Belkar's Deep-Seated Emotional Problems

[Strindberg]

I would like to stress that I am not psychologist and I would be more than happy to get my ideas corrected by a professional. And there might be spoilers.

Here is the thing, there is a lot of talking about class, proficiencies spells, etc. but not so many people tend to analyse the growth of a particular character. We know what happened to :roy: , :haley: , :xykon: during their childhood so we can easily see what influenced their personality. However we have scarce information about Belkar.

What we know:


he is incapable of love
he was not able to maintain a civil relationship with anything (lust/hate)
he knows the feeling of compassion, mutual understanding but seems to block the out (we can see it while he got his Wisdom increased)
He was chronically and frantically insecure - culminating when he kills a gnome while not being watched by Roy
he doesn't know how a theoretical relationship with a woman would function (the only known to oscillates around misogyny)
he doesn't know how to act around women in general (sexual taunts and harass might be used to over up the insufficiency in this field)


1. My hipothesis is that Belkar lost his mother during his early age and on this basis he did not learn the "know-how" about healthy relationships. Though I would cross out murdering her with his own hands - he seems to cherish the memories of her; he is still using his mother's secret ingredient and seems to enjoy cooking. It might be the reason why she doesn't hug him enough. Being dead might be an interference.

I know that Freud's theory is overrated and nobody is using it anymore so if you wish you can add to this that he his father was too busy to teach him a thing about empathy and emotions.

2. He was definitely picked on during his school years because of his race. He calls humans racist nearly in every interaction. Those who mention his background, LOTR or his vertical incapability do not "live long a prosper". As a bonus: he might have developed a human fetish alongside - we have not seen him with a halfling prostitute, have we? It would fall nicely into the theory "I will defile your women the way you twisted my sense of inner integrity"

3. He was in a toxic/devastating relationship. This also a vague hypothesis but I think that before you give yourself to a carnage and bloodshed, you seek compassion and understanding first. That would also explain the whoring system.

4. He developed complexes. Compared with his companions - everyone got what he wanted - V got ultimate power, Roy his vengeance - twice, Haley love and somebody to confide in and Elan got a chance to find his family. During his sickness Belkar got a lot of time to think what motivated him and how he feels about it; the "sexy shoeless god of war" scene pictured that he has got over them. Also the phrase contains notable remarks what he could be insecure about - is appearances and abilities (fighting). Killing creatures gives him also the security and reaffirms him as warrior.

I enocurage you write the background stories of your own and here is my shortened version:

Belkar's family moved from the hobbit village to a human city to open an inn. His mother was a cook and his father took care for the business. There were plenty of adventurers around and young Belkar was both curious about and intimidate by warriors.

He started his trainings in a guild only to become the laughing stock because of his strength penalty and short melee range. Around this time his mother got killed by either an adventurer or a commoner - it was never resolved. His father with twice as many responsibilities had hardly any time for him.

The murder did not help an inn to become a blooming business so Belky couldn't pay guild fees and was forced to help his dad. Later on he met a girl who was to be a love of his life but dumped/cheated on/manipulated him instead. Belkar grew weary of this and run away into the woods. There he learned how to avoid humans who could be the most dangerous to him by learning their scent and weaknesses.

Around time he got his first ranger level we can read about his adventures in a bonus pdf. When the money ran out he seeked out another job but due to his last incident with police officers and fire brigade he got a reputation of untrustworthy. He became a slaver for a short time and he eventually rolled in into a town where he met Roy.

PS. Humans are for sure Belkar's preferred enemy - he smells them the way predator smells its prey.

PS2. Some of the word juxtapositions are that way because I tried to be sarcastic; some are just mistakes beacuse I an not a native language speaker so please be patient. :wink:

[Grynberg]

What we know:


he is incapable of love
he was not able to maintain a civil relationship with anything (lust/hate)
he knows the feeling of compassion, mutual understanding but seems to block the out (we can see it while he got his Wisdom increased)
He was chronically and frantically insecure - culminating when he kills a gnome while not being watched by Roy
he doesn't know how a theoretical relationship with a woman would function (the only known to oscillates around misogyny)
he doesn't know how to act around women in general (sexual taunts and harass might be used to over up the insufficiency in this field)



He has an animal companion and he just took another animal under his wing. so he can definetly love. Lust/hate is just a theory that V came up with and it should be taken with a bit of salt.

As for the rest, it mostly falls in the category of prolonged puberty. A lot of men suffer with it and in some cases it can last for their entire life. My father decided a few years ago that one woman isn't good enough anymore so I'm seeing a new 'mommy' every few months.

[Paseo H]

As for the rest, it mostly falls in the category of prolonged puberty. A lot of men suffer with it and in some cases it can last for their entire life. My father decided a few years ago that one woman isn't good enough anymore so I'm seeing a new 'mommy' every few months.

Uh... :smallconfused:

On to the actual topic:

As interesting a read as that breakdown is, it could simply be that the entire family is all a bunch of jackasses? Since their last name is Bitterleaf, surely it's no accident.

[Grynberg]

Uh... :smallconfused:

Should have been written in blue, I guess :)

[Trillium]

I like it how sincerity and freedom from conventions and lies are branded as "emotional problems".

Guy is just being himself, without hiding behind paladin code, like Miko.

[Paseo H]

I don't think that's actually the issue, but I will say this:

To a certain extent, lying is necessary for normal human relations to carry on as they do.

Do you know why in fiction and stuff the crazy types get a sizable fanbase? Because they're honest. Or something like that, maybe honest isn't the best word, but it's clear when someone doesn't have the usual sense of mental reservation that normal people do during social interactions.

[BaronOfHell]

Not sure about lying being a requirement. There do exist private stuff each of us don't want to share with most or even anyone, I imagine, but I don't think those qualify as lying.

Haley never told Roy about her father. It could be argued that since it had relevance to their mission in how much Roy could thrust Haley, Haley was lying by withholding important information. I do not however think it reflects typical everyday life relationships and I'm sure there are a lot of private things most of us wouldn't want to know about each other.

[Keltest]

I like it how sincerity and freedom from conventions and lies are branded as "emotional problems".

Guy is just being himself, without hiding behind paladin code, like Miko.

Whether or not he has them, Roy seems to be under that impression (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0014.html).

[Kish]

I like it how sincerity and freedom from conventions and lies are branded as "emotional problems".

Guy is just being himself, without hiding behind paladin code, like Miko.
Because "Other people have the right to exist" is part of the paladin code, which no non-paladin has a reason to believe in.

[BeerMug Paladin]

A lot of things could have happened to Belkar to make him the way he is. Or Belkar could have always just been that way. I don't really consider it that important, the character development in regards to his 'playing along' with society is a lot more interesting than probably any backstory would be.

Because whatever character history Belkar has, it probably won't reveal or do anything really interesting about the plot, about the character, or about future events. If Belkar doesn't care about his past, why should we? Not that it couldn't be interesting, just I won't really begin to speculate on it until that is demonstrated otherwise.

As for Belkar's behavior, he certainly seems to care about animals he thinks are cool. That kind of gives him room for redemption, if he encounters the right kind of situations in the future.

Belkar hangs out with adventurers because it gives him a reason to kill, but there are things and people which he cares about. Elan makes him laugh, he liked Shojo's sense of humor and success in deception, and he likes cats and dinosaurs. Belkar's few redeeming features demonstrated in the present story makes now the most interesting time period for his character so far.

[Snails]

FYI: We will never know more about Belkar's intimate background because the Giant has said so explicitly. He could not figure out how a reasonable explanation of Belkar could be even a tiny bit funny, to mitigate the logically necessary horrifying aspects, without being in bad taste.

[Bulldog Psion]

Not sure about lying being a requirement. There do exist private stuff each of us don't want to share with most or even anyone, I imagine, but I don't think those qualify as lying.

Haley never told Roy about her father. It could be argued that since it had relevance to their mission in how much Roy could thrust Haley, Haley was lying by withholding important information. I do not however think it reflects typical everyday life relationships and I'm sure there are a lot of private things most of us wouldn't want to know about each other.

Sins of omission, I guess you could say.

I've been around someone who didn't feel the need to conceal anything they were thinking or feeling, any opinion, etc. Believe me, after about two minutes, it doesn't come across as honest, liberating, open, or whatever. Instead, it comes across as an infuriating boor whose passive-aggressive obnoxiousness makes you dread even seeing them coming in the distance.

Sins of omission are a good thing, IMO. :smallamused:

[Paseo H]

Sins of omission, I guess you could say.

I've been around someone who didn't feel the need to conceal anything they were thinking or feeling, any opinion, etc. Believe me, after about two minutes, it doesn't come across as honest, liberating, open, or whatever. Instead, it comes across as an infuriating boor whose passive-aggressive obnoxiousness makes you dread even seeing them coming in the distance.

Sins of omission are a good thing, IMO. :smallamused:

It's a double edged sword, of course.

On the one hand, it might be refreshing to find an honest person with less sense of mental reservation than the average person. On the other hand, knowing as I've said about the issue, you know that mental reservation is normal and one has to wonder why a given person might be lacking in it.

It's not that it's only crazy people with the problem, but it's definitely one of the possibilities.

[NerdyKris]

The thing is, there's a difference between open and honest, and being socially unacceptable. For instance, it's one thing to be open about your feelings. It's another thing entirely to go to a funeral and say "I don't care, I'm glad he's dead" to the grieving widow.

The first is being honest. The second is being a jerk and covering it up by saying "I'm just being open about my feelings!". One is refreshing, the other is just incapable either by choice or not, of empathy. A less extreme example would be someone who insists on talking about a topic nobody else enjoys. Exuberance is refreshing, refusing to understand that others don't share your exuberance is not.

[BaronOfHell]

Sins of omission, I guess you could say.


I was thinking about Sins of omission too, btw. I am still not too sure about real life applications, would be nice with some examples, please. :smallsmile:

About people with lack of reservation, trying to generalize, I've seen two types, one type who speaks up whatever they're thinking, another who doesn't let the circumstances hinder them speaking their "important" opinion, no matter how intrusive and unsolicited, believing it makes them "a straight man", not afraid to speak his opinion and being honest.

But that's generalizing a lot.

[Keltest]

I was thinking about Sins of omission too, btw. I am still not too sure about real life applications, would be nice with some examples, please. :smallsmile:

About people with lack of reservation, trying to generalize, I've seen two types, one type who speaks up whatever they're thinking, another who doesn't let the circumstances hinder them speaking their "important" opinion, no matter how intrusive and unsolicited, believing it makes them "a straight man", not afraid to speak his opinion and being honest.

But that's generalizing a lot.

I disagree. I think there is one type: the kind who is willing to speak their mind regardless of what others think.

The ability to recognize when people appreciate being spoken to is something different, and your second type simply lacks this ability. I have met plenty of people who will give honest answers when asked questions, and plenty of people who will make stuff up for the sake of talking.

[Sir_Leorik]

I would like to stress that I am not psychologist and I would be more than happy to get my ideas corrected by a professional. And there might be spoilers.

Here is the thing, there is a lot of talking about class, proficiencies spells, etc. but not so many people tend to analyse the growth of a particular character. We know what happened to :roy: , :haley: , :xykon: during their childhood so we can easily see what influenced their personality. However we have scarce information about Belkar.

Intentionally so. The Giant was afraid that if he gave Belkar a tragic backstory it would either a) undermine the humor of Belkar's sociopathic antics, or b) cause the audience to view Belkar with sympathy. (See the author commentary to OtOoPCs for more info.)


What we know:


he is incapable of love
he was not able to maintain a civil relationship with anything (lust/hate)

The latter is speculation on V's part.



he knows the feeling of compassion, mutual understanding but seems to block the out (we can see it while he got his Wisdom increased)
He was chronically and frantically insecure - culminating when he kills a gnome while not being watched by Roy

He didn't murder Solt Lurkyurg (he had a name, y'know!) because he was chronically and frantically insecure. He did it because he was bored, he smelled chocolate and was tired of dragging Roy's stinking corpse in the cart. Roy would have taken steps to keep Belkar under control; Haley did not.


he doesn't know how a theoretical relationship with a woman would function (the only known to oscillates around misogyny)
he doesn't know how to act around women in general (sexual taunts and harass might be used to over up the insufficiency in this field)


Jenny disagrees with your claims of Belkar's inadequacy. :smallwink:


Long rambling hypothesis snipped.

Around time he got his first ranger level we can read about his adventures in a bonus pdf. When the money ran out he seeked out another job but due to his last incident with police officers and fire brigade he got a reputation of untrustworthy. He became a slaver for a short time and he eventually rolled in into a town where he met Roy.

PS. Humans are for sure Belkar's preferred enemy - he smells them the way predator smells its prey.

PS2. Some of the word juxtapositions are that way because I tried to be sarcastic; some are just mistakes beacuse I an not a native language speaker so please be patient. :wink:

You're overthinking things. Belkar hates Humans. He hates Kobolds. He can't stand certain Halflings. (You know who you are! Yeah, you Ufgood, I'm talking about you!) Although Belkar hates Humans, he still recognizes Human hotties when he sees 'em. Elan makes Belkar laugh. Belkar considers Haley a hottie. He considers Samantha and Jenny hotties. He did not consider Miko, Crystal, or that girl who dissed him in that bonus comic in book three, hotties, smoking or otherwise. He considers Sabine hot enough that he reference dropped her when he insulted Crystal.

And Belkar loves Mr. Scruffy and Bloodfeast the Extreme-inator. Just don't make fun of that fact; Belkar has deep-seated emotional problems and he will forcefeed another man's intestines to you. :smallwink:

[Sir_Leorik]

I like it how sincerity and freedom from conventions and lies are branded as "emotional problems".

Guy is just being himself, without hiding behind paladin code, like Miko.


The thing is, there's a difference between open and honest, and being socially unacceptable. For instance, it's one thing to be open about your feelings. It's another thing entirely to go to a funeral and say "I don't care, I'm glad he's dead" to the grieving widow.

The first is being honest. The second is being a jerk and covering it up by saying "I'm just being open about my feelings!". One is refreshing, the other is just incapable either by choice or not, of empathy. A less extreme example would be someone who insists on talking about a topic nobody else enjoys. Exuberance is refreshing, refusing to understand that others don't share your exuberance is not.

Here's the difference between an honest character, like O-Chul and a jerk like Belkar. O-Chul, for example, got very upset with Haley when she was giving her pep talk to the Azurite archers. In a war even soldiers on the winning side might die. That's a harsh truth, but it's better to know that harsh truth when going into battle. And as harsh as O-Chul's speech may be, it convinces Haley to spend the night with Elan.

Belkar is just an inconsiderate jerk who mouths off just for the sake of mouthing off. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0467.html)

[Astroturtle]

You know, 99% of Belkar's jerkery could have been avoided if someone just slapped a Periapt of Wisdom +4/6 on him.

[sengmeng]

I think Belkar's dialogue in the last panel of this comic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0165.html) tells us basically all we need to know: he's a sociopath raised by sociopaths. His family may have had some positive interactions with him, but he ultimately learned that if he doesn't value someone, then they don't have value. His emotional growth is stunted, but Mr. Scruffy and Bloodfeast the Extreme-inator have jump-started his maturation again.

[Lombard]

FYI: We will never know more about Belkar's intimate background because the Giant has said so explicitly. He could not figure out how a reasonable explanation of Belkar could be even a tiny bit funny, to mitigate the logically necessary horrifying aspects, without being in bad taste.

I think the Giant was selling himself short with that. If his back was to the wallhe could make it funny by simply riffing on tropes/memes/parodies.

For example, a riff on the Conan the Barbarian movie montage featuring the Wheel of Discomfort , a gladiator pit and culminating in some grizzled old warriors asking Belkar to tell them what is best in life. :thog:

[AKA_Bait]

I think the Giant was selling himself short with that. If his back was to the wallhe could make it funny by simply riffing on tropes/memes/parodies.

For example, a riff on the Conan the Barbarian movie montage featuring the Wheel of Discomfort , a gladiator pit and culminating in some grizzled old warriors asking Belkar to tell them what is best in life. :thog:

I think the point the Giant was making in the Origins comment was that he would not include a back story for Belkar because the purpose of the back stories was to help explain the motivations behind the various OotS members and any back story that actually explained Belkar would have to show him as the subject of such abuse that it would run a serious risk of making him look sympathetic and unfunny. While a back story for Belkar that is just a riff on various tropes might be funny by itself, I have trouble seeing how it would help us better understand how Belkar became the little psychopath we meet in comic 1.

[Quartz]

he is incapable of love
he was not able to maintain a civil relationship with anything (lust/hate)
he knows the feeling of compassion, mutual understanding but seems to block the out (we can see it while he got his Wisdom increased)
He was chronically and frantically insecure - culminating when he kills a gnome while not being watched by Roy
he doesn't know how a theoretical relationship with a woman would function (the only known to oscillates around misogyny)
he doesn't know how to act around women in general (sexual taunts and harass might be used to over up the insufficiency in this field)



I don't know about the insecurity angle, but everything else is contradicted within the comic. He has love for Mr Scruffy (remember how he turned on Buggy Lou) and he cares for Bloodfeast. He seduced at least one woman (Jenny?) in the attack on the Thieves' guild, so his relationship with them is just fine. He maintains a civil relationship with the rest of the Order, even V.

BTW I don't get the bit about hating humans. He's got them as a Favoured Enemy, but could that just mean that he's specialised in fighting them?

[Keltest]

I don't know about the insecurity angle, but everything else is contradicted within the comic. He has love for Mr Scruffy (remember how he turned on Buggy Lou) and he cares for Bloodfeast. He seduced at least one woman (Jenny?) in the attack on the Thieves' guild, so his relationship with them is just fine. He maintains a civil relationship with the rest of the Order, even V.

BTW I don't get the bit about hating humans. He's got them as a Favoured Enemy, but could that just mean that he's specialised in fighting them?

Its never explicitly stated what his favored enemies are. The idea that humans are one of them stems from a comment by the Giant saying that he once had a Halfling ranger character who had humans as a favored enemy, but then went on to say that he didn't inspire Belkar, he just happened to be the closest a character of his came to any in the order.

He has however expressed some mild disdain for humans in the past, calling them smelly and using "humans" in a derogatory/dismissive manner (like guys will sometimes go "Women" when they don't understand what a woman is doing)

[Ghost Nappa]

Considering that adventurers only get to bathe for special scenes in prequel books as fanservice every once in a while, a female city dweller who bathes more frequently is probably doubly more attractive. Once for the smell, and twice for being hot. The man's nose knows.

I supposed if she's actually smoking, like part Fire Elemental that could count for something.

[Kish]

BTW I don't get the bit about hating humans. He's got them as a Favoured Enemy, but could that just mean that he's specialised in fighting them?
Keltest addressed the "Belkar's favored enemies are unknown" point, so I'm just going to answer your explicit question: No, a ranger need not hate her/his favored enemy race (or even specialize in fighting them, necessarily; favored enemy rather than something like "studied race" is unfortunately misleading terminology, like the name of the thief class). There's nothing (in 3.5ed) preventing a ranger, including a Good-aligned ranger, from taking her/his own race as a favored enemy. For that matter, racism is officially a Lawful Evil trait in D&D and rangers have no alignment requirements; it's thus logically insupportable to theorize that all rangers are racist.

[Mauve Shirt]

Come on, it's frickin' obvious that Kobolds are his favored enemy.

[Kish]

Come on, it's frickin' obvious that Kobolds are his favored enemy.
You mean "Reptilian humanoids"? 'Cause Kobold was never one of his choices.

Beyond that, there are a lot of people on this board who would fill in "humans" or "halflings" where you have "kobolds" in your sentence, so I'm reasonably sure it is not, in fact, "frickin' obvious" what Belkar's favored enemies (plural) are.

[allenw]

Come on, it's frickin' obvious that Kobolds are his favored enemy.

One of them, very likely. By this point in his career, Belkar should have 3, maybe 4 Favored Enemies. Of course, some of them may be more favored than others.

[Sir_Leorik]

Come on, it's frickin' obvious that Kobolds are his favored enemy.


One of them, very likely. By this point in his career, Belkar should have 3, maybe 4 Favored Enemies. Of course, some of them may be more favored than others.

As Kish pointed out, "Kobolds" aren't a candidate for any Ranger's Favored Enemy. "Humanoids (Reptilian)", are.

[sengmeng]

He seduced at least one woman (Jenny?) in the attack on the Thieves' guild, so his relationship with them is just fine.

There's so much wrong in this that I don't even know where to begin. No. Just no. He found one woman so far who isn't put off by his manners, and she should have been. She's probably a little mentally unwell herself, considering that the kiss that led to their tryst took place amongst the corpses of her friends (in fact, he killed the last one during the kiss). Their brief encounter was so far from a healthy relationship that I doubt either of them knows what one looks like. Having sex with a woman does not mean you understand, like, or think well of them. Sex is not synonymous with love or even like.

[JSSheridan]

One of them, very likely. By this point in his career, Belkar should have 3, maybe 4 Favored Enemies. Of course, some of them may be more favored than others.

Belkar's the kind of PC that would get 'Ambulatory', 'Stationary', 'Animate', and 'Inanimate' as favored enemies.

[Sir_Leorik]

There's so much wrong in this that I don't even know where to begin. No. Just no. He found one woman so far who isn't put off by his manners, and she should have been. She's probably a little mentally unwell herself, considering that the kiss that led to their tryst took place amongst the corpses of her friends (in fact, he killed the last one during the kiss). Their brief encounter was so far from a healthy relationship that I doubt either of them knows what one looks like. Having sex with a woman does not mean you understand, like, or think well of them. Sex is not synonymous with love or even like.

I absolutely agree with you about Belkar's relationship with Jenny was not a healthy one. That being said, she found him attractive enough for them to go "questing" a few times. Belkar almost certainly doesn't like Jenny, he barely knew anything about her, and I doubt he ever bothered to learn her name (despite her telling it to him at least once). But he finds her a hottie, so they "rolled initiative". (It's a shame that Belkar's ranks in the 3.0 Innuendo skill had to be retrained in 3.5. :smallwink:)

As for why Jenny put up with that... she almost certainly has low self-esteem brought on by having a sub-optimal build.

[sengmeng]

I absolutely agree with you about Belkar's relationship with Jenny was not a healthy one. That being said, she found him attractive enough for them to go "questing" a few times. Belkar almost certainly doesn't like Jenny, he barely knew anything about her, and I doubt he ever bothered to learn her name (despite her telling it to him at least once). But he finds her a hottie, so they "rolled initiative". (It's a shame that Belkar's ranks in the 3.0 Innuendo skill had to be retrained in 3.5. :smallwink:)

As for why Jenny put up with that... she almost certainly has low self-esteem brought on by having a sub-optimal build.

I don't want to misinterpret your words here, but it seems like you're presenting his attractiveness as a counterpoint. It isn't. He certainly has it, but being attractive doesn't indicate mental health at all. Lots of damaged people are fascinating because of that damage. Belkar is a great example. He's a "beloved" character without having any loveable qualities, by design.

Being charismatic enough to talk women into bed doesn't even preclude you from being a psychopath.

[Lexible]

I would like to stress that I am not psychologist and I would be more than happy to get my ideas corrected by a professional.

Coincidentally, neither is Belkar's author! :smallsmile:

[Strindberg]

Thank you everybody for your contribution to the sum of East-European knowledge.

I would like to thank especially Sengmeng and Sir_Leorik for their constructive criticism and interesting comments on the topic.

It slipped my mind that Rich commented on Belkar's beginning in the Origin of PCs and I wasn't really aware that I was overthinking this. You are right - Belkar comes from a violent family with a long tradition of physical and psychical harassment. Good point with Solt Lurkyurg - he definietely had a name so he wasn't just a generic gnome - he was someone and it makes the murder even worse.

I know that B was bored and sick and tired of Roy's corpse but why didn't he just taunt the little guy?

And let me clarify some things: maybe Belkar is capable of love but he hasn't really shown it in the comics. He cares about Scruffy and Bloodfeast, it sure makes him a better person but I don't think this qualifies as love. Would you care a relationship between a crazy cat lady and her animals "love".

Last and least- I am aware that Belkar has more than one preferred enemy. Though I am pretty sure that he is a artist when it comes to killing people. He avoids their attack better and hacks through them packing tockens and a radar detector :)

Thanks again!