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

When used on an object, Disintegrate can destroy up to 10 cubic feet.

If the OotS world is the same size as our earth, Vaarsuvius could, in fact, completely obliterate it using the Disintegrate spell.

V would only have to cast it about 3,825,380,376,576,000,000,000 times.

Sutremaine

2013-09-03, 01:54 PM

The earth disintegrates, everyone dies,
More like 'everyone in a 10-foot square takes 1d6 falling damage'.

TRH

2013-09-03, 02:12 PM

You know, it really does irritate me that pretty much the only way for the OOTS to not take casualties in the next strip or two will involve Durkon completely stealing the show with Thor's Might (or whatever it's renamed) and Vampire powers. Why is it that that's A-ok but the mere threat of V doing similar is cause to sideline her for an entire book?

The way I see it, it's less about functionality or potential story-breaking at this point, and more about enforcing an insanely introverted character arc. When it comes down to it, it's just her with Blackwing and the Fiends as shoulder angel and devil(s), respectively. It's not so much boring as it is wasteful, I think. Whether it's prank wars with Belkar or tutoring Elan, V's character interactions have consistently added a lot of zest to the story, so why haven't see seen any of this since War & XP's? It made sense in DSTP, when the isolation was part of the plot, but it's continued afterwards for no good reason.

Maybe this will all pay off when the Fiends take center stage, I don't know. What I do know is that we're missing a great character in the meantime. Plus, at what point has V been gone for so long that nothing would do her return justice? I don't know the answer to this, either, but I do know that it will be very, very easy not to try.

ChaosArchon

2013-09-03, 02:21 PM

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

When used on an object, Disintegrate can destroy up to 10 cubic feet.

If the OotS world is the same size as our earth, Vaarsuvius could, in fact, completely obliterate it using the Disintegrate spell.

V would only have to cast it about 3,825,380,376,576,000,000,000 times.

Thanks for the info! Although thats unfortunate, as it would be hilarious in a campaign for a party wizard to just say **** it and disintegrate the world :P

TRH

2013-09-03, 02:22 PM

Thanks for the info! Although thats unfortunate, as it would be hilarious in a campaign for a party wizard to just say **** it and disintegrate the world :P

That's what the Locate City Bomb is for: http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/856019/#856461

Sir_Leorik

2013-09-03, 02:41 PM

Irenaeus

2013-09-03, 02:42 PM

NihhusHuotAliro

2013-09-03, 02:43 PM

Oh, also, in the fight for Azure City, the poisoned arrow hit the earth, so the Earth has been poisoned and will certainly die from that. How much damage does the earth take per round; and how many rounds does it take to destroy the earth?

Also, Roy assaulted the ground with his body in that same fight, doing damage to the earth.

jidasfire

2013-09-03, 03:01 PM

Regrettably, I think it's fair to say that this is part of the price V paid for the Soul Splice. For all that it was useful, the IFCC have exacted a characteristically unfair price for their services. While V was able to rescue her family, save the Azurite fleet, help rescue O-Chul and and delay Xykon, at least as much bad was the result. Part of that price, we now know, is that the Fiends can take him out of the game two more times after this. While I imagine it's frustrating knowing that V could probably save the day in several of these situations, that is perhaps precisely why our favorite gender-ambiguous mage is currently out of commission.

Still, I wouldn't worry overmuch. No one in the Order gets neglected for too long. It's clear enough that Rich cares a great deal about the entire cast and works on giving them all solid character development as well as chances to be useful in the story. If V isn't at the forefront right now, that's okay, because she's had a fair bit to do already this arc, not to mention being center stage last time. Right now, Elan and Haley are at the forefront, with Durkon, Belkar, and Roy getting some decent moments as well. Anyway, I would be very surprised if V doesn't eventually have a reckoning with Lee, Nero and Cedrik somwhere down the line. You want to see some awesome magic being thrown around, I'm guessing that will be the moment for it.
Edit: Afterthought on that, I would be most amused if a strip in that battle was called "V for Vendetta."

TRH

2013-09-03, 03:13 PM

Two reasons:
1) Durkon was more of a healbot in the past; the only major time that his powers saved the day in combat before was in Cliffport;

I dunno, I think I can enumerate a couple others:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0561.html

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0859.html

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0871.html

2) Durkon, even as a Vampire, is humble. Vaarsuvius is many things, but she is not humble.

I'd say it's a bit too simplistic to assume Vaarsuvius is the same loudmouthed monologuer we started out with. Even if it mattered (which it doesn't, since she hasn't had a meaningful conversation with any of the others in a good 200 strips or more), she's far too busy with her own personal subplot at this point to be a pompous windbag like before.

Plus Durkon has the whole self-sacrifice angle, where he died in single combat with Malack and was Sired as a Vampire Thrall. I'd say Durkon can get away with a little showboating after taking a Blood Drain for the team.

Honestly, I'd call that swan-song fight one of Durkon's cooler moments by itself, so showboating begets showboating, is what you're saying? By that logic, what is V entitled to for saving O-Chul from Xykon for no other reason than that it was the right thing to do?

If V isn't at the forefront right now, that's okay, because she's had a fair bit to do already this arc, not to mention being center stage last time.

Wait, seriously? Have we been reading the same comic? Because from where I'm standing, V's done jack all since breaking even with regards to Xykon doing anything.

Sir_Leorik

2013-09-03, 03:29 PM

I dunno, I think I can enumerate a couple others:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0561.html

Okay, that one doesn't count. The whole bit with the Orcs was resolved by Elan's pie-eating ability, and their conversion to worship of Giggles!

But, I will concede:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0859.html

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0871.html

But in both cases, Durkon does what he needs to do, with no bravado, no bragging, only a simple sense of humility, duty and dare I say piety?

I'd say it's a bit too simplistic to assume Vaarsuvius is the same loudmouthed monologuer we started out with. Even if it mattered (which it doesn't, since she hasn't had a meaningful conversation with any of the others in a good 200 strips or more), she's far too busy with her own personal subplot at this point to be a pompous windbag like before.

She's not the same Elf she was before, but she has a long way to go. Right now she seems to prefer wallowing in self-pity, which helps no one. And she can still show flashes of the old Vaarsuvius, especially when she was dumped into the Semi-Elemental Plane of Ranch Dressing with Yukyuk.

Honestly, I'd call that swan-song fight one of Durkon's cooler moments by itself, so showboating begets showboating, is what you're saying? By that logic, what is V entitled to for saving O-Chul from Xykon for no other reason than that it was the right thing to do?

Except that Durkon doesn't showboat. Even as a newly freed Vampire he hasn't exactly been bragging. While he told Roy about Z's death and Nale's escape, Roy needed to know that. And he didn't showboat in the fight with the Silicon Elemental; he and the Barbed Devil joined the rest of the OotS in beating the thing to death. So if Durkon is going to use his new powers to save everyone's bacon from Tarquin, I don't see him suddenly gloating about it.

Kish

2013-09-03, 03:30 PM

By that logic, what is V entitled to for saving O-Chul from Xykon for no other reason than that it was the right thing to do?
Being able to trance again.

(Benefit contingent on subject not thinking about the whole committed quasi-genocide thing.)

TRH

2013-09-03, 03:53 PM

snip

Alright, I think I understand your position now, but if we're treating this as a distinct trend, then it doesn't track V's character well. By your accounting, the combination of V's power and arrogance would cause her to usurp the story if left unchecked. But if we see the sidelining solely as a corrective measure for that, then we'd expect it to happen more often earlier in the comic, when her ego was most overt. If we're being fair, we'd expect more of this near the start of Paladin Blues, since a lot of DCF predated the intricate plotting and creative decisions that came after. But that's not what happens: before Azure City, we had V end entire combats in instances like this:
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0145.html,

this: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0186.html,

and (much later) this: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0397.html

It's not until the big battle that waylaying V became a trope, and it hasn't gotten better as V's tried to rein herself in, it's gotten worse. This makes a lot more sense if we use my running theory, that it's about V's arc and nothing (or comparatively little) else.

And I'm not a fan of her arc as it's been going. It's...monotonous would be a good word, moreso than straight boring. There's very few characters involved, and it detracts from other parts of the story (especially serialized like it is now, since time's more of a commodity now then it will be when everything's in book form) I don't expect everyone (or anyone in particular really) to agree with me, but I feel it needs throwing out there.

jidasfire

2013-09-03, 03:58 PM

Wait, seriously? Have we been reading the same comic? Because from where I'm standing, V's done jack all since breaking even with regards to Xykon doing anything.

Let's see. In this arc, Vaarsuvius has come to understand blasting away at problems doesn't solve them, has begun working on her temper, decided that her family is better off without her, worked out through hearing one word that Girard had an organization backing him, defeated an opponent whose entire build was designed to kill her, began to understand the true enormity and true depths of her crimes in the last arc and thus taken a decent step towards redemption, outwitted Qarr (admittedly not the greatest challenge, but still) and figured out where Roy was headed, and nearly stopped Roy from playing into the Fiends' hands, failing only because they personally intervened.

I don't know what you consider "jack all" but it doesn't seem to mean the same thing to you as it does to me. Unless you're talking about flat out winning on her own, and considering the point of the entire last book for V was that she can't, V has done plenty.

TRH

2013-09-03, 04:09 PM

Let's see. In this arc, Vaarsuvius has come to understand blasting away at problems doesn't solve them, has begun working on her temper, decided that her family is better off without her, worked out through hearing one word that Girard had an organization backing him, defeated an opponent whose entire build was designed to kill her, began to understand the true enormity and true depths of her crimes in the last arc and thus taken a decent step towards redemption, outwitted Qarr (admittedly not the greatest challenge, but still) and figured out where Roy was headed, and nearly stopped Roy from playing into the Fiends' hands, failing only because they personally intervened.

I don't know what you consider "jack all" but it doesn't seem to mean the same thing to you as it does to me. Unless you're talking about flat out winning on her own, and considering the point of the entire last book for V was that she can't, V has done plenty.

Well, most of that's character development, and it's generally slow and incremental stuff. Not that that's a bad thing, but the fact that people are still all too willing to consider her the same mouthy and mindless blaster-wizard as she was a few hundred strips ago would suggest that these steps have failed to significantly alter our collective perception of the elf. Might be a bit harsh and premature to call the development a failure, then, but I'm still waiting on a payoff for all of it. Failing that, I'd settle for her getting to be a part of the party again.

Oh, and in no meaningful sense did V win against Z. The fact that she was only saved from eternal torment by Z's double-dealing familiar should make that pretty clear.

Blisstake

2013-09-03, 04:32 PM

Slightly longer answer: because she is too powerful to be interesting.

I don't see how those two are related at all. A character can be powerful and interesting. I find V interesting, both character-wise and combat-wise. V has grown as a character, and during encounters has the most interesting options available in a fight. V vs Xykon, Z, and Qarr's buddy I think were some of the most interesting battles in this series (well, maybe the latest Roy vs Thog wins :smallsmile:)

Chantelune

2013-09-03, 04:41 PM

You mean the time when she threatened to sic the dragon on the party if they didn't cater to her every whim, then executed it while it was helpless thus beginning the arc that culminated in familicide? Some help.

You mean after the party were giving sign of forgetting that V was around, giving credit for her actions to Elan ? She just made sure that the party wouldn't forget to dispel her curse. And do you really think she would have actually let the dragon kill them when she endeavor to help them as soon as she realised that she had a mean that have even a 0.0001% chance to be effective ? Being almost killed in the process ?

And the "helpless dragon" was regaining his senses and considering how it was tearing the party appart when she was in lizard form, a pre-emptive strike was the logical move. But sure, it would have been so much better for her to just let the whole party get eaten.

Which didn't matter to anyone but V. Both elves were out of spells and despite packing scimitars Z was probably less of a melee threat than Elan to anyone but V.

Sabine only mattered to Haley at the time, I don't see you complaining about her chasing her away by using two arrows, not remembering which one to use. That fight was pretty much a one on one for everyone of them, save Roy and Elan because Nale decided to switch opponent.

See, the way I read that scene, Z toyed with V, then put her down when the situation got serious. V had her bacon saved by Qarr.

The fact that Z was clearly bleeding out, given how his last action let him unconscious mean that the situation only got "serious" to you ? V ended up in another plane, Z unconscious, I'd call that a tie myself.

V's and O-Chul's not being present at Girard's Gate gave Xykon a reason to teleport immediately to Kraggor's Tomb, giving Team Evil a massive head start and probably letting them blindside O-Chul and Lien.

Sure, it's V's fault that Xykon teleport away and the rest of the order didn't attack them to prevent them for leaving. They chould have decided to sacrifice themselves so to give O-Chul and Lien more time to prepare. It's fine for them, but not for V...

Matter of perspective, all that stuff.

Kish

2013-09-03, 04:48 PM

The fact that Z was clearly bleeding out, given how his last action let him unconscious mean that the situation only got "serious" to you ? V ended up in another plane, Z unconscious, I'd call that a tie myself.
And, in fact, Zz'dtri only did as well as he did because Vaarsuvius blew her/his best save.

No, I do not believe we were supposed to take away, from "Kobold beat me. Not you," that the Plane Shift amounted to, "PSYCHE! No one beat me!" It was a last-ditch effort to snatch--a draw--from the jaws of defeat.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-03, 05:24 PM

Then what is your argument for why V is still in the story?
As threads like this one demonstrate, she kind of isn't. In the past I've argued that V's story be spun off into a separate comic if it must continue, because it just doesn't matter to The Order of the Stick anymore.

I don't see how those two are related at all. A character can be powerful and interesting.
Thank you for invoking Stormwind, but you're missing the point. I don't really care how interesting a character seems on his or her own. V specifically has the power to render the story uninteresting by her intervention in it.

You mean after the party were giving sign of forgetting that V was around, giving credit for her actions to Elan ? She just made sure that the party wouldn't forget to dispel her curse. And do you really think she would have actually let the dragon kill them when she endeavor to help them as soon as she realised that she had a mean that have even a 0.0001% chance to be effective ? Being almost killed in the process ?

And the "helpless dragon" was regaining his senses and considering how it was tearing the party appart when she was in lizard form, a pre-emptive strike was the logical move. But sure, it would have been so much better for her to just let the whole party get eaten.
What shameless whitewashing.

Sabine only mattered to Haley at the time, I don't see you complaining about her chasing her away by using two arrows, not remembering which one to use. That fight was pretty much a one on one for everyone of them, save Roy and Elan because Nale decided to switch opponent.
As she demonstrated when she incapacitated Durkon, Sabine was a threat to the whole group, not just Haley. Z, with his terrible to-hit and damage, could at best have provided Nale or Thog a flanking buddy with his scimitars.

[quote\The fact that Z was clearly bleeding out, given how his last action let him unconscious mean that the situation only got "serious" to you ? V ended up in another plane, Z unconscious, I'd call that a tie myself.[/quote]
Whereas I'd say that V failed to overcome the challenge that Z presented. That is a loss for her.

Goosefeather

2013-09-03, 05:38 PM

You mean the time when she threatened to sic the dragon on the party if they didn't cater to her every whim, then executed it while it was helpless thus beginning the arc that culminated in familicide? Some help.

You do remember that the dragon had just eaten (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0183.html) Haley? And that the party being there fighting the dragon in the first place was a decision due to Roy, not V? Had V not been there, the party would still have gone to the starmetal cave and, oh wait, fallen to their deaths (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0180.html). Had they somehow avoided doing so, they would still have faced the dragon, and either been TPK'd or killed it, just barely, by themselves - inevitably still drawing the ire of the ABD.

You may dislike the character, and that's your prerogative, but deliberately twisting comic events in an attempt to back up your position in fact devalues your argument.

The Pilgrim

2013-09-03, 05:54 PM

Well, since V is the most powerful member of the Party, by far... it comes to sense that any enemy of the Order will first target her. Add that Wizards tend to be very fragile when caught flat-footed.

Ramien

2013-09-03, 05:57 PM

Despite all possible reasons for separating him from the rest, his tribulations right now are very much an integral part of his own personal arc, and not the OOTS version of random GM pettiness.

Also, I might have missed something, but isn't V quite likely dead? If so, "benched" seems a little bit of an understatement, even in the OOTSverse.

The IFCC stated that V's body would be shielded from all harm while V's soul was their guest. There might be some rubble to blast through afterwards, but V's body is safe.

Irenaeus

2013-09-03, 05:59 PM

The IFCC stated that V's body would be shielded from all harm while V's soul was their guest. There might be some rubble to blast through afterwards, but V's body is safe.
I knew there had to be something I had missed. Thanks.

Bulldog Psion

2013-09-03, 07:43 PM

Well, I think it's supposed to be frustrating that V is out of the action for the moment. After all, the fiends aren't doing this to produce great results and ice cream for everybody.

Chantelune

2013-09-04, 03:30 AM

What shameless whitewashing.

As I said, perspective. Roy decided to leave Elan to the bandit and couldn't believe that the rest of the party would risk their live to save him and even then, turn their back on them.

Roy even threathen an innocent weapon seller that if he could buy a weapon, he would use it on him right away.

Don't see people complaining about Roy being baaaaad !

And yes, Roy did save the day in the end. Just as V didn't actually sic the dragon on the team and save them from that dragon that was outmatching them.

As she demonstrated when she incapacitated Durkon, Sabine was a threat to the whole group, not just Haley. Z, with his terrible to-hit and damage, could at best have provided Nale or Thog a flanking buddy with his scimitars.

If V wasn't there at the time, you really think Z would have just sit still and didn't attack the rest of the group ? :smallconfused: Z would have been able to then help his group and a wizard supporting the fighters would have been devastating.

Whereas I'd say that V failed to overcome the challenge that Z presented. That is a loss for her.

It was mentioned that not only Z prepared his whole daily spell slots just to counter and face V, but also tailored his build just to be able to defeat V (moar magic resistance ?). And was actually prepared as he was the ambushing one. V was attacked without notice, didn't prepare her spells with fighting Z in mind and I doubt she tailored her build just to face Z. Even when fearing an ambush, V was sure at the time that Z was out of the "game"

In those circumstances, that Z was barely able to snatch a draw on his last spurr beside having all the good cards at hand is not what I'd call a victory for him. Especially since he was then unconscious and couldn't help his party either. Even calling that a draw can be arguable given the peculiar circumstances of that fight, but I just can't call it V's victory either as she ended up in another plane and thus, unable to provide help during the rest of the fight. Still, Z wasted his best shot at taking out V here.

TrinityGrace

2013-09-04, 03:53 AM

Don't forget that the imp was in on the attack, and secretly didn't want anything to happen to V. Even if V hadn't found the way to win, or at least end, the fight with Z I don't think V would have died.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-04, 10:40 AM

As I said, perspective. Roy decided to leave Elan to the bandit and couldn't believe that the rest of the party would risk their live to save him and even then, turn their back on them.

Roy even threathen an innocent weapon seller that if he could buy a weapon, he would use it on him right away.

Don't see people complaining about Roy being baaaaad !
I have. I've not been among them, but they do exist.

And yes, Roy did save the day in the end. Just as V didn't actually sic the dragon on the team and save them from that dragon that was outmatching them.
I fail to see how executing the dragon was preferable to, say, negotiating a trade for the starmetal or at least a peaceful withdrawal from its home.

If V wasn't there at the time, you really think Z would have just sit still and didn't attack the rest of the group ? :smallconfused: Z would have been able to then help his group and a wizard supporting the fighters would have been devastating.
I think Z would have done everything in his power to help his team...and that that wouldn't amount to much. Again, he was all but out of spells at this point. Again, as evidenced by his resorting to melee against V, the most he could do would be to flank Roy or Elan, who are both better warriors than him.

In those circumstances, that Z was barely able to snatch a draw on his last spurr beside having all the good cards at hand is not what I'd call a victory for him.
Moving the goalposts. The original claim by Reddish Mage, to which I was responding and that you took it upon yourself to defend, was that V "defeat[ed] Z in the second match". It ain't so.

Kish

2013-09-04, 01:03 PM

Moving the goalposts. The original claim by Reddish Mage, to which I was responding and that you took it upon yourself to defend, was that V "defeat[ed] Z in the second match". It ain't so.
Considering the Plane Shift and the lapse into unconsciousness followed by arrest, "Vaarsuvius won" is indeed no better a claim than "Zz'dtri won."

Or to put it another way, :vaarsuvius: "A plague on both your houses...with a Fortitude DC of 18...incubation period of 1 day...and 1d4 Constitution damage per day infected."

Sir_Leorik

2013-09-04, 01:59 PM

Alright, I think I understand your position now, but if we're treating this as a distinct trend, then it doesn't track V's character well. By your accounting, the combination of V's power and arrogance would cause her to usurp the story if left unchecked. But if we see the sidelining solely as a corrective measure for that, then we'd expect it to happen more often earlier in the comic, when her ego was most overt. If we're being fair, we'd expect more of this near the start of Paladin Blues, since a lot of DCF predated the intricate plotting and creative decisions that came after. But that's not what happens: before Azure City, we had V end entire combats in instances like this:
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0145.html,

this: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0186.html,

I'm going to stop you right there, because you kind of missed the point of the arc that strip appeared in. In that arc, a Hag Baleful Polymorphs V into a small lizard, and she can no longer use her most powerful spells. In the end she manages to save the party by preparing and casting Feather Fall and Suggestion, a utilitarian spell with limited applications, and a Language Dependent Enchantment spell. V could have learned to better appreciate what she can do with her magic, preparing a wider variety of spells, but she immediately ignored those potential lessons and not only Disintegrated the YABD, she threatened to do so to the rest of the party, out of displeasure with their leaving her as a lizard longer than she felt necessary.

During that arc V was unable to communicate with the party, was almost eaten by Blackwing, and was groped by Belkar out of "curiosity". But she didn't learn anything, and did not undergo character growth. So she was forced to undergo character growth in Book Four by painful experiences.

It's not until the big battle that waylaying V became a trope, and it hasn't gotten better as V's tried to rein herself in, it's gotten worse.

It was the second occasion, not the first; the first was the lizard arc. The third occasion was V refusing to help save Lien, and the third was V abandoning Elan and Durkon after she murdered Kubota. The fourth time was being sent to the Semi-Elemental Plane of Ranch Dressing. The Archfiends snatching her and Blackwing's souls away is the fifth time V has been "removed from play". (I don't count any situtation like the fight in Cliffport, where V gets knocked unconscious from hit point loss, to be V getting benched. She is an Elf Wizard, she doesn't have a lot of hp.)

This makes a lot more sense if we use my running theory, that it's about V's arc and nothing (or comparatively little) else.

And I'm not a fan of her arc as it's been going. It's...monotonous would be a good word, moreso than straight boring. There's very few characters involved, and it detracts from other parts of the story (especially serialized like it is now, since time's more of a commodity now then it will be when everything's in book form) I don't expect everyone (or anyone in particular really) to agree with me, but I feel it needs throwing out there.

Well then you're in for some disappointment. All of the characters have experienced character growth, and V's arc since Book Four has been entirely a journey of self-discovery, with Blackwing acting as her conscience.

Let's see. In this arc, Vaarsuvius has come to understand blasting away at problems doesn't solve them, has begun working on her temper, decided that her family is better off without her, worked out through hearing one word that Girard had an organization backing him, defeated an opponent whose entire build was designed to kill her, began to understand the true enormity and true depths of her crimes in the last arc and thus taken a decent step towards redemption, outwitted Qarr (admittedly not the greatest challenge, but still) and figured out where Roy was headed, and nearly stopped Roy from playing into the Fiends' hands, failing only because they personally intervened.

I don't know what you consider "jack all" but it doesn't seem to mean the same thing to you as it does to me. Unless you're talking about flat out winning on her own, and considering the point of the entire last book for V was that she can't, V has done plenty.

Well, most of that's character development, and it's generally slow and incremental stuff. Not that that's a bad thing, but the fact that people are still all too willing to consider her the same mouthy and mindless blaster-wizard as she was a few hundred strips ago would suggest that these steps have failed to significantly alter our collective perception of the elf. Might be a bit harsh and premature to call the development a failure, then, but I'm still waiting on a payoff for all of it. Failing that, I'd settle for her getting to be a part of the party again.

Oh, and in no meaningful sense did V win against Z. The fact that she was only saved from eternal torment by Z's double-dealing familiar should make that pretty clear.

Z didn't win that fight either; he was slapped in irons the moment it was over. And like I said V is on a journey of self-discovery. There are some people who post here who feel she is a monster who doesn't deserve a redemption arc, and now you come along and posit that redemption arcs are boring. Like they say, you can't please everyone all the time. :smallwink:

Malek2991

2013-09-04, 02:09 PM

I have. I've not been among them, but they do exist.

I fail to see how executing the dragon was preferable to, say, negotiating a trade for the starmetal or at least a peaceful withdrawal from its home.

I think Z would have done everything in his power to help his team...and that that wouldn't amount to much. Again, he was all but out of spells at this point. Again, as evidenced by his resorting to melee against V, the most he could do would be to flank Roy or Elan, who are both better warriors than him.

Moving the goalposts. The original claim by Reddish Mage, to which I was responding and that you took it upon yourself to defend, was that V "defeat[ed] Z in the second match". It ain't so.

First: The dragon attacked the order first, and pretty much had them beat without Varsuvius's help, granted V was kinda a jerk about it. Furthermore, what would the Order have been able to trade a dragon for the starmetal, The only thing they would have to offer the dragon was a tasty snack. (By which I mean their flesh). Not even Haley had enough money to buy the starmetal from the Dragon, and even if they somehow convinced the dragon to accept some sort of offer, there would be no guarentee that the dragon would actually follow through on its side of the bargin.

Second: He would easily be crushed in melee by Roy, even with Nale flanking, but flanking Elan with Thog, while being able to inform Thog that the female Half-Orc is an illusion, means Elan is toast.

Reddish Mage

2013-09-04, 02:32 PM

You mean the time when she threatened to sic the dragon on the party if they didn't cater to her every whim, then executed it while it was helpless thus beginning the arc that culminated in familicide? Some help.

...Z was probably less of a melee threat than Elan to anyone but V.

See, the way I read that scene, Z toyed with V, then put her down when the situation got serious. V had her bacon saved by Qarr.

V's and O-Chul's not being present at Girard's Gate gave Xykon a reason to teleport immediately to Kraggor's Tomb, giving Team Evil a massive head start and probably letting them blindside O-Chul and Lien.

I can't say that I agree that V hasn't been at all helpful, ever, this analysis has suggested that at least V's magic has yet to obviously prove itself indispensable to the Order.

That is quite remarkable given what we know a wizard is capable of, and is truly humiliating compared to Elan's contributions.

SavageWombat

2013-09-04, 03:03 PM

Just a thought:

After Belkar had his turning point of character growth, and role-played his way out of the mark of justice - he had one of his biggest Moments of Awesome and saved the entire party.

Vaarsuvius has role-played himself to the same point - and the party is in a position where one well-placed wizard could save the entire group.

(I can't make the timing work out myself, but it's possible.)

littlebum2002

2013-09-04, 04:43 PM

I dunno, I think I can enumerate a couple others:
...

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0871.html

You picked a strip right before Durkon gets killed to point out how strong he is?

Let me present my counter-argument:

HE GETS KILLED

Domino Quartz

2013-09-04, 04:49 PM

HE GETS KILLED

Not for another 6 strips. :smalltongue:

DiamondHooHaMan

2013-09-04, 05:27 PM

You picked a strip right before Durkon gets killed to point out how strong he is?

Let me present my counter-argument:

HE GETS KILLED

he is struck down only to become more powerful then you could possibly imagine.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-04, 06:51 PM

First: The dragon attacked the order first,
The Order were invading the dragon's home, were visibly armed, and were talking about what they would do with a piece of the dragon's personal property. He could have reasonably expected bodily harm. What was he supposed to do? Call the police? The bandit arc had established that Wooden Forest wasn't part of any kingdom, that there was no local authority - except possibly the druid's local that never showed up - to which to appeal.

Furthermore, what would the Order have been able to trade a dragon for the starmetal, The only thing they would have to offer the dragon was a tasty snack. (By which I mean their flesh). Not even Haley had enough money to buy the starmetal from the Dragon, and even if they somehow convinced the dragon to accept some sort of offer, there would be no guarentee that the dragon would actually follow through on its side of the bargin.
That's not really the dragon's problem, now, is it? The Order were clearly in the wrong, and the burden was upon them to redress that wrong.

Mammal

2013-09-04, 07:34 PM

That's not really the dragon's problem, now, is it? The Order were clearly in the wrong, and the burden was upon them to redress that wrong.

I think you've got some interesting points, but at least with the dragon encounter, you're applying Real World (tm) logic to a story. There was no peaceful resolution possible because of course there wasn't. That the heroes come into conflict with a dragon while seeking its treasure is as inevitable as the heroes seeking the treasure to begin with.

That doesn't excuse anyone's actions per se, but I think you're overthinking it. V began the comic as a pretty flawed person, but so did everyone in the Order but Durkon. And OotS has an ensemble cast. Like it or not, it's just as much V's story as Roy's, Xykon's, and Haley's, even if her personal arc isn't tied into the main story at the moment. We wouldn't be spending all this time with V if it weren't going to be relevant again in a big way.

Kish

2013-09-04, 07:37 PM

I do not believe either that Vaarsuvius was or is or...sigh...ever will be anything less than one of the six main characters of the comic.

I also do not believe Rich meant it to be morally irrelevant that Vaarsuvius, alone of the Order, had it actively shoved in her/his face that the dragon was willing to talk, and s/he responded by immediately breaking out the Suggestion spells, and disintegrating the dragon after s/he had kept her/him prisoner for hours.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-04, 08:16 PM

I do not believe either that Vaarsuvius was or is or...sigh...ever will be anything less than one of the six main characters of the comic.
Embrace denial of this point. It's great for the blood pressure :smallbiggrin:

Arcanist

2013-09-04, 09:02 PM

You mean the time when she threatened to sic the dragon on the party if they didn't cater to her every whim, then executed it while it was helpless thus beginning the arc that culminated in familicide? Some help.

Oh yes, it is seriously V's fault that s/he did not have the foreknowledge nor omniscience to know that after killing the Young Adult Black Dragon, someone would come after him. Especially considering that nobody had mentioned age category or other such information until after the fact.

I find it interesting that you paint that scenario in a darker light than it actually is. As if V had any serious intent to actually kill the party unless s/he got what s/he desired like some brutish thug or whining child. It was painfully obvious that eventually the Order would have returned V to his/her form, but when V confirmed and managed to establish communication with the Order requested that s/he be transformed immediately, rather than later. Any such threat while in that state was clearly made in a joking manner.

The Order were invading the dragon's home, were visibly armed, and were talking about what they would do with a piece of the dragon's personal property. He could have reasonably expected bodily harm. What was he supposed to do? Call the police? The bandit arc had established that Wooden Forest wasn't part of any kingdom, that there was no local authority - except possibly the druid's local that never showed up - to which to appeal.

You assume that their world operates on any form of real worldtm logic (except where explicitly mentioned). In their world invading a Dragon's home and stealing it's treasure can be considered an everyday event and applying our moral views on property laws to their world would be ridiculous.

If anything, the Order's world operates on a form of "might makes right" outside of the jurisdiction of the law and clearly killing Chromatic Dragons (regardless of innocence) is not illegal (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0207.html).

That's not really the dragon's problem, now, is it? The Order were clearly in the wrong, and the burden was upon them to redress that wrong.

Of course it's not the Dragon's problem, but it isn't the Order's either. You conveniently ignore the fact that the Order entered the cave under the idea that there was no Dragon (black or otherwise) inside of it. Upon encountering it, the Dragon attacked home invaders and the Order defended themselves against an attacking Dragon.

In essence, nobody really did anything wrong. They all reacted perfectly normal under the circumstances presented. We cannot know if they had any time to seek parley on the Dragon to discuss a price for the object they desire and thus we must exclude it as a possible outcome for this scenario.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-04, 09:30 PM

Oh yes, it is seriously V's fault that s/he did not have the foreknowledge nor omniscience to know that after killing the Young Adult Black Dragon, someone would come after him. Especially considering that nobody had mentioned age category or other such information until after the fact.
V had at that point been adventuring with a man who was on record as being more inclined to talk to people than to kill them because doing so would be slightly more convenient for weeks if not months. She had plenty of time to be exposed to that attitude. She had absorbed none of it. I, for one, don't blame Roy for this.

I find it interesting that you paint that scenario in a darker light than it actually is. As if V had any serious intent to actually kill the party unless s/he got what s/he desired like some brutish thug or whining child. It was painfully obvious that eventually the Order would have returned V to his/her form, but when V confirmed and managed to establish communication with the Order requested that s/he be transformed immediately, rather than later. Any such threat while in that state was clearly made in a joking manner.
And as I said earlier, I find any attempt to paint this scenario as anything other than a home invasion culminating in mindrape and cold-blooded murder shameless whitewashing. Good words, by the way, "brutish thug" and "whining child". I'll have to incorporate them into my hatedom lexicon :smallsmile:

You assume that their world operates on any form of real worldtm logic (except where explicitly mentioned). In their world invading a Dragon's home and stealing it's treasure can be considered an everyday event and applying our moral views on property laws to their world would be ridiculous.
We've seen a number of legal/law enforcement regimes so far: Azure City, Cliffport, the Empire of Blood, the "arbitrary civilization" where Nale and Thog were imprisoned, and others that I'm forgetting but which I am sure exist. Azure City, Cliffport, and the Empire of Blood seem to follow some variant of American criminal procedure. Roy in the Azure City trial seems to expect freedom of speech, suggesting that even though this isn't an Azurite concept, it is fairly common in Northern law. To me this suggests that when the Giant writes about law and legal norms, he - being like most people not an expert on comparative law or even on the law of his own culture - writes what he does know.

Besides, just because something is common doesn't make it either legal or right. It just means that some people in that world consider some kinds of people legitimate targets of violence and don't expect condemnation or punishment. This is not something the Giant means us to accept; it's an attitude he wants to criticize and condemn.

Of course it's not the Dragon's problem, but it isn't the Order's either. You conveniently ignore the fact that the Order entered the cave under the idea that there was no Dragon (black or otherwise) inside of it. Upon encountering it, the Dragon attacked home invaders and the Order defended themselves against an attacking Dragon.
Doesn't matter. They intended to enter its home, and then did so. They intended to remove something. Whether or not they knew it was anybody's home is irrelevant. It was on them to determine whether what they were after belonged to anybody, not on the possessor to prove title.

In essence, nobody really did anything wrong. They all reacted perfectly normal under the circumstances presented. We cannot know if they had any time to seek parley on the Dragon to discuss a price for the object they desire and thus we must exclude it as a possible outcome for this scenario.
Normal behavior can also be bad behavior. The Giant has spoken out before against normative gamer and PC behavior, and has stated that one of the things we ought to be doing with The Order of the Stick is learning what it has to teach.

Rakoa

2013-09-04, 09:36 PM

Reddish Mage

2013-09-04, 09:45 PM

Doesn't matter. They intended to enter its home, and then did so. They intended to remove something. Whether or not they knew it was anybody's home is irrelevant. It was on them to determine whether what they were after belonged to anybody, not on the possessor to prove title.

Normal behavior can also be bad behavior. The Giant has spoken out before against normative gamer and PC behavior, and has stated that one of the things we ought to be doing with The Order of the Stick is learning what it has to teach.

Actually, if your home is a cave, and you do nothing to fence the property or to block entry, there certainly was no "breaking and entering." The dragon did nothing to warn approaching adventurers that it was its cave and attacked without additional provocation.

Seems to me to be a case isn't so clear cut morally or legally.

shamgar001

2013-09-04, 09:55 PM

The dragon's scales weren't shiny. Yes, we the readers can understand in retrospect that the OotS shouldn't have killed it, but considering the OotS lives in a world where all chromatic dragons are regarded as evil by default, I don't think we can blame them for killing it; according to the knowledge they had, that was the right thing to do. When that strip first came out - when dragons were just another fantasy monster and we had no idea that the mother was coming back - did anyone think "oh hey, maybe they shouldn't be invading another sentient creature's home"?

So V saving the group from the dragon is not an insignificant help on V's part. Even if we disregard that fact and say that the Order was doing wrong by being in the dragon's lair in the first place - that doesn't change the fact that without V, they might very well have ended up dead. That counts as a contribution to the party.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-04, 10:10 PM

Given that the Dragon did attack first, the Order was well within their rights to kill it. And don't say it's their fault because it's the Dragon's "home". I highly doubt it has the land deed, and it could have attempted to parlay with the Order just as easily as they with it (in fact, even more easily).
Why does the dragon not get to expect to live unmolested in its place of residence? Why is it not on adventurers to have some special reason for dragon-slaying beyond "I don't like dragons" or "I want their stuff"?

The dragon's scales weren't shiny. Yes, we the readers can understand in retrospect that the OotS shouldn't have killed it, but considering the OotS lives in a world where all chromatic dragons are regarded as evil by default, I don't think we can blame them for killing it; according to the knowledge they had, that was the right thing to do. When that strip first came out - when dragons were just another fantasy monster and we had no idea that the mother was coming back - did anyone think "oh hey, maybe they shouldn't be invading another sentient creature's home"?
Normative behavior, again, is not justified by its being normative, nor is it above condemnation. Out of universe, the Giant condemns such behavior. In-universe, Roy has condemned it even if he's had his moments of backsliding.

So V saving the group from the dragon is not an insignificant help on V's part. Even if we disregard that fact and say that the Order was doing wrong by being in the dragon's lair in the first place - that doesn't change the fact that without V, they might very well have ended up dead. That counts as a contribution to the party.
There is a point where you taint your contribution by the method you use to make it.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-04, 10:14 PM

Actually, if your home is a cave, and you do nothing to fence the property or to block entry, there certainly was no "breaking and entering." The dragon did nothing to warn approaching adventurers that it was its cave and attacked without additional provocation.

Seems to me to be a case isn't so clear cut morally or legally.
There might not be breaking and entering, but there was for sure trespass. And no, a homeowner or landowner is under no obligation to notify intruders that they're on his property; they have a right to expect to live free of intruders. The obligation is on intruders to avoid other people's property. They're the ones in motion, the ones in charge of their own route. They can move out of the way of others' homes. Others' homes can't move out of their way.

archon_huskie

2013-09-04, 10:15 PM

Arcanist

2013-09-04, 10:25 PM

V had at that point been adventuring with a man who was on record as being more inclined to talk to people than to kill them because doing so would be slightly more convenient for weeks if not months. She had plenty of time to be exposed to that attitude. She had absorbed none of it. I, for one, don't blame Roy for this.

Who said anything about Roy specifically? This is a moral "problem" that the entire order faces.

And as I said earlier, I find any attempt to paint this scenario as anything other than a home invasion culminating in mindrape and cold-blooded murder shameless whitewashing. Good words, by the way, "brutish thug" and "whining child". I'll have to incorporate them into my hatedom lexicon :smallsmile:

Interesting. Using this line of reasoning I can declare that Tarquin being anything less than a Heroic figure who brought order to a lawless territory by any means necessary is shameless mudslinging. You are creating an obvious bias towards the Dragon in that it was ethically entitled to kill the party immediately upon entering the cave, however what was really stopping the Dragon from seeking parley? Absolutely nothing. Despite having the advantage of territory, might and only failing due to an unfortunate saving throw, it had the advantage and most likely would have emerged victorious. So why not avoid the conflict entirely and talk it out rather than fight? Do you sincerely believe that the Dragon should have killed them all strictly by virtue of them being in it's cave?

I welcome you to add those terms to your lexicon.

We've seen a number of legal/law enforcement regimes so far: Azure City, Cliffport, the Empire of Blood, the "arbitrary civilization" where Nale and Thog were imprisoned, and others that I'm forgetting but which I am sure exist. Azure City, Cliffport, and the Empire of Blood seem to follow some variant of American criminal procedure. Roy in the Azure City trial seems to expect freedom of speech, suggesting that even though this isn't an Azurite concept, it is fairly common in Northern law. To me this suggests that when the Giant writes about law and legal norms, he - being like most people not an expert on comparative law or even on the law of his own culture - writes what he does know.

Not once did I attempt invalidate any of those countries legal systems and in fact invoked them as a counter point. Most prominently being that the murder of a Chromatic Dragons is legal as endorsed by Miko. Thereafter stealing from it's hoard would be considered fair game (mostly because it is performed in a lawless region).

Besides, just because something is common doesn't make it either legal or right. It just means that some people in that world consider some kinds of people legitimate targets of violence and don't expect condemnation or punishment. This is not something the Giant means us to accept; it's an attitude he wants to criticize and condemn.

It was endorsed as being perfectly acceptable (by a Paladin no less) and thereafter commended (making it reason to believe that it was ethical). From this we can confirm that Chromatic Dragons have no legal rights under Azurite law. Therefore it is legal and debatable in it's ethics.

Doesn't matter. They intended to enter its home, and then did so. They intended to remove something. Whether or not they knew it was anybody's home is irrelevant. It was on them to determine whether what they were after belonged to anybody, not on the possessor to prove title.

You're ignoring facts that alter your view of the events to allow you to reach your desired conclusion.

They entered the cave with the intent to obtain the Starmetal (regardless of obstacle), however they did so under the assumption that there were no creatures guarding it (beyond the Ogre's that Roy made up). Upon entering the cave they encountered a Black Dragon that asked no questions and just decided to take the law into his own hands. The Dragon did not appear shocked at their arrival and was quite expecting of them.

If anything this Dragon was looking for a reason to kill someone. It didn't care if it was the Order or someone else.

Normal behavior can also be bad behavior. The Giant has spoken out before against normative gamer and PC behavior, and has stated that one of the things we ought to be doing with The Order of the Stick is learning what it has to teach.

This was not normal gamer and PC behavior. This was action as logic dictates. Someone attacks you, is it not logical to assume they will attack you back?

Perhaps it would be more appropriate in saying that everyone acted normally. The Dragon attacked and the Party responded back.

Scow2

2013-09-04, 10:29 PM

There might not be breaking and entering, but there was for sure trespass. And no, a homeowner or landowner is under no obligation to notify intruders that they're on his property; they have a right to expect to live free of intruders. The obligation is on intruders to avoid other people's property. They're the ones in motion, the ones in charge of their own route. They can move out of the way of others' homes. Others' homes can't move out of their way.It's not Tresspassing until there's a warning that you're on Private Property - usually in the form of a highly-visible sign.

They entered the cave with the intent to obtain the Starmetal (regardless of obstacle), however they did so under the assumption that there were no creatures guarding it (beyond the Ogre's that Roy made up). Upon entering the cave they encountered a Black Dragon that asked no questions and just decided to take the law into his own hands. The Dragon did not appear shocked at their arrival and was quite expecting of them. Law has all of jack **** to do with what's Right. And why should someone be forced to negotiate/parlay with rats coming into their home?

This was not normal gamer and PC behavior. This was action as logic dictates. Someone attacks you, is it not logical to assume they will attack you back?

Perhaps it would be more appropriate in saying that everyone acted normally. The Dragon attacked and the Party responded back.Normally is not Right. Take your "Legally"s, and keep them off the Moral axis.

shamgar001

2013-09-04, 10:37 PM

Normative behavior, again, is not justified by its being normative, nor is it above condemnation. Out of universe, the Giant condemns such behavior. In-universe, Roy has condemned it even if he's had his moments of backsliding.

There is a point where you taint your contribution by the method you use to make it.

I undermined my own point by engaging the question of whether the order was right or not. Either way, you have to judge people according to the knowledge they had in the circumstances. V and the rest of the order had every reason to believe that they were doing the right thing.

Arcanist

2013-09-04, 10:45 PM

Law has all of jack **** to do with what's Right. And why should someone be forced to negotiate/parlay with rats coming into their home?

This is terrible comparison and using this line of reasoning would mean that I can kill anyone (and anything) on my property that I desire. Logic be damned.

Normally is not Right. Take your "Legally"s, and keep them off the Moral axis.

This was a question of whether this was morally and therefore legally acceptable behavior.

Scow2

2013-09-04, 10:55 PM

This is terrible comparison and using this line of reasoning would mean that I can kill anyone (and anything) on my property that I desire. Logic be damned.You can if you're a Dragon, Deity, or Lovecraftian Horror.

This was a question of whether this was morally and therefore legally acceptable behavior.Law has nothing to do with morals. There are a lot of legally unacceptable behaviors that are moral, and a lot of morally unacceptable behaviors that are legal.

However, the Law and Chaos alignments LOVE to paint themselves as "Good" and the other as "Evil".

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-04, 10:55 PM

I undermined my own point by engaging the question of whether the order was right or not. Either way, you have to judge people according to the knowledge they had in the circumstances. V and the rest of the order had every reason to believe that they were doing the right thing.
Belief and knowledge don't matter for squat, except insofar as the dragon deigns to grant the Order a courtesy. Nobody picked them up and deposited them in the cave. They intended to be there. They brought deadly weapons along (this is what allows the dragon to respond with force; he could reasonably have believed the Order intended to use those weapons against him). They intended to abscond with a movable good, and spoke those intentions aloud. They brought any consequence on themselves.

Domino Quartz

2013-09-04, 10:59 PM

shamgar001

2013-09-04, 11:01 PM

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-04, 11:03 PM

I'm not disagreeing with that. My disagreement is that you seem to be suggesting that V saving the Order doesn't count as a contribution to their goals since s/he should have said "Hey, you guys broke in here; you deserve to be eaten" (and then later gotten eater him/herself).
I have no comment on what the Order should or shouldn't have done. My problem is with how the audience lauds or excuses their actions.

TRH

2013-09-04, 11:11 PM

Emanick

2013-09-04, 11:16 PM

Belief and knowledge don't matter for squat, except insofar as the dragon deigns to grant the Order a courtesy. Nobody picked them up and deposited them in the cave. They intended to be there. They brought deadly weapons along (this is what allows the dragon to respond with force; he could reasonably have believed the Order intended to use those weapons against him) They intended to abscond with a movable good. They brought any consequence on themselves.

What should the Order have done, then?

Should they have purchased a megaphone from the local boutique and shouted through it into the cave in order to determine if any creature lived there, and, if so, whether or not they had its permission to go inside? Is it morally wrong to enter a cave without proof that nobody lives there? As far as I can tell - and correct me if I'm wrong, because I am genuinely confused - according to you, the Order literally could not have gone about this a correct way. They had no moral right to enter the cave, despite the fact that it was not marked as a residence in any way, shape or form, and they had no way of asking whether or not it was okay to go inside, because there was nobody present to ask the permission of. It seems unlikely that the dragon was within shouting range.

Also, since when is it acceptable to attack ANYBODY with lethal force when they have not expressly indicated hostile intent towards you? Remember, the dragon attacked the Order immediately after seeing Haley retreat at her first glimpse of it. It seems like you've set up a moral double standard here - the dragon is justified in aggression, but the Order somehow can't be, no matter what their intent.

Let's say I'm a member of a rare ethnic group or subculture that prefers to live in caves rather than houses. (Otherwise, it's not really fair to compare me to a dragon, as dragons, unlike most societies today, can reasonably be expected to live in caves.) I decide to move into a cave in a dangerous forest, leaving no indication that I live there. One day, a group of miners with guns comes into the cave (they may have guns because the area is dangerous and they need to defend themselves, but I don't know this for sure). One of them comes into the lantern-lit cavern I'm sitting in me, gasps, and turns away, yelling at her friends to head back into a darker cavern. I immediately draw my machine gun and start shooting at her.

Is this okay? Because I honestly cannot see any difference between that and what the black dragon did upon meeting the Order.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-04, 11:16 PM

I have to ask now: do you like any of the protagonists of this story? They're all culpable in the Dragon incident to varying degrees, and although V seems to have been the only one with an option to resolve things peacefully ( the Dragon not knowing Common and all), they were all party to the intrusion that you also object to. Aren't they all horrible people who've escaped justice for that encounter, by your accounting of things?
I think I've liked every single post of yours I've read for being a clear and concise restatement of things I think. This one is no exception.

Is this okay? Because I honestly cannot see any difference between that and what the black dragon did upon meeting the Order.
Yes. It is my contention that the dragon was acting reasonably, using proportionate force in response to a threat a reasonable dragon could have perceived against its life and property in the same circumstances. Again, the Order was in visible possession of deadly weapons, and talked openly about taking a piece of the dragon's [mother's] property. The reasonable inference was that they posed a deadly and imminent threat that needed to be met. Whether this reasonable action is also a moral action? I am not going to say. But the dragon is under no obligation to act in a moral fashion. The Order, ostensible heroes, are. They get held to a higher standard because, as TRH points out, we're supposed to like them and to accept their actions as things heroes would do.

TRH

2013-09-04, 11:25 PM

I think I've liked every single post of yours I've read for being a clear and concise restatement of things I think. This one is no exception.

Well, thanks for the props, but I'm still confused. What do you expect out of this comic, if you hate the main characters? They may be dragon-killers (or killer and accomplices, if we split hairs), but the villains are quite a bit worse. Among major characters (that aren't dead, like most of the Scribblers), that pretty much just leaves the Sapphire Guard, Paladins with a track record of killing Goblins for generally unjustified reasons, including civilians. It seems to me like your ideal ending to this story would involve the Snarl unmaking everything, since 90% of the named characters have done horrible things or been party to same. It's not like I don't get your individual takes on things, but I don't see why you'd be invested in reading more, since Rocks Fall Everyone Dies isn't a very likely ending for this story.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-04, 11:29 PM

Well, thanks for the props, but I'm still confused. What do you expect out of this comic, if you hate the main characters? They may be dragon-killers (or killer and accomplices, if we split hairs), but the villains are quite a bit worse. Among major characters (that aren't dead, like most of the Scribblers), that pretty much just leaves the Sapphire Guard, Paladins with a track record of killing Goblins for generally unjustified reasons, including civilians. It seems to me like your ideal ending to this story would involve the Snarl unmaking everything, since 90% of the named characters have done horrible things or been party to same. It's not like I don't get your individual takes on things, but I don't see why you'd be invested in reading more, since Rocks Fall Everyone Dies isn't a very likely ending for this story.
Where the story goes is no business of mine. But you're right; I'm not here because I feel for the characters, though that might be why a great majority of the readers are here, and the author even says this is a character-driven story. I'm here to watch the characters do things that make me feel and think things. If those things I feel happen to be outrage and a desire to have people in the real world be better than these characters, so be it. Brecht would approve.

lio45

2013-09-05, 12:00 AM

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 12:04 AM

That dragon was in no way a "homeowner" or "landowner" in possession of a valid deed to the place, just a sentient wild creature that happened to live there.

If I'm walking on MY land and I see a moose, I'm not legally trespassing on that moose's property, even though in the moose's mind I actually am, and he might very well charge and attack...
So in order to excuse the Order in your mind, you need to equate a person about as smart as a human (and capable of growing a lot smarter), just as capable of claiming a space in which it can feel safe and autonomous and just as endowed with the right to expect that autonomy and safety not to be violated, with a moose. Uh huh.

If nothing else, Wooden Forest being a lawless territory, the dragon['s mother] owned that cave by right of conquest, notarized deed or no.

Koo Rehtorb

2013-09-05, 12:10 AM

This is absurd. If you're walking around in a forest and happen to cross the border of someone's unmarked estate that person is nether legally nor morally entitled to blow you away on the spot.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 12:14 AM

This is absurd. If you're walking around in a forest and happen to cross the border of someone's unmarked estate that person is nether legally nor morally entitled to blow you away on the spot.
People keep omitting the elements "visibly carrying deadly weapons" and "talking openly about taking a piece of one's property". I wonder why.

Koo Rehtorb

2013-09-05, 12:25 AM

People keep omitting the elements "visibly carrying deadly weapons" and "talking openly about taking a piece of one's property". I wonder why.

Okay, buddy, let's modify it to see if it sounds any better.

A party of people are walking around in the middle of an uncharted wilderness, no settlements for miles and miles around. They are carrying hunting rifles because, you know, ****, it's the middle of an uncharted wilderness. They talk about finding a meteor that fell out of the sky.

Some hermit happens to be living in the middle of the uncharted forest. He filed no claims, made no mark of what he considers to be his "property line". As soon as they walk across this invisible boundary he blows them all away on the spot.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 12:32 AM

Okay, buddy, let's modify it to see if it sounds any better.

A party of people are walking around in the middle of an uncharted wilderness, no settlements for miles and miles around. They are carrying hunting rifles because, you know, ****, it's the middle of an uncharted wilderness. They talk about finding a meteor that fell out of the sky.

Some hermit happens to be living in the middle of the uncharted forest. He filed no claims, made no mark of what he considers to be his "property line". As soon as they walk across this invisible boundary he blows them all away on the spot.
I don't understand this attempt to construct a hypothetical scenario. The chain of events is clear: it happened as is shown from strip 180 to strip 188. That said, this hypothetical, despite your stated intention still does not conform to the facts as laid out in those strips. The meteor in question was clearly regarded by the dragons as their personal property. They had "enshrined" it, we are told, in a special room to indicate its significance. The hermit in this scenario has taken no such steps to mark the meteorite as his own. What's more, a cave's outer boundary is clearly delineated, much more clearly so than an imaginary line on a map. The mouth of a cave is more analogous to a gate in a fence or a door to a house than to said imaginary line. The Order didn't just pass through the mouth of this particular cave by accident; they deliberately crossed the threshold, expending significant effort and at significant personal risk. They weren't innocent saunterers who made a mistake, not that it would make any difference to the dragon's reasonable expectations of them, but deliberate intruders.

Koo Rehtorb

2013-09-05, 12:42 AM

I don't understand this attempt to construct a hypothetical scenario.

Mostly because I am flabbergasted that someone could look at strips 180-182 and go "Yup. This is a perfectly reasonable reaction." Not even "Gosh. That sure was an unfortunate but understandable misunderstanding on the dragon's part."

I find it to be a severely warped perspective.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 12:42 AM

Mostly because I am flabbergasted that someone could look at strips 180-182 and go "Yup. This is a perfectly reasonable reaction." Not even "Gosh. That sure was an unfortunate but understandable misunderstanding on the dragon's part."

I find it to be a severely warped perspective.
I think the dragon was reasonably in fear for his life, safety, and property, had a right to protect the first at least, and reacted in proportion to the threat it reasonably perceived. I think most reasonable dragons would have reacted the same way, and I think many reasonable humans would as well if they had the power (most reasonable humans who find themselves naked and unarmed in the face of armed intruders would, of course, run and hide, but the dragon can hardly be considered "unarmed" and so our hypothetical humans should be armed too for purposes of analogy). Why don't you?

Koo Rehtorb

2013-09-05, 12:48 AM

I think the dragon was reasonably in fear for his life, safety, and property, had a right to protect the first at least, and reacted in proportion to the threat it reasonably perceived. I think most reasonable dragons would have reacted the same way, and I think many reasonable humans would as well. Why don't you?

I guess because I don't feel that a group of people walking into an unmarked cave in the middle of a forest deserve to die on the spot because the resident didn't feel like putting up a sign warning people that it was inhabited. Call me crazy.

shamgar001

2013-09-05, 12:52 AM

Is it totally unthinkable that both sides were correct in their reactions, given their respective understandings of property rights?

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 12:53 AM

I guess because I don't feel that a group of people walking into an unmarked cave in the middle of a forest deserve to die on the spot because the resident didn't feel like putting up a sign warning people that it was inhabited. Call me crazy.
Whereas I think that a group of heavily armed people who make a concerted and deliberate effort to penetrate a difficult-to-access cave and who wax eloquent about their plans to abscond with someone's property can be reasonably perceived as a threat to one's person or property. Is that a reasonable perception? If not, why not?

If the Order were not heavily armed, had crossed an imaginary line that only existed in the dragon's head instead of going to the trouble of climbing down a cliff face, and had not indicated to the dragon that they intended to pose a threat to its property, then yes, I'll concede force would not have been proportional. Happy? But I won't back off on maintaining that that wasn't the situation the dragon faced. It faced a situation it could have reasonably perceived as a threat. It reacted appropriately.

Is it totally unthinkable that both sides were correct in their reactions, given their respective understandings of property rights?
Sure, the Order may have acted reasonably, but it doesn't actually matter. What's in their heads is irrelevant. What matters for the purposes of determining the dragon's appropriate course of action is how their actions could reasonably be perceived by the dragon.

What happens if they act as they did in my little hypothetical response to Koo Rhetorb? They probably get killed and eaten, because they'd be defenseless and the dragon would probably not have deigned to offer them the courtesy of explaining themselves (in which case I'd probably rail at the dragon for being a tool and employing disproportionate force to a situation that it could not have reasonably perceived as a threat to its life or property). So as pointed out above, the Order is in kind of a lose-lose situation: either they go armed and risk provoking violence in self-defense from the people into whose homes they intrude, or they don't and risk provoking violence in peeved ire from the people whose homes they intrude. They might choose not to put themselves into situations where they might intrude upon people's homes (such as by staying in town and not venturing out into the wilderness), but then they wouldn't be adventurers. The conclusion is clear: adventurers, in reasonably providing for their own safety, assume the risk of attracting reasonable violence in self-defense from people into whose homes they intrude. Either accept that, or don't be adventurers.

Koo Rehtorb

2013-09-05, 01:01 AM

Whereas I think that a group of heavily armed people

This is a fact of the world. Any band of people traveling through the wilderness are going to be armed because to do otherwise is suicide.

who make a concerted and deliberate effort to penetrate a difficult-to-access cave and who wax eloquent about their plans to abscond with someone's property

Making no mention of the dragon's ownership of the property or that they expected the cave to be inhabited.

can be reasonably perceived as a threat to one's person or property. Is that a reasonable perception?

This much I will grant you. However, it was the dragon's fault that this occurred in the first place. If it had made some effort to mark the cave as a dwelling as opposed to an abandoned pit then there would be a considerable amount more evidence that any trespassers were malicious and the response would be far more justified.

You can't blow innocent people away who are doing nothing wrong because you feel threatened by them.

It faced a situation it could have reasonably perceived as a threat.

This is not sufficient. Striking first without warning may have been tactically sound. This is a long way from justifiable.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 01:10 AM

This is a fact of the world. Any band of people traveling through the wilderness are going to be armed because to do otherwise is suicide.
And as I point out in my post above, to go armed is also to court reasonable violence in self-defense. This is also a fact of the world.

Making no mention of the dragon's ownership of the property or that they expected the cave to be inhabited.

This much I will grant you. However, it was the dragon's fault that this occurred in the first place. If it had made some effort to mark the cave as a dwelling as opposed to an abandoned pit then there would be a considerable amount more evidence that any trespassers were malicious and the response would be far more justified.
Look, marking the limits of one's property might be the smart thing to do, in that it will deter people from trespassing, but it is not an obligation incumbent upon anybody. Giving people notice that you intend to defend yourself and your property with force might be the Good thing to do, in that it indicates an altruistic respect for the lives and dignity of potential trespassors, but it is not an obligation incumbent upon anybody. Doing these things is going above and beyond the call of duty for property owners. The obligation is on the potential trespassor not to become a trespassor because they, and not the property holder, control where they will and will not go. The dragon could not control whether or not the Order climbed down into the cave no matter how many signs he put up; that choice would always be the Order's alone. If the property holder leaves1 it hard to know whether or not one is trespassing...tough. That's the regime of private property.

1I originally had "makes" here, and changed it because "makes" implies that the property owner made it more difficult than it would naturally be to know whether or not one is trespassing, inviting more trespassers and assuming some culpability for their trespass.

You can't blow innocent people away who are doing nothing wrong because you feel threatened by them.
Yeah, actually, you can, if the fear of imminent bodily harm is reasonable under the circumstances. I maintain that here, it was. I'd bring up more specific examples, but there are real life politics concerns (and before you get the wrong idea, I take issue with the reasonableness in those particular not-to-be-mentioned circumstances, but not the doctrine of self-defense itself). Such a mistake may be tragic. But it is just as wrong if not more wrong to deny people the right to defend themselves on the off chance that the person brandishing a claymore at them and demanding their engagement ring (to choose a slightly different sword and valuable rock) might just want to discuss price.

Paisley

2013-09-05, 01:34 AM

Whereas I think that a group of heavily armed people who make a concerted and deliberate effort to penetrate a difficult-to-access cave and who wax eloquent about their plans to abscond with someone's property can be reasonably perceived as a threat to one's person or property. Is that a reasonable perception? If not, why not?

To be fair, wax eloquent is a bit of a stretch. Save for a brief comment by Haley before entering the cave, no one so much as mentions anything that would suggest they were planning on plundering the dragon's horde. I'm not supporting the Order here, but for all the dragon knows, they could just be a group of highly enthusiastic spelunkers.

Also, I think the argument is starting to get a little over-complicated. I doubt that the first thought the dragon has upon seeing the party is "what reasonable course of action should I take in response to this group of possibly dangerous lifeforms who may or may not be willfully trespassing on my territory?" Rather, I suspect it's something more along the lines of "oh hey, free food."

It's like a bunch of steaks showing up on your doorstep. You don't go for your gun, you go for your knife and fork.

I think the dragon was reasonably in fear for his life, safety, and property, had a right to protect the first at least, and reacted in proportion to the threat it reasonably perceived.

Rereading strips 180-183, I can't say I see anything like fear motivating the dragon's actions. Anger, sure. Disdain, definitely. But fear? Not really.

Domino Quartz

2013-09-05, 01:38 AM

Okay, seriously? You seem to be saying "It was totally okay* for the dragon to attack the OotS first for entering its cave, which they didn't know was inhabited, but the OotS are terrible people for entering a cave they didn't know, had no way of knowing, and had no reason to believe was inhabited with the weapons they happened to be carrying." If that's not what you're saying, please enlighten me.
Haley is the first person to see the dragon, and her reaction isn't "Oh, there's the dragon!" or "Oh, there's the creature that inhabits this cave" but "Oh crap! There's a dragon here!" upon which the dragon attacks.

*note: I'm not saying it wasn't an understandable reaction, but to say it was okay for the dragon to attack first but that the OotS are terrible people for entering the cave with weapons is ridiculous.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 01:45 AM

Rereading strips 180-183, I can't say I see anything like fear motivating the dragon's actions. Anger, sure. Disdain, definitely. But fear? Not really.
Okay, I guess I could be a little clearer. I'm not referring to the emotion of fear. I'm referring to the way a reasonable person makes predictions about the future based on what they know in the present. When I say "reasonable fear" and "reasonably feared", read "reasonable expectation" and "reasonably expected".

I've also tried to use language like "a reasonable dragon" to indicate that I'm not even concerned with what was in this dragon's state of mind when it attacked the Order. That matters as little as the Order's state of mind. What matters is what a given reasonable person in the dragon's position would fear [expect] from the Order. I think a reasonable dragon could easily have come to the conclusion that there was an imminent threat of bodily harm to itself based on what said dragon could have reasonably known1. Do you disagree?

1I'm not saying you've argued this, but I want to head this argument off at the pass. Saying any reasonable dragon would react as if steaks had shown up on his doorstep is more than a little speciesist (ugh, I hate this term), and flies in the face of one of The Order of the Stick's main themes. As such, it is likely an incorrect characterization.

*note: I'm not saying it wasn't an understandable reaction, but to say it was okay for the dragon to attack first but that the OotS are terrible people for entering the cave with weapons is ridiculous.
Look, the only person against whom I've made a moral judgment in this thread is V, who moved from unwitting trespassor to wilful mind-rapist and executioner. My last few posts haven't been about condemning the Order (I do call them trespassors and accessories to V's actions, but that's a pretty shallow condemnation) so much as about defending the rights of the dragon. The Order doesn't have to actually do anything wrong for the dragon to reasonably feel it has to defend itself. Roy's, Elan's, and Durkon's minds might have been lily-white. I'm saying their state of mind doesn't matter.

Paisley

2013-09-05, 01:58 AM

Okay, I guess I could be a little clearer. I'm not referring to the emotion of fear. I'm referring to the way a reasonable person makes predictions about the future based on what they know in the present. When I say "reasonable fear" and "reasonably feared", read "reasonable expectation" and "reasonably expected".

I see. That's different, then. Apologies for misunderstanding. I still read the dragon's behavior as "offensive"/"motivated by selfishness" rather than defensiveness, but that could just be my interpretation.

Okay, seriously? You seem to be saying "It was totally okay* for the dragon to attack the OotS first for entering its cave, which they didn't know was inhabited, but the OotS are terrible people for entering a cave they didn't know, had no way of knowing, and had no reason to believe was inhabited with the weapons they happened to be carrying." If that's not what you're saying, please enlighten me.

Actually, at that point most of the Order has been led to believe that they were going to be fighting "really tough [king] giants" for possession of the starmetal. Of course it's a lie Roy makes up to get them going, but the point stands that they were fully prepared to hoodwink/injure/kill these alleged giants for the treasure—it is, in fact, the only reason Belkar and Haley join their mission.

GreyHound

2013-09-05, 02:07 AM

Sure, the Order may have acted reasonably, but it doesn't actually matter. What's in their heads is irrelevant. What matters for the purposes of determining the dragon's appropriate course of action is how their actions could reasonably be perceived by the dragon.

On the whole I agree with what you are saying. If we look at this from the dragon’s perspective I find it hard to sympathize with heavily armed thugs.

However, the name of the game is Dungeon and Dragons. What can you expect from that kind of a set up? I mean, the raiding of dragons, is almost routine in nature. Although the fact, that killing dragons is common, does not excuse V’s actions.

Is this not what makes V interesting as a character? That he has to live with the damage he has caused to so many living beings. I'm getting the sense you don't like V so much.

I might be missing your point completely though.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 02:09 AM

I see. That's different, then. Apologies for misunderstanding. I still read the dragon's behavior as "offensive"/"motivated by selfishness" rather than defensiveness, but that could just be my interpretation.
I appreciate (and will strive to match) the cordial tone. I hope you won't take offense when I push a little harder at this point. It shouldn't matter what this particular dragon's motivations are at all. What matters in determining whether the dragon has a right to self-defense is what a reasonable dragon could have reasonably inferred from the information it could reasonably have known (an aside, I think it likely that it heard Haley's comment about the starmetal at the top of the shaft).

Is this not what makes V interesting as a character? That he has to live with the damage he has caused to so many living beings. I'm getting the sense you don't like V so much.
You're right, I don't like V very much. I don't like Mother Courage much either. I don't sympathize with her, and I find her motivations banal, much like V's. What is interesting, to me, is not the character, but the story and the effect the story has on the audience. I like and find interesting the reactions the actions and effects on the world of a character like V inspire in people.

Another aside: I think there's a lot of room for a much better critic than I to do a Brechtian reading of The Order of the Stick.

Domino Quartz

2013-09-05, 02:09 AM

Actually, at that point most of the Order has been led to believe that they were going to be fighting "really tough [king] giants" for possession of the starmetal. Of course it's a lie Roy makes up to get them going, but the point stands that they were fully prepared to hoodwink/injure/kill these alleged giants for the treasure—it is, in fact, the only reason Belkar and Haley join their mission.

I'm pretty sure that they'd forgotten that by that point (or at least Belkar had).

WindStruck

2013-09-05, 02:16 AM

I think a better solution other than simply benching V would be to present numerous difficult challenges that would actually require his spell casting ability and give no resting time. Eventually he would run out of spells.

Oh wait, that already happened.

This time, let's give V a fancy bow Haley has been saving though. :smallwink:

Paisley

2013-09-05, 02:44 AM

I appreciate (and will strive to match) the cordial tone. I hope you won't take offense when I push a little harder at this point. It shouldn't matter what this particular dragon's motivations are at all. What matters in determining whether the dragon has a right to self-defense is what a reasonable dragon could have reasonably inferred from the information it could reasonably have known (an aside, I think it likely that it heard Haley's comment about the starmetal at the top of the shaft).

No offense taken; I understand this is a discussion and some points are bound to be stressed.

Anyway—I concede that the dragon's course of action was within reason, if a bit ruthless (though that is to be expected, given his nature). He certainly has the right to act out of self-defense, even though he was probably not purely motivated as such. That, I will not contend.

I am not so certain about him hearing Haley's comment, but accept it as a possibility. As we are never shown the dragon's perspective, we won't be able to say for certain.

I'm pretty sure that they'd forgotten that by that point (or at least Belkar had).

Belkar might have, but Haley certainly hadn't. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0180.html)

I think a better solution other than simply benching V would be to present numerous difficult challenges that would actually require his spell casting ability and give no resting time. Eventually he would run out of spells.

Oh wait, that already happened.

This time, let's give V a fancy bow Haley has been saving though. :smallwink:

...And I'm reminded of how far off topic I am.

Following that line of thought, I think it would be interesting to see V rely on something other than magic. Probably never going to happen, but it would give the elf something to work with while "on the bench," as it is.

marq

2013-09-05, 02:46 AM

My last few posts haven't been about condemning the Order (I do call them trespassors and accessories to V's actions, but that's a pretty shallow condemnation) so much as about defending the rights of the dragon.

Why would you want to do that? Dragons are basically animals, right?

Paisley

2013-09-05, 02:54 AM

Why would you want to do that? Dragons are basically animals, right?

Animals who are perfectly sapient. Animals who, despite their evil alignment, have been shown to be capable of emotions up to and including love. And, while I'm at it, I'd like to point out that humans are technically animals as well.

I'm getting off topic again, sorry.

DiamondHooHaMan

2013-09-05, 03:48 AM

Animals who are perfectly sapient. Animals who, despite their evil alignment, have been shown to be capable of emotions up to and including love. And, while I'm at it, I'd like to point out that humans are technically animals as well.

I'm getting off topic again, sorry.

ah wouldn't worry about it, this things been off topic for a while. :smallbiggrin:

but you are exactly right. Dragons are as sapient as any other race, but the fact that they are listed as always evil is the reason the Order attacked. Red Cloaks entire motivation is pretty much explaining why this is a bad thing.

Liliet

2013-09-05, 03:51 AM

You know, I don't like the idea of some powers being labeled as story-breaking. Ever since I got introduced to the concept, I had in mind a good counter for it.

One of my favorite books has all major characters, including the protagonist,
1) being able to fly as easily as walk;
2) never needing money because they can create anything they need out of thin air, except for food, but it's not hard to get it;
3) having very high positions in their societies;
4) being quite capable Reality Warpers, albeit in different ways;
5) being able to communicate telepatically with emphatical images, not words;
6) having teleport powers.
Oh, and resurrection is avaliable in that universe too, restrictions on its use are mostly ethical/cultural.

It's a trilogy (not just one book!), and it's very, very interesting. NEITHER of these powers is story-breaking. No, not even reality warping and resurrection. Seriously. There is story to tell even with them.

Yes, V is constantly getting benched. Yes, on meta-level one of the reasons is that ve is too powerful. But in-universe there are other good reasons for this: vir arrogance and over-reliance on arcane powers, for one. Ve still has vir powers, they still are important to the story, but there is a story because ve cannot use them to full extent because of personal reasons.

That's a different way of handling "story-breaking powers" than in the book I mentioned above. But it's no less valid. The story isn't broken in the end.

And however much I like V and would like to see more of vir, I accept that ve brought it all upon virself.

The Giant

2013-09-05, 04:35 AM

You know, I don't like the idea of some powers being labeled as story-breaking. Ever since I got introduced to the concept, I had in mind a good counter for it.

One of my favorite books has all major characters, including the protagonist,
1) being able to fly as easily as walk;
2) never needing money because they can create anything they need out of thin air, except for food, but it's not hard to get it;
3) having very high positions in their societies;
4) being quite capable Reality Warpers, albeit in different ways;
5) being able to communicate telepatically with emphatical images, not words;
6) having teleport powers.
Oh, and resurrection is avaliable in that universe too, restrictions on its use are mostly ethical/cultural.

It's a trilogy (not just one book!), and it's very, very interesting. NEITHER of these powers is story-breaking. No, not even reality warping and resurrection. Seriously. There is story to tell even with them.

There is a huge difference between EVERY main character having such powers, and ONLY ONE main character in a group of supposed equals having such powers. There is no power—no power in the world—that is story-breaking all by itself, especially if the author has the freedom to detail the costs and drawbacks of that power (a luxury I don't have with OOTS).

Superman by himself is not a problem. Superman as part of the Justice League is not a problem. Superman as a member of an ensemble FBI team IS a problem, because sometimes Agent Fred is supposed to be the one to catch the serial killer. You end up resorting to a LOT of kryptonite.

That said, I'd ask that we please drop the, "Was the young black dragon morally justified in attacking the OOTS?" derail. It's off-topic in multiple ways.

Liliet

2013-09-05, 04:40 AM

There is a huge difference between EVERY main character having such powers, and ONLY ONE main character in a group of supposed equals having such powers. There is no power—no power in the world—that is story-breaking all by itself, especially if the author has the freedom to detail the costs and drawbacks of that power (a luxury I don't have with OOTS).

Superman by himself is not a problem. Superman as part of the Justice League is not a problem. Superman as a member of an ensemble FBI team IS a problem, because sometimes Agent Fred is supposed to be the one to catch the serial killer. You end up resorting to a LOT of kryptonite.

Well, I did say that I appreciate the way you made V's power not story-breaking - as in, it hasn't broken the story yet and isn't going to in any foreseeable moment (=

My objection was more to generalisation... and probably a bit off-topic, for which I apologise ><

The Giant

2013-09-05, 05:13 AM

Well, I did say that I appreciate the way you made V's power not story-breaking - as in, it hasn't broken the story yet and isn't going to in any foreseeable moment (=

My objection was more to generalisation... and probably a bit off-topic, for which I apologise ><

I didn't read the whole thread, I only came in to deal with reported derailment. Your comment was more on-topic than the previous twenty posts, so don't apologize.

Psyren

2013-09-05, 08:45 AM

It's a trilogy (not just one book!), and it's very, very interesting. NEITHER of these powers is story-breaking. No, not even reality warping and resurrection. Seriously. There is story to tell even with them.

Which book series is that?

Superman by himself is not a problem. Superman as part of the Justice League is not a problem. Superman as a member of an ensemble FBI team IS a problem, because sometimes Agent Fred is supposed to be the one to catch the serial killer. You end up resorting to a LOT of kryptonite.

Heck, I would say that even in the League he's a problem. A lot of stories have him just plain absent, because not sidelining him would solve the plot in very short order. Not to mention what would happen if he started policing Gotham, Metro City etc.

lio45

2013-09-05, 10:33 AM

Is it totally unthinkable that both sides were correct in their reactions, given their respective understandings of property rights?

That was exactly my point with the forest dwelling creature (moose with no deed attacking the property owner intruder) example...

The difference in intellect that zimmerwald thinks all important isn't actually such a major point -- a sentient moose who doesn't speak Common could very well be expected to behave the same way.

[Edited after reading the rest of the thread to remove the parts of the post that could've caused the off-topic conversation to continue.]

Liliet

2013-09-05, 11:39 AM

Which book series is that?
It's in Russian and has never been translated into English... I think. Russian fantasy is very... different from American in prevalent tropes, I have noticed.
It's "Танцующая с Ауте" / "Tantsuyushchaia s Aute" / "Dancer with Aute" by Anastasia Parfenova (Анастасия Парфенова).

...why can not everyone know Russian like everyone knows English? :smallfrown:

Heck, I would say that even in the League he's a problem. A lot of stories have him just plain absent, because not sidelining him would solve the plot in very short order. Not to mention what would happen if he started policing Gotham, Metro City etc.
Hah. I have never read Superman comics, but what little I know of him makes me wonder just how can there still be crime on Earth...

Koo Rehtorb

2013-09-05, 11:46 AM

Look, marking the limits of one's property might be the smart thing to do, in that it will deter people from trespassing, but it is not an obligation incumbent upon anybody.

Hence the point of my analogy. Entering a cave is more similar to crossing an invisible boundary in the forest than entering a home because one of the defining features of a home is that it is clearly a home.

Chantelune

2013-09-05, 12:18 PM

Don't see the point of discussing the black dragon stuff further. the Giant asked for it to stop and as much as zimmerwald1915 is saying people are "whitewashing" V and the order's action, he's "blackwashing" V and the order just as much.

This discussion is headed to a wall, full steam.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 12:28 PM

Don't see the point of discussing the black dragon stuff further.
The point, originally, was to establish that V is more a liability than an asset to the Order, and thus ought not to be in it at all. Other facts, including V's outstanding debt to the IFCC, support this case better, but they're also rather obvious and were thus never contested.

Liliet

2013-09-05, 02:23 PM

The point, originally, was to establish that V is more a liability than an asset to the Order, and thus ought not to be in it at all. Other facts, including V's outstanding debt to the IFCC, support this case better, but they're also rather obvious and were thus never contested.

Khm.
Spiked Tentacles of Doom and other on-screen and off-screen moments of fighting in Dungeon Crawlin' Fools.
Namely, defeating Zz'dtri and aiding Elan with illusions against Thog.
Fireball at the ogres.
Azure city siege and holding the breach until out of spells.
Directing Elan's illusions again.
Teleporting the Azure city refugees to the island.
Saving O-Chul.

And that's only on-screen.

lio45

2013-09-05, 02:25 PM

The point, originally, was to establish that V is more a liability than an asset to the Order, and thus ought not to be in it at all.

If that's the point, then I don't believe you'll find many to agree with you on that. V is one of the more powerful PCs, and definitely an asset.

In fact the reason V is "constantly benched" is that V is so much of an asset, it makes for a more interesting story when the Order is stripped of that too-strong-an-asset character.

To recycle the Giant's words and analogy, you're trying to argue that Superman in an ensemble FBI team would be more a liability than an asset to the FBI team, and that Agent Fred and his buddies would be better off without Superman as a teammate... Sorry to disagree, but I do.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 02:27 PM

Khm.
Spiked Tentacles of Doom and other on-screen and off-screen moments of fighting in Dungeon Crawlin' Fools.
Namely, defeating Zz'dtri and aiding Elan with illusions against Thog.
Fireball at the ogres.
Azure city siege and holding the breach until out of spells.
Directing Elan's illusions again.
Teleporting the Azure city refugees to the island.
Saving O-Chul.

And that's only on-screen.
Key words being "more liability than asset". Balance those actions against owing time to the IFCC that the Directors can claim at any given moment and the practical consequences of familicide with respect to the Gate quest (setting aside discussion with respect to any other aspect of that action) and you end up with a substantial deficit.

Chantelune

2013-09-05, 02:38 PM

yeah, and owing time to the IFCC is not a convenient and reasonable way to get V out of the action without having her get "lost on the way" or incapacitated over and over again ?

Fact is, V is at a level were she can deal with most encounter by herself if she actually stayed in action. It has nothing to do with her personality, just the way D&D is. Wizard sucks the first level, but after that, they're just that powerful.

You can argue all you want, but most of the occurences where V was a liability was because if she was given free reign, she would have cast a few choice spells and ruined the plot by getting rid of the obstacles within a few rounds.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 02:40 PM

You can argue all you want, but most of the occurences where V was a liability was because if she was given free reign, she would have cast a few choice spells and ruined the plot by getting rid of the obstacles within a few rounds.
I think we're talking past each other. I've already taken it as a given that V is "benched" when she ought to be useful, and am speculating as to what the other characters might do when they realize that.

Imgran

2013-09-05, 03:06 PM

I have no comment on what the Order should or shouldn't have done. My problem is with how the audience lauds or excuses their actions.

It takes a special, strange type of insanity, or an utter inability either to compartmentalize or to suspend disbelief, to apply Western postmodern morality to a roughly medieval era fantasy RPG.

Scow2

2013-09-05, 03:14 PM

It takes a special, strange type of insanity, or an utter inability either to compartmentalize or to suspend disbelief, to apply Western postmodern morality to a roughly medieval era fantasy RPG.

And yet, D&D is largely written with that Western Postmodern Morality in mind with the sole exception of "Killing things is Fun!"

Imgran

2013-09-05, 03:16 PM

And as I point out in my post above, to go armed is also to court reasonable violence in self-defense. This is also a fact of the world.

Holy hell, no, it is NOT. BEING armed does not constitute a direct threat, and without a direct threat, there is no responsibility for the perception of danger in the other person's mind.

If I have a weapon that I am legally entitled to and allowed to carry, and am in a place I have a reasonable expectation that I am allowed to be, and you blow me away because the fact that I am armed presents a threat to you, guess what? YOU JUST MURDERED ME!!!!

Law after law, case after case, virtually regardless of jurisdiction or predominate religion throughout the civilized world you will find that the law agrees with that premise. Anywhere where an armed populace is possible the presence of a weapon constitutes no threat at all, and even in places where being armed is illegal by statute, more than possession is required to invoke self defense laws.

The CAPABILITY for damage does not AND CANNOT, under any concievable legal or moral structure, constitute a threat on its own. Otherwise you might as well arrest the dragon for having fangs and claws!

Imgran

2013-09-05, 03:17 PM

And yet, D&D is largely written with that Western Postmodern Morality in mind with the sole exception of "Killing things is Fun!"

Written with it in mind? Perhaps, at least to the point that it's a source of inspiration and a way we instinctively fill in the gaps in worldbuilding. That still doesn't entitle anyone to apply the entire postmodern cultural mindset into a world in which it is a horrible fit, point blank, without even thinking about the implications.

Bulldog Psion

2013-09-05, 03:21 PM

V is an asset and a liability, just like the rest of the Order. :smallsmile: Sure, they might have less problems without Familicide killing off the Draketooths. But then again, they also would have had less problems if Roy hadn't jumped on a zombie dragon and then gotten killed, if Elan didn't have an identical evil twin brother, if Haley didn't get aphasia...

sarez

2013-09-05, 03:36 PM

I like V as a character very much, s/he's got a lot of depth and is actually dealing with the aftermath of several layers of 'not good/powerful enough'

1. being defeated in arcane power by Xkyon even after being buffed beyond belief.

2. being intellectually defeated by the IFCC

3. being morally/spiritually defeated by own worst desires and being all evil when spliced.

4. being functionally defeated by being wrenched off by the IFCC whist the rest of the gang are in it deep.

And basically Xykon and Redcloak are of a power level that surely will require the OotS to have V back in before the end?
..but for now I think benched is fine considering how much spotlight s/he has had recently.

AKA_Bait

2013-09-05, 03:40 PM

It takes a special, strange type of insanity, or an utter inability either to compartmentalize or to suspend disbelief, to apply Western postmodern morality to a roughly medieval era fantasy RPG.

Shouldn't anyone reading this comic (or any work of fiction) be allowed to bring whatever moral system they like to it? D&D, and works based on it, has an alignment system that is arguably medieval for game play but I don't see how that leads to the conclusion that a reader or player analyzing the world in a different manner is somehow wrong. Relatedly, you may wish to review the flaming section of this post (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/announcement.php?a=1).

Liliet

2013-09-05, 03:40 PM

Well, murdering the Draketooths was a major screw-up, but isn't it sort of balanced out (from the "liability-asset", not moral point of view) by teleporting the fleet and rescuing O-Chul?

And I don't know how "being less useful than ve could be" makes V a liability. Ve's still useful, just less useful. Owing to IFCC just makes vir not do something ve might, but if ve weren't there in the first place, ve wouldn't do it anyway!

Bulldog Psion

2013-09-05, 03:43 PM

AKA_Bait

2013-09-05, 03:51 PM

Yes, this was pretty much my point. Everyone in the comic has done "liability" things, yet they're also assets to the party. Kind of how things work out generally, isn't it?

While true, I think there is an argument to be made regarding proportionality of liability things to positive things. Haley's getting aphasia, for example, was certainly inconvenient for the party but it didn't have a significant effect on the quest to destroy Xykon. V's familicide spell, on the other hand, had the effect of leaving one of the gates entirely undefended.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 04:10 PM

The CAPABILITY for damage does not AND CANNOT, under any concievable legal or moral structure, constitute a threat on its own. Otherwise you might as well arrest the dragon for having fangs and claws!
Good thing I established further elements that would let the dragon suspect a threat to itself then :smallsmile:

But apparently this discussion is over.

Liliet

2013-09-05, 04:58 PM

Good thing I established further elements that would let the dragon suspect a threat to itself then :smallsmile:

But apparently this discussion is over.

Well, this is offtopic and morally justified topics are banned. I would say yes, it is over.

And by the way, now is V's big chance to prove virself an asset. Especially if ve has the guts to tell Roy and Haley all of vir Familicide story and its consequences.

I hope ve does.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 05:24 PM

And by the way, now is V's big chance to prove virself an asset. Especially if ve has the guts to tell Roy and Haley all of vir Familicide story and its consequences.

I hope ve does.
I don't think those are helpful terms for V to be thinking in. She was thinking in terms of proving herself an [the?] asset throughout the last book, and we saw where that led. Roy can think in such terms about his subordinatesn though he tends not to because he considers them friends.

Psyren

2013-09-05, 06:30 PM

Did anyone find that War & XPs quote? *waits impatiently for books to arrive*

It's in Russian and has never been translated into English... I think. Russian fantasy is very... different from American in prevalent tropes, I have noticed.
It's "Танцующая с Ауте" / "Tantsuyushchaia s Aute" / "Dancer with Aute" by Anastasia Parfenova (Анастасия Парфенова).

...why can not everyone know Russian like everyone knows English? :smallfrown:

It sounds awesome and I wish I spoke Russian now! :smallbiggrin:

lio45

2013-09-05, 08:08 PM

Owing to IFCC just makes vir not do something ve might, but if ve weren't there in the first place, ve wouldn't do it anyway!

FWIW, that sentence (and others like it) would be a lot less painful to the eyes in this very simple format:

"Owing to IFCC just makes V not do something V might, but if V weren't there in the first place, V wouldn't do it anyway!"

sims796

2013-09-05, 08:14 PM

Ok, random question, but is it at all possible for Xykon to have access to Wish, outside of story reasons?

Kish

2013-09-05, 08:22 PM

Ok, random question, but is it at all possible for Xykon to have access to Wish, outside of story reasons?
All his automatic level 9 spells known are accounted for, but he could have the epic feat that gives him two more, so yes, it's theoretically possible, "outside of story reasons." Why?

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 08:23 PM

Ok, random question, but is it at all possible for Xykon to have access to Wish, outside of story reasons?
Possible? Sure. He'd need to spend a feat to learn it (all his "normal" level 9 spells are accounted for AFAIK), or he'd need to find some creature to scribe a scroll or craft a staff of it, or he'd need Redcloak to call an Outsider with it, but it's possible.

EDIT: ninja'd.

sims796

2013-09-05, 08:27 PM

All his automatic level 9 spells known are accounted for, but he could have the epic feat that gives him two more, so yes, it's theoretically possible, "outside of story reasons." Why?

Just wondering. Thinking of the possibilities of what he would do with that type of power. Thanks, you two.

137beth

2013-09-05, 09:30 PM

Also, even without feats, Xykon has more than enough wealth to get Wish from a scroll.

As to V, the only thing V has done which actually HINDERED the OOTS was kill the draketooths. That's it. Everything else zimmerwald1915 keeps saying makes V a 'liability' is V being of minimal help. In order for V to be "more a liability than an asset", then killing the draketooths would need to have caused more harm than everything else V has ever done. Including preventing multiple TPKs (yes, including the adult black dragon), the stuff in the battle for Azure city, killing a CR 20 devil that probably would have TPKed the order AND possibly Hinjo...
yea, sorry, I'm not seeing it.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 09:54 PM

As to V, the only thing V has done which actually HINDERED the OOTS was kill the draketooths. That's it.
Some "it". Killing the Draketooths led directly to V isolating herself from the party and being unable to help fend off the Linear Guild, to Belkar's incapacitation, and to Durkon's death and vampirization. She is proximately responsible for all the practical diffidulty and emotional suffering the Order has endured since entering Girard's pyramid.

Everything else zimmerwald1915 keeps saying makes V a 'liability' is V being of minimal help. In order for V to be "more a liability than an asset", then killing the draketooths would need to have caused more harm than everything else V has ever done. Including preventing multiple TPKs (yes, including the adult black dragon), the stuff in the battle for Azure city, killing a CR 20 devil that probably would have TPKed the order AND possibly Hinjo...
yea, sorry, I'm not seeing it.
The dragon incident's been discussed, but not from this angle. Would it have been a TPK but for V? I don't think so. Things didn't look good for Haley, certainly, but Roy, Durkon, and Belkar could have carried the day and recovered enough of Haley to resurrect - no doubt plundering the dragon's hoard for the diamonds like the murderhoboes they are. So V saved the Order in that encounter about 5000 gp and some emotional anguish.

V barely affected the course of the battle. The elementals would have been defeated eventually, and any further damage would have been gratuitous; they did what they needed to do. Any soldiers, giant or not, would have been reaped by the Death Knight at about the same time. The dragon head would have fallen on it at the same time regardless of V's presence. V did help Elan keep the refugees from getting slaughtered, so let's give her credit for saving 200 out of 400 lives.

The devil's easy. Its orders were to make "all mortals on the island dead". It clearly wanted to be elsewhere, carrying out more important tasks, so it can be stated with some confidence that it would leave once all the mortals were off theisland. Hinjo and company could have run, and probably would have eventually (and while I can't prove this, I believe it was V, an XP hound at that point in the story, that convinced them to stay and buff instead of running, or forced their hand by just starting to buff herself without consulting the rest of them). Again, V accomplishes nothing beyond maybe saving a few thousand gp worth of diamonds. Let's be generous and say 15,000 gp and some pain and anguish.

To recap, but for V the Order would be something like 20,000 gp richer, and while the first few books would have been darker, the last two would have been much lighter. My feeling is that what the Order have suffered in this book thanks to V's actions far outweighs the suffering they avoided thanks to V in earlier books.

Imgran

2013-09-05, 09:59 PM

Shouldn't anyone reading this comic (or any work of fiction) be allowed to bring whatever moral system they like to it?

No. Not really. There is such a thing as an objective right and wrong, even if it can be clouded by various situations. If you add a "within reason" to that I'll be more inclined to climb on board. And of course, far be it from me to chastise anyone else's head-canon, since that's something we all do with any work of fiction. But when you weigh in on an issue of ethics raised by the comic, one with a legitimate, well-precedented answer repeatedly verified from sources around the globe, established by logic, law, and legal precedent alike, and your position is in direct contrast with that precedented answer, other people get to call you on it.

I do apologize for the level of emphasis I put on my point, but under the circumstances, I was responding to someone with which the not-listen was absolutely palpable. Sometimes you just have to make sure you get through.

D&D, and works based on it, has an alignment system that is arguably medieval for game play but I don't see how that leads to the conclusion that a reader or player analyzing the world in a different manner is somehow wrong.

Attempting to analyze the world in a different manner is not why that poster was wrong. That poster was wrong because they took a position on a topic with established legal and ethical material covering it (self-defense) that was itself provably wrong, and then proceeded to go to the wall for it. It is well established that simply being armed and in the wrong place are not, all by themselves, a statement of threat. Conversely, the result of a well publicized legal case here in the States reconfirms that the notion of being unarmed in a public space does not, all by itself, convey the absence of a threat, so it does cut both ways.

To paraphrase Xykon, what constitutes a threat? Well, a threat constitutes a threat. And a threat can take many forms, and be many things, but the mere presence of a weapon is not one of them. An inferred intent to use that weapon must be present in order for self defense to hold up regardless of jurisdiction. This is true whether you're in an area that has a codified "stand your ground" law or a codified "duty to retreat" law, and even in places where possession of a weapon is illegal. All that differs is the action permitted in the presence of a threat.

shamgar001

2013-09-05, 10:09 PM

So at this stage saving someone's life isn't an accomplishment, because it only saves some gold and emotional anguish. Really, that takes a lot of the heroism in this strip off the table.

Imgran

2013-09-05, 10:17 PM

Paseo H

2013-09-05, 10:42 PM

As for V being a liability b/c of the dead Draketooths:

Can you really be sure that they would have 1. Listened to reason with regard to the gate, Xykon, and Tarquin, and 2. If yes, would they have been any help defending against Xykon or Tarquin's army?

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 10:49 PM

Mm. Two of the three biggest examples you provide I disagree with.
Let's assume for a moment that, apart from not casting familicide, everything proceeds exactly as it did in the comic. So V still teleports the fleet, looses the splices to Xykon, the MitD still rescues her and O-Chul, they still take a boat to the Western Continent etc. The first major change stemming from leaving the Draketooths alive comes right at the beginning of the book, when they get the heuristic illusion's warning that it's been activated. Presumably, they scry the area and see V's and Elan's message, which they weren't able to do in the prime timeline due to being dead. So they've activated their defenses. They also know that the person who warned them was named "Elan".

Over the days the Order spends in Bleedingham, the Draketooths have the opportunity to scry on this "Elan" person and get a measure of his character. Chaotic as they come? Check. Willing to believe the best of his family and give them the benefit of the doubt? Check. Any associates worth worrying about? Well, there's that big bald fellow and the dwarf...

Again, we're assuming everything as far as the Order is concerned is proceeding as normal. So the Order beats the Linear Guild to the Windy Canyon...only this time the Draketooths are there to greet them. Here's where the ramifications of our point of divergence really start to crop up. From this point on, there's no reason to believe that the Order will necessarily be in a position to be ambushed by the Linear Guild in the same way as they were in the prime timeline. The Draketooths might take them prisoner and sequester them underground, possibly in the phantasm room. The Draketooths might try and kill them. The Draketooths might decide to hear them out. In any case, when Order meets Guild, it will almost certainly not be at the same time and in the same way, because of the influence the Draketooths, as autonomous beings with free will, will have on the situation.

But in the prime timeline, the Draketooths didn't get to do any of that. They were dead. All the actions stemming from their deaths can be traced back to V, their murderer.

As for V being a liability b/c of the dead Draketooths:

Can you really be sure that they would have 1. Listened to reason with regard to the gate, Xykon, and Tarquin, and 2. If yes, would they have been any help defending against Xykon or Tarquin's army?
I'm afraid I typed out the above before I saw your post, so it only obliquely answers your first question and hedges at that. I am fairly confident the Draketooths would have been effective against the Linear Guild, though not against Xykon...but remember, had they been around to see V's and Elan's message, they would have been warned about Xykon and would have had days or weeks of time (unlike Hinjo) to prepare possible contingencies up to and including destroying the Gate.

Amphiox

2013-09-05, 10:53 PM

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 10:58 PM

In which case V has actually saved everyone's lives.
Not everyone's :smallwink:

137beth

2013-09-05, 11:04 PM

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 11:09 PM

So, your argument is that V was a liability because V was not there to help fight the linear guild? That in no way makes V a liability, it makes V not an instant-win. V not being in the party to begin with also means V wouldn't be there to help:smallsigh:
No, I'm saying V was a liability because her killing the Draketooths caused her not to be with the Order. If she had been separated from the party for some reason other than her own actions (for example, Roy not sending Belkar and Durkon to retrieve her), then she wouldn't be to blame for her absence. In this case? She is.

And yes, there is a difference between missing an asset you thought you had and relied on and never having that asset in the first place. In the first case, a team leader like Roy will make his plans on the assumption that he'll have an asset at his disposal, and those plans will be disrupted if it is not. The switch to the contingency plan will take some time and some reshuffling of other assets. Contrariwise, if the leader never assumes he has that asset at his disposal in the first place, he is likely to evolve a plan that is similar to what his contingency plan for losing that asset would be, but putting that plan into practice will be more efficient and less confusing for the rest of the team.

Goosefeather

2013-09-05, 11:09 PM

V barely affected the course of the battle. The elementals would have been defeated eventually, and any further damage would have been gratuitous; they did what they needed to do. Any soldiers, giant or not, would have been reaped by the Death Knight at about the same time. The dragon head would have fallen on it at the same time regardless of V's presence. V did help Elan keep the refugees from getting slaughtered, so let's give her credit for saving 200 out of 400 lives.

Nah, V's actions significantly slowed the invading force. Many of the soldiers slowing the advance on the walls would have been killed by the elementals had V not got rid of them. The soldiers on the ground wouldn't have been reaped by the Death Knight because they'd already have been killed by goblins (who would consequently already be inside the city). Without V, there wouldn't have been time to get that last boat away, as it'd already have been swarmed by goblins, and Hinjo, Captain Axehand, Elan, Durkon and Lien, plus every single refugee on Hinjo's junk, would have been slaughtered.

I submit that this leap of logic is no greater than that of 'without V everyone would have run away from the demon on the island and it wouldn't have done anything about it'.

Razanir

2013-09-05, 11:11 PM

Simple. V is being given a break to regain vis sanity. 900 strips is far too long to have gone on believing V has a pet bird.

Cavenskull

2013-09-05, 11:14 PM

On the other hand, the ultra paranoid, and possibly evil, Draketooth clan might have straight up and murdered the entire Order the moment they laid eyes on them, or the moment one of them accidentally let slip that they were even ever so slightly acquainted with the Sapphire Guard paladins...
The fact that they set off a trap that only a paladin knew the location of would be enough for that.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 11:17 PM

Nah, V's actions significantly slowed the invading force. Many of the soldiers slowing the advance on the walls would have been killed by the elementals had V not got rid of them.
Doesn't match what we were shown the elementals doing. The elemtentals we saw on the walls were tearing at the masonry, not killing soldiers. If any soldiers died to the barrage, it was to falls, being hit by flying or falling masonry, or being hit by the elementals as they landed.

The soldiers on the ground wouldn't have been reaped by the Death Knight because they'd already have been killed by goblins (who would consequently already be inside the city).
Again, doesn't match the battle plan we were shown. The death knight's plan was to create a ramp of dead hobgoblins so it could ride in and get among the defenders (which I'm sure appealed to Redcloak at the time it was formulated as it involved mass hobgoblin death). If anything, the lack of giant soldiers would have slowed this plan down, because normal Azurites wouldn't have been able to kill so many hobgoblins so quickly.

Without V, there wouldn't have been time to get that last boat away, as it'd already have been swarmed by goblins, and Hinjo, Captain Axehand, Elan, Durkon and Lien, plus every single refugee on Hinjo's junk, would have been slaughtered.
I already granted this in my response to 137ben. Rub it in, why don'tcha :smalltongue:

Imgran

2013-09-05, 11:19 PM

Let's assume for a moment that, apart from not casting familicide, everything proceeds exactly as it did in the comic. So V still teleports the fleet, looses the splices to Xykon, the MitD still rescues her and O-Chul, they still take a boat to the Western Continent etc. The first major change stemming from leaving the Draketooths alive comes right at the beginning of the book, when they get the heuristic illusion's warning that it's been activated. Presumably, they scry the area and see V's and Elan's message, which they weren't able to do in the prime timeline due to being dead. So they've activated their defenses. They also know that the person who warned them was named "Elan".

Over the days the Order spends in Bleedingham, the Draketooths have the opportunity to scry on this "Elan" person and get a measure of his character. Chaotic as they come? Check. Willing to believe the best of his family and give them the benefit of the doubt? Check. Any associates worth worrying about? Well, there's that big bald fellow and the dwarf...

Again, we're assuming everything as far as the Order is concerned is proceeding as normal. So the Order beats the Linear Guild to the Windy Canyon...only this time the Draketooths are there to greet them. Here's where the ramifications of our point of divergence really start to crop up. From this point on, there's no reason to believe that the Order will necessarily be in a position to be ambushed by the Linear Guild in the same way as they were in the prime timeline. The Draketooths might take them prisoner and sequester them underground, possibly in the phantasm room. The Draketooths might try and kill them. The Draketooths might decide to hear them out. In any case, when Order meets Guild, it will almost certainly not be at the same time and in the same way, because of the influence the Draketooths, as autonomous beings with free will, will have on the situation.

Remember that the real threat only arrives with the arrival of Xykon. Unless you think that a lich can be fooled by illusions, your scenario just makes it MORE Likely that Xykon captures a gate. Whatever happens, it's unlikely that the Draketooths will permit Roy to destroy the gate and their home with it.

Now this is not said to justify familicide. I want to make that clear. Just that if you want to play what-if, your favorite what-if isn't the only valid one.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 11:29 PM

Now this is not said to justify familicide. I want to make that clear. Just that if you want to play what-if, your favorite what-if isn't the only valid one.
Granted, absolutely. But once a character makes a choice, closing off the hypothetical scenarios from ever happening to them, the consequences become their responsibility. The death of the Draketooths, and all the bad consequences stemming therefrom for the party, are V's cross to bear. She does not get credit for stopping hypothetical bad consequences, but she does bear the blame for actual bad consequences.

Scow2

2013-09-05, 11:30 PM

Without V, the party would have been slain by Trigak (The party was routed and acknowledged an inability to defeat him - even from Haley's early sneak attack damage)... which I guess could mean that V's presence led to the invasion of Azure City, because the Order wouldn't have kicked Xykon out of Dorukan's tower and blow it up.

Without V, we'd STILL be waiting for Kubota to be brought to justice.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-05, 11:32 PM

Without V, the party would have been slain by Trigak (The party was routed and acknowledged an inability to defeat him - even from Haley's early sneak attack damage)
What? Elan, Haley, and Belkar were running from Trigak, not "the party". And Roy indulged V by siccing her on Trigak. Letting her vent was a luxury for him. From this, I gather that were V absent he would have rallied the party, fought back, and won.

Liliet

2013-09-06, 12:54 AM

Did anyone find that War & XPs quote? *waits impatiently for books to arrive*

It sounds awesome and I wish I spoke Russian now! :smallbiggrin:
It's mostly politics, love story and self-improvement, there isn't much heroic action. Except the first half of the first book... and almost entire second book... and about a half of the third book... Nah. It is friggin' awesome in every possible way. Carrying blasters under medieval jackets and all that :smallbiggrin:

Seriously, if you like good fantasy, you should totally learn Russian, because there's a lot of it that's unlikely to ever be translated.

Doesn't match what we were shown the elementals doing. The elemtentals we saw on the walls were tearing at the masonry, not killing soldiers. If any soldiers died to the barrage, it was to falls, being hit by flying or falling masonry, or being hit by the elementals as they landed.

Again, doesn't match the battle plan we were shown. The death knight's plan was to create a ramp of dead hobgoblins so it could ride in and get among the defenders (which I'm sure appealed to Redcloak at the time it was formulated as it involved mass hobgoblin death). If anything, the lack of giant soldiers would have slowed this plan down, because normal Azurites wouldn't have been able to kill so many hobgoblins so quickly.

I think the plan went like this only because the soldiers were able to stop hobbos in the first place. Without V, immediately capturing the breach and entering the city would satisfy Reddy just as well.

But anyway, this isn't a very meaningful discussion. We know that OotS is a Ragtag Bunch of Misfits (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RagtagBunchOfMisfits), the point of which IS to be disfunctional but succeed in the end because of admirable personal qualities and dynamics nevertheless. The party wouldn't be the same without V (for one, ve is Haley's closest friend), and we haven't seen the ending yet, so it's too early to judge.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-06, 01:57 AM

Did anyone find that War & XPs quote? *waits impatiently for books to arrive*
Sorry, Psyren, I didn't think you wanted the full block quote. And thanks Lilet for reminding me. The relevant bit of commentary begins on the page facing strip 412...

"I then [after clearly establishing each character's location] made certain to isolate characters who could change the intended outcome of events [of the Battle of Azure City] away from the action - and I needed to establish that I had done so before the events in question transpired. That's why the war was by far the most well-planned story I have yet written for OOTS, with full scripts prepared for almost the entire war before it began.

"One of the prime offenders in this area was Vaarsuvius. The unfortunate truth is that a high-level D&D wizard is enormously powerful and can manage effects that would have nullified most of the plot twists I had planned. A wizard could have blasted Xykon from afar or given Roy a flying spell (or at least a feather fall), all of which would have derailed my planned death scene. If I had created the physics of the OOTS world from scratch, I would have simply not given Vaarsuvius any capabilities that could interfere with the plot, but one of the great writing obstacles I face is that it is the game rules that set the boundaries of my characters' power. My readers know what a wizard of V's level should be able to pull off, and when he/she fails to display such powers in a do-or-die situation, they (rightly) cry foul. And so I wanted V out of the way of the others. I still wanted him/her to get the chance to unleash his/her magic on the battlefield to full effect - just, you know, over there. The opening salvo (the titanium elementals) therefore effectively separates V from the rest of the party, and they remain apart for the rest of the battle."

Whether the objective that a character that is separated from the group for the sake of preserving the plot still gets to affect the story in some way has been preserved is, in my view, debatable.

for one, ve is Haley's closest friend
Is this true anymore? Haley-V is one of the relationships that predates anyone filling out one of Roy's forms (the others being Durkon-Roy and Elan-Roy), but it seems to me that Elan and Haley are closer than Haley and V are now, even setting aside the former's romantic relationship.

Chantelune

2013-09-06, 03:31 AM

Doesn't match what we were shown the elementals doing. The elemtentals we saw on the walls were tearing at the masonry, not killing soldiers. If any soldiers died to the barrage, it was to falls, being hit by flying or falling masonry, or being hit by the elementals as they landed.

Seriously ? You seriously think that Redcloack, of all people, summoned Elementals to be catapulted over Azure City, no less, and give them the specific order of "Get those walls down, but please, try not to kill any soldier when doing so and once you're done, just stand there doing nothing. I wouldn't want you to accidentally stomp on an azurite while we're conquering their city and trounce them all".

Redcloack hated the azurite. He might have gave them order to take down the wall first, as it was clearly the priority, but to think that any soldier dying in the process is an accident and not intentional on Redcloack part, that's just grasping at straw. There's very high chance that the order was more about "get those walls down, then kill every human you see."

This discussion is getting more and more ridiculous... :smallannoyed:

Liliet

2013-09-06, 06:44 AM

Is this true anymore? Haley-V is one of the relationships that predates anyone filling out one of Roy's forms (the others being Durkon-Roy and Elan-Roy), but it seems to me that Elan and Haley are closer than Haley and V are now, even setting aside the former's romantic relationship.

...I like to think so. Of course, Elan-Haley relationship is given a lot of focus, partly because it's in the process of development as we observe it. Haley-V is already established, as is Roy-Durkon - and we don't get to see much of that, either.

I also like to think that when V comes out in the open and tells the party about what happened, this friendship will be given some more focus.

...But yeah, that's mostly my wishful thinking. It's too early to judge, as I've already said.

theNater

2013-09-06, 06:59 AM

Doesn't match what we were shown the elementals doing. The elemtentals we saw on the walls were tearing at the masonry, not killing soldiers. If any soldiers died to the barrage, it was to falls, being hit by flying or falling masonry, or being hit by the elementals as they landed.
What about panel 7 of #424 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0424.html)? Also, why don't soldiers killed incidentally count? They're still just as dead and just as unable to attack hobgoblins.

The death knight's plan was to create a ramp of dead hobgoblins so it could ride in and get among the defenders (which I'm sure appealed to Redcloak at the time it was formulated as it involved mass hobgoblin death). If anything, the lack of giant soldiers would have slowed this plan down, because normal Azurites wouldn't have been able to kill so many hobgoblins so quickly.
Without Vaarsuvius' repair work (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0427.html), a ramp may not have been necessary. Fewer hobgoblin corpses would have been necessary for it, certainly.

Chantelune

2013-09-06, 07:04 AM

Also, a lover is not the same as a friend, in mose case. It has been establish that Haley and V are so close that they knew a lot about each-other beforehand (Haley knowing about V being married, V knowing most of Haley's secret, etc...) and being affectionate (V scrying to madness during the split the party period was probably more to find Haley and be sure she was safe than for Roy's sake or Belkar) to some degree.

Elan took more importance for Haley, which is normal as they started their relationship, but I don't see much that would indicate that Haley and V's friendship would have been deteriorated. And certainly not to the point where they would no longer see each other as friends.

ithildur

2013-09-06, 08:04 AM

Someone seems like they're really determined to tell the world how much they dislike the murderous bastardly character(s) and why they're right to do so. :smallsigh:

I think that's been abundantly conveyed; let's move on.

Imgran

2013-09-06, 09:24 AM

(V scrying to madness during the split the party period was probably more to find Haley and be sure she was safe than for Roy's sake or Belkar) to some degree.

That, and V was desperate to validate his magic and use her magic to get a win. His spellcasting was effective in Azure City, but in the end she was one wizard, and the troops depending on him were quickly overwhelmed once her magic wore out. That's what the scene with the trance was about. He was feeling guilty about the fact that people died because her magic wasn't sufficient to carry the sector against what Redcloak could throw at them and the fact he did a lot of good before she had to retreat is something more mature people than Vaarsuvius lack the experience to really internalize after a major defeat.

Chantelune

2013-09-06, 10:24 AM

Psyren

2013-09-06, 10:55 AM

Sorry, Psyren, I didn't think you wanted the full block quote. And thanks Lilet for reminding me. The relevant bit of commentary begins on the page facing strip 412...

"I then [after clearly establishing each character's location] made certain to isolate characters who could change the intended outcome of events [of the Battle of Azure City] away from the action - and I needed to establish that I had done so before the events in question transpired. That's why the war was by far the most well-planned story I have yet written for OOTS, with full scripts prepared for almost the entire war before it began.

"One of the prime offenders in this area was Vaarsuvius. The unfortunate truth is that a high-level D&D wizard is enormously powerful and can manage effects that would have nullified most of the plot twists I had planned. A wizard could have blasted Xykon from afar or given Roy a flying spell (or at least a feather fall), all of which would have derailed my planned death scene. If I had created the physics of the OOTS world from scratch, I would have simply not given Vaarsuvius any capabilities that could interfere with the plot, but one of the great writing obstacles I face is that it is the game rules that set the boundaries of my characters' power. My readers know what a wizard of V's level should be able to pull off, and when he/she fails to display such powers in a do-or-die situation, they (rightly) cry foul. And so I wanted V out of the way of the others. I still wanted him/her to get the chance to unleash his/her magic on the battlefield to full effect - just, you know, over there. The opening salvo (the titanium elementals) therefore effectively separates V from the rest of the party, and they remain apart for the rest of the battle."

Whether the objective that a character that is separated from the group for the sake of preserving the plot still gets to affect the story in some way has been preserved is, in my view, debatable.

Thanks a ton for quoting this.

Though come to think of it - it looks like V didn't prepare Fly that day anyway, so it's not like he would have been able to save Roy regardless.

I can see where Durkon would prevent less story problems - not because his magic is less powerful (though in some ways it is), but because regardless of what he prepares that day, the Giant can simply have him burn it off for additional healing by making the Order take additional damage. So Durkon ends up avoiding all the sticky "why didn't he prepare X?" questions that V runs into. And even though he can't spontaneously heal anymore, now Durkon needs to prepare healing spells manually, which again is a great narrative dial to tweak his power.

So I can see where V runs into trouble. Hell, V even knows Polymorph, but we have yet to see him use it in a fight despite its strength. Polymorphing into something nasty could have helped him take on Z for instance, given that Z prepared his complement to weather magical assaults but not physical attacks.

It is unfortunate, but I maintain that the benefits of using a predefined magic system can outweigh these drawbacks - the Giant doesn't have to explain that counterspells exist for instance, or magic can be dispelled, or that it can't be used while bound and gagged etc.

Liliet

2013-09-06, 11:02 AM

Of course, there's no arguing that V is extremely competitive, which end up leading her to make that deal with the IFCC instead of following that back-up plan (which wasn't her idea).

This is actually her greatest weakness. But hey, she's working on it, as shown by the fact she didn't let Z's "kobold win, not you" bother her enough to make it an effective taunt.

That back-up plan... it was ridiculous. Had V had half a minute to dwell on it, ve would have realised it. Even without knowing that Resurrection takes ten minutes (by that time vir family would be long dead), there's no way Qarr would have gone along with that. V didn't have the luxury to even dwell on it, ve made the only possible decision that could save vir family. And I would not say for sure that pride was the only reason V had at the moment.

Thanks a ton for quoting this.

Though come to think of it - it looks like V didn't prepare Fly that day anyway, so it's not like he would have been able to save Roy regardless.

I can see where Durkon would prevent less story problems - not because his magic is less powerful (though in some ways it is), but because regardless of what he prepares that day, the Giant can simply have him burn it off for additional healing by making the Order take additional damage. So Durkon ends up avoiding all the sticky "why didn't he prepare X?" questions that V runs into. And even though he can't spontaneously heal anymore, now Durkon needs to prepare healing spells manually, which again is a great narrative dial to tweak his power.

So I can see where V runs into trouble. Hell, V even knows Polymorph, but we have yet to see him use it in a fight despite its strength. Polymorphing into something nasty could have helped him take on Z for instance, given that Z prepared his complement to weather magical assaults but not physical attacks.

It is unfortunate, but I maintain that the benefits of using a predefined magic system can outweigh these drawbacks - the Giant doesn't have to explain that counterspells exist for instance, or magic can be dispelled, or that it can't be used while bound and gagged etc.

No comic writer ever has to explain it. No matter how unique his magic system is, if he's half good at what he does he can just draw it and describe it with appropriate character dialog without disctracting from the story. At least, that's my experience with reading fantasy comics.

Also, I started my first ever DnD game with a homebrew setting, because I felt it was easier, less restrictive and required less work than using a pre-existing one (=

TRH

2013-09-06, 11:06 AM

Liliet

2013-09-06, 11:07 AM

The sad thing is, the backup plan would have worked if V had had Reduce Person prepared. There's no particular reason she would have had that, of course, but it's just something that occurred to me a while back.

I guess, had V had that spell, ve wouldn't call IFCC in the first place.

Kish

2013-09-06, 11:27 AM

The sad thing is, the backup plan would have worked if V had had Reduce Person prepared. There's no particular reason she would have had that, of course, but it's just something that occurred to me a while back.
It would not have; Qarr said 50 pounds of unliving material. Vaarsuvius could shrink to the size of an ant; Qarr would still not be able to bring her/him along while teleporting.

Psyren

2013-09-06, 11:36 AM

That back-up plan... it was ridiculous. Had V had half a minute to dwell on it, ve would have realised it. Even without knowing that Resurrection takes ten minutes (by that time vir family would be long dead), there's no way Qarr would have gone along with that. V didn't have the luxury to even dwell on it, ve made the only possible decision that could save vir family. And I would not say for sure that pride was the only reason V had at the moment.

Maybe not - but thanks to their manipulation, it was the uppermost thought in V's mind. Which was the whole point of even mentioning it.

Remember, they didn't care whether or not they could actually change his alignment because of it - his soul was the "free soup-or-salad."

No comic writer ever has to explain it. No matter how unique his magic system is, if he's half good at what he does he can just draw it and describe it with appropriate character dialog without disctracting from the story. At least, that's my experience with reading fantasy comics.

It's certainly possible to establish the rules smoothly, but that doesn't change the fact that they need to be established. With OotS, the Giant has all kinds of advantages from using an existing ruleset. For instance, he can show that Redcloak is capable of this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0431.html) and this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html) with only a couple panels' worth of explanation and no suspension of disbelief.

Chantelune

2013-09-06, 12:02 PM

The overall issue with getting V out of the way is that it needs to be done in different way to avoid it getting frustrating when it's always the same pattern over and over again.

That quote from the Giant regarding the battle of Azure City is interesting in that regard as it didn't felt like V was kept out of the way, but that she could be efficient by herself and thus didn't need to regroup with the party and provide help where she was. I prefer that to cruder ways that could be used as well.

One example that come to mind is the TV show Smallville, were Clark Kent needed to save people that couldn't be allowed to witness his power. As a result, his friends kept being knocked up on the head so they could be unconscious during the big fight almost every single time. It's a wonder none of them ended up with a concusion or any form of trauma. :smallbiggrin:

Liliet

2013-09-06, 12:09 PM

Maybe not - but thanks to their manipulation, it was the uppermost thought in V's mind. Which was the whole point of even mentioning it.

Remember, they didn't care whether or not they could actually change his alignment because of it - his soul was the "free soup-or-salad."
That's why I feel so sorry for V - ve thinks ve is worse person than ve actually is because of this little trick.

It's certainly possible to establish the rules smoothly, but that doesn't change the fact that they need to be established. With OotS, the Giant has all kinds of advantages from using an existing ruleset. For instance, he can show that Redcloak is capable of this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0431.html) and this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html) with only a couple panels' worth of explanation and no suspension of disbelief.

Pffft. Have you read this comic (http://www.egscomics.com/index.php?id=137)? It took one page to establish that a guy has a gun that can transform him into a girl. One hilarious page. Without any explanation. Because there's not a system a writer has to conform to (yet), and therefore he's under no obligation to explain anything.

Ok, I have picked a wrong comic, it's usually pretty heavy on magic rules exposition. How about this one (http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php)? All sorts of weird stuff happens, and only explanation you can expect to be provided is who did this and for what personal reason. No magic rules established at all.

See also this (http://www.gunnerkrigg.com/) and this (http://nadircomics.com/?cat=1). No rules established at all, and it runs pretty smoothly - and is all the more exciting, because we never know what can happen next page.

snikrept

2013-09-06, 12:10 PM

At least these methods of hobbling V are more interesting than the usual method used by DMs: namely steal the wizard's spellbook !

Psyren

2013-09-06, 12:47 PM

One example that come to mind is the TV show Smallville, were Clark Kent needed to save people that couldn't be allowed to witness his power. As a result, his friends kept being knocked up on the head so they could be unconscious during the big fight almost every single time. It's a wonder none of them ended up with a concusion or any form of trauma. :smallbiggrin:

As the Giant mentioned, Superman is a common problem :smallbiggrin:

But IIRC, other shows have done the "hide my powers from my friends" thing - Jem would constantly lock her boyfriend in the closet or something so she could "showtime Synergy!"

That's why I feel so sorry for V - ve thinks ve is worse person than ve actually is because of this little trick.

V doesn't feel guilty about the splice itself though - V feels guilty about Familicide, and he absolutely should feel bad about that.

Pffft. Have you read this comic (http://www.egscomics.com/index.php?id=137)? It took one page to establish that a guy has a gun that can transform him into a girl. One hilarious page. Without any explanation. Because there's not a system a writer has to conform to (yet), and therefore he's under no obligation to explain anything.

Ok, I have picked a wrong comic, it's usually pretty heavy on magic rules exposition. How about this one (http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php)? All sorts of weird stuff happens, and only explanation you can expect to be provided is who did this and for what personal reason. No magic rules established at all.

See also this (http://www.gunnerkrigg.com/) and this (http://nadircomics.com/?cat=1). No rules established at all, and it runs pretty smoothly - and is all the more exciting, because we never know what can happen next page.

I haven't read any of those so I can't really point to counterexamples. But even if you're right and those comics manage to establish their magic systems without a line of explanation, that doesn't change anything about my point; the Giant still benefits here in OotS by being able to rely on rules everyone knows.

Redcloak can announce "I rebuked your wights over to my team" and it works; the audience doesn't immediately think "Huh? Can he really do that? Why couldn't Tsukiko notice or fight back? I don't understand this scene!" Instead we simply go "Wow, Redcloak is powerful! And yeah, by the rules, Tsukiko actually wouldn't have noticed he did anything until she tried to give them orders or make more undead." And just like that, we are right back in the story.

Anarion

2013-09-06, 01:47 PM

Some "it". Killing the Draketooths led directly to V isolating herself from the party and being unable to help fend off the Linear Guild, to Belkar's incapacitation, and to Durkon's death and vampirization. She is proximately responsible for all the practical diffidulty and emotional suffering the Order has endured since entering Girard's pyramid.

Pardon the interruption, but you should be very careful using that word I bolded there. It's got a technical meaning, which has to do with whether the results that occurred are foreseeable based on a person's bad actions and whether or not there is an intervening unforeseeable cause of the harm.

From a legal standpoint, Durkon's death and Belkar's incapacitation are the classic examples of a complete lack of proximate cause. While V could, with some thought, have foreseen that familicide would affect humans and that perhaps Draketooth referred to a family that was related to dragons (already debatable, but we'll assume it), there's still no way short of divination spells V has never been shown to possess to predict that the casting of familicide would lead to the harm caused to Durkon and Belkar.

The presence of the Linear Guild where they were wasn't foreseeable, the fact that a vampire would decide to join the Linear Guild (decide being used somewhat loosely there) is not foreseeable. Or that the party would split due to a hellhound door trap for that matter. Nearly that entire sequence of events is unforeseeable, and as a technical matter, V is not the proximate cause of any of it.

This has been a terminology aside, now back to your regularly scheduled debate.

Is this true anymore? Haley-V is one of the relationships that predates anyone filling out one of Roy's forms (the others being Durkon-Roy and Elan-Roy), but it seems to me that Elan and Haley are closer than Haley and V are now, even setting aside the former's romantic relationship.

I'd say unknown. The scenes in the thieves guild and the Western continent suggest that Haley and V still feel comfortable around each other (e.g. hug when Haley first sees V, traveling together with V and Elan when lizard bounty hunters arrive). One of the side effects of V getting often separate from the party, however, is that we haven't had a moment where Haley and V get to sit down, catch up and have any kind of heart to heart. At least not on camera.

On top of that, I think that V is a little bit mentally unstable still, and may fear that confessing part of V's problems to Haley would lead to confessing all of them, even the ones that V doesn't want anyone to know about.

So, an interesting side effect of the benching is that it's sort of holding some of V's relationships in stasis simply because others don't know about a lot of what V has done or suffered.

V doesn't feel guilty about the splice itself though - V feels guilty about Familicide, and he absolutely should feel bad about that.

Debatable. V felt pretty bad right after coming back from losing to Xykon and then even worse when V found out that Inkyrius wanted a divorce. Plus the whole synchronized soul-selling joke from Blackwing when the bounty hunters caught V. All of those predated full knowledge of the effects of familicide. The current benching is certainly a reaction to the realization of just how much famlicide did, but I think V has felt guilty about everything related to the soul splice even before she knew of the ramifications of familicide.

Psyren

2013-09-06, 01:53 PM

Debatable. V felt pretty bad right after coming back from losing to Xykon and then even worse when V found out that Inkyrius wanted a divorce. Plus the whole synchronized soul-selling joke from Blackwing when the bounty hunters caught V. All of those predated full knowledge of the effects of familicide. The current benching is certainly a reaction to the realization of just how much famlicide did, but I think V has felt guilty about everything related to the soul splice even before she knew of the ramifications of familicide.

Okay, I'll amend my statement - it's possible he feels some amount of guilt about the splice itself. Still, when he talks about his crimes, he focuses primarily on Familicide. Indeed, his initial guilt is around all the humans he killed, and then later he begins to even show remorse for the dragons. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0866.html)

Morty

2013-09-06, 01:57 PM

Much as I realize that having an existing rule-set can be handy and that this comic wouldn't be where it is now if not for its D&D roots, I sometimes wish the story didn't have to be written around the thundering incompetence of the people who wrote 3e D&D all those years ago.

Chantelune

2013-09-06, 02:19 PM

Debatable. V felt pretty bad right after coming back from losing to Xykon and then even worse when V found out that Inkyrius wanted a divorce. Plus the whole synchronized soul-selling joke from Blackwing when the bounty hunters caught V. All of those predated full knowledge of the effects of familicide. The current benching is certainly a reaction to the realization of just how much famlicide did, but I think V has felt guilty about everything related to the soul splice even before she knew of the ramifications of familicide.

I tend to agree, V realized that her usual approach to magic (moar power !) was the issue. She understands that her deal was a mistake that derivate from her wants for ultimate arcane power and her relishing, which lead to bad consequences and more string attached than she realized.

And she started to realize it soon after her bout with Xykon, when mentioning how it was only after having lost the power of the splice that she started to be efficient as she then stop thinking about raw power but efficient application of what remained of her magic at the time.

Psyren

2013-09-06, 02:28 PM

And she started to realize it soon after her bout with Xykon, when mentioning how it was only after having lost the power of the splice that she started to be efficient as she then stop thinking about raw power but efficient application of what remained of her magic at the time.

That was regret for squandering its potential though, not guilt for having made the deal in the first place.

Anarion

2013-09-06, 02:32 PM

Okay, I'll amend my statement - it's possible he feels some amount of guilt about the splice itself. Still, when he talks about his crimes, he focuses primarily on Familicide. Indeed, his initial guilt is around all the humans he killed, and then later he begins to even show remorse for the dragons. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0866.html)

Definitely. The familicide is the focus because it was the major bad act that V committed while spliced (note the fiends' discussion that the familicide spell gives them a 50-50 chance of getting V's soul permanently).

Although the soul-selling was itself evil and V almost surely feels bad about it, had V killed the ABD and given it up as Inkyrius requested, it would probably have fallen under evil but necessary and would not have affected V's alignment or V's soul except for the ~15 minute period the IFCC obtained.

Even if V had skipped familicide and done everything else up to and including saving O'chul and losing to Xykon, it might have been considered a selfish evil act with a net gain and still no permanent affect on V's soul. The crushing guilt that currently afflicts V is the result of realizing the full implications of familicide due to entering the Draketooth pyramid.

It was also a convenient excuse to get V to run out of the room in terror and disappear into the pyramid. Which, looping back around to the point of this thread, is a good reason for benching V in this circumstance and led to some interesting drama around the gate. It also, as a matter of pure fact, led to the vamping of Durkon, but that wasn't V's fault as there was no way to predict the results of running away at the time. Of course, that doesn't mean it won't weigh on V's conscience later on.

Liliet

2013-09-07, 04:02 AM

Well, other people are saying what I want to say about V feeling guilty NOT ONLY about Familicide, but also about vir pride that presumably let to accepting the splice (even though in reality it didn't).

So I'm going to focus on another interesting point.

I haven't read any of those so I can't really point to counterexamples. But even if you're right and those comics manage to establish their magic systems without a line of explanation, that doesn't change anything about my point; the Giant still benefits here in OotS by being able to rely on rules everyone knows.

Redcloak can announce "I rebuked your wights over to my team" and it works; the audience doesn't immediately think "Huh? Can he really do that? Why couldn't Tsukiko notice or fight back? I don't understand this scene!" Instead we simply go "Wow, Redcloak is powerful! And yeah, by the rules, Tsukiko actually wouldn't have noticed he did anything until she tried to give them orders or make more undead." And just like that, we are right back in the story.
A line of explanation is still needed. "I rebuked your wights over to my team" and "I gained a level so I have this spell now" is just as much explanation as "Oh, and have I mentioned I can shoot lasers from my eyes?". It is needed because not all of the audience is familiar with DnD. See more below.

Much as I realize that having an existing rule-set can be handy and that this comic wouldn't be where it is now if not for its D&D roots, I sometimes wish the story didn't have to be written around the thundering incompetence of the people who wrote 3e D&D all those years ago.
That may be a bit of overstatement, but yeah, I basically agree.

What I think is generally bad about basing a comic on D&D is that all powers become foreseeable. Not entirely predictable, you never know what spells a wizard has in his spellbook and which of them he has prepared today (unless you do), but you can plan for every power-related contingency. All surprises that are left are about people's decisions and relationships, which kinda defeats the point (or at least part of the point) of using the fantasy magic system.

When a villain says "I'm in control of your undead army now!" the audience and characters don't go "Oh God! I had no idea he could do that!", they go "Well duh, he's an Evil cleric, should have planned better". I'm not saying it's necessarily bad, just that all potential benefits by letting the audience know the system beforehand are outweighed by the drawbacks more or less equally.

However, the argument "you don't have to develop the system from scratch" is, from creative point of view, far outweighed by "you don't get to develop the system from scratch". Rich has already said why - because you have to tailor the plot to the powers, not the powers to the plot, and... and don't get to develop a new system from scratch, duh. (although that can be just me)

When you are writing your own system, you have to care to make all your powers look logical from a certain point of view (examples: "Duh, redhead with a violent temper and a lighter in her pocket, it's only natural that she would control fire", "Well, she is mysterious and with unknown origins, no wonder she has some mystical powers"), but as a result, they REALLY look awesome. People say that Roy is awesome for being able to beat an army, but honestly... their calculations show that at his level he SHOULD be able to beat an army. It's predictable. It's what everyone of his level gets. We know for certain that Tarquin would be able to beat an even bigger army because he's of the same class (presumably) and higher level than Roy. The closest thing to dramatic personal empowering we've seen was Elan seeing through the illusion, and it was soon mitigated by showing Nale do the same.

Because the whole point of D&D rules is consistency and equality: if one person can do that, another of the same class and level can do it too.

You don't need to have an undeveloped and unexplained magic system to avoid that. You merely need to incorporate inpredictability into magic system, allowing for some to be more awesome than others because of personal resolve (translated to D&D as will saves), learning capability (translated to D&D as earning XP according to strict rules) and perhaps just personality (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PersonalityPowers).

And about the benefits of the audience already being familiar with the system... but not all of it is. There are lots of people in the forums, and probably even more out there, who have never heard the term "DnD" before starting to read the comic. For some of them, Roy cleaving through the army is awesome because they didn't see that coming, for some - it's unrealistic and feels like cheating, because DnD isn't realistic enough to provide drama for those who are not used to it.

I hope I was coherent enough.

Morty

2013-09-07, 10:35 AM

That may be a bit of overstatement, but yeah, I basically agree.
*snip*

It's not really about working within an existing, very detailed system. The problem here is not really that D&D 3e is detailed and math-heavy, but that it's shoddy. Its designers had no idea what they were doing, and a wizard above a certain level will simply have far too many options for dealing with problems, without really trying. Which is why V ends up being 'benched'.

Liliet

2013-09-07, 01:30 PM

It's not really about working within an existing, very detailed system. The problem here is not really that D&D 3e is detailed and math-heavy, but that it's shoddy. Its designers had no idea what they were doing, and a wizard above a certain level will simply have far too many options for dealing with problems, without really trying. Which is why V ends up being 'benched'.

I think that the main problem is, even the best game system is NOT applicable for making a good story, ever. Game systems are designed so that everything be predictable and calculable, including the odds. And repeatable. The good story requires unpredictable twists and "one in a million chances" actually working, and not because the dice was kind, but because the character was awesome. They have directly contradicting purposes.

Psyren

2013-09-07, 01:44 PM

A line of explanation is still needed.

Of course. Obviously we need to be clear on what he did, and as you point out, the D&D neophytes would be handicapped without one. (D&D-savvy folks could have come to this conclusion without explanation - note how many people sussed out not only that Malack was a vampire, but that he had researched a sunlight blocking spell, before the reveal.)

But while an explanation is needed to show what he did, no explanation is needed to show how he did it. Rebuking is supernatural (i.e. mental), so we know how he was able to seize control without Tsukiko's knowledge - check. Nobody explains what a "dimensional lock" is, but the rules lay out what it does pretty clearly - check. Casting spells while grappled is very difficult - check (this particular one comes up in many other contexts, such as Durkon's battle with Malack and V's battle with Xykon.) Tsukiko stumbles on the truth because of her knowledge of spell schools - check. Wights have enough agency to crack jokes or attack on their own, but not enough to resist their cleric's commands - check. And so on.

Plenty of other scenes use the rules to conserve on dialogue. We aren't told in the comic what an "attack roll" is, but we know why Tsukiko's new spells can hit Haley easily while having a harder time hitting Belkar's cat. We also know why Belkar's cat can distract her so effectively and why the Wight touching her to get the cat off would be a bad thing.

So even with the difficulties that powerful protagonist spellcasters can cause, there are still some benefits to outweigh those drawbacks.

Bulldog Psion

2013-09-07, 03:09 PM

I think both approaches are valid and have something to bring to the table.

Liliet

2013-09-07, 03:36 PM

Of course. Obviously we need to be clear on what he did, and as you point out, the D&D neophytes would be handicapped without one. (D&D-savvy folks could have come to this conclusion without explanation - note how many people sussed out not only that Malack was a vampire, but that he had researched a sunlight blocking spell, before the reveal.)
Exactly. For the sake of those not in the know, D&D is just like a made-up-on-the-spot magic system, but unnecessarily complicated.

But while an explanation is needed to show what he did, no explanation is needed to show how he did it. Rebuking is supernatural (i.e. mental), so we know how he was able to seize control without Tsukiko's knowledge - check. Nobody explains what a "dimensional lock" is, but the rules lay out what it does pretty clearly - check. Casting spells while grappled is very difficult - check (this particular one comes up in many other contexts, such as Durkon's battle with Malack and V's battle with Xykon.) Tsukiko stumbles on the truth because of her knowledge of spell schools - check. Wights have enough agency to crack jokes or attack on their own, but not enough to resist their cleric's commands - check. And so on.
Wha?...
No explanation is EVER needed on how magic works, unless you specifically want to Do In The Wizard (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DoingInTheWizard). It's magic. That just works for anyone who is willing to read a fantasy comic. If it doesn't, DnD doesn't exactly provide an explanation either.

Actually, DnD terms only complicate the explanation, if you keep in mind those who are not familiar with the system. I only knew what "rebuke" was because it was clearly what Reddy just did to Tsukiko's wights. It may be because of me not being a native speaker, but there is a lot of unnecessary for the story complication anyway. For example, V's barred school preventing vir from casting Teleport, which would translate into original magic system as "I can't learn that spell" and would be much simpler for a new reader. Malack's raising Durkon immediately with his staff, which would not require explanation AT ALL without a need to conform to an existing system.

Plenty of other scenes use the rules to conserve on dialogue. We aren't told in the comic what an "attack roll" is, but we know why Tsukiko's new spells can hit Haley easily while having a harder time hitting Belkar's cat. We also know why Belkar's cat can distract her so effectively and why the Wight touching her to get the cat off would be a bad thing.
No, they don't. They can't. They have no right to. Rich is aiming his comic at larger audience than just DnD fans, so he can't count on his readers knowing the rules. Tsukiko's new spell can hit Haley easily while having a harder time hitting Belkar's cat because it's different from the spell she used before, and that's all we need to know for that scene to make sense. "Attack roll" is an inside joke and an additional explanation for DnD geeks, and only complicates things for those who don't know.

Of course, if your audience is exclusively DnD geeks, then you can get away with less explanation... but that's pretty narrow.

What DnD gives you in a story sense is the settings, concepts - like paladins with their falls, clerics of Chaotic gods that must be themselves Chaotic, alignment system, races/monsters with their complex relationship and so on. It may give you inspiration for your own story alright, I know it firsthand (I'm in the middle of such story myself), and of course you would conform to the rules to not destroy your own point (provided you want to make some point). But having to follow pre-existing rules is a drawback of writing a "DnD story", not an advantage.

Well, rules also provide a source for rules jokes, which was, as far as I know, exactly the reason why OotS is a DnD comic. But you can't base a story on jokes. You can base a comic on jokes, and it doesn't make a comic any worse, but if you do want a story, you need a little more.

Reddish Mage

2013-09-07, 05:17 PM

Superman by himself is not a problem. Superman as part of the Justice League is not a problem. Superman as a member of an ensemble FBI team IS a problem, because sometimes Agent Fred is supposed to be the one to catch the serial killer. You end up resorting to a LOT of kryptonite.

That's an interesting analogy. In that it suggest that the whole rest of the whole order is not EVEN in V's league! That includes Durkon who has some pretty nice game-breaking potential himself, and I note that Durkon ran low on spells early and somehow ran all out of spells by this point.

I thought Superman and the Justice League is actually a pretty good analogy to the Wizard and the lower tier classes.

Heck, I would say that even in the League he's a problem. A lot of stories have him just plain absent, because not sidelining him would solve the plot in very short order. Not to mention what would happen if he started policing Gotham, Metro City etc.

Numerous other members of the league have some powers. Even "mundanes" like Batman and Green Arrow have tons of tricks they can do and are more like Wuxia martial artists than ordinary humans. However, Superman's powers dwarf most of those abilities and he has a ton of powers! That seems to be a good analogy to D&D characters where high level mundanes can pull out all sorts of mythological heroic abilities, but a Wizard can usually dwarf those abilities an then have a number of others to spare!

Now the Justice League stories do have Superman in there, not to mention a the endless series of Superman and Batman team-ups. Sometimes that involves a willful ignorance of the fact that Superman can clean up a particular combat at superspeed, or perhaps Superman is just holding back so that Batman gets a chance. Not to mention that most authors forget that Superman is a technical and scientific super-human genius with hyper-advanced alien knowledge on top of those superpowers. Yet for all his genius, how many times has Superman faced off with the main villain prematurely without making adequate preparations? What sort of irresponsible comic would suggest their genius character will just go charging headlong into danger like that?

Now Superman and FBI agents? That's overkill. That'd be like dropping Vaarsuvius + a template in a party of commoners.

Sir_Leorik

2013-09-08, 11:45 PM

That's an interesting analogy. In that it suggest that the whole rest of the whole order is not EVEN in V's league! That includes Durkon who has some pretty nice game-breaking potential himself, and I note that Durkon ran low on spells early and somehow ran all out of spells by this point.

I thought Superman and the Justice League is actually a pretty good analogy to the Wizard and the lower tier classes.

Numerous other members of the league have some powers. Even "mundanes" like Batman and Green Arrow have tons of tricks they can do and are more like Wuxia martial artists than ordinary humans. However, Superman's powers dwarf most of those abilities and he has a ton of powers! That seems to be a good analogy to D&D characters where high level mundanes can pull out all sorts of mythological heroic abilities, but a Wizard can usually dwarf those abilities an then have a number of others to spare!

Now the Justice League stories do have Superman in there, not to mention a the endless series of Superman and Batman team-ups. Sometimes that involves a willful ignorance of the fact that Superman can clean up a particular combat at superspeed, or perhaps Superman is just holding back so that Batman gets a chance. Not to mention that most authors forget that Superman is a technical and scientific super-human genius with hyper-advanced alien knowledge on top of those superpowers. Yet for all his genius, how many times has Superman faced off with the main villain prematurely without making adequate preparations? What sort of irresponsible comic would suggest their genius character will just go charging headlong into danger like that?

The Justice League often fights enemies that are more powerful than Superman, such as Darkseid, Lobo, Starro, Despero, Amazo, Neron or anybody from the Fifth Dimension, as well as enemies that are equal in power to Superman, such as Mongul, Bizarro, Felix Faust, Dr. Light, or the Female Furies. In these cases, Superman is not too powerful; he relies on Wonder Woman, Green Lantern or the Flash to back him up, and Batman usually provides the winning strategies for the League. The Flash is faster than Superman, Wonder Woman is as strong as Superman and she's resistant to magic, Green Lantern wields the most powerful weapon in the universe, Aquaman is super-strong, telepathic, able to resist the pressures of the Marianas Trench, has access to the Atlantean Navy, Atlantean technology and Atlantean magic, and is as rich as Bruce Wayne or Lex Luthor from sunken pirate treasure alone. (And he has an octopus that fire four longbows at once. :smallbiggrin:) And Batman is the world's greatest detective. That's a nice mix of powers, that Superman doesn't overshadow. Especially when you remember that Superman pulls his punches to avoid killing his opponents and to minimize property damage.

Vaarsuvius does sometimes overshadow the rest of the OotS. That may no longer be true of Durkon, but V is often able to resolve combats on her own before anyone else can do anything. Sometimes that's not a big deal, other times it gets in the way of the story. And when she runs out of spells, V is in serious trouble, not to mention that she lacks access to the Conjuration school. So in the long run V is not too powerful, but in some cases she needs to be separated from the group, by running off on her own, being turned into a small purple lizard, or having her soul yanked into the Nine Hells.

TheWolfe

2013-09-09, 03:04 AM

Exactly. For the sake of those not in the know, D&D is just like a made-up-on-the-spot magic system, but unnecessarily complicated.

Wha?...
No explanation is EVER needed on how magic works, unless you specifically want to Do In The Wizard (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DoingInTheWizard). It's magic. That just works for anyone who is willing to read a fantasy comic. If it doesn't, DnD doesn't exactly provide an explanation either.

I disagree. Even if magic is a power that is not understood, it still needs limitations and rules. I recommend reading this essay (http://eragon-sporkings.wikispaces.com/Magic) on the subject.
Basically, if you just say "It's Magic!", you can do anything with it. If there were no limitations on magic in OOTS, we would wonder "Why doesn't V just teleport? Why does Durkon needs to rest for his spells?"

I don't require a scientific explanation for magic, because then it's not fantasy anymore, but scifi. But I do require that magic has it's limitations and own 'Laws of Nature/Magic'. Because in this world, magic is simply another force of nature. Just like we know that things fall down when we drop them because of gravity, so do the characters (and the DnD players) know that wizards can not study every school of magic.

Another example. In the RPG game Dragon Age Origins there was magic, but one of the rules of magic was: Teleportation is impossible. If you establish such a rule, your story has to support it. Meaning you can't just introduce a teleport spell halfway through to solve a problem. At least not without a good explanation, like that this new spell is not part of normal magic, but of a dark magic that works different than the normal magic, or that you didn't strictly teleport, but slowed time down and walked the entire way in a fraction of a second.

I have to add that in Dragon Age there actually was a bit of an explanation for magic. It basically was a power that some people could draw from the 'Fade' a sort of other plain that contains demons and is the source of all supernatural things, such as walking skeletons, demonic possessions etc.

Imgran

2013-09-09, 08:32 AM

It was also a convenient excuse to get V to run out of the room in terror and disappear into the pyramid. Which, looping back around to the point of this thread, is a good reason for benching V in this circumstance and led to some interesting drama around the gate. It also, as a matter of pure fact, led to the vamping of Durkon, but that wasn't V's fault as there was no way to predict the results of running away at the time. Of course, that doesn't mean it won't weigh on V's conscience later on.

I'd love to know how a mistake Haley made, followed by a decision Belkar made, culminating in in a duty Durkon felt he had, in any could have been prevented by Vaarsuvius. Nothing in that chain of events is something that V would have been likely to be able to identify or prevent.

I feel extremely comfortable saying that with a magical trap onhand to disable, Vaarsuvius would have stayed with the main party to lend whatever aid she can, and only when the trap was down would he have been willing to investigate the location of either of the wayward pair. V would not have gone after Belkar himself, and it's unlikely she would have followed Durkon either.

And even if he had, she's such a vulnerable little thing, and Malack's abilities are so versatile, that I doubt his presence makes the battle any easier. A wizard dealing with either a cleric or a vampire is a ticklish thing even without the bonuses and abilities provided by the other hand of Malack's identity, and giving up a few levels to the vampire cleric hardly helps matters. Disabling the wizard would have been Malack's first move before he even spoke to Durkon, the upshot being that V is either dead, or also vamped, and the rest of the scene goes on more or less as dictated.

TRH

2013-09-09, 08:36 AM

Eh, disintegrate would have put down that Hellhound before it could drag Belkar halfway down the pyramid, so that's something.

Chantelune

2013-09-09, 09:07 AM

Eh, disintegrate would have put down that Hellhound before it could drag Belkar halfway down the pyramid, so that's something.

Durkon was there too and could have used some spells too to try and kill the hellhound before he goes too far away. Thor's ligthning comes to mind, but has he looked like he was in thouch range at the time, he could have even tried more powerfull spells. Still, he didn't do a single thing, not even trying to swing his hammer, has the hound ran away with Belkar. Eck, he didn't even draw his hammer. Check the strip again, in the time the hound got summoned and fled, Durkon didn't move at all. All the other member were busy : Haley disarming, Roy giving her a lift and Elan inspiring comp with his music. Roy almost made a move, trying to draw, but couldn't because Haley was fiddling with a meteor swarm rune. Durkon could have done something, he didn't.

Durkon being vamped was bound to happen. If V wasn't benched at the time, she would have reacted as much as Durkon and then probably stayed with the party in case her expertise would be required with the magically trapped door. But for some reason, it's okay with Durkon to stand there doing nothing, but not for V.

TRH

2013-09-09, 09:10 AM

Durkon being vamped was bound to happen. If V wasn't benched at the time, she would have reacted as much as Durkon and then probably stayed with the party in case her expertise would be required with the magically trapped door. But for some reason, it's okay with Durkon to stand there doing nothing, but not for V.

Well, DSTP got us used to Durkon sitting around doing nothing - with V, it feels more like she's forced to be useless than actually being passive. That's kind of the point of this thread, if it still has a point.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-09, 09:58 AM

Eh, disintegrate would have put down that Hellhound before it could drag Belkar halfway down the pyramid, so that's something.
Dismissal, banishment or greater dispel magic, all of which V has cast on-panel, would have served the same purpose more efficiently.

Scurvy Cur

2013-09-09, 10:50 AM

Too, disintegrate would have probably done a number on Malack. A fort save of +8 and a likely HP total of 84 HP (average 12d12 with the first die auto maximized) do not a happy disintegrate target make. Plus vampire natural AC does nothing to stop a ranged touch attack, and the usual undead immunity to fort save effects aside from those which affect inanimate objects doesn't apply to disintegrate, which works just fine on inanimate objects.

If Malack fails the fort save, which is more likely than not, chances are he's ashed (assume level 15 V, which is where the CLG thread puts him iirc, a failed disintegrate save produces 30d6 damage, or an average of 105). Sometimes, those fancy templates just aren't worth the ECL adjustment. Especially when none of their usual immunities apply. Mind, this is part of why V had to be benched. There are only so many minor villains that can be dusted off with disintegrate + gust of wind before it starts losing its impact.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-09, 10:54 AM

Scurvy Cur

2013-09-09, 10:55 AM

Would have been enough to end the fight though. A vampire forced to gas up and retreat is a vampire that's not killing Durkon or Belkar.

Edit: plus, the vampire autogas requires it to reach its coffin in 2 hours. SRD gives that a 9 mile range; so even assuming Malack could get to his coffin, it would put him back in Bleedingham.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-09, 10:57 AM

Would have been enough to end the fight though. A vampire forced to gas up and retreat is a vampire that's not killing Durkon or Belkar.
Malack managed to do just that.

Scurvy Cur

2013-09-09, 10:58 AM

Durkon never took him to 0 HP. Malack's gaseous form assumption was the standard action one, not the automatic one that kicks in when they are reduced to 0 HP or less.

Edit again (have to keep swapping back to the SRD): for clarification, the result of taking a vampire to 0 HP or lower is that they automatically assume gaseous form. They then have 2 hours to make it to their coffin or be destroyed utterly. If they do make it there, they take an hour to recuperate their first HP, at which point the fast healing resumes as normal. This 1 hour window is the usual window in which the vampire can be staked.

Zim is absolutely right when he says disintegrate can't kill a vampire, but hitting 0 HP isn't meaningless for them. Perhaps I should have suggested disintegrate + dimensional anchor as an alternative to V's usual dismissive kill combo. Either way though, V needed to be benched for that fight because of his ability to reduce a combat sequence to 4 words or less.

zimmerwald1915

2013-09-09, 11:01 AM

Durkon never took him to 0 HP. Malack's gaseous form assumption was the standard action one, not the automatic one that kicks in when they are reduced to 0 HP or less.
This seems like a distinction without a difference to me, assuming the Giant would ignore the bit of the template that says a vampire must reach its coffin in order to heal from zero hit points.

Scurvy Cur

2013-09-09, 11:10 AM

I don't see why Rich would observe all of the powers attributed to a vampire by D&D mechanics, but specifically ignore the detailed description of what happens when combat reduces them to no HP. See clarification edit in the above post. I'd provide a link, but that's hard to do on a smartphone. The relevant mechanics are detailed in the fast healing entry.

Chantelune

2013-09-09, 11:13 AM

This seems like a distinction without a difference to me, assuming the Giant would ignore the bit of the template that says a vampire must reach its coffin in order to heal from zero hit points.

But we don't know if the Giant would have ignored that, or I miss the comment were he said he would have.

And V being there for this fight (in the event were she was not benched and decided to follow Durkon) would have make a difference even if the Giant did. Malack won over Durkon because he managed to grapple him, forcing the two into a lockdown until Malack dispelled the death ward and killed Durkon. If V had been there, she could have prevented the lockdown situation, either forcing Malack to retreat, or working toward getting Belkar before retreating themselves to regroup with the order.

Durkon had the upper hand in the fight until Malack managed to grapple him. Only a one-on-one situation allowed this issue. Or if Malack managed to dominate the others like he did Belkar, but V was the only one with Durkon to have a good enough will save to make that strategy near impossible.

Edit : Actually, if the Giant does ignore the fact that vampire forced into gaseous form by lowering their hp to 0 must reach their coffin, then Durkula is near unbeatable and save for the sun, there's not much that can actually kill him. He'll just turn gaseous, wait for a bit and come back in the fight.

Sir_Leorik

2013-09-09, 12:32 PM

I disagree. Even if magic is a power that is not understood, it still needs limitations and rules. I recommend reading this essay (http://eragon-sporkings.wikispaces.com/Magic) on the subject.
Basically, if you just say "It's Magic!", you can do anything with it. If there were no limitations on magic in OOTS, we would wonder "Why doesn't V just teleport? Why does Durkon needs to rest for his spells?"

I don't require a scientific explanation for magic, because then it's not fantasy anymore, but scifi. But I do require that magic has it's limitations and own 'Laws of Nature/Magic'. Because in this world, magic is simply another force of nature. Just like we know that things fall down when we drop them because of gravity, so do the characters (and the DnD players) know that wizards can not study every school of magic.

There are two issues you are touching on, which are not mutually exclusive. The first is internal consistency (what TVTropes calls "Magic A is Magic A"), while the second is providing a detailed explanation for exactly how magic works (TVTropes calls this "Doing in the Wizard"). If a game or a work of fiction establishes that Wizards, Sorcerers, Warlocks, Psions and Clerics all have slightly different "rules" for magic, those "rules" need to be consistent.

In D&D Wizards need to keep spell books, into which they use expensive inks and quills to scribe new spells. Wizards need to spend one hour each morning studying from their spellbook to prepare new spells to replace ones they have cast (or want to exchange). Wizards can not prepare spells if they have not rested for eight hours, and can not prepare spells more than once in a 24 hour period. Generalist Wizards can learn any spell they want, but can prepare fewer spells per day than a Specialist Wizard, while a Specialist Wizard is barred from learning or casting any spell that is in their barred school.

D&D Sorcerers know their spells inherently and therefore do not need spellbooks, do not need to prepare spells daily, but are limited in the number of spells they can ever know, their spells have the same components as Wizard versions of the same spells, and they take longer to cast spells enhanced by Metamagic feats.

D&D 3.5 Warlocks do not cast spells. Warlocks make a pact with an Outsider or Fey, and gain spell-like abilities called Evocations. Their most common power is their Eldritch Blast, which they can modify using other Evocations. Warlocks can not learn spells without multiclassing.

D&D Clerics need to prepare their spells, but unlike a Wizard they don't need to maintain a spellbook. Instead they pray to their patron deity (or to their ethos or philosophy for non-theistic Clerics) at an appropriate time of day or night. This can be dawn, sunrise, noon, sunset, dusk, early evening, midnight, or tea-time, but if they don't pray at the appropriate time they need to wait 24 hours for their next opportunity to prepare spells. Clerics usually don't require material components or focuses, using their holy symbol as a focus for their spells.

D&D 3.5 Psions and Wilders have a reserve of Power Points that they renew after resting for eight hours. Psions and Wilders spend Power Points to manifest a Psionic Power, and can spend extra Points to Augment a power while manifesting it. Wilders can try to augment a power with a Wild Surge without paying Power Points, but they risk Psychic Enervation if they do so. Psions and Wilders never need verbal, somatic or material components to manifest their powers, but when a Psionic Power is manifested there may be a verbal, auditory, or other sensory display.

If a Wizard in a D&D adventure module, novel, comic book or video game can suddenly cast spells spontaneously like a Sorcerer, that is a violation of the game and setting's internal consistency. A Psion in a Dark Sun novel needs to use material components, a Sorcerer in an Eberron MMO needs a spellbook, a Warlock in a comic book is shown using a holy symbol, or a Cleric in OotS uses an Eldritch Blast; these all violate the internal consistency of "Magic A is Magic A".

Over the years various D&D supplements have addressed how magic "works", in an attempt to justify why Clerics can wear armor but Wizards (and later Sorcerers) can't, what the difference between Arcane and Divine magic is, where Arcane or Divine power comes from, how Psionics works, who Warlocks are making their pacts with, etc.

In the "Dragonlance" Campaign Setting, all magic comes from the gods, with Wizardry coming from the three Draconic gods of the moons, Solinari (White, or Good wizardry), Lunitari (Red, or Neutral wizardry) and Nuitari (Black, or Evil Wizardry). All Wizards paid fealty to Solinari, Lunitari or Nuitari, and the phases of the moons could increase or diminish a Wizard's power. Later on, following the Chaos War and the War of Souls, Sorcerers were introduced to Dragonlance, but they drew on their own selves for Arcane power.

In the "Forgotten Realms" Campaign Setting, all Arcane magic came from Mystra and the Weave, until Cyric murdered Mystra and the Weave was torn, causing Fourth Edition the Spellplague.

In the "Dark Sun" Campaign setting, Arcane magic was leeched from the life force of living things, via Preserving magic or Defiling magic, with the Defilers causing the environmental cataclysm that led to Athas' current devastation. In 2E Dark Sun, Templars and Elemental Clerics could cast Cleric spells, but there were no gods to call upon for Divine power. In 4E Dark Sun, the Divine Power source no longer exists on Athas; Templars are Warlocks who made pacts with a Sorcerer King, or they are Wizards or Psions. The "Elemental Clerics" are Shamans using the Primal Power Source. The gods of Athas were killed long before the end of the Green Age, thousands of years before present day Athas.

In the "Ravenloft" Campaign, the Dark Powers reserve the right to alter how spells work, making Necromancy spells easier to cast, deadlier and more likely to produce unforseen consequences. Most of the inhabitants of the Lands of the Mists are superstitious peasants, and Wizards, Sorcerers and Warlocks hide the fact that they can cast spells, unless they know a lynch mob will not form. In the Domain of Lamordia, the inhabitants do not believe in magic, Divine or Arcane. Like Dr. Victor Mordenheim, the mad scientist who created Lamordia's Flesh Golem Darklord, the locals are Flat-Earth Atheists (to again cite TVTropes), who consider magic to simply be a scientific phenomenon that hasn't been properly explored. They consider Clerics, Wizards, etc., to be charlatans or fools who are like children playing with gunpowder weapons.

In the Order of the Stick webcomic, the laws of magic require just as much calculus as the laws of physics. Both take a back seat to the laws of Gaming, Comedy and Drama.

jere7my

2013-09-09, 01:02 PM

Kish

2013-09-09, 01:18 PM

I don't see why Rich would observe all of the powers attributed to a vampire by D&D mechanics, but specifically ignore the detailed description of what happens when combat reduces them to no HP.
Indeed, Malack said that Durkon couldn't destroy him by hitting him with a hammer, and Durkon replied, "Aye, but I can send ye back to yer coffin. Good enuff!" To which Malack conspicuously failed to respond with, "Actually, the writer house ruled that you can only force me into gaseous form for a few rounds, so just give up already."

Psyren

2013-09-09, 01:35 PM

No explanation is EVER needed on how magic works, unless you specifically want to Do In The Wizard (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DoingInTheWizard). It's magic.

The limitations of magic are important. Are your spellcasters living gods? If the answer is no, then you need to be clear about the conditions under which their magic will not succeed, particularly when one of them faces off against another.

By basing the comic on existing rules, he cuts down the gap between "plot point" and "understanding." There's also the aesthetic appeal of using the game rules to craft a detailed story.

Actually, DnD terms only complicate the explanation, if you keep in mind those who are not familiar with the system. I only knew what "rebuke" was because it was clearly what Reddy just did to Tsukiko's wights. It may be because of me not being a native speaker, but there is a lot of unnecessary for the story complication anyway. For example, V's barred school preventing vir from casting Teleport, which would translate into original magic system as "I can't learn that spell" and would be much simpler for a new reader. Malack's raising Durkon immediately with his staff, which would not require explanation AT ALL without a need to conform to an existing system.

Concerning V - I'm glad you brought that up, because that was a good example of a time-saver. Z can teleport and V cannot; without the rules there, we would be wondering "why is that? Can only dark elves teleport, or evil ones? He has to know how important teleport would be on this quest; if he's so intelligent, why doesn't he try to learn it?" This is particularly relevant since we see V in no less than two different magic shops during the story.

Concerning Malack - yes, you end up with some exposition there due to his staff, but it still saves us exposition in other places. Do staffs contain spells themselves, or are they just used to amplify the powers of the wielder? This is an important plot point, and without the rules, we'd have to explain it. When Malack turned into gas earlier, his equipment went with him - why didn't it do the same thing when he burned into smoke? This is also important because it shows he's truly dead and also shows why Durkon gets to keep his staff.

No, they don't. They can't. They have no right to.

Nevertheless, they do, and I've provided several examples at this point.

What DnD gives you in a story sense is the settings, concepts - like paladins with their falls, clerics of Chaotic gods that must be themselves Chaotic, alignment system, races/monsters with their complex relationship and so on. It may give you inspiration for your own story alright, I know it firsthand (I'm in the middle of such story myself), and of course you would conform to the rules to not destroy your own point (provided you want to make some point). But having to follow pre-existing rules is a drawback of writing a "DnD story", not an advantage.

That's a matter of perspective. It's constraining/disadvantageous for you, but others see constraints as a creative wellspring, like the artist who only paints in one color.

Well, rules also provide a source for rules jokes, which was, as far as I know, exactly the reason why OotS is a DnD comic.

That's why it started, but obviously it became much more than that.

Imgran

2013-09-09, 02:52 PM

You guys are overlooking the rather obvious fact that if Vaarsuvius is there, Malack puts everything he has into taking the wizard down in the first round. Part of the reason Malack had a tough time taking Durkon down is he legitimately did not want to kill him. He has no such reservations when it comes to V -- if V corners him, he goes into all-out attack mode, and even with Mass Death Ward to fall back on, I have to give the advantage to Malack in close quarters. A vampire that's determined to kill a wizard has a few options in close quarters in a darkened hallway, especially if he's willing to tank a few heal spells from Durkon to snap his target's twiggy little Elven neck before moving on.'

Long story short -- V is probably grappled in the first round, and unless either Durkon or V can do something about it pretty quickly, it just goes downhill from there.

Emanick

2013-09-09, 03:19 PM

bguy

2013-09-09, 04:31 PM

If Malack grapples V, Durkon will immediately cast Heal. Then Malack has to mist or he'll go straight to 0 hit points in the next round. It's difficult to successfully grapple a physically weak opponent if there's a hostile high-level cleric standing right next to you.

Couldn't Malack pretty well one shot V with either Harm or Slay Living as V is unlikely to make a Fort Save against either spell? Malack would have to dispel the Mass Death Ward first, but that might well take only a swift action since all it takes is for him to say a single word. Alternatively, Malack would also have a decent chance of dropping V with a single Flame Strike if V doesn't have any buffs against fire up. (Though based on V surviving a Meteor Swarm from Xykon, I suspect V does have some sort of ring of fire resistance.)

Chantelune

2013-09-09, 04:52 PM

Malack would have to dispel the Mass Death Ward first, but that might well take only a swift action since all it takes is for him to say a single word.

Too risky, I'd guess. Malack could have dispeled the MDW right at the start of his duel with Durkon, yet he waited for a favorable situation to do so. Dispelling it that way, Durkon would have realized the trickery and be way more cautious of Malack, so he might have killed V, Durkon would have better chances to defeat him afterward. The backdoor was his trump card, he wasn't about to use it lightly, I think.

AKA_Bait

2013-09-09, 04:56 PM

TRH

2013-09-09, 05:11 PM

Have we considered what the affect of Malack draining V, then spending a round to use his auto-vampire spell might have had? A Vampire V thrall would be just as nasty, perhaps nastier, than a Vampire Durkon thrall.

That seems like the kind of development that would genuinely throw the IFCC for a loop, depending on how the do vampires have souls question pans out.

Emanick

2013-09-09, 05:11 PM

Couldn't Malack pretty well one shot V with either Harm or Slay Living as V is unlikely to make a Fort Save against either spell? Malack would have to dispel the Mass Death Ward first, but that might well take only a swift action since all it takes is for him to say a single word. Alternatively, Malack would also have a decent chance of dropping V with a single Flame Strike if V doesn't have any buffs against fire up. (Though based on V surviving a Meteor Swarm from Xykon, I suspect V does have some sort of ring of fire resistance.)

Harm, like its opposite number Heal, can't one-shot anything. Slay Living could potentially kill V, I suppose, though the Fortitude DC isn't insanely difficult (15 + Malack's WIS modifier, and from the amount of punishment V has taken in some fights, I suspect s/he has a fairly sound Constitution score). But then again, one Disintegrate from V could turn Malack into mist. And Malack, who has no Constitution score, will probably have trouble making a DC 22+ Fortitude save.

Initiative/surprise is arguably the most important factor in a potential three-way battle between V, Malack and Durkon. If both V and Durkon attack before Malack has a chance to act, he's likely to be a goner. If not, Malack might have a decent chance of taking one of them out and evening the odds.

bguy

2013-09-09, 05:17 PM

Too risky, I'd guess. Malack could have dispeled the MDW right at the start of his duel with Durkon, yet he waited for a favorable situation to do so. Dispelling it that way, Durkon would have realized the trickery and be way more cautious of Malack, so he might have killed V, Durkon would have better chances to defeat him afterward. The backdoor was his trump card, he wasn't about to use it lightly, I think.

Well when fighting against Durkon alone opening with dispelling the MDW would have been a bad move, since Malack was unlikely to be able to take out Durkon in a single round, and if Durkon has a regular Death Ward racked, he could then buff himself with that and Malack probably wouldn't be able take it down. However, if Malack is facing both V and Durkon then immediately disspelling the MDW is a much better move. Facing both V and Durkon he pretty much has to drop one of them with his opening attack to have any chance of winning, and he actually does have pretty good odds of taking out V with a single spell if V is stripped of the MDW protection. Yes, he'll have lost his secret weapon against Durkon at that point, but that still gives him much better odds than trying to fight both Durkon and V at the same time.

Imgran

2013-09-09, 09:06 PM

Harm, like its opposite number Heal, can't one-shot anything. Slay Living could potentially kill V, I suppose, though the Fortitude DC isn't insanely difficult (15 + Malack's WIS modifier, and from the amount of punishment V has taken in some fights, I suspect s/he has a fairly sound Constitution score). But then again, one Disintegrate from V could turn Malack into mist. And Malack, who has no Constitution score, will probably have trouble making a DC 22+ Fortitude save.

Initiative/surprise is arguably the most important factor in a potential three-way battle between V, Malack and Durkon. If both V and Durkon attack before Malack has a chance to act, he's likely to be a goner. If not, Malack might have a decent chance of taking one of them out and evening the odds.

Main point being, Malak has a definite fighting chance even with V in the picture -- even assuming that was possible even if V was with the party.

bguy

2013-09-10, 01:06 PM

Harm, like its opposite number Heal, can't one-shot anything.

I thought it was only if you successfully saved that you couldn't drop below 1 HP from Harm.

Slay Living could potentially kill V, I suppose, though the Fortitude DC isn't insanely difficult (15 + Malack's WIS modifier, and from the amount of punishment V has taken in some fights, I suspect s/he has a fairly sound Constitution score).

Well in the Giant's commentary on the Order vs Miko fight he said that V lacks a decent CON. (Which was why Miko was able to take V out so easily in that fight.) Though it's certainly possible V has gotten some CON boasting items since then.

Initiative/surprise is arguably the most important factor in a potential three-way battle between V, Malack and Durkon. If both V and Durkon attack before Malack has a chance to act, he's likely to be a goner. If not, Malack might have a decent chance of taking one of them out and evening the odds.

Agreed. Malack would pretty much have to win initative against both Durkon and V to have any chance.

Snails

2013-09-10, 01:11 PM

That seems like the kind of development that would genuinely throw the IFCC for a loop, depending on how the do vampires have souls question pans out.

It would be pretty funny watching the three of them pore over the rule books trying to figure out how it would work...

Chantelune

2013-09-10, 02:42 PM

I thought it was only if you successfully saved that you couldn't drop below 1 HP from Harm.

Spell description is as follow :

Harm charges a subject with negative energy that deals 10 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 150 points at 15th level). If the creature successfully saves, harm deals half this amount, but it cannot reduce the target’s hit points to less than 1.

Kish

2013-09-10, 03:14 PM

And WotC clarified, a while ago, that Harm cannot reduce anyone below 1 hit point whether the save is passed or failed--nor can Heal reduce an undead creature below 1 hit point.

Scow2

2013-09-10, 03:34 PM

And WotC clarified, a while ago, that Harm cannot reduce anyone below 1 hit point whether the save is passed or failed--nor can Heal reduce an undead creature below 1 hit point.

And the reason for such is that, originally, failing the save always reduced your HP to 1, regardless of what else you may have had... and it made the spells WAY too overpowered. Also - Heal and Harm used to fully restore Living Creatures and Undead, respectively, regardless of that HP value.

Anarion

2013-09-10, 06:05 PM

I'd love to know how a mistake Haley made, followed by a decision Belkar made, culminating in in a duty Durkon felt he had, in any could have been prevented by Vaarsuvius. Nothing in that chain of events is something that V would have been likely to be able to identify or prevent.

I feel extremely comfortable saying that with a magical trap onhand to disable, Vaarsuvius would have stayed with the main party to lend whatever aid she can, and only when the trap was down would he have been willing to investigate the location of either of the wayward pair. V would not have gone after Belkar himself, and it's unlikely she would have followed Durkon either.

Eh, disintegrate would have put down that Hellhound before it could drag Belkar halfway down the pyramid, so that's something.

Dismissal, banishment or greater dispel magic, all of which V has cast on-panel, would have served the same purpose more efficiently.

In addition to these two very excellent answers, I want to point out that when I called it a "cause in fact" what I meant was that it is an action without which the result would not have occurred. There are infinite causes in fact for a particular result. For example, one cause in fact of Durkon's vampirism is his mother and father have intimate relations. Had that never occurred, Durkon would not have been turned into a vampire because Durkon wouldn't have been born. The cause in fact I was referencing was actually the familicide spell: had V not killed all of the Draketooths, Malack and Durkon would not have been where they were and the vamping would not have happened (at least not at that time in that manner).

This is actually why I distinguished proximate cause a few pages back. There are infinite causes in fact for a given result, but often only a single proximate cause. This is because unforeseeable outcomes should be distinguished from foreseeable outcomes, even if there are many actions that, had they not occurred, would have changed the outcome.

Edit: by the by, I'm using technical terminology here because I think it's useful in thinking about how to understand V's emotions in this circumstance. So, if you read through this and feel like you get it, congrats, you just learned a little piece of legal theory.

Reddish Mage

2013-09-10, 11:23 PM

In addition to these two very excellent answers, I want to point out that when I called it a "cause in fact" what I meant was that it is an action without which the result would not have occurred. There are infinite causes in fact for a particular result. For example, one cause in fact of Durkon's vampirism is his mother and father have intimate relations. Had that never occurred, Durkon would not have been turned into a vampire because Durkon wouldn't have been born. The cause in fact I was referencing was actually the familicide spell: had V not killed all of the Draketooths, Malack and Durkon would not have been where they were and the vamping would not have happened (at least not at that time in that manner).

This is actually why I distinguished proximate cause a few pages back. There are infinite causes in fact for a given result, but often only a single proximate cause. This is because unforeseeable outcomes should be distinguished from foreseeable outcomes, even if there are many actions that, had they not occurred, would have changed the outcome.

Edit: by the by, I'm using technical terminology here because I think it's useful in thinking about how to understand V's emotions in this circumstance. So, if you read through this and feel like you get it, congrats, you just learned a little piece of legal theory.

I thought the term proximate cause, in the way you mean it to be the ONE cause directly responsible for the event immediately following the earlier event that gave rise to the proximate cause, is more philosophical (and debatable, why can't the law of gravity as well as the impact to his brain as well the bursting of a critical blood vessel all be simultaneously and proximate ly the cause of Roy's death?).

Legal proximity seemed to have something to do with foreseeability and was in your previous post about how Varsuvius, in addition to being very distant in time and space from the OOTS's problems in the Pyramid, also couldn't foresee that his actions would lead to such problems arising for the OOTS at the Pyramid.

Liliet

2013-09-11, 06:24 AM

Of course magic has to have consistent rules. Thing is, those rules don't have to be detailed. You don't need to explain why the character can't teleport, you can just have him say "I wish I could teleport!" or something to that effect, and the only thing you have to watch after that is internal consistency. The most obvious narrative-appropriate approach, I think, is Personality Powers (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PersonalityPowers). You do need to establish a personality, but it's not like there can be a good story without that.

I think the sensible approach to both reading and writing magical stories is "if something is not established as possible, it is not". If no-one teleports in a story, you don't have to explain that there are no teleport powers in it, viewers/readers will just assume there aren't.

Of course lack of clearly established magic system can help with creating plot holes, mary sues, deus ex machinas and other bad things. But it's not like they are entirely prevented by its existence, so in the end it all boils down to narrative mastery.

Let me give you an example. Imagine that you start reading a webcomic, and first panel features a person magically conjuring a light source to walk safely home from work at midnight. Will your first thought be "Why doesn't he just teleport there if he's a wizard"? Does the author have to establish lack of teleport powers or is it obvious from the fact the wizard is shown walking?

SavageWombat

2013-09-11, 08:42 AM

Let me give you an example. Imagine that you start reading a webcomic, and first panel features a person magically conjuring a light source to walk safely home from work at midnight. Will your first thought be "Why doesn't he just teleport there if he's a wizard"? Does the author have to establish lack of teleport powers or is it obvious from the fact the wizard is shown walking?

I like this example.

I think most people would assume that, yes, the absence of teleport in this scene means that the character can't, or at least can't at this time. (Won't is also possible.) The thing is - if it comes up later in the story that the character can teleport after all, some people won't mind, and some people will go "wait a minute ... why". The fact that we have magic as a premise means that most people can stretch the premise to include a new fact later, without presuming those facts until they arise.

I remember some spec-fic writer saying that the audience will allow you one free violation of the status quo without questioning - you can say "there's future science", "there's magic", "my baby is Bigfoot" etc. - and they won't complain. Until you throw a second premise in - that's where the implausibility comes in. ("If superpowers come from aliens, why is there a wizard?")

Imgran

2013-09-11, 09:11 AM

Edit: by the by, I'm using technical terminology here because I think it's useful in thinking about how to understand V's emotions in this circumstance. So, if you read through this and feel like you get it, congrats, you just learned a little piece of legal theory.

And like all legal theory, it does its best work when it adopts a slightly misleading term to exaggerate the significance of a point of fact to make it sound much bigger and more serious than it ever really could have been.

Also, your cause in fact is in fact rather dubious. Had V not cast Familicide, the adventuring sextet would still have met Malack, because they still would have had to check on Girard's Gate. Encountering Malack happened before they discovered what had happened to the Draketooths, and at that point, Durkon getting vampirized could have happened in any number of different ways some of which have nothing to do with V. Unless you can establish that by not casting Familicide, Durkon never encounters Malack or piques Malack's interest, I'm afraid you haven't made your case.

Mammal

2013-09-11, 09:21 AM

I think an interesting take on the magic rules thing is when there are consistent rules, but the audience never actually figures out what they are.

For example, in the Dishonored video game, magic comes from the Outsider. Everything but that is a complete mystery. The protagonist has 8 or 9 different abilities, but other people have completely different powers, or some of the same powers or more powers or fewer powers and it's all based on whether or not the Outsider thinks you're "interesting." It's almost entirely arbitrary, and while the powers themselves aren't the main narrative focus, they're interesting enough that they could serve as the narrative focus for the inevitable sequel.

Another series with largely unexplained rules is the Runaways comic series: Niko is a witch, but she needs the Staff of One to cast spells, she needs to be bleeding to access the Staff of One, and she can only cast any given spell once. Those rules are concrete, but pretty much everything else is up in the air. There's no guarantee that the spells will take on the forms she expects them to-I can't think of the exact scenario, but at one point, she accidentally conjures up a flock of geese-very much not what she was hoping for.

I guess that only works if the audience is learning the rules as the characters do. It'd be harder to pull off in a setting like OotS, where magic is prevalent-if it's common, someone would already know the rules. If it's not, then experimentation on the protagonist's part is the only way to learn about the magic.

EDIT: And re: "you only get one deviation from the norm before the audience revolts:" I've heard a variation on that phrased "the audience will believe the impossible, but not the improbable." There is a wizard, and she can fly? Fine. The wizard fails to save her boyfriend from a monster because she can't get there in time? If she can fly, why couldn't she get there in time? I call BS!

Psyren

2013-09-11, 09:54 AM

Of course magic has to have consistent rules. Thing is, those rules don't have to be detailed. You don't need to explain why the character can't teleport, you can just have him say "I wish I could teleport!" or something to that effect, and the only thing you have to watch after that is internal consistency.

You're wrong - because we know that in OotS, not only can spellcasters learn new spells, they can even research custom ones. Teleportation is just too useful to not have a reason why everyone with sufficient power would try and learn it. It would be like a cleric who couldn't heal- you do have to explain it somehow or it leaves a jarring gap.

The rules provide a very plausible reason why V can never learn it, and it only required one line of dialogue to put to bed for the entire strip.

I think the sensible approach to both reading and writing magical stories is "if something is not established as possible, it is not". If no-one teleports in a story, you don't have to explain that there are no teleport powers in it, viewers/readers will just assume there aren't.

Z, Xykon, and even Redcloak teleport, so you need to explain why V and Durkon can't or won't.

Let me give you an example. Imagine that you start reading a webcomic, and first panel features a person magically conjuring a light source to walk safely home from work at midnight. Will your first thought be "Why doesn't he just teleport there if he's a wizard"? Does the author have to establish lack of teleport powers or is it obvious from the fact the wizard is shown walking?

Obviously I wouldn't think that then. But I would think that if his rival wizard teleports around the place to commit evil deeds, and particularly if a wizard established as being weaker (e.g. the Cliffport Taxi Mage in the comic) is capable of it when the protagonist is not.

bguy

2013-09-11, 11:22 AM

Also, your cause in fact is in fact rather dubious. Had V not cast Familicide, the adventuring sextet would still have met Malack, because they still would have had to check on Girard's Gate. Encountering Malack happened before they discovered what had happened to the Draketooths, and at that point, Durkon getting vampirized could have happened in any number of different ways some of which have nothing to do with V. Unless you can establish that by not casting Familicide, Durkon never encounters Malack or piques Malack's interest, I'm afraid you haven't made your case.

Well if V had not cast Familicide, it's possible that the still living Girard Clan would have responded in some manner to the Order setting off Girard's trap in the middle of the desert. (They are bound to take an interest in someone setting off their trap after all.) If they actually contact the Order (even if that contact is hostile) it would prevent the Order from needing to go to Bleedingham to look for them, and thus Durkon would never meet Malack.

Liliet

2013-09-11, 12:03 PM

You're wrong - because we know that in OotS, not only can spellcasters learn new spells, they can even research custom ones. Teleportation is just too useful to not have a reason why everyone with sufficient power would try and learn it. It would be like a cleric who couldn't heal- you do have to explain it somehow or it leaves a jarring gap.
The rules provide a very plausible reason why V can never learn it, and it only required one line of dialogue to put to bed for the entire strip.
1) OotS is based on DnD. Had it been based on a custom system, it may well not have had choosing spells.
2) "I wish my chosen school would allow me to learn to teleport!" - 1 line of dialogue.

Oh, and by the way, in the custom system there is no reason for the cleric to necessarily be able to heal. Not a single one. Seriously.

Z, Xykon, and even Redcloak teleport, so you need to explain why V and Durkon can't or won't.
This explanation takes 1 line of dialogue stating that they can't. Nothing more.

Obviously I wouldn't think that then. But I would think that if his rival wizard teleports around the place to commit evil deeds, and particularly if a wizard established as being weaker (e.g. the Cliffport Taxi Mage in the comic) is capable of it when the protagonist is not.
Let's start with stating the fact that without a leveling system, any "weaker"-ness is relative. Our protagonist may have more powerful combat spells or bigger quantity of them, but lack teleport powers, effectively establishing him as being weaker than his opponent in a situation that requires quick movement.

Then, ok, some other wizard can teleport and our protagonist can't. He is frustrated over it (OBVIOUSLY) and says something like "I wish I had listened at school when we were learning those spells!" or "I wish I had chosen my specialisation wiser!"

Problem solved?