What's Durkon's soul doing right now?

[Finagle]

What is Durkon's soul up to at the moment? Relaxing in Lawful Good heaven, trapped in the vampire's body somehow, or elsewhere?

[hamishspence]

If you believe Complete Divine, watching helplessly from inside Durkon while Something Else, with access to all his memories, controls his body.

If you believe other sources, possibly the soul is in full control- just "warped" by the transformation the body has undergone.

Older sources hint that the soul is transformed into a completely different blood-drinking evil monster - an incorporeal ghostlike entity called a Crimson Death.

Can't think of any D&D sources that say a vampire's soul goes to the afterlife when the living body is drained to death, and stays there when the vampire rises.

Based on the "character development" mentions, I figure "soul is in full control of body" makes the most sense.

[Shale]

You know, the usual. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0380.html)

[ThePhantasm]

That's one of the funniest strips ever. That parcheesi panel cracks me up every time. Especially Belkar's "what the hell, OK."

[Fitzclowningham]

I'm fairly certain it's in his body, corrupted by vampirism. You can't vamp a corpse; you need a living body-and-soul. I can't imagine why the soul would need to be present at the creation if it was only to shuffle off to the outer planes upon the awakening of the vampire.

Edit: Also, come to think of it, that's also the reason the vamp has to be staked in order to be resurrected; you have to get the soul out of the body first.


(I realize the mechanism of wight, etc., creation is problematic/fatal to this argument.)

[Grey Watcher]

...

Based on the "character development" mentions, I figure "soul is in full control of body" makes the most sense.

I have to concur with this.

Prior to the Durkon debates, I had not encountered the idea that a vampire was anything other than the original soul (albeit warped and corrupted, possibly beyond recognition), so maybe I'm just biased against the idea that Vampire!Durkon is a separate entity that's taken over. Still, from a Doylist perspective, it just doesn't seem to make any sense for Burlew to explicitly note (such as in the book commentaries) that Durkon lacks character development only to kill him off and swap him out for an entirely new character (who happens to look like a recolored Durkon).

[BaronOfHell]

If the soul is warped, it's changed, it's not the same soul, it's not Durkon..

I'd rather like to think that his decision processes has been altered by his new body.

[JeenLeen]

From what Malack said when Durkon spoke of resurrecting him, the resurrected being is the person-before-vampirism, even not having the memories of the intervening years. (At least, that's what I understood Malack to mean.)

If that's the case, I would think the soul is elsewhere, likely some LG or dwarf afterlife. The soul is still linked to the body and/or Resurrection requires part of the body, so you can't cast Resurrection until the vampire is destroyed. (I recall Rich doesn't like True Resurrection, but in straight D&D it should work even if the body is still a vampire.)

Of course, there doesn't have to be a direct connection between memories and soul, so my argument could be void.

[hamishspence]

The soul is still linked to the body and/or Resurrection requires part of the body, so you can't cast Resurrection until the vampire is destroyed. (I recall Rich doesn't like True Resurrection, but in straight D&D it should work even if the body is still a vampire.)


Even the TR spell says "turned into an undead creature and then destroyed"

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

[Clistenes]

I'm fairly certain it's in his body, corrupted by vampirism. You can't vamp a corpse; you need a living body-and-soul. I can't imagine why the soul would need to be present at the creation if it was only to shuffle off to the outer planes upon the awakening of the vampire.

Edit: Also, come to think of it, that's also the reason the vamp has to be staked in order to be resurrected; you have to get the soul out of the body first.


(I realize the mechanism of wight, etc., creation is problematic/fatal to this argument.)

Actually, in the older myths the stake was supposed to keep the vampire nailed to its tomb/coffin so it couldn't get out, not to kill it. They expected the vampire to eventually starve and rot. The italians used to stuff a brick into their mouth so they couldn't bite anybody, and other people cut their feet so they couldn't walk. Other people just tied them with rope.

[Grey Watcher]

If the soul is warped, it's changed, it's not the same soul, it's not Durkon..

I'd rather like to think that his decision processes has been altered by his new body.

Well, I think of it like this: I've undergone a lot of changes since I was 5 (I'm 31, for reference), but I still think of myself as the same person. Even if someone who last saw me at 5 would have great difficulty recognizing me, that doesn't change that there's a... continuity that exists between that child and this adult that we accept that they're the "same person".

I figure souls might work the same way. It's still Durkon's soul, in that it's whatever he was born with and has been a part of him through his entire life, it's just undergone a major change recently. (I suppose to make the analogy to my physical self then vs. now, vampirism might be the equivalent of some major injury? An amputation or a transplant? A life-altering illness?)

Disclaimer, I mean to draw no equivalency between any of these things and vampirism, except that they result in major changes in the subject's life.


From what Malack said when Durkon spoke of resurrecting him, the resurrected being is the person-before-vampirism, even not having the memories of the intervening years. (At least, that's what I understood Malack to mean.)

If that's the case, I would think the soul is elsewhere, likely some LG or dwarf afterlife. The soul is still linked to the body and/or Resurrection requires part of the body, so you can't cast Resurrection until the vampire is destroyed. (I recall Rich doesn't like True Resurrection, but in straight D&D it should work even if the body is still a vampire.)

Of course, there doesn't have to be a direct connection between memories and soul, so my argument could be void.

I understood Malack's comment slightly differently. Malack has lived (for lack of a better term) so long as a vampire, for several times longer than he was a living lizardfolk, that it's just become a fundamental part of who he is. As disruptive as being changed into a vampire has been for Durkon, it would be equally disruptive for Malack to change back.

Yes, he can go out and try to find someone to re-vampirize him, but if finding a Cleric who is both willing and able to cast Raise Dead or Resurrection is difficult, I can only imagine how hard it would be to find a vampire, who is no doubt making an effort to stay hidden due to vampire hunters, who would be willing to just vampirize someone who came up and asked. And even then he's probably going to have to be a thrall for quite a long while, surrendering his autonomy for goodness knows how long before he can finally get back to where he started.

Anyway, that's my take on why I think the soul running Durkon's vampirized body is Durkon's vampirized soul. Even though it would certainly be a happier thought to imagine Durkon kicking back and having a drinking contest with Thor. :smallfrown:

[Domino Quartz]

From what Malack said when Durkon spoke of resurrecting him, the resurrected being is the person-before-vampirism, even not having the memories of the intervening years. (At least, that's what I understood Malack to mean.)

If that's the case, I would think the soul is elsewhere, likely some LG or dwarf afterlife. The soul is still linked to the body and/or Resurrection requires part of the body, so you can't cast Resurrection until the vampire is destroyed. (I recall Rich doesn't like True Resurrection, but in straight D&D it should work even if the body is still a vampire.)

Of course, there doesn't have to be a direct connection between memories and soul, so my argument could be void.

Also, keep in mind that just because a character said something, that doesn't necessarily make it so. How could Malack possibly know that, anyway?

[zero]

That is a very controversial question, but common in D&D. It comes often in discussion on how the True Ressurection spell works with undead.

AFAIK, the most accepted view (and one I tend to favor) is that there are two classes of undead, sentient and non-sentient.

For non-sentient undeads, like skeletons and zombies, the soul of the former person goes to its afterlife as usual. That means that the True Ressurection spell would work even if the body was raised as a skeleton.

For sentient undeads, the soul is somehow warped and trapped in the creature. In this case, True Ressurection would not work*.

Of course, given the plethora of undeads in D&D, it's often tricky to say which are sentient and which are not. A good rule of thumb seems to be: If it has non-zero Int, its sentient.

As vampires have a non-zero Int score, Durkon's soul is still there.

Again, nothing above is from RAW. You're free to choose your own interpretation.

* Yes, I'm aware that this almost contradicts the wording on the True Resurrection spell description.

[Ridureyu]

Well, I think of it like this: I've undergone a lot of changes since I was 5 (I'm 31, for reference), but I still think of myself as the same person.

No you're not! You are a hideous evil spirit possessing your old body, and must be killed if there is any good to be done in this world!

[SaintRidley]

If the soul is warped, it's changed, it's not the same soul, it's not Durkon..

I'd rather like to think that his decision processes has been altered by his new body.

Just like if you break your finger, it's changed, it's not the same finger, you're not BaronOfHell anymore...

Yeah, no.

Durkon's soul is hanging out in his body, drinking blood and playing Parcheesi like it wants to do.

[JBiddles]

People develop based on their thoughts and experiences. Consciousness is a continuum, but one that makes sense and is cohesive barring things like certain specific brain injuries, which can effectively replace the original person.

Living Durkon wouldn't gleefully snap a helpless enemy's neck. He might do it out of necessity (but I highly doubt it), but not with a grin on his face, and not whilst taunting his friend about it. Living Durkon wouldn't be "right as Thor's rain" about becoming a vampire. It may be that that Durkula still is Durkon - consumed by urges to kill that he can't control, stiff-upper-lipping his way through the duress of becoming what he truly detests - and I very much hope that this is the case, because it would provide an opportunity for true character development for Durkon rather than Quickened Character Derailment.

If not, though - if Durkula really coldly decided that he was perfectly fine with murdering Zz'dtri and being a vampire, then the entity that currently lives in Durkon's body isn't Durkon Thundershield, no matter how much Roy might try to persuade himself that it is. If this is the case, Durkon is dead, and may be in the afterlife, watching helplessly from within, or - more chillingly - gone until Durkula dies.

[BaronOfHell]

Just like...

Yeah, no.


Finger and soul have different meaning. The way I understand it, soul and "you from ones own perspective" have the same meaning. No soul, no you.


Well, I think of it like this: I've undergone a lot of changes since I was 5 (I'm 31, for reference), but I still think of myself as the same person. Even if someone who last saw me at 5 would have great difficulty recognizing me, that doesn't change that there's a... continuity that exists between that child and this adult that we accept that they're the "same person".

I figure souls might work the same way. It's still Durkon's soul, in that it's whatever he was born with and has been a part of him through his entire life, it's just undergone a major change recently. (I suppose to make the analogy to my physical self then vs. now, vampirism might be the equivalent of some major injury? An amputation or a transplant? A life-altering illness?)

Disclaimer, I mean to draw no equivalency between any of these things and vampirism, except that they result in major changes in the subject's life.

I figure it's really my fault for misunderstanding how the soul works in OotS.
I saw Roy in Heaven and imagined it meant his soul was the embodiment that defined the true Roy. That is, there's Roy's body and there's Roy's soul, together they're Roy in the mortal realm, separated, and Roy is his soul, not his body, which is then an empty vessel.

But Roy still had his mental processes in Heaven, and I'd like to think that even those who're, for whatever reason, incapable of thought, still is a uniquely defined, existing entity.
Hence I imagine in OotS the "you" and the mental processes are linked in the total form which is the soul, whereby your interpretation of the warped soul is probably more correct, whereas I used an idea of a soul which doesn't match in-comic evidence, but was more based on a personal belief of what the word "soul" is supposed to mean.



Consciousness is a continuum, but one that makes sense and is cohesive barring things like certain specific brain injuries, which can effectively replace the original person.

From the perspective of not oneself.

[Rosstin]

Basically... no good can come of this.

[Forikroder]

People develop based on their thoughts and experiences. Consciousness is a continuum, but one that makes sense and is cohesive barring things like certain specific brain injuries, which can effectively replace the original person.

Living Durkon wouldn't gleefully snap a helpless enemy's neck. He might do it out of necessity (but I highly doubt it), but not with a grin on his face, and not whilst taunting his friend about it. Living Durkon wouldn't be "right as Thor's rain" about becoming a vampire. It may be that that Durkula still is Durkon - consumed by urges to kill that he can't control, stiff-upper-lipping his way through the duress of becoming what he truly detests - and I very much hope that this is the case, because it would provide an opportunity for true character development for Durkon rather than Quickened Character Derailment.

If not, though - if Durkula really coldly decided that he was perfectly fine with murdering Zz'dtri and being a vampire, then the entity that currently lives in Durkon's body isn't Durkon Thundershield, no matter how much Roy might try to persuade himself that it is. If this is the case, Durkon is dead, and may be in the afterlife, watching helplessly from within, or - more chillingly - gone until Durkula dies.

he IS Durkon Thundershield, he just had a massive life changing experience that resulted in looser morals and less senseless racism

[veti]

I saw Roy in Heaven and imagined it meant his soul was the embodiment that defined the true Roy. That is, there's Roy's body and there's Roy's soul, together they're Roy in the mortal realm, separated, and Roy is his soul, not his body, which is then an empty vessel.

As a thought experiment, then - how do you imagine the scenes in Celestia (including the pending area) might have played out, if instead of dying as he did, Roy had been drained by a vampire and was 3 days from rising as one himself?

What do you think happened to Durkon's soul, in the brief time he was dead?

[hamishspence]

I'd probably go with

"when killed by a Spawning Undead that uses its Spawn ability - the soul is trapped in the corpse for those 3 days."

[BaronOfHell]

As a thought experiment, then - how do you imagine the scenes in Celestia (including the pending area) might have played out, if instead of dying as he did, Roy had been drained by a vampire and was 3 days from rising as one himself?

What do you think happened to Durkon's soul, in the brief time he was dead?

I can only guess, and can say for sure I don't know. So I image that because the way Durkon died, he was certain to spawn as a vampire spawn (eventually), hence the soul may never have separated from the body. Maybe trapped in a corpse until it rises? There's probably other possible explanations as well.

I really look forward to see Durkon's take on having been a vampire once he's resurrected.. if he gets resurrected, which I sure hope he does.

Edit: So yeah.., what hamishspence said.

[Snails]

he IS Durkon Thundershield, he just had a massive life changing experience that resulted in looser morals and less senseless racism

I suppose his anti-silvanism is now sensible?

[Forikroder]

I can only guess, and can say for sure I don't know. So I image that because the way Durkon died, he was certain to spawn as a vampire spawn (eventually), hence the soul may never have separated from the body. Maybe trapped in a corpse until it rises? There's probably other possible explanations as well.

I really look forward to see Durkon's take on having been a vampire once he's resurrected.. if he gets resurrected, which I sure hope he does.

Edit: So yeah.., what hamishspence said.

ill be surprised if he is, the odds fo them managing to find a way to rez him before all this is over is slim, and the odds of him accepting after this is over is even more slim

[Vinyadan]

What is Durkon's soul up to at the moment? Relaxing in Lawful Good heaven, trapped in the vampire's body somehow, or elsewhere?

Wherever he is, if he isn't the one controlling his body, he's likely swearing all the way towards Roy&Co.

[BaronOfHell]

But how do you know how close they're to the climax of all climaxes in this story of one climax after another?

There's the last gate in the on going gate plot, but there's also the whole other world inside the rift deal which I think may complicate things beyond what before seemed like an obvious railroad plot. Also there's Xykon's Fortress, but that's less likely to be significant, I think.

[hamishspence]

Wherever he is, if he isn't the one controlling his body, he's likely swearing all the way towards Roy&Co.

Why? He probably knows how rare clerics who can cast Resurrection or True Resurrection are- and he knows that the Order are short of time, too- Xykon's already heading for the last gate.

[Forikroder]

Wherever he is, if he isn't the one controlling his body, he's likely swearing all the way towards Roy&Co.

oh sure he jsut so happened to be possesed by a vampire with a dwarven accent who worships Thor

But how do you know how close they're to the climax of all climaxes in this story of one climax after another?


There's the last gate in the on going gate plot, but there's also the whole other world inside the rift deal which I think may complicate things beyond what before seemed like an obvious railroad plot. Also there's Xykon's Fortress, but that's less likely to be significant, I think.

it doesnt matter how close, its how urgent

there not stopping till Kraagors gate, and after Kraagors gate there not going to drag there feet probably jump right into Riftworld

so unless they meet a cleric in Kraagars dungeon or riftworld theres no chance of him getting ressurected

[BaronOfHell]

I agree with the importance of urgency. I'm, however, as of yet not convinced if jumping into the rift world (if that's how it plays out), will be urgent.

[Forikroder]

I agree with the importance of urgency. I'm, however, as of yet not convinced if jumping into the rift world (if that's how it plays out), will be urgent.

i cant understand why theyd jump into the rift if it wasnt extremely urgent

[happyman]

i cant understand why theyd jump into the rift if it wasnt extremely urgent

I'd say given recent history near a rift, that's pretty well certain.

As well it should be. Until we actually know what's up with the rifts, I'd make any other non-suicidal choice before that.

[Koo Rehtorb]

It's trapped in vampire Durkon's body, writhing in agony as its divine essence is used to fuel the unholy abomination that is undeath.

[CaDzilla]

In Start of DarknessXykon trapped Lirian's soul and was still able to make a zombie. Complete divine's rules don't apply

[hamishspence]

It's specifically "spawning undead" that Complete Divine mentions- zombies don't produce more zombies by spawning, in D&D.

[Vinyadan]

Why? He probably knows how rare clerics who can cast Resurrection or True Resurrection are- and he knows that the Order are short of time, too- Xykon's already heading for the last gate.

Because, after what happened with Malak, he may have some doubt about the reliability of vampires. He could simply hate the entity governing his body, and not see it as likely that the undead will willingly fight against the epic lich necromancer and an evil cleric of unknown but probably impressive power. There also is the chance that his soul is fueling the undead its power through unthinkable suffering (although I never read about this in sourcebooks, there was some theory of this sort I read on the Net, so yea, not too probable).


oh sure he jsut so happened to be possesed by a vampire with a dwarven accent who worships Thor

Notice the "if". Besides, the accent seems to disappear under stress (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0931.html), which is the opposite of how accents work, and the devotion to Thor has not been shown, but just the recognizing his existence, which is kind of a moot point, or even only the admittance of his nominal relationship to rain in a certain cultural environment. Or maybe the little monster sometimes tries to play the part.
But, as I said, "if".

[CaDzilla]

It's specifically "spawning undead" that Complete Divine mentions- zombies don't produce more zombies by spawning, in D&D.

They could just be referring to vampire spawn.

[Soporific]

The text for magic jar states that only sentient undead creatures have, or are, souls. That is not the same as saying that every sentient undead creature has or is a soul but I think it is safe to assume that, since there is nothing particular unusual about the creation of a vampire, a vampire does have a soul. I have never read anything about a new soul being made for an undead creature so I assume that the soul would be the original creature's soul.

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

[Keltest]

Notice the "if". Besides, the accent seems to disappear under stress (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0931.html), which is the opposite of how accents work, and the devotion to Thor has not been shown, but just the recognizing his existence, which is kind of a moot point, or even only the admittance of his nominal relationship to rain in a certain cultural environment. Or maybe the little monster sometimes tries to play the part.
But, as I said, "if".

Out of curiosity, how exactly do you think a Scottish accent would be phonetically spelled in that specific case? The only thing I can think of that would be spelled differently would maybe be the My, which is what he normally says instead of "Mah" or something like that.

[Vinyadan]

Out of curiosity, how exactly do you think a Scottish accent would be phonetically spelled in that specific case? The only thing I can think of that would be spelled differently would maybe be the My, which is what he normally says instead of "Mah" or something like that.

Yes, it was the "my" which I found spelled wrong. I actually don't know anything about Scottish accents, but I can see that the last strip has it spelled "me", I suppose with a short e (or it starts sounding like "I'll tell me ma"). I think the Giant also spelled it like "mah" or "ma'", but I am really not sure. The epistle (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0305.html)also has "me". Interestingly, the answer (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0375.html)is written in standard English. If I were to take things seriously, I would think of Dwarven evolving as a detached form of English, with its own writing style following its pronunciation (it is like that for many dialects); the dialect area would then come into contact with standard English and a double standard would develop, with writing and voice separated from each other (I think Andalusian has such a situation, where people writ in Castillian but actually pronounce words following their own regional norms). Durkon wouldn't be very accustomed to reading text written in standard form and would attempt to reproduce his dialectal forms, while his boss would have a wider written culture and would answer in the now culturally dominant form.

Anyway, if you talk about real phonetic spelling, there is this (I found it here (http://www.scots-online.org/dictionary/search_english.asp)): [mɑe, DD. mɛ]
also ma [ma, mə]

I would like to learn more about dialects in Great Britain, but there are already too many in my country.

One thing I forgot: it is possible that the Giant used the standard spelling because he found that the dwarven one would have sounded too comical in this situation, as dialects are often supposed to be the culturally low language and somewhat grotesque when used in a very serious context (but I am not sure about this in the Anglophone world).

[oonker]

Notice the "if". Besides, the accent seems to disappear under stress (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0931.html), which is the opposite of how accents work, and the devotion to Thor has not been shown, but just the recognizing his existence, which is kind of a moot point, or even only the admittance of his nominal relationship to rain in a certain cultural environment. Or maybe the little monster sometimes tries to play the part.
But, as I said, "if".

He is not only recognizing the existence of Thor. He is saying he feels as right as Thor's rain. He is stating that what is right in the world is Thor's rain. He could've gone "as right as Hel's smell", or "as right as the taste of a dwarven ale", he could've made any comparison, but he did it with Thor's rain. In my book, that spells a little more than simply acknowledging the existence :)

[Keltest]

Yes, it was the "my" which I found spelled wrong. I actually don't know anything about Scottish accents, but I can see that the last strip has it spelled "me", I suppose with a short e (or it starts sounding like "I'll tell me ma"). I think the Giant also spelled it like "mah" or "ma'", but I am really not sure. The epistle (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0305.html)also has "me". Interestingly, the answer (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0375.html)is written in standard English. If I were to take things seriously, I would think of Dwarven evolving as a detached form of English, with its own writing style following its pronunciation (it is like that for many dialects); the dialect area would then come into contact with standard English and a double standard would develop, with writing and voice separated from each other (I think Andalusian has such a situation, where people writ in Castillian but actually pronounce words following their own regional norms). Durkon wouldn't be very accustomed to reading text written in standard form and would attempt to reproduce his dialectal forms, while his boss would have a wider written culture and would answer in the now culturally dominant form.

Anyway, if you talk about real phonetic spelling, there is this (I found it here (http://www.scots-online.org/dictionary/search_english.asp)): [mɑe, DD. mɛ]
also ma [ma, mə]

I would like to learn more about dialects in Great Britain, but there are already too many in my country.

One thing I forgot: it is possible that the Giant used the standard spelling because he found that the dwarven one would have sounded too comical in this situation, as dialects are often supposed to be the culturally low language and somewhat grotesque when used in a very serious context (but I am not sure about this in the Anglophone world).

The giant has used My in the past, and may have used me as well (im not going to go looking for every personal possessive). But its entirely possible to say My with a Scottish accent, although it does sound a bit like Mah.

[Ghost Nappa]

What is Durkon's soul up to at the moment? Relaxing in Lawful Good heaven, trapped in the vampire's body somehow, or elsewhere?

Do you know that scene in the finale for Season 2 where the villain tries to use spirit water bending to corrupt Korra's soul and you see him almost succeed until Jinora arrives? I feel like Vampirization is a similar concept. It's like "Dark Durkon." It's like Peter Parker bonded to the Venom symbiote. It's like Shadow Link.

[CaDzilla]

Maybe he's just regular Durkon and this form just gives him the power to act out his urges. A good way to get a good person to do something horrible is to convince them that they're not responsible for their actions. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0640.html)

[Forikroder]

Maybe he's just regular Durkon and this form just gives him the power to act out his urges. A good way to get a good person to do something horrible is to convince them that they're not responsible for their actions. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0640.html)

or maybe he just decided that limiting his actions to whats expected of him from dwarven society is wrong and were seeing how Durkon has always wanted to act

[BaronOfHell]

were seeing how Durkon has always wanted to act

I gotta admit I've never been keen of the idea of there's "something they always wanted if not for X holding them back".

Durkon may indeed have had conflicting wants, but he didn't seem like a conflicted person, so I think he was comfortable in how he'd prioritized. That his prioritizes may have changed, does not mean this is what he always wanted, but it can indicate it has been something he also wanted, but didn't prioritize as highly.

[Forikroder]

I gotta admit I've never been keen of the idea of there's "something they always wanted if not for X holding them back".

Durkon may indeed have had conflicting wants, but he didn't seem like a conflicted person, so I think he was comfortable in how he'd prioritized. That his prioritizes may have changed, does not mean this is what he always wanted, but it can indicate it has been something he also wanted, but didn't prioritize as highly.

tell that to the lonely tear of sadness http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0084.html

im not saying that hes always wanted to be evil, but dwarven duty has held him back from true happiness

[jere7my]

He is not only recognizing the existence of Thor. He is saying he feels as right as Thor's rain. He is stating that what is right in the world is Thor's rain. He could've gone "as right as Hel's smell", or "as right as the taste of a dwarven ale", he could've made any comparison, but he did it with Thor's rain. In my book, that spells a little more than simply acknowledging the existence :)

Yes, an undead abomination engaged in manipulating its former friends to get to the homeland it was banished from would never fib....

[Forikroder]

Yes, an undead abomination engaged in manipulating its former friends to get to the homeland it was banished from would never fib....

what reason does he have to even want to go back there? to get revenge because they sent him on a mission? why walk into the middle of undead hating society just because hes angry about his assignment?

[jere7my]

what reason does he have to even want to go back there? to get revenge because they sent him on a mission? why walk into the middle of undead hating society just because hes angry about his assignment?

What's prevented Durkon from returning to his homeland for all these years? His senses of honor and duty. If he is indeed an undead abomination who has decided to let his long-suppressed resentment at being sent away bubble over into outright revenge, honor and duty aren't going to be in play for him.

I'm not saying that is what's going on—Durkon could be just what he seems to be, a helpful pal with new superpowers—but I can't think of anything that would happen differently if he's posing as old-Durkon to get the Order to fly him home. We the audience desperately want Durkon to be right as Thor's rain, so this would be a great rug to pull out from under us if Rich wants to go that way.

[Silva Stormrage]

Yes, an undead abomination engaged in manipulating its former friends to get to the homeland it was banished from would never fib....

There is no evidence that he is doing any sort of manipulation what so ever. The much more likely perspective, regardless if Durkula is the original soul or not (I think that it is just warped by vampirisim), is that the evil soul control Durkula currently realized that he wouldn't be around much longer if Xykon succeeded with his plans for the gates.

There is no reason to think that an person would suddenly betray all of his friends immediately upon being evil.

Hell the spell morality undone which should be similar to vampirism to a degree (In respects to the turning evil part) even mentions that evil characters won't instantly turn on their allies.

[Forikroder]

What's prevented Durkon from returning to his homeland for all these years? His senses of honor and duty. If he is indeed an undead abomination who has decided to let his long-suppressed resentment at being sent away bubble over into outright revenge, honor and duty aren't going to be in play for him.

I'm not saying that is what's going on—Durkon could be just what he seems to be, a helpful pal with new superpowers—but I can't think of anything that would happen differently if he's posing as old-Durkon to get the Order to fly him home. We the audience desperately want Durkon to be right as Thor's rain, so this would be a great rug to pull out from under us if Rich wants to go that way.

he has no home now, he cant go live in dwarven lands they hate the undead so the only reason would be for revenge, but hes not even aware that the head priest banished him as far as he knows it was a legit mission

besides if he does plan to do anything to the dwarven lands it would be AFTER the world is safe

[jere7my]

There is no evidence that he is doing any sort of manipulation what so ever.

Sure there is. His accent slips when he gets emotional, and he finessed the question of how Zz'd'tri died. It's certainly not conclusive, but if Rich wants to surprise us then conclusive evidence would be a pretty terrible thing to give us. This is just enough to look back at and say, "Oh, damn, something was wrong all along."

[Forikroder]

Sure there is. His accent slips when he gets emotional, and he finessed the question of how Zz'd'tri died. It's certainly not conclusive, but if Rich wants to surprise us then conclusive evidence would be a pretty terrible thing to give us. This is just enough to look back at and say, "Oh, damn, something was wrong all along."

there wasnt a slip he jsut said "my" dont take it like its the end of the world, how does even shout out MA anyway if you yell it it counts out as my

and everyone in the party knew he killed Z that he didnt do a play by play means nothing

[jere7my]

there wasnt a slip he jsut said "my" dont take it like its the end of the world, how does even shout out MA anyway if you yell it it counts out as my

and everyone in the party knew he killed Z that he didnt do a play by play means nothing

We're just theorizing here; there are plenty of ways for the story to go. The fact that he didn't mention that Zz'd'tri was helpless at the time strikes me as significant, particularly since it was particularly out of character for old-Durkon. And an accent slip could be nothing, or it could be evidence. We just don't know.

[Forikroder]

We're just theorizing here; there are plenty of ways for the story to go. The fact that he didn't mention that Zz'd'tri was helpless at the time strikes me as significant, particularly since it was particularly out of character for old-Durkon. And an accent slip could be nothing, or it could be evidence. We just don't know.

your right it makes much mroe sense for him to go "and i snapped Zs kneck while he was unconcious" that explanation TOTALLY fit the scene that much more

unless Roy recently made out with a mind flayer he already knows capture was possible, all Durkon had was a staff and no spells so its pretty obvious Durkon didnt take him to -10 in one hit

[oppyu]

your right it makes much mroe sense for him to go "and i snapped Zs kneck while he was unconcious" that explanation TOTALLY fit the scene that much more

unless Roy recently made out with a mind flayer he already knows capture was possible, all Durkon had was a staff and no spells so its pretty obvious Durkon didnt take him to -10 in one hit
Actually, Roy seems to be trying very hard not to look too closely into not-Durkon's actions right now. Personally, I don't think he'd want to consider the ramifications of not-Durkon killing in a situation where Durkon may have simply left his opponent in negatives without the coup de grace. Maybe later it'll all click and he'll be concerned, but right now he just wants to relax, open a vein for his Durkon-shaped vampire cleric and put his feet up.

[Forikroder]

Actually, Roy seems to be trying very hard not to look too closely into not-Durkon's actions right now. Personally, I don't think he'd want to consider the ramifications of not-Durkon killing in a situation where Durkon may have simply left his opponent in negatives without the coup de grace. Maybe later it'll all click and he'll be concerned, but right now he just wants to relax, open a vein for his Durkon-shaped vampire cleric and put his feet up.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0908.html

hes already accepted hes as evil as Belkar, and Belkar would have gone alot farher then just snapping Zs kneck

[oppyu]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0908.html

hes already accepted hes as evil as Belkar, and Belkar would have gone alot farher then just snapping Zs kneck
Yes, but there's a difference between academically acknowledging something, and having the willpower to really engage with the issue. Roy knows that not-Durkon is Evil, but as long as he says the right things and doesn't bite anyone in front of him, Roy's happy to put his head in the sand, so to speak, and assume that Durkon is the cuddly non-murdery type of Lawful Evil vampire.

[Seward]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0908.html

hes already accepted hes as evil as Belkar, and Belkar would have gone alot farher then just snapping Zs kneck

Skull-hat-with-pointy-ears

[Forikroder]

Yes, but there's a difference between academically acknowledging something, and having the willpower to really engage with the issue. Roy knows that not-Durkon is Evil, but as long as he says the right things and doesn't bite anyone in front of him, Roy's happy to put his head in the sand, so to speak, and assume that Durkon is the cuddly non-murdery type of Lawful Evil vampire.

he already knows Durkon is not a cuddly non-murder type, hes just taking a gamble (with odds heavily in his favour) that hes not a complete idiot whos in for senseless killing

basically hes relying on Durkon being another Belkar, someone whos evil but can still be manipulated to help with the quest without causing severe problems

[Aron Times]

In D&D 4e, there are three major types of undead:

1. Mindless - Automatons powered by negative energy, e.g. zombies, skeletons.

2. Soulless - Undead which retain their anima but not their souls. They have a limited ability to think for themselves, and are wholly consumed by their unnatural drives, e.g. wraiths, specters, ghouls, ghasts, etc.

3. Intelligent - Undead which retain both their anima and their soul. They are basically the same person as their living selves, and they are capable of thinking and reasoning, e.g. vampires, liches, wights.

Note that the difference between the soulless ghoul and the intelligent vampire is that the ghoul generally cannot resist its urge to feed and to create more of its kind, while a vampire can choose which vessels to feed from and which to turn.

Durkon is pretty much an intelligent undead, as he can think for himself, and he doesn't immediately drain the nearest vessel to sate his bloodthirst. If this were the World of Darkness (new or old), Durkon would be a high Humanity (Dwarfity?) vampire. He's recently turned, and probably still thinks like a living dwarf except for the need to stay out of the sun and to drink blood.

[Bulldog Psion]

"It's ten o'clock. Do you know where your soul is?"

[Cel'Daren]

In my personal opinion, Durkon's soul is currently looking down on the world much in the same manner that Roy himself was, perhaps standing right next to Eugene Greenhilt (They are both Northerners, right?, and so would be processed on the same side of the Mountain).

Why I think that vampire is not controlled by Durkon's soul:

Firstly, The undead are in-comic accepted as the anti-thesis of life (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0700.html) They're completely opposite of each other. Life comes from Positive Energy, undeath from negative energy. Undead are by and large thoroughly hated by the majority of the world, and even a couple deities. Specifically, Durkon has been shown to be an avid Creature-typist with a great hatred of all undead. If there was anything left of Durkon's soul in that vamp there would be some kind of internal conflict going on right now. A great deal of self-loathing, horror, and hysteria would be present. That doesn't seem to be present anywhere we've seen the vampire up and moving about. Not in dealing with the OotS, not during the unprovoked and brutal murder of Z,Of course this could be stamped down by the ever duty-minded Durkon, but somehow the unprovoked and brutal murder of Z, or anywhere else as far as I can see.

Not to mention it's been mentioned multiple times in-comic that Vampires are not their former selves. Malack stated that resurrecting him was a complicated way of destroying who he was then. He would be the most reliable source to listen to, being an experienced vampire and all. If not Malack, how about Redcloak and his speech on how all undead are just bits of skin and bone and dark energy glued together into the shape of a man. Both Roy and Belkar also agree that the Vampire is not the real Durkon, albeit Roy believes it is just close enough to finish saving the world with.

Also, It's apparently really really hard for a soul to switch what type of energy powers them. That entire process to becoming a Lich? The one that often costs an entire kingdom's treasury in research materials and components, and which is supposed to be personal to the Mage performing the ritual? Yeah, that's what it takes to adapt a living soul to using negative energy. Not only is it difficult, it's a process that has to be done willingly, right? Doesn't seem like something some constitution drain by a Vampire should be able to replicate.

So yeah, to me, that Vampire is not Durkon.

[Domino Quartz]

Not to mention it's been mentioned multiple times in-comic that Vampires are not their former selves. Malack stated that resurrecting him was a complicated way of destroying who he was then. He would be the most reliable source to listen to, being an experienced vampire and all.

How does that prove anything? How does Malack know? Has he been staked and resurrected before? Has one of his vampiric offspring had that done to them? Just because a character in the comic says something, it doesn't necessarily make it so.


If not Malack, how about Redcloak and his speech on how all undead are just bits of skin and bone and dark energy glued together into the shape of a man. Both Roy and Belkar also agree that the Vampire is not the real Durkon, albeit Roy believes it is just close enough to finish saving the world with.

There is a very strong possibility that Redcloak is deluding himself there.
Also, I would hardly call Belkar and Roy experts on the undead. Killing them, yes. Knowing exactly what they are and how they work, no.

[TeflonSam1]

Durkon's soul is currently encased in the shell of a nonliving corpse and is being intoxicated with Negative Energy, with the result of making decisions and taking actions consistent with a Lawful Evil philosophical outlook.

When the contaminated vampire body is destroyed, Durkon's soul will wake up in the afterlife, probably groggy and confused, and try to figure out "what happened last night?" like those guys from The Hangover.

It's like Malack gave him an evil roofie.

[Finagle]

Durkon's soul is currently encased in the shell of a nonliving corpse and is being intoxicated with Negative Energy, with the result of making decisions and taking actions consistent with a Lawful Evil philosophical outlook.

When the contaminated vampire body is destroyed, Durkon's soul will wake up in the afterlife, probably groggy and confused, and try to figure out "what happened last night?" like those guys from The Hangover.

It's like Malack gave him an evil roofie.

That's the answer I was looking for. Thanks!

[oonker]

What is to be evil?

Durkon may not be the same person. This matter simply doesn't matter to my assumption. In my opinion, whatever that vampire is, it has all the memories and behaves EXACTLY like Durkon. It won't hurt the Order, it won't betray its friends, it won't think less of honour and duty, it won't hate its own Dwarven ancestry.

That Vampire is the exact same thing as Durkon, except for the coloring and the approach to actions. And that is why I make the question: what is to be evil? To be evil is to commit evil acts, regardless of motifs, reasons, objectives, goals, external factors, and the likes. And that vampire, who looks and thinks and reasons JUST LIKE Durkon is more brutal and vicious than plain old Durkon.

And that's about the only difference we've seen in the course of the last 50 strips or so. The "slipping the accent" part is not solid evidence as to Durkula being something different. I can't recall when and where, but I think that I remember the Giant saying that Durkon's accent was inconsistent, it was not solidly built to be perfect scotish accent. Also, the writing of the "Give me my staff" could've just been a choice of wording that made better sthetical and semanthical sense than "Give me staff" or "Give me me staff" or even "Gimme staff".

[Evandar]

I don't understand people saying Vampire Durkon isn't Durkon. I am hugely different from how I was five years ago, and slightly different from how I was two hours ago (When I finished Bioshock: Infinite, because now I'm sad).

I consider myself to be the same person as I was then. It seems like if you want to argue the changes to Durkon's soul mean he isn't Durkon, you would have to accept that changing anything to any extent has caused a similar change.

I.e, I just googled the definition of 'trail blazing'. The Evandar that wrote this post didn't know that, so I'm not Evandar anymore.

I mean, you are perfectly entitled to say "Sure, he isn't the same as old Durkon anymore.", but it's a meaningless distinction because then every character is totally replaced by an imposter every second.

[hamishspence]

I mean, you are perfectly entitled to say "Sure, he isn't the same as old Durkon anymore.", but it's a meaningless distinction because then every character is totally replaced by an imposter every second.As Yoda put it, when trying (unsuccessfully) to persuade Dooku to submit, and try and redeem himself, in the EU:

"Each instant the universe annihilates itself and starts again. Choose - and start again!"

[Evandar]

Was that from Dark Rendezvous?

Because I love that book.

[BaronOfHell]

tell that to the lonely tear of sadness http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0084.html

im not saying that hes always wanted to be evil, but dwarven duty has held him back from true happiness

A single event where he appears conflicted does not mean he appeared as a conflicted person in general. For all we know, doing his duty was/is his "true" happiness.

[Seward]

Firstly, The undead are in-comic accepted as the anti-thesis of life (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0700.html)
...
So yeah, to me, that Vampire is not Durkon.

Well, that's Tsukiko's theory

Redcloak has a different theory (panel after he takes away Tsukiko's ring)
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html

Xycon, on the other hand, believes he's the same person (second to last panel) and is staying out of the evil afterlife by going Lich. He believes vampire gets you the same deal.
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html

Which of these three has actually BEEN a sentient undead? Even if Xycon is wrong, Durkula probably feels he's really Durkon, just as Xycon the Lich believes he's still the same person as Xycon the aging human sorcerer.

Malak's statement may mean that he believes he'll lose the life experience he got over the last couple hundred years of being a vampire. He may also be wrong, or he may have observed that restoring a sentient undead to life causes a kind of amnesia in his 200ish years of undeath. In which case, well, subtract 80-90% of your lifetime and see how like your current self you would be.

[Forikroder]

A single event where he appears conflicted does not mean he appeared as a conflicted person in general. For all we know, doing his duty was/is his "true" happiness.

despite his long speech about how miserable he was?

[Keltest]

despite his long speech about how miserable he was?

He didn't actually say he was miserable at all. Other situations have indicated that he would vastly prefer to do his duty to his people and friends than give up because its hard on him.

[Komatik]

In my personal opinion, Durkon's soul is currently looking down on the world much in the same manner that Roy himself was, perhaps standing right next to Eugene Greenhilt (They are both Northerners, right?, and so would be processed on the same side of the Mountain).

Why I think that vampire is not controlled by Durkon's soul:

Firstly, The undead are in-comic accepted as the anti-thesis of life (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0700.html) They're completely opposite of each other. Life comes from Positive Energy, undeath from negative energy. Undead are by and large thoroughly hated by the majority of the world, and even a couple deities. Specifically, Durkon has been shown to be an avid Creature-typist with a great hatred of all undead. If there was anything left of Durkon's soul in that vamp there would be some kind of internal conflict going on right now. A great deal of self-loathing, horror, and hysteria would be present. That doesn't seem to be present anywhere we've seen the vampire up and moving about. Not in dealing with the OotS, not during the unprovoked and brutal murder of Z,Of course this could be stamped down by the ever duty-minded Durkon, but somehow the unprovoked and brutal murder of Z, or anywhere else as far as I can see.

Not to mention it's been mentioned multiple times in-comic that Vampires are not their former selves. Malack stated that resurrecting him was a complicated way of destroying who he was then. He would be the most reliable source to listen to, being an experienced vampire and all. If not Malack, how about Redcloak and his speech on how all undead are just bits of skin and bone and dark energy glued together into the shape of a man. Both Roy and Belkar also agree that the Vampire is not the real Durkon, albeit Roy believes it is just close enough to finish saving the world with.

Reading a hell of lot into a couple of comments much?

First, negative energy is just cosmic acid, that's it.

Second, you need to keep in mind, it is a changed Durkon. Liberal application of ancient black magic to turn his mindset evil and such. That being a vampire feels good and natural is not very far-fetched.

Also, of course Malack believes Durkon wouldn't be the same. Vampirization entails a forced alignment change to Evil. It will leave Durkon much the same as he was, but also very different.

As to Malack saying resurrecting him would be a complicated way to destroy who he was, Malack has been a vampire for most of his life. It's presumably very integral to his whole identity. Being turned into a different being than you've been for most of your life is easily "a complicated way to destroy the person you are today". I mean, say you retained your faculties and memories but were turned into a chimpanzee? You would still consider yourself the same, let alone undergo the change willingly? I very much doubt it.

Redcloak's example is presumably denial, rationalization to keep him sane instead of snapping from all the humiliation and inanity Xykon subjects him to. Apart from which, it really is a more or less appropriate view of soulless, mindless things like Zombies.

Hell, a creature like a Vampire with Dominate Person at will could easily treat living people like that, and wouldn't necessarily be very wrong at that.


Also, It's apparently really really hard for a soul to switch what type of energy powers them. That entire process to becoming a Lich? The one that often costs an entire kingdom's treasury in research materials and components, and which is supposed to be personal to the Mage performing the ritual? Yeah, that's what it takes to adapt a living soul to using negative energy. Not only is it difficult, it's a process that has to be done willingly, right? Doesn't seem like something some constitution drain by a Vampire should be able to replicate.

Also, this Lich thing? Liches aren't special because they have a soul. They are special and require a crapton of effort because unlike basically any other creature ever, whether living, sentient undead, outsider, can store their soul outside their body. Most of the lichification process is creating the phylactery that snags a dead Lich's soul into it and reforms a new body for the soul to inhabit.

A simple counterexample to the vampire not having it's soul: Create Greater Undead, and Ancient Black Dragon, who clearly had her soul when Darth V raised her with a simple spell. The spawn-creating thing is a pretty integral part of being a vampire, too, and probably a result of some pretty ancient black magic that created the original ones. Not a hard sell, IMO.

[Forikroder]

He didn't actually say he was miserable at all. Other situations have indicated that he would vastly prefer to do his duty to his people and friends than give up because its hard on him.

he quite clearly mentioned how he hated everything about the human lands, how doing your duty basically means being miserable and how he keeps all his negative feelings in a little dark box in a corner of his soul

he also saids Hilgya is acting like a human with her "inalienable right to the pursuit of happiness"

[BaronOfHell]

In that context I understood happiness as joy, whereas when talking about what someone "truly wants" as happiness, emotions doesn't have to be part of the equation.

Durkon dislikes human lands, but it does not mean he dislike following his duty, even if it means following his duty will bring dislike.

[Forikroder]

In that context I understood happiness as joy, whereas when talking about what someone "truly wants" as happiness, emotions doesn't have to be part of the equation.

Durkon dislikes human lands, but it does not mean he dislike following his duty, even if it means following his duty will bring dislike.

hed be happier without his duty though

[Keltest]

hed be happier without his duty though

Somehow I doubt that. Certainly hed rather be home doing his duty at home, but if somebody told him, "Ok, you have done your share, no more responsibility for you anymore!" hed be seriously depressed.

[Kish]

"Duty is a burden that eases only with death. For us, the undying, duty is eternal."
...Durkon's always been pretty depressing if I think about it, I find.

[Keltest]

"Duty is a burden that eases only with death. For us, the undying, duty is eternal."
...Durkon's always been pretty depressing if I think about it, I find.

yeah, but you gotta admire someone who is as selfless as he is.

[Forikroder]

Somehow I doubt that. Certainly hed rather be home doing his duty at home, but if somebody told him, "Ok, you have done your share, no more responsibility for you anymore!" hed be seriously depressed.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0084.html

hes been taught since he was a child to hide his emotions, hates everything about the human lands and hates having to aprt with Hilgya

how is his duty making him happy?

[oonker]

We're all going full Franz Durkafka, here.

[BaronOfHell]

how is his duty making him happy?

I imagine the same way as having a tedious horrible job, which helps support your family, puts you in a position of more happiness than if you were free of said job, but could not support those close to you. Emotional maybe not, but I don't think that is what this is about.

[Forikroder]

I imagine the same way as having a tedious horrible job, which helps support your family, puts you in a position of more happiness than if you were free of said job, but could not support those close to you. Emotional maybe not, but I don't think that is what this is about.

except his tedious horrible job is preventing him from having a family and doesnt give him weekends off

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0084.html

read that page and tell me that Durkon is happier in the bonds of duty

[Keltest]

except his tedious horrible job is preventing him from having a family and doesnt give him weekends off

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0084.html

read that page and tell me that Durkon is happier in the bonds of duty

The phrase ive put as my sig suggests that he is very much pleased to be doing his duty.

[Forikroder]

The phrase ive put as my sig suggests that he is very much pleased to be doing his duty.

because hes been made so miserable by his duty.... that he must be happy to do his duty....

[Keltest]

because hes been made so miserable by his duty.... that he must be happy to do his duty....

Someone who takes it THAT seriously has to get some degree of satisfaction out of it.

[Giggling Ghast]

If you believe Complete Divine, watching helplessly from inside Durkon while Something Else, with access to all his memories, controls his body.

If that's the case, then Roy is committing a rather horrible deed by refusing to kill Durkula.

[BaronOfHell]

except his tedious horrible job is preventing him from having a family and doesnt give him weekends off

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0084.html

read that page and tell me that Durkon is happier in the bonds of duty

Use of family, in my example, was supposed to be analogous to what Durkon cares about. I imagine what Durkon cares about is his homeland/nation/following his superior/authority or something some such. To say, what he has his duty to.


If that's the case, then Roy is committing a rather horrible deed by refusing to kill Durkula.

Playing DA, what crime has the being now controlling Durkon's body ever done that makes it deserve destruction? It's not its fault how it was born, nor how or where.

[oonker]

Someone who takes it THAT seriously has to get some degree of satisfaction out of it.

not necessarily. Happiness and sense of duty are two distinct things. One can be happy albeit sacrificing his duty, another might be unhappy if not following his duty, and a third person might be miserable and following his duty.

And one can follow a duty, even if following it won't bring her any kind of satisfaction at all, simply for the sense that if there's a duty, then it must be followed.

[Vinyadan]

not necessarily. Happiness and sense of duty are two distinct things. One can be happy albeit sacrificing his duty, another might be unhappy if not following his duty, and a third person might be miserable and following his duty.

And one can follow a duty, even if following it won't bring her any kind of satisfaction at all, simply for the sense that if there's a duty, then it must be followed.

Let's say that you can take pride into something without liking doing it, and you can feel ashamed to death by doing something you love.

[rodneyAnonymous]

I think the strongest argument (among many) that it's "really" Durkon is that if it's something else, there would be little or no character development with Durkon, which is kind of the point of this.

I realize he might be very different than before, but an evil spirit (or whatever) pretending to be Durkon seems extremely unlikely.

PS: Durkon's "GIVE ME MY STAFF!" reminded me of the Joker's "LOOK AT ME!" in The Dark Knight. A raised voice would enunciate more clearly I think, plus "GIVE ME ME STAFF!" would have looked funny.

[Forikroder]

Use of family, in my example, was supposed to be analogous to what Durkon cares about. I imagine what Durkon cares about is his homeland/nation/following his superior/authority or something some such. To say, what he has his duty to.



Playing DA, what crime has the being now controlling Durkon's body ever done that makes it deserve destruction? It's not its fault how it was born, nor how or where.

what about Hilgya? he obviously cared about her yet he had to leave her

[Snails]

what about Hilgya? he obviously cared about her yet he had to leave her

As depicted, Hilgya was pretty much insane. Durkon thought so to, but for reasons that we the Readers might not agree with.

She is rather rough material to bring back in. But if Malackssen is actively exploring his EVIL side in the dwarves lands, it might be interesting to see him meet Hilgya's husband...

[Forikroder]

As depicted, Hilgya was pretty much insane. Durkon thought so to, but for reasons that we the Readers might not agree with.

She is rather rough material to bring back in. But if Malackssen is actively exploring his EVIL side in the dwarves lands, it might be interesting to see him meet Hilgya's husband...

how on earth could you possibly get "hilgya is insane"?

[oppyu]

how on earth could you possibly get "hilgya is insane"?
Well despite the arranged marriage, her husband seemed like a nice dude contrary to Hilgya's claims that he was a horrible, cruel man. Of course it's entirely possible that he was actually a complete monster, but that would bring into question why the Giant chose to show him earnestly professing his love for Hilgya, offering to massage Hilgya's feet and saying his wife is the greatest after she brought him a (very poisoned) sandwich. And by her account she was attempting to murder him for some time before running away.

[Forikroder]

Well despite the arranged marriage, her husband seemed like a nice dude contrary to Hilgya's claims that he was a horrible, cruel man. Of course it's entirely possible that he was actually a complete monster, but that would bring into question why the Giant chose to show him earnestly professing his love for Hilgya, offering to massage Hilgya's feet and saying his wife is the greatest after she brought him a (very poisoned) sandwich. And by her account she was attempting to murder him for some time before running away.

now how do you get "hilgya is insane" out of that? she dislikes her husband and is evil thats a long ways from insane

[oppyu]

now how do you get "hilgya is insane" out of that? she dislikes her husband and is evil thats a long ways from insane
True. Still, 'Is Evil and an attempted murderer' is a good excuse for Durkon to run for the hills.

[SiuiS]

If you believe Complete Divine, watching helplessly from inside Durkon while Something Else, with access to all his memories, controls his body.

If you believe other sources, possibly the soul is in full control- just "warped" by the transformation the body has undergone.

Older sources hint that the soul is transformed into a completely different blood-drinking evil monster - an incorporeal ghostlike entity called a Crimson Death.

Can't think of any D&D sources that say a vampire's soul goes to the afterlife when the living body is drained to death, and stays there when the vampire rises.

Based on the "character development" mentions, I figure "soul is in full control of body" makes the most sense.

Corporal undead specifically maintain their souls, which is the sole reason people assume a vampire is the same person before and after, just twisted.

[Forikroder]

True. Still, 'Is Evil and an attempted murderer' is a good excuse for Durkon to run for the hills.

except he doesnt even mention that all he mentions that its her duty to be with her husband, and thats why she has to leave

hell he even tells her to go back to him knowing that shed probably just try and kill him again

[Bulldog Psion]

Corporal undead specifically maintain their souls, which is the sole reason people assume a vampire is the same person before and after, just twisted.

*Resists urge to be a wiseguy for about 5 seconds :smallwink:*

Yes, it's true the corporal undead maintain their souls. It's rather less likely with the lieutenants and higher ranks, though. And as for the sergeants, don't even ask. :smallcool:

[oppyu]

except he doesnt even mention that all he mentions that its her duty to be with her husband, and thats why she has to leave

hell he even tells her to go back to him knowing that shed probably just try and kill him again
Um... I don't have an answer there. Either he's totally cool with Hilgya trying to murder her husband (which, Durkon? Cool with murder? Huh?) or he's just so darn upset by the idea of a woman forsaking her marriage vows that it overrides petty concerns like murder.

I think I'll just chalk that strip up to 'OOTS was really a mess back then, if the rape jokes and funny looking stick figures didn't already make that apparent.'

[thereaper]

I'm pretty sure the "and don't murder your husband" part was implied.

[Ridry]

My 2 cents.

Durkon's soul is in control, but warped. Consider mixing salt and water to make salt water. You took a Durkon soul and some evil energy, mixed and ended up with a new soul. The old soul is a part of it, but a new being was created.

Malak compares this to having children. So that fits. Malak says that resurrecting him would destroy the person he is today. That fits too. If you have any ST : VOY fans, I'd consider what's going on right now to be a lot like the Tuvix episode (the transporter splices Tuvok and Neelix together, creating a new entity that is a piece of each of them and contains their memories).

So no... I don't think Durkon is somewhere else, but I also think that the being in control right now is much Durkon as salt water is salt or water. If who you are is your soul + your experiences then it stands to reason that a being who's soul is half Durkon and who's memories are all Durkon would in fact, act a whole heck of a lot like Durkon.

As each day passes and this new being creates new memories for itself... it's experiences become more and more that of Durkula. I actually don't think he's much faking, I think he's just 75% Durkon (50% Durkon's Soul + 50% Evil Energy + 100% Durkon's Memories) and to Roy 75% of Durkon seems pretty Durkon.

[veti]

I'm pretty sure the "and don't murder your husband" part was implied.

I think that's pretty well covered by the whole speech about "duty". I'm not sure what the dwarven code of "duty" covers, but I'd be surprised if "murdering your family" was entirely compatible with it.

[Vinyadan]

I think that's pretty well covered by the whole speech about "duty". I'm not sure what the dwarven code of "duty" covers, but I'd be surprised if "murdering your family" was entirely compatible with it.

Only if they start huggin' trees, lad. *shudders away*

[SiuiS]

"It's ten o'clock. Do you know where your soul is?"

Oh, I don't have one. It was retroactively undone as part of the ritual.



Also, It's apparently really really hard for a soul to switch what type of energy powers them. That entire process to becoming a Lich? The one that often costs an entire kingdom's treasury in research materials and components, and which is supposed to be personal to the Mage performing the ritual? Yeah, that's what it takes to adapt a living soul to using negative energy. Not only is it difficult, it's a process that has to be done willingly, right? Doesn't seem like something some constitution drain by a Vampire should be able to replicate.

So yeah, to me, that Vampire is not Durkon.

The soul is never, ever, ever converted to negative energy. The soul is also not powered by anything; it is power.


Durkon's soul is currently encased in the shell of a nonliving corpse and is being intoxicated with Negative Energy, with the result of making decisions and taking actions consistent with a Lawful Evil philosophical outlook.

When the contaminated vampire body is destroyed, Durkon's soul will wake up in the afterlife, probably groggy and confused, and try to figure out "what happened last night?" like those guys from The Hangover.

It's like Malack gave him an evil roofie.

Yup!


I don't understand people saying Vampire Durkon isn't Durkon. I am hugely different from how I was five years ago, and slightly different from how I was two hours ago (When I finished Bioshock: Infinite, because now I'm sad).

Oh? Why? I found it to be a beautiful and touchig fairy love story.


*Resists urge to be a wiseguy for about 5 seconds :smallwink:*

Yes, it's true the corporal undead maintain their souls. It's rather less likely with the lieutenants and higher ranks, though. And as for the sergeants, don't even ask. :smallcool:

Your resistance is terrible. What is that, Sarcasm resist 5? That's like bringif leather armor as the tank!

More seriously, I've for software that accepts ur as a word but automatically corrects the word 'got' to 'for' regardless of context. I'm doing the best I can, here :smalltongue:

[Vinyadan]

More seriously, I've for software that accepts ur as a word but automatically corrects the word 'got' to 'for' regardless of context. I'm doing the best I can, here :smalltongue:

There's only a thin line between auto-correct and auto-corrupt.

[martianmister]

Durkon is probably too shaken up by the revelation, he didn't understand what Hilgya implied.