Alignment changes [Belkar]

[Gusion]

I think this strip gives Belkar a concrete reason to seek an alignment change. While lots of people have postulated he has been acting less evil... now he has a very good reason to want to officially be neutral - and he knows it may save his life.

So we have seen one alignment change in Durkula, but I don't think that really counts. I wonder how it will go for Belkar.

My prediction is that in the near future he is going to see out V's advice with conversation that goes something like, "how do you get to be almost as evil as me but still be neutral? I want to do that."

To which V's reply might be something that makes certain forum members' heads explode, but otherwise be about regret and trying to create balance...

[Darth Paul]

That....

Had not occurred to me.

(sound of head implosion)

My question is whether Belkar would ever be sufficiently self-reflective to see his alignment as a problem to overcome- whether he could ever experience what alcoholics refer to as a "moment of clarity"- or whether he will just continue going through life seeing everything else as an obstacle to his progress, in this case, the side-effect of the magic clasp. My suspicion is the latter.

And even if he saw the need to become CN instead of CE, his motivation for change being "to avoid a magical side-effect" would not be very convincing to the DM if he were a character in my campaign. A true change has to come from internal motives, not from an external problem.

So Belkar could have the idea, I suppose (though I'm doubting it). Genuinely pulling off the change is another matter entirely.

[factotum]

I think this would require Belkar to show a great deal more self-analysis and introspection than he's ever shown. Not to mention that you can't just change alignments on a whim (barring magic items, of course)--for Belkar to come within shouting distance of Neutral he'd have to start actually doing some good, and he'd have to do that for *years* to compensate for his evil life to date. We know he doesn't have years yet to live, so this just isn't going to happen.

[wumpus]

This is a really deep question for something as inherently broken as the D&D alignment system*.

Alignment has two "in-game" (or in-story for OOTS) effects:
1. Spell effects (ex. protection from evil, detect evil, know alignment).
2. Eventual residence of a D&D soul.

There are three sources of determining D&D alignment:
1. What is written on the character sheet
2. How the character is currently acting.
3. The historical actions over a character's lifetime (the Giant seems to avoid magic exceptions)

We know that the plane of residence of a D&D soul is determined by the effect of all a character's actions (see Roy and abandonment of Elan). There are also strong hints of characters (particularly paladins) playing to other alignments (Miko is a bad example, but I suspect that the paladin in Roy's party during the Origin of the Stick isn't (haven't read it)). I would go so far as to say that the OOTS-verse appears to work on the presumption that what is written on the character sheet *is* the alignment until the character is judged at death (although with death being less than permenant, this leads to the question of a character returning from resurection with a different alignment). I would stongly recommmend not assuming a character will change alignment (in the sense of what is written on the character sheet and spell effects) without a major event such as death/paladin fall**/"that card in the deck of many things that can begin such a judgement***".

I'd argue that the likely (reasonably large) set of NPCs that may have the "official" alignment and the current actions out of whack (not due to PC agency) is a great reason to remove alignments from your game (assuming it isn't a murderhobo dungeon crawl). There simply is too much material here for the Giant to even begin to run low.

* Alignment in D&D presumably started as "red/blue" sides on Dave Anderson's wargame tabletop. Somehow it has morphed not only to sides in a [somewhat optional] vast battle between both good/evil and law/chaos (with nuetrality less than neutral in the battles), but also as a complete pyschological state of a PC/NPC. I understand it is far to iconic to D&D to simply remove, but I really with 5e had included enough options to thoroughly remove it. PS. Don't even ask how silly it was in 1e (barely removed from the wargame): I'll just mention the term "alignment language".

** Put me down in the "Miko is still [barely] lawful good but presently residing in Acadia (which contains both LG and LN souls)" camp.

*** If the deck is in your campaign, you have bigger problems than alighnment.

[wumpus]

More to the point on Belkar, he just doesn't really have the time. We have seen one neutral act and can hardly generalize that somehow Belkar isn't still likely to knife a gnome for his favorite cuisine.

Could you possibly argue that an antipaladin could somehow fall [rise?] due to this act? I'd argue that it might put the Belkster closer to sight of the neutral side of things, but he still has something like 9000kNazis of evil to work off. What do you think this act did, 2miliMotherTersas of good?

[Gusion]

More to the point on Belkar, he just doesn't really have the time. We have seen one neutral act and can hardly generalize that somehow Belkar isn't still likely to knife a gnome for his favorite cuisine.

Could you possibly argue that an antipaladin could somehow fall [rise?] due to this act? I'd argue that it might put the Belkster closer to sight of the neutral side of things, but he still has something like 9000kNazis of evil to work off. What do you think this act did, 2miliMotherTersas of good?

Thematically I think Rich has been indicating a gradual shift away from evil for Belkar for some time at least coinciding with his bonding of Scruffy. If I were to hazard a guess, the argument would be that in caring (e.g. having empathy) for ANY creature - in this case a cat - other than himself, Belkar started down the path away from evil. For example, in 783-784 Belkar's empathy made him perform a non-evil act by releasing the dinosaur.

Do you have to "work off" evil acts with good acts to be neutral? I think that depends on how Rich sees the alignment system.

Is it just a reflection on one's actions? If so than there is no reason that Belkar can't simply decide he is going to be neutral in order to not be harmed by the trinket - because motivation is irrelevant if only actions matter. I think it is more than that. I think Belkar's change was started by his growth of empathy and this strip brought it home to him how being evil is hurting him. I suppose maybe being evil is like being an alcoholic - sometimes they need a reason to change that isn't always the best reason, but it is still a practical reason that gets them to the right place in the end.

[Xelbiuj]

He could be shifting more from chaotic instead of from evil. :\

[Peelee]

If I were to hazard a guess, the argument would be that in caring (e.g. having empathy) for ANY creature - in this case a cat - other than himself, Belkar started down the path away from evil. For example, in 783-784 Belkar's empathy made him perform a non-evil act by releasing the dinosaur.

I think a bit of context might dissuade you from this notion:

Consider the following example: In an old campaign, I had introduced two completely evil villains. Both had plans to conquer the world, and I had let the PCs know that they had known each other a century earlier. When the players discovered that they were working together, they couldn't understand it. "Why help each other?" they asked themselves, "It would make more sense to go it alone."

"Wait," said one player, "I bet that one is planning on helping the other up to a point, and then turning on him." They all agreed that this must be the reason for their alliance, and even formulated a plan to "warn" the lesser of the two evils about the other's presumed treachery. This was a solution that was arrived at by a fairly logical process, but it was completely and utterly incorrect. What the players had failed to consider was that the two villains were simply friends. They had grown up together, and trusted each other implicitly despite having every logical reason to not trust one another at all. The fact was that the villains were letting their emotional attachment to each other override strict logic; they had made an agreement to share control of the world, and both were intending to follow through. Further, by contacting the "lesser" villain, the PCs had accidentally tipped their hand that they knew the two were working together, allowing the villains to set up an ambush for the players in a future session. By relying on logic and logic alone, the players had gravely miscalculated their foes.

Source (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/XbsQgS9YYu9g3HZBAGE.html)
I doubt he would then say, "well, Evil is a pretty one-dimensional aspect, and truly caring about someone else is enough to help knock one away from it, or at least realize they don't want to be evil anymore."

And on a deeper level, I don't think, "well, I do have an item now, so I should probably change who I am so it can be more useful," is a message he would support either. He is always welcome to prove me wrong, of course.

[Itrogash]

He could be shifting more from chaotic instead of from evil. :\

Why? What's so lawful in his recent behaviour?

[Lexible]

[Much of thoughtful post snipped]

* Alignment in D&D presumably started as "red/blue" sides on Dave Anderson's wargame tabletop. Somehow it has morphed not only to sides in a [somewhat optional] vast battle between both good/evil and law/chaos (with nuetrality less than neutral in the battles), but also as a complete pyschological state of a PC/NPC. I understand it is far to iconic to D&D to simply remove...

In my experience as a DM and as a player since 1st edition (I skipped 4th, though), it has always been easy to eliminate alignment from the game for a few reasons.

First, the alignment system is not an objective fact of the reality in which all D&D players think, feel, value, interact and live, so we all have a lot of experience in that regard.

Second, relatively few mechanics depend on alignment, to the extent that, depending on the flavor of a particular campaign, some campaigns may be more or less transparent to the presence of alignment. Caveat: this probably reflects the utterly home-brew campaign worlds of my adult gaming experiences.

Third, where game mechanics do involve alignment, it is trivially easy to replace with precepts (e.g. paladins are not champions of good but of honesty or compassion, etc.) or conditions (e.g. protection from evil becomes protection from extra-planar, or protection from shapeshifter, and so on).

There's an RPG Stack Exchange question with answers (http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51344/how-to-make-dd-like-alignment-work/51375) disagreeing with the premise that alignment is necessary to D&D.

Of course, this is getting a bit off from OotS, and the question of Belkar shifting alignments. I think that Belkar can shift alignments, and possibly quite rapidly. While we saw his delirium dream while trapped at Sharp-Eyed Pete's, and saw his brief empathy for Ganji and Enor in the Empire of Blood, there is a great deal of his internal process that we are not privy to [Edit: "trivial, too?!?" Ahem: "privy to!"]. I could see a "moment of clarity" for him leading to an externally rapid shift in alignment (my guess would be to CN, perhaps to CG). We know he understands the chaotic side of the spectrum pretty well... he more or less nailed what Kooky Old Guy With the Cat's posthumous motivations were likely to be. :smallsmile:

[Gusion]

I think a bit of context might dissuade you from this notion:

[cut]

And on a deeper level, I don't think, "well, I do have an item now, so I should probably change who I am so it can be more useful," is a message he would support either. He is always welcome to prove me wrong, of course.

I agree that evil people can have friends. That's not what was happening in 783-784 though. It wasn't long before that those guys were Belkar's enemy. Belkar was experiencing empathy for relative strangers because he could identify with their situation - that's radically different than having friends from childhood.

As for the message, I won't guess Rich's personal views on it. I think it is a reasonable one in Belkar's mind to have though especially if that action is seen as the way to save his life against Durkula. It might be coincidence that it is representative of how being evil is actually negative to his situation, something he never really had to deal with before provided he had his lead sheet with him.

In my view? I dunno man. Sometimes people end up doing good things for less than angelic reasons. Maybe that's all it takes to be Neutral in Rich's view.

[Peelee]

I agree that evil people can have friends. That's not what was happening in 783-784 though. It wasn't long before that those guys were Belkar's enemy. Belkar was experiencing empathy for relative strangers because he could identify with their situation - that's radically different than having friends from childhood.

As for the message, I won't guess Rich's personal views on it. I think it is a reasonable one in Belkar's mind to have though especially if that action is seen as the way to save his life against Durkula. It might be coincidence that it is representative of how being evil is actually negative to his situation, something he never really had to deal with before provided he had his lead sheet with him.

In my view? I dunno man. Sometimes people end up doing good things for less than angelic reasons. Maybe that's all it takes to be Neutral in Rich's view.

I can totally understand your argument. I just think, in this case, with Belkar as the focus, that it's not going to happen. Dude just isn't evil because he's predisposed towards it, or likes going against the grain. He didn't even truly understand evil, and he shouldn't be doing it (he has expressed confusion on what is and isn't allowed). In effect, he has no moral barometer, and he still choose to sail straight into the storm because it's more fun. It's a large part of who he is, not just an alignment written on a character sheet. I don't think he'll give up such a substantial part of what makes him Belkar just for the convenience of an item.

[Gusion]

I can totally understand your argument. I just think, in this case, with Belkar as the focus, that it's not going to happen. Dude just isn't evil because he's predisposed towards it, or likes going against the grain. He didn't even truly understand evil, and he shouldn't be doing it (he has expressed confusion on what is and isn't allowed). In effect, he has no moral barometer, and he still choose to sail straight into the storm because it's more fun. It's a large part of who he is, not just an alignment written on a character sheet. I don't think he'll give up such a substantial part of what makes him Belkar just for the convenience of an item.

Which is pretty much what Roy says in 786. :-)

I agree that he *was* that way, pre-Scruffy, but that's the whole character development theme. And, from Belkar's perspective, is isn't like he can't still torture a kobold every now and again while remaining neutral... he's got V as a moral role model.

[Peelee]

Which is pretty much what Roy says in 786. :-)

Not being one dimensional =/= moving away from evil. He's not one-dimensional anymore, which was why Roy thought the way he did. I think the way i do because i don't think he is going to change his entire personna based on a trinket. Keep in mind, your argument is predicated upon maximizing the usage of his new toy.

[wumpus]

Not being one dimensional =/= moving away from evil. He's not one-dimensional anymore, which was why Roy thought the way he did. I think the way i do because i don't think he is going to change his entire personna based on a trinket. Keep in mind, your argument is predicated upon maximizing the usage of his new toy.

In Belkar's case, there aren't many other dimensions he can expand in that will allow him to remain as evil as he is. Perhaps if he focused on optimization or strategy, he could become more effective in his evil. His present course away from "treating people other than: items of lust, items of hate, and little chunks of xp" will tend to cramp the high levels of evil he was getting (he still can stay at least as evil as Thog).

As Soon said, redemption isn't for everyone. I doubt Belkar could manage it with a grey elf's lifetime. That said, there isn't any real indication that he wants to be non-evil (although maybe Mr. Scruffy does*). He *does* want the party (or other companions) to want him enough to rez him, but even that looks like it is a stretch with what little time he has left (a few weeks at most).

* While I assume that Belkar's dream in the Gerard's tomb was a joke (I suspect the Giant has even admitted that he didn't want to draw Belkar's fantasy), it puts a real question as to who is the "animal companion" between the two.

[wumpus]

There's an RPG Stack Exchange question with answers (http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51344/how-to-make-dd-like-alignment-work/51375) disagreeing with the premise that alignment is necessary to D&D.


My belief that D&D should include alignments has more to do with marketing. I'm pretty sure there was a thread over in the gaming [roleplaying] section about "what is D&D" that included things like rolling d20s to hit, class-based progression, Vancian casting, alignments, etc. I agree that removing alignments would make a better game. Thus why I wanted the option (note that the link seems to either ignore various combat changes by a sudden lack of holy damage). I just think such a game would be "less D&D".

[Jasdoif]

While I assume that Belkar's dream in the Gerard's tomb was a joke (I suspect the Giant has even admitted that he didn't want to draw Belkar's fantasy)Not quite.


My belief that D&D should include alignments has more to do with marketing. I'm pretty sure there was a thread over in the gaming [roleplaying] section about "what is D&D" that included things like rolling d20s to hit, class-based progression, Vancian casting, alignments, etc. I agree that removing alignments would make a better game. Thus why I wanted the option (note that the link seems to either ignore various combat changes by a sudden lack of holy damage). I just think such a game would be "less D&D".You might be interested in the Giant's view on the alignment system.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I think that Belkar has been changing, that much is certain. I would even go so far as to say that he has, from time to time, shown feelings resembling compassion and other similar emotions. I do think that a shift in alignment would take a huge change in outlook on Belkar's behalf, as well as requiring to start doing a lot of good. I would be much more satisfied with Belkar being a very complex, but still Evil, character, because I thin that may be more interesting than redemption.

[RatElemental]

This might not mean anything in the long run, but did anyone else notice Belkar not bursting into flames again after getting the clasp back from the gnome? Or perhaps that he didn't seem to be in flames/pain while talking to Scruffy despite still touching the clasp?

[Jaxzan Proditor]

This might not mean anything in the long run, but did anyone else notice Belkar not bursting into flames again after getting the clasp back from the gnome? Or perhaps that he didn't seem to be in flames/pain while talking to Scruffy despite still touching the clasp?

The clasp isn't always on: it is activated. When he is touching it and not being hurt, the clasp is not on.

[Gusion]

I think that Belkar has been changing, that much is certain. I would even go so far as to say that he has, from time to time, shown feelings resembling compassion and other similar emotions. I do think that a shift in alignment would take a huge change in outlook on Belkar's behalf, as well as requiring to start doing a lot of good. I would be much more satisfied with Belkar being a very complex, but still Evil, character, because I thin that may be more interesting than redemption.

I guess I'm not really sure how much good a neutral character needs to do or how much redemption needs to happen. V has does a considerable amount of evil and while s/he feels bad about some of it, I don't see V trying to balance it out. But by Word of Giant, V is neutral.

With Belkar's current character development and growth, I see less of a difference between their morality than before - aside from the fact that Belkar never particularly had any desire to not be evil, while V preferred to be neutral because morality was generally unimportant.

[factotum]

V has does a considerable amount of evil and while s/he feels bad about some of it, I don't see V trying to balance it out. But by Word of Giant, V is neutral.


The major evil we've seen V do post-dates the Giant's quote about him being definitively neutral, and it's noticeable that a couple of in-comic panels have suggested V is maybe no longer TN: in strip #668, one of the IFCC says "After that stunt with the dragons, I think we have a 50-50 chance of ending up with [V's soul] anyway", and in strip #843 V himself says "The few paltry moments that the trio of fiends shall hold my soul will be but a preview of the eternity that--", indicating he himself thinks he's likely to be going to Hell for Familicide. The latter, to my mind, is the real indicator that V is still trying to be Neutral, though: he is genuinely horrified at what he's done, whereas Belkar would be giving himself a mental high-five for doing something like that!

[ti'esar]

The major evil we've seen V do post-dates the Giant's quote about him being definitively neutral

Incorrect: the Giant's last statement that V is True Neutral occurred around the time of 801 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?209334-Is-Varsuuvius-Lawful-Chaotic-or-True-Neutral/page8&p=11664984#post11664984), significantly post-dating Familicide.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I guess I'm not really sure how much good a neutral character needs to do or how much redemption needs to happen. V has does a considerable amount of evil and while s/he feels bad about some of it, I don't see V trying to balance it out. But by Word of Giant, V is neutral.

With Belkar's current character development and growth, I see less of a difference between their morality than before - aside from the fact that Belkar never particularly had any desire to not be evil, while V preferred to be neutral because morality was generally unimportant.

I think that Vaarsuvius has been doing many things different since they failed to defeat Xykon and since they learned of the other people they killed. According to Word of Giant, Vaarsuvius's fight with Laurin shows a lot of the ways in which they have changed.

Also, Belkar has been consistently doing Evil or wishing to do Evil since day one. Vaarsuvius, on the other hand, has a few major blips of Evil, but I do not feel they have been consistently Evil, and they have not become Evil. Belkar has a major uphill struggle, while Vaarsuvius doesn't have quite as large of one.

[hamishspence]

Also, Belkar has been consistently doing Evil or wishing to do Evil since day one. Vaarsuvius, on the other hand, has a few major blips of Evil, but I do not feel they have been consistently Evil, and they have not become Evil. Belkar has a major uphill struggle, while Vaarsuvius doesn't have quite as large of one.

Makes me think a bit of Malhevik from the 3.0 Manual of the Planes - a "chaotic evil wizard dedicated to learning the ways of goodness" who resides in a castle in Celestia thanks to the agreement of the inhabitants. The book goes on to say that "While he's sincerely trying to reform, he's got a long way to go, and still retains many of the instincts and attitudes of his former lifestyle".

If Belkar were to consciously begin his uphill struggle - state to himself that he desires to change his nature - and make a resolution to do so - he might be like this.

[RatElemental]

There is also the possibility that Belkar is faking all this character development, based on his conversation with his hallucination of Lord Shojo back when he was still cursed by the mark of justice. I think that would be wonderfully meta if it turns out to be the case.

Edit: I don't know how I confused Soon with Lord Shojo.

[orrion]

There is also the possibility that Belkar is faking all this character development, based on his conversation with his hallucination of Soon back when he was still cursed by the mark of justice. I think that would be wonderfully meta if it turns out to be the case.

He started out faking it, yes. Not anymore.

---

Look, Belkar's still Chaotic Evil. Just as there are multiple interpretations of Chaotic Good (IE Elan and Haley, and Elan's changes), there are multiple ways to be Chaotic Evil. Nothing Belkar has done suggests he's going to start following the laws of society or that he doesn't like killing and discord anymore. He was riding around on Bloodfeast and ENJOYING slaughtering everything in his way. No, his alignment hasn't changed one bit.

[RatElemental]

He started out faking it, yes. Not anymore.

---

Look, Belkar's still Chaotic Evil. Just as there are multiple interpretations of Chaotic Good (IE Elan and Haley, and Elan's changes), there are multiple ways to be Chaotic Evil. Nothing Belkar has done suggests he's going to start following the laws of society or that he doesn't like killing and discord anymore. He was riding around on Bloodfeast and ENJOYING slaughtering everything in his way. No, his alignment hasn't changed one bit.

There was that one time way back before they faced Xykon the first time when V buffed his wisdom so he could heal Elan. Before V dispelled the effect, Belkar resolved to never hurt a living thing again. So presumably if his wisdom were to be increased a little more permanently...

Of course, I don't see that happening anytime soon without outside help.

[orrion]

There was that one time way back before they faced Xykon the first time when V buffed his wisdom so he could heal Elan. Before V dispelled the effect, Belkar resolved to never hurt a living thing again. So presumably if his wisdom were to be increased a little more permanently...

Of course, I don't see that happening anytime soon without outside help.

That was still back when the strip was more a gag-a-day than plot oriented. I'd bet that even if Belkar had his Wisdom increased somehow we wouldn't see anything like that happening again.

It's like this comic in 8-Bit Theater (http://www.nuklearpower.com/2003/05/31/episode-289-a-change-of-heart/).

[Jak]

That was still back when the strip was more a gag-a-day than plot oriented. I'd bet that even if Belkar had his Wisdom increased somehow we wouldn't see anything like that happening again.

It's like this comic in 8-Bit Theater (http://www.nuklearpower.com/2003/05/31/episode-289-a-change-of-heart/).
Regardless of whether or not this comic was ever a gag-a-day kind of thing, that bit from #58 was still indeed in the oots canon, and if one is to judge anything within a given thing objectively, one must use that thing's own rules.*

...

In my opinion.

...

*edit: reworded for clarity

[orrion]

Regardless of whether or not this comic was ever a gag-a-day kind of thing, that bit from #58 was still indeed in the oots canon, and if one is to judge anything within a given thing objectively, one must use that thing's own rules.*

...

In my opinion.

...

*edit: reworded for clarity

Things from that early have been trumped or disregarded before, so it wouldn't be anything new. I'm not even sure what rule you're referring to. That a high Wisdom score correlates to a cessation of violence? That makes zero sense.

Anyway, this is beside the point. Regardless of whether an increased Wisdom score for Belkar would do what it did in comic #58 it's still quite clear at this point that Belkar revels in violence.

[Darth Tom]

I suppose the other question is whether an alignment change would actually be a good thing, whether for Belkar personally or the narrative as a whole. From a narrative perspective I guess it could be as it's one way of providing character development - although we have seen that the Giant has no shortage in that area. Personally for Belkar, I'm less convinced, mostly because alignment doesn't seem to be all that significant a factor in a character's actions. We've seen Miko, who was anything but good while meant to be a paragon; and it's possible that the necessities of trade and diplomacy will make Gobbotopia a functioning city with less automatic anti-human bias.

[Darth Paul]

Things from that early have been trumped or disregarded before, so it wouldn't be anything new. I'm not even sure what rule you're referring to. That a high Wisdom score correlates to a cessation of violence? That makes zero sense.

The "rule" being that if it happens to Belkar once, it must happen to him every time. But Orrion is right, most things like that from prior to #100 or so that were one-off gags are not going to happen again.

In any case, there is no evidence- zero, zilch, nada- that a high WIS translates to a peace-loving, non-violent personality. Case in point; Miko has already been mentioned, whose Wisdom was well into the 'teens, and yet who had no qualms whatsoever about resorting to violence when provoked. Even better case in point; Redcloak, whose Wisdom may easily be up around 20 (haven't checked the character sheet thread, sorry), and who often turns to violence as his preferred option.

So... yeah. Wisdom score =/= non-violence.

[Jay R]

While I agree that it was a throwaway joke from the days of a joke-a-day comic strip, not even that strip suggested that Wisdom necessarily implied non-violence in general. It merely stated that Belkar's violent streak stemmed from his anger, which seemed petty with greater Wisdom.

:belkar:(on drugs Wisdom):Wow ... the world seems so much clearer now .. I can understand everything. <snip> I've wasted my life on anger and needless rage, when I might have been healing.

[veti]

While I agree that it was a throwaway joke from the days of a joke-a-day comic strip, not even that strip suggested that Wisdom necessarily implied non-violence in general. It merely stated that Belkar's violent streak stemmed from his anger, which seemed petty with greater Wisdom.

:belkar:(on drugs Wisdom):Wow ... the world seems so much clearer now .. I can understand everything. <snip> I've wasted my life on anger and needless rage, when I might have been healing.

I think this is a more important episode than people give it credit for. Looking at that, can you seriously doubt that for those few frames, Belkar is Good? Regardless of his earlier or later actions, for that brief episode, he's Good.

Alignment isn't some sort of global reckoning of everything you've ever done. Okay, it's sometimes played that way - but that's only because the DM can't read the character's mind and see what's really motivating them, so they have to go by outer appearances. But if the DM can read the character's mind - as in OOTS - the DM knows exactly when the character's had a real change of heart, and doesn't have to wait for the moral accountants to catch up.

Alignment is a reflection of what you are, not what you have been. As soon as Belkar has had opportunity and motivation to do evil acts, and turned down those opportunities, enough times to establish a pattern - he'll no longer be evil. He doesn't have to do a whole pile of Good acts to cancel out his Evil ones. If he starts thinking like a neutral, he'll be neutral.

That's what the fiends' '50/50' comment about V meant: "if she starts thinking like an evil character, she's ours, and the guilt of an act like that is very likely to do the trick".

My current guess is that Belkar is going to find himself neutral, before he tries to use the clasp against Durkula. And when he does use it, and doesn't feel the effect (whatever it is), his first thought will be that it's not working.

[Jak]

Things from that early have been trumped or disregarded before, so it wouldn't be anything new. I'm not even sure what rule you're referring to. That a high Wisdom score correlates to a cessation of violence? That makes zero sense.

Anyway, this is beside the point. Regardless of whether an increased Wisdom score for Belkar would do what it did in comic #58 it's still quite clear at this point that Belkar revels in violence.

Okay, when was #58 trumped or disregarded?

[orrion]

Okay, when was #58 trumped or disregarded?

I didn't say it was. I said that things from that early in the comic have been trumped or disregarded.

Right now, comic 58 is irrelevant because there's no evidence of a Wisdom increase and Belkar is still clearly Chaotic Evil.

[Jak]

I didn't say it was. I said that things from that early in the comic have been trumped or disregarded.

Right now, comic 58 is irrelevant because there's no evidence of a Wisdom increase and Belkar is still clearly Chaotic Evil.

Well, the main plot hook was also revealed to us within the first hundred strips, so wouldn't it be wise to at least consider, since it hasn't been trumped yet, that comic 58 is a decent basis for theory? I'm not saying that it has to be that way, I'm just saying that Belkar's wisdom stat could play a role in his alignment. It's a plausible hypothesis.

[Peelee]

Well, the main plot hook was also revealed to us within the first hundred strips, so wouldn't it be wise to at least consider, since it hasn't been trumped yet, that comic 58 is a decent basis for theory? I'm not saying that it has to be that way, I'm just saying that Belkar's wisdom stat could play a role in his alignment. It's a plausible hypothesis.

Comparing a single-strip joke to the main plot is disingenuous at best.

[Jak]

Comparing a single-strip joke to the main plot is disingenuous at best.

So we're discrediting everything that is a joke in the first 100 strips?

[Peelee]

So we're discrediting everything that is a joke in the first 100 strips?

I would not assume that obvious jokes at the 3.5 system that were only present in a single strip in the first 100ish comics are canonically accurate without additional verification. Unless you wish to state that you believe Vaarsuvius has Evan's Spiked Tentacles of Forced Intrusion in his spellbook, or that Elan is lacking an unknown internal organ, to give two examples.

[Jak]

I would not assume that obvious jokes at the 3.5 system that were only present in a single strip in the first 100ish comics are canonically accurate without additional verification. Unless you wish to state that you believe Vaarsuvius has Evan's Spiked Tentacles of Forced Intrusion in his spellbook, or that Elan is lacking an unknown internal organ, to give two examples.

In short, yes, I do. Only in the case of Elan's missing organ, I assumed it was healed by the healing potion 2 strips later. I assume that, unless stated otherwise, everything presented in the comic is true to the comic. Seems like a risky bet, I know, but I like to live on the edge. :smallsmile:

[Peelee]

In short, yes, I do. Only in the case of Elan's missing organ, I assumed it was healed by the healing potion 2 strips later. I assume that, unless stated otherwise, everything presented in the comic is true to the comic. Seems like a risky bet, I know, but I like to live on the edge. :smallsmile:

No worries, then. One point of contention, though - the organ wouldn't be healed by the potion.
Regenerate
Level: Clr 7, Drd 9, Healing 7

The subject’s severed body members (fingers, toes, hands, feet, arms, legs, tails, or even heads of multiheaded creatures), broken bones, and ruined organs grow back.

[Jak]

No worries, then. One point of contention, though - the organ wouldn't be healed by the potion.

I don't see any contention there. I think regenerate covers severed organs, too. But that's just the way I interpreted it.

[Peelee]

I don't see any contention there. I think regenerate covers severed organs, too. But that's just the way I interpreted it.

?

No other healing spell covers things like organs; only regenerate specifically does. This is less an issue of interpretation and more an issue of you changing the way potions work because it fits in with your view better. Or else there's no reason to say that the same healing potion couldn't grow back severed limbs. I have no issue if you feel the events of the early strips are to be kept to 100% faithfully, but the way the potions and spells work are laid out with intentional wording and intent, and you are ignoring both.

[Jak]

?

No other healing spell covers things like organs; only regenerate specifically does. This is less an issue of interpretation and more an issue of you changing the way potions work because it fits in with your view better. Or else there's no reason to say that the same healing potion couldn't grow back severed limbs. I have no issue if you feel the events of the early strips are to be kept to 100% faithfully, but the way the potions and spells work are laid out with intentional wording and intent, and you are ignoring both.

I don't think I understand how my interpretation deviates from the intent of the spell. It seems to me to be a sort of "catch all" healing spell. Is that not the case?

[Peelee]

I don't think I understand how my interpretation deviates from the intent of the spell. It seems to me to be a sort of "catch all" healing spell. Is that not the case?

The intent of the spell is to heal damage. The intent is not to grow back bodily parts. That falls solely under the domain of Regenerate. If not, then Regenerate is a useless spell, entirely without merit.

[Jak]

The intent of the spell is to heal damage. The intent is not to grow back bodily parts. That falls solely under the domain of Regenerate. If not, then Regenerate is a useless spell, entirely without merit.

Oooooohh! I thought it was a potion of regenerate. Okay, I see now. I don't know then, maybe it was his appendix. Humans don't need those, right?

[Peelee]

Oooooohh! I thought it was a potion of regenerate. Okay, I see now. I don't know then, maybe it was his appendix. Humans don't need those, right?

Understandable. For the record, only spells of 3rd level or lower can be brewed into potions, and even then, having a potion of regenerate around level 10 would be a bit.... impressive, is the word I'll use. Also, like I said, I have no issue with your belief in the continuing adherence to accuracy of the early strips, so long as that belief is consistent. Which yours definitely is.

[Jak]

Understandable. For the record, only spells of 3rd level or lower can be brewed into potions, and even then, having a potion of regenerate around level 10 would be a bit.... impressive, is the word I'll use. Also, like I said, I have no issue with your belief in the continuing adherence to accuracy of the early strips, so long as that belief is consistent. Which yours definitely is.

I try to be consistent, thanks for the compliment. :smallsmile:

Sorry about the misunderstanding, I never really had much experience with potions, or even casters for that matter, (one of my weaker points.)

So uh. Yeah.:smallsmile:

[Darth Paul]

While I agree that it was a throwaway joke from the days of a joke-a-day comic strip, not even that strip suggested that Wisdom necessarily implied non-violence in general. It merely stated that Belkar's violent streak stemmed from his anger, which seemed petty with greater Wisdom.

Thank you, Jay, that is a perspective I had never thought of before.

Now could anyone explain why Belkar's tunic turned white instead of green while the spell was in effect?

[Jaxzan Proditor]

In short, yes, I do. Only in the case of Elan's missing organ, I assumed it was healed by the healing potion 2 strips later. I assume that, unless stated otherwise, everything presented in the comic is true to the comic. Seems like a risky bet, I know, but I like to live on the edge. :smallsmile:

Actually, the case of the spiked tentacles is one of the few were The Giant has said that he wouldn't have included. This is because a) he sees that joke as an inappropriate one to make and b) Vaarsuvius barred Conjuration. So there are definite cases were early jokes have been seen as contradictory at best.

[hamishspence]

Now could anyone explain why Belkar's tunic turned white instead of green while the spell was in effect?

Possibly for the same reason V's outfit turned black while V's under the Soul Splte, and back to its normal colour afterward:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0653.html

it's a handy visual cue.

[orrion]

So we're discrediting everything that is a joke in the first 100 strips?

Grain(s) of salt, more like.

Besides, it's still irrelevant. None of the cues of that scene have come up (no increased Wisdom, no clothing change, no attitude change). Until they do this conversation is kind of useless.

At this moment, Belkar's still Chaotic Evil. He's just a little less indiscriminate about it.

[littlebum2002]

Given that Class and Level Geekery had Durkon pegged at level 11 by strip 201, it really isn't an issue. He just waited a few weeks then regenerated the organ. Still ancient history now.

The bigger question is the Spiked Tentacles. Maybe they're another school? What school are V's various "hand"spells supposed to be?

[orrion]

Given that Class and Level Geekery had Durkon pegged at level 11 by strip 201, it really isn't an issue. He just waited a few weeks then regenerated the organ. Still ancient history now.

The bigger question is the Spiked Tentacles. Maybe they're another school? What school are V's various "hand"spells supposed to be?

Clerics don't get access to Regenerate until level 13.

The Hand line of spells are Evocation.

[Gusion]

Grain(s) of salt, more like.

Besides, it's still irrelevant. None of the cues of that scene have come up (no increased Wisdom, no clothing change, no attitude change). Until they do this conversation is kind of useless.

At this moment, Belkar's still Chaotic Evil. He's just a little less indiscriminate about it.

I think we have seen an attitude change, that I would say started with his acquisition of Scruffy. It has been an incremental attitude change, no doubt, but I think there certainly has been one. Yes, he's still CE... but I think he may make a conscious choice not to be in the near future.


It merely stated that Belkar's violent streak stemmed from his anger, which seemed petty with greater Wisdom.

Good point. Maybe he's angry because nobody ever loved him and now Scruffy does!

[Jak]

Thank you, Jay, that is a perspective I had never thought of before.

Now could anyone explain why Belkar's tunic turned white instead of green while the spell was in effect?


Possibly for the same reason V's outfit turned black while V's under the Soul Splte, and back to its normal colour afterward:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0653.html

it's a handy visual cue.

I was wondering the same thing. Belkar's tunic and cape are a lot bluer in #128, too.

[Kish]

Belkar can use the clasp just fine, he just has to grit his teeth to do it. Being Neutral would not, based on anything he knows at this time, save his life, just save him a little pain when he's preparing for a domination attempt.

[littlebum2002]

Clerics don't get access to Regenerate until level 13.

The Hand line of spells are Evocation.

Sorry, I always mess up those tables.

Anyway, the point is, it is entirely possible that Elan walked around missing a less-important organ for a few months until Durkon Regenerated it, and it is entirely possible that Spiked Tentacles was an Evocation spell.

[Onyavar]

Regardless of whether or not this comic was ever a gag-a-day kind of thing, that bit from #58 was still indeed in the oots canon, and if one is to judge anything within a given thing objectively, one must use that thing's own rules.[...]

I regard scenes like this one as "exaggeration for story purposes" (www.schlockmercenary.com/2013-07-11). Very often, a story can't depict what is really going on without being boring, and the "plot result" is the same whether the characters follow the "funny" or the "boring" route.

Let's say, V's Owl's Wisdom spell raised Belkars Wis stat by six points (afaik the spell boosts 1d6?). Now, if Belkar had a whole page dedicated to him, internally monologueing about a better way to get through life, it would have been a lot more realistic (IF there really is a "meaning" behind it) and of course a whole lot less funny than two panels and two speech balloons of switching back and forth. Of course, the Giant did the latter. It's more fun that way.

On the basis of "exaggeration for story purposes": What if there is more to that scene?

What if Belkar has recently leveled (these days, we don't get to know when they do!), and has taken a new point in WIS instead of his phyical stats? He might have recognized that his will saves suck, and his wisdom-based ranger skills as well. His other stats are doing fairly well, and even a munchkin should recognize this flaw. It's WAY too late to be an effective ranger, but he can work on minimizing his biggest weakness so he gets a chance instead of an immediate fail. In that case, his outlook on life has slightly changed. Not dramatically like with V's boost, but a little bit.

How can I think that the WIS boost wasn't a one-time gag?

I think that alignment evolves over time, and that there are many factors that form it.
- Most of that is education and background history (Nale and Elan as the primo example).
- Some is racial preference (Redcloak, plus his background. Sabine, Zz'dtri.).
- Age is also a factor (the rebellious good goblin teens).
- Some is personal preference (Thog likes bloodshed. IMHO, a cleverer Thog would realize that other people are not killers like him, but he'd still love to maim them.)
- A major factor is personality (Miko is an example where "chosen" class and personality interacted badly.)
- Talents and class are also important. (Samantha wasn't always evil, but her sorcerer talent and character background formed her decisions to become an evil sorceress. Might also be personal preference a bit. Even more so with Xykon and his necromancer talent. He loved it from the start, and honed it further during his life and undeath.)
- And finally, there are three mental stats. Since alignment is also "mental", the stats are very important factors in shaping it. They may change themselves (slightly) over the course of a characters life, but they are major factors, shaping the backstory. A rapid boost in a mental stat must therefore have some consequences.

--> I'm not saying that increasing WIS and INT leads to goodness - oh no. A wiser villain will have more insight in the world and how he can exploit it. A more intelligent villain will be able to come up with a cleverer plan. A more charismatic villain will have the means to convince like-minded badguys and lead them.

What if we apply all of this to Belkar? Hm. We don't know anything about his upbringing, except for a likely made-up sob story. His racial preference isn't evil, he isn't a teenager either. His chosen profession isn't evil per se, either. His personality is impulsive, his violence seems to be a personal preference seems. Still, the Giant has so far never explained WHY he is a horrible psychopath. Actually, my guess is we will never know, like with Xykon. Sometimes, there is utter evil for no reason at all.

But isn't it a possibilty, that Belkar suffers from a pretty simple mental defect? Curing that, he'd shift upwards on the good-evil axis. He could be the one exception where alignment is tied directly to a stat.

Its only a hypothesis, though, I'm not really claiming it must be so.

[veti]

--> I'm not saying that increasing WIS and INT leads to goodness - oh no. A wiser villain will have more insight in the world and how he can exploit it. A more intelligent villain will be able to come up with a cleverer plan. A more charismatic villain will have the means to convince like-minded badguys and lead them.

+1 Insightful. I have a few quibbles (e.g. in the case of goblins at least, I see no reason to suppose that their "racial preference" is anything more than the sum of their background/education), but on the whole I think you're on the money.

I sometimes wonder whether I'm the only person in the universe who sees this, but Belkar isn't particularly evil. Yes, he's a nasty little murderer and he enjoys tormenting his enemies - but compared with, say, Xykon or Nale, or even Thog, he's barely a blip on the evildar. He tortures for revenge, but not (like Xykon) just for fun. He kills for utility (including XP), but not for laughs. Most importantly - unlike almost every other evil character in the strip (Redcloak, Xykon, Tsukiko, Samantha and her dad, Bozzok, Tarquin, Kubota, Sabine, Nale...) - he has never acquired the taste for dominating and controlling others (possibly - which would be one way of interpreting the Deva's chart - because he's been under the shadow of Roy's dominant personality all this time). He has no interest in evil. He is "indifferent evil".

The Owl's Wisdom episode shows that his evil is firmly connected to his mental stats. He does the things he does because he has no empathy. (Unlike Xykon, who has plenty of empathy and uses it to revel in the suffering of his victims, chiefly Redcloak.) His relationship with Mr Scruffy is creating that empathy, and that's slowly turning him into a significantly-less-nasty person. Both his "flashes of non-evil" (releasing the allosaurus, putting some spine into Roy, standing up for Durkon, sparing the gnome) and his "proofs of continuing evil" (torturing the kobold, desecrating Buggy Lou's corpse) are related to that fast-growing empathy.

[orrion]

Sorry, I always mess up those tables.

Anyway, the point is, it is entirely possible that Elan walked around missing a less-important organ for a few months until Durkon Regenerated it, and it is entirely possible that Spiked Tentacles was an Evocation spell.

Why bother to think up some roundabout explanation for the organ when there's an obvious one that fits everything at the time?

The spell Spiked Tentacles is parodying is Conjuration. Black Tentacles (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/blackTentacles.htm). There have also been discussions about it, and I'm pretty sure the conclusion was "gag spell, because V barred Conjuration."

[littlebum2002]

Why bother to think up some roundabout explanation for the organ when there's an obvious one that fits everything at the time?

The spell Spiked Tentacles is parodying is Conjuration. Black Tentacles (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/blackTentacles.htm). There have also been discussions about it, and I'm pretty sure the conclusion was "gag spell, because V barred Conjuration."

I know which it was parodying, but the way it looks, it can possibly, albeit less accurately, be explained as an evocation spell.

My point is that both of these, while EASILY explained as "they were just gags", can also POSSIBLY be explained while still remaining canon.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I know which it was parodying, but the way it looks, it can possibly, albeit less accurately, be explained as an evocation spell.

My point is that both of these, while EASILY explained as "they were just gags", can also POSSIBLY be explained while still remaining canon.

Except how the Giant has said that he shouldn't have given Vaarsuvius that spell, listing Conjuration as a minor reason.

[littlebum2002]

Except how the Giant has said that he shouldn't have given Vaarsuvius that spell, listing Conjuration as a minor reason.

Yeah but what does he know?

[Gusion]

Belkar can use the clasp just fine, he just has to grit his teeth to do it. Being Neutral would not, based on anything he knows at this time, save his life, just save him a little pain when he's preparing for a domination attempt.

True, all we know is that it hurts. We don't know what it actually does beyond that. Presumably he has a better idea of what it is than we do, but I suppose that's just conjecture as well.

Based on gritting of his teeth, the flames, and smoke coming off him... combined with the exhausted look... well, I doubt he will be able to perform full round actions while activating it.

[orrion]

I know which it was parodying, but the way it looks, it can possibly, albeit less accurately, be explained as an evocation spell.

My point is that both of these, while EASILY explained as "they were just gags", can also POSSIBLY be explained while still remaining canon.

No, they can't.

[Big Hungry Joe]

My view is that all will be made clear if Belkar can get his enormous T-Rex back in working order. Much like winning the lottery, an enormous murder lizard companion simply makes you much more of what you already were.

[littlebum2002]

No, they can't.

Except, yes, they can. Elan's organ could possibly have been missing for hundreds of strips, we don't know. The Spiked Tentacles could possibly have been an Evocation, we don't know. Yes, Rich stated they were based off a Conjuration and therefore shouldn't have been used, but there are Evocation spells which are similar to this and therefore it could possibly belong to that school.

[RighteousWarior]

I feel that Belkar is unintentionally undergoing a real and tangible change to his character. It has been slow, but it started when shojo convinced him to "fake" his character growth. Ever since then he's been his old self but when it really mattered what he did, he did something he normally wouldn't do then threw the credit at someone else to keep up his image.

I half-way wonder if we don't have a Piccolo on our hands with Belkar. Like how training Gohan slowly changed him, Belkar is changing inadvertently because he wanted to fake change.

I dunno. Maybe I'm reading too much into it. What do you think? :smallsmile:

[Peelee]

Yeah but what does he know?

Honest question, with no condescension or sarcasm intended: are you seriously implying that the author is wrong about his own story?

[littlebum2002]

Honest question, with no condescension or sarcasm intended: are you seriously implying that the author is wrong about his own story?

Sorry, I thought the sarcasm was obvious, but I forgot: this is the internet. There probably IS someone, somewhere, who feels that way. Edited it to blue.

[Keltest]

Sorry, I thought the sarcasm was obvious, but I forgot: this is the internet. There probably IS someone, somewhere, who feels that way. Edited it to blue.

It would hardly be the first time that people have told Rich that he is breaking the rules when he writes his story.

[Darth Paul]

I sometimes wonder whether I'm the only person in the universe who sees this, but Belkar isn't particularly evil.

No, you're not.

Belkar is somewhere between Obliviously Evil (he can't comprehend another way to be, and doesn't really see that killing people who annoy him is wrong) and For The Evulz (it's just more fun to be an unrestrained murder machine). Belkar is mostly evil in the way a self-propelled lawnmower is evil: it runs over whatever is in its path, and if nobody's steering it, then there's no telling who might get hurt. When Roy is steering him, Belkar runs over the right targets, and that's good fun for everybody.

His slowly increased empathy, as you say, is slowly cutting into his "kilonazis of evil" ratio. Belkar will not ever, ever, ever turn Good (in the time he has left) and probably never even Neutral, if I'm any judge; but even bad guys can have loved ones.

[Gusion]

. Belkar will not ever, ever, ever turn Good (in the time he has left) and probably never even Neutral, if I'm any judge; but even bad guys can have loved ones.

So what would serve as sufficient evidence that he has (in some future strip) turned neutral?

I think the three most obvious are:

1. Ends up in a neutral afterlife
2. The trinket ceases to hurt him
3. Word of Giant

Is there anything short of those that would convince you?

[Peelee]

So what would serve as sufficient evidence that he has (in some future strip) turned neutral?

I think the three most obvious are:

1. Ends up in a neutral afterlife
2. The trinket ceases to hurt him
3. Word of Giant

Is there anything short of those that would convince you?

Speaking just for myself, i'd think all those were a cheap copout unless Belkar willfully stops being evil, and expresses remorse for his former life. Coincidentally, that would also convince me Belkar turned Neutral. But I'm not going to interpret any not-explicitly-evil act he does as "ZOMG GUIS he is turning neutral!!1"

[littlebum2002]

I think it would be INCREDIBLY disappointing if Belkar went through this whole redemption arc just to remain Evil. I personally think his death will be a sacrifice to save someone, which should be a Good enough act to nudge him over to Neutral.

I mean, remember his dream? His greatest pleasure isn't killing hookers, it's chilling with his CG friend and animal companion. It would be rather tragic and unfullfilling if he died without completing his redemption and ended up in the Abyss.

I just think starting someone on a redemption for hundreds of strips then killing them off without finishing it is poor storytelling. What's the point?

[Peelee]

I think it would be INCREDIBLY disappointing if Belkar went through this whole redemption arc just to remain Evil.

Hold on right quick. What makes you think it's a redemption arc? To me, it screams "stop being a one-dimensional character" arc.

[littlebum2002]

I think it started out as one, but I think the actions in the colleseum and with the gnome merchant certainly point to a decidedly "less-evil" Belkar.

Also, remember the line (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0957.html) he told Durkon about changing.

[Peelee]

I think it started out as one, but I think the actions in the colleseum and with the gnome merchant certainly point to a decidedly "less-evil" Belkar.

Also, remember the line (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0957.html) he told Durkon about changing.

His actions in the collosseum are exactly what I mean by, "not one dimensional." Just because he's not evil 100% of the time doesn't mean he's moving to neutral, it means he's moving to more depth. Evil people can care about people while still being evil. Belkar can let loose a dinosaur so Enor and Gannji don't have to kill each other and still be evil.

Again, if he establishes a pattern of willful change and regret, then I'll buy into it. I'm not entirely discounting that he could become neutral. I just don't think it'll happen, because he has no real reason to change who he is right now.

[factotum]

I'm going to make an analogy to the Star Wars prequels here--Anakin Skywalker does many, many horrible things, up to and including slaughtering children, and it was largely *his* fault that the Emperor came to power in the first place; yet his single act of killing the Emperor at the end of ROTJ is supposed to be sufficient to redeem him for all that? Not even close, mate. Similarly, I don't believe that Belkar sacrificing his life to save a single other being would be anywhere near sufficient to redeem all the people he's killed and the evil he's done. Sacrificing his life to save the entire world from the Snarl? That might just about do it.

[hamishspence]

Alignment change isn't necessarily the same thing as redemption though.

[littlebum2002]

His actions in the collosseum are exactly what I mean by, "not one dimensional." Just because he's not evil 100% of the time doesn't mean he's moving to neutral, it means he's moving to more depth. Evil people can care about people while still being evil. Belkar can let loose a dinosaur so Enor and Gannji don't have to kill each other and still be evil.

Again, if he establishes a pattern of willful change and regret, then I'll buy into it. I'm not entirely discounting that he could become neutral. I just don't think it'll happen, because he has no real reason to change who he is right now.


Alignment change isn't necessarily the same thing as redemption though.


I'm going to change my stance. You are right, maybe his alignment won't change. But I seriously doubt Belkar will die as an evil you-know-what trying to look like a decent person. I think there is going to be some sort of self-sacrifice here that redeems him in the eyes of his friends and the audience that will probably be his undoing.



I'm going to make an analogy to the Star Wars prequels here--Anakin Skywalker does many, many horrible things, up to and including slaughtering children, and it was largely *his* fault that the Emperor came to power in the first place; yet his single act of killing the Emperor at the end of ROTJ is supposed to be sufficient to redeem him for all that? Not even close, mate. Similarly, I don't believe that Belkar sacrificing his life to save a single other being would be anywhere near sufficient to redeem all the people he's killed and the evil he's done. Sacrificing his life to save the entire world from the Snarl? That might just about do it.

Did we watch the same movie? Because I distinctly remember Luke risking his own life to carry his father from the Death Star, and then giving him a Jedi hero's funeral. That looks a whole lot like redemption to me.

At least, he was redeemed in the eyes of Luke, and that's all that really matters in a story. The same goes for Belkar, as long as he can redeem himself in the eyes of the Order by some sort of heroic self-sacrifice, then he can be considered redeemed at least in the context of the story.

[hamishspence]

I'm going to change my stance. You are right, maybe his alignment won't change. But I seriously doubt Belkar will die as an evil you-know-what trying to look like a decent person. I think there is going to be some sort of self-sacrifice here that redeems him in the eyes of his friends and the audience that will probably be his undoing.

Actually I was approaching it from the opposite direction - his alignment might change - but he might still have to go through another lifetime or more of work to be "redeemed" - perhaps as a ghost.

[Keltest]

I'm going to make an analogy to the Star Wars prequels here--Anakin Skywalker does many, many horrible things, up to and including slaughtering children, and it was largely *his* fault that the Emperor came to power in the first place; yet his single act of killing the Emperor at the end of ROTJ is supposed to be sufficient to redeem him for all that? Not even close, mate. Similarly, I don't believe that Belkar sacrificing his life to save a single other being would be anywhere near sufficient to redeem all the people he's killed and the evil he's done. Sacrificing his life to save the entire world from the Snarl? That might just about do it.

I think that's an unfairly strict definition of redemption. No he didn't go out and manually right every wrong he committed. That's, for all intents and purposes, impossible even if he didn't die. However he did have a change of heart and selflessly gave his life to kill the emperor and save his son. He did not die as the person who was willing to kill kids because they had a lightsaber.

[Snails]

My belief that D&D should include alignments has more to do with marketing. I'm pretty sure there was a thread over in the gaming [roleplaying] section about "what is D&D" that included things like rolling d20s to hit, class-based progression, Vancian casting, alignments, etc. I agree that removing alignments would make a better game. Thus why I wanted the option (note that the link seems to either ignore various combat changes by a sudden lack of holy damage). I just think such a game would be "less D&D".

The reason D&D has alignments is that seems to add to the overall fun for most players, despite its obvious flaws.

Removing or de-emphasizing alignments is a trivial change. Most D&D groups simply do not bother because it is a minor effort with a negative return, at least for them.

[littlebum2002]

Actually I was approaching it from the opposite direction - his alignment might change - but he might still have to go through another lifetime or more of work to be "redeemed" - perhaps as a ghost.

That makes sense, too.

[Peelee]

Did we watch the same movie? Because I distinctly remember Luke risking his own life to carry his father from the Death Star, and then giving him a Jedi hero's funeral.
Gonna try to not derail this thread for the uninterested...
OK, here's another reason I have issues with the prequels. Before, Luke burned Vader in a funeral pyre. Respectful, and also ensures that extremists cannot desecrate the body, and the Empire cannot attempt cloning or other evil imperial what-may-have-yous with it. All fine and dandy.

Then the prequels show up, and the pyre becomes the proper way to treat a Jedi's corpse. Well then why the crap would Luke know it? Ben and Yoda gave him the emergency training, basically (I am of the thought that Luke spent at least months, possibly over a year, on Dagobah); training that lasted 20+ years for other Jedi given to Luke in a ridiculously short time frame. There's no reason to believe Yoda said, "ok, now enough of that concentration and intense mind-training. Let's discuss about proper ceremonial procedures and protocol!" Add that to the fact that the only two Jedi Luke knew had their corpses vanish when they died, and it seems like that is the norm for Jedi. So the way he disposes of his father's body just happens to coincide with the exact way the Jedi Order did it for thousands of years, and it's supposed to mean he regarded Vader as a Jedi at the end? It's as bad as the ghost of Vader reverting back to the 20-ish year-old Anakin for no reason whatsoever, instead of the 60 year-old Anakin he was when he died. Why not de-age Obi-Wan or Yoda while they're at it?

[Keltest]

Gonna try to not derail this thread for the uninterested...
OK, here's another reason I have issues with the prequels. Before, Luke burned Vader in a funeral pyre. Respectful, and also ensures that extremists cannot desecrate the body, and the Empire cannot attempt cloning or other evil imperial what-may-have-yous with it. All fine and dandy.

Then the prequels show up, and the pyre becomes the proper way to treat a Jedi's corpse. Well then why the crap would Luke know it? Ben and Yoda gave him the emergency training, basically (I am of the thought that Luke spent at least months, possibly over a year, on Dagobah); training that lasted 20+ years for other Jedi given to Luke in a ridiculously short time frame. There's no reason to believe Yoda said, "ok, now enough of that concentration and intense mind-training. Let's discuss about proper ceremonial procedures and protocol!" Add that to the fact that the only two Jedi Luke knew had their corpses vanish when they died, and it seems like that is the norm for Jedi. So the way he disposes of his father's body just happens to coincide with the exact way the Jedi Order did it for thousands of years, and it's supposed to mean he regarded Vader as a Jedi at the end? It's as bad as the ghost of Vader reverting back to the 20-ish year-old Anakin for no reason whatsoever, instead of the 60 year-old Anakin he was when he died. Why not de-age Obi-Wan or Yoda while they're at it?

Its not like a funeral pyre is an obscure method or anything. As you pointed out its respectful and practical, which is probably why it became tradition.

[Peelee]

Its not like a funeral pyre is an obscure method or anything. As you pointed out its respectful and practical, which is probably why it became tradition.

My anger is more in the backwards direction; they shouldn't have made it the typical Jedi burial method, since they had precedent with two other Jedi's deaths as becoming one with the Force. Also, it's not so much the prequels as a whole as Episode I. I can pretty much tear every part of that movie apart as ridiculous, shoe-horny, spastic tripe.

[littlebum2002]

Honestly, I don't even remember the scene from Episode 1 you are talking about. I'm referring solely to the one movie.

I don't think Luke pulled a dead body from a ship that was about to explode to keep people from desecrating the corpse, Desecrating it would be pointless even if they could find the molecules that once made up the body after it had been blown up. He retrieved the corpse because, in his mind, his father had redeemed himself by sacrificing his own body not only to save his son but thousands of other innocents whom the Emperor would eventually kill. Then, he burned the body in what appeared to be a very respectful ritual, with a look of sorrow on his face.

I mean it's pretty clear to me from the ending of that movie that Vader was redeemed in Luke's eyes.


EDIT: I don't want to talk real-world religion, but no religion on earth that I know of requires you to completely undo every misdeed you have ever done in order to atone. Usually admitting you were wrong and regretting your bad decisions is enough, and it appears that Vader did this.

[Peelee]

Honestly, I don't even remember the scene from Episode 1 you are talking about. I'm referring solely to the one movie.

I don't think Luke pulled a dead body from a ship that was about to explode to keep people from desecrating the corpse, Desecrating it would be pointless even if they could find the molecules that once made up the body after it had been blown up. He retrieved the corpse because, in his mind, his father had redeemed himself by sacrificing his own body not only to save his son but thousands of other innocents whom the Emperor would eventually kill. Then, he burned the body in what appeared to be a very respectful ritual, with a look of sorrow on his face.

I mean it's pretty clear to me from the ending of that movie that Vader was redeemed in Luke's eyes.


EDIT: I don't want to talk real-world religion, but no religion on earth that I know of requires you to completely undo every misdeed you have ever done in order to atone. Usually admitting you were wrong and regretting your bad decisions is enough, and it appears that Vader did this.

I'm referring to Qui-Gon Jinn's pyre, which was the only reason to believe it was a Jedi-specific rite. Without that scene, it could be a traditional rite for any number of cultures or planets. That you said it was a Jedi ritual made me think that you were referring to that Qui-Gon's was also burned, thus dictating burial rights for Jedi whose bodies remained corporeal upon death.

Sorry. I tend to nerd out on the Star War.

[littlebum2002]

I'm referring to Qui-Gon Jinn's pyre, which was the only reason to believe it was a Jedi-specific rite. Without that scene, it could be a traditional rite for any number of cultures or planets. That you said it was a Jedi ritual made me think that you were referring to that Qui-Gon's was also burned, thus dictating burial rights for Jedi whose bodies remained corporeal upon death.

Sorry. I tend to nerd out on the Star War.

Well, apparently I remember more than I thought I did. You're right, I do remember it somehow being a Jedi thing, I just assumed it was from Episode "Six" but clearly it wasn't.

There are much worse things to nerd out on than Star Wars.

[Peelee]

Well, apparently I remember more than I thought I did. You're right, I do remember it somehow being a Jedi thing, I just assumed it was from Episode "Six" but clearly it wasn't.

There are much worse things to nerd out on than Star Wars.

Oh, I was apologizing for the miscommunication, not the nerding out. I'm not shy about that at all.

[Snails]

Its not like a funeral pyre is an obscure method or anything. As you pointed out its respectful and practical, which is probably why it became tradition.

Also a respectful ceremony of burning has strong connotations of "cleansing", because it is a practical means of dealing with a body of a loved one who has been "corrupted" by disease. That such would be particularly apt from Luke's POV at a spiritual level was completely obvious waaaaaay back when the movie first came out.

[Peelee]

Also a respectful ceremony of burning has strong connotations of "cleansing", because it is a practical means of dealing with a body of a loved one who has been "corrupted" by disease. That such would be particularly apt from Luke's POV at a spiritual level was completely obvious waaaaaay back when the movie first came out.

For the record, several details about Vader's pyre correspond to a real-world religion's ritual. This was intentionally done, and because I enjoy not being banned from these forums, that is all I will say on the matter of spiritualism about the pyre.

[Darth Paul]

... because I enjoy not being banned from these forums, that is all I will say on the matter of spiritualism about the pyre.

May I say, we enjoy having you here.

I recall thinking, re: Episode VI, that, since Vader/Anakin didn't disappear upon death, the pyre was needed to "release" him; something I believe the novelization confirmed for me. I guess I figured Obi-Wan explained it to Luke offscreen.

[Gusion]

I mean it's pretty clear to me from the ending of that movie that Vader was redeemed in Luke's eyes.

I always took the fact that Anakin Skywalker appeared next to Yoda and Obi-Wan at the very end as the sign he was "cosmically" redeemed, not just in Luke's eyes.

[hamishspence]

In the books (and in some Lucas commentary) - "becoming a Force ghost" is something you have to learn - just being a Jedi won't do it.

So, after Anakin has died but "before his spirit fades" - Obi-Wan comes to him and offers him that chance to learn.

[Darth Paul]

In the books (and in some Lucas commentary) - "becoming a Force ghost" is something you have to learn - just being a Jedi won't do it.

So, after Anakin has died but "before his spirit fades" - Obi-Wan comes to him and offers him that chance to learn.

Hmmm.

Not to question Word Of Lucas, but that makes Anakin a really, really fast learner, considering the timeline.

1) Dies on the Death Star- mid-day Endor time, actually probably closer to 1800 considering battle going on for a considerable time, but let's give benefit of the doubt.
2) Appears as a spirit during party, probably no later than midnight.

So even if the battle and his death took place in the morning Endor time, that's still less than 16 hours to learn the trick of transmogrifying himself into a Force spirit.

I think I prefer my head-canon, that The Force itself transmuted him into a spirit as a reward for doing away with the Sith. (I know that might contradict what Ep III had to say at the end, that Qui-Gon learned how to do it and then taught Obi-Wan. Never said that was the only way to do it though.)

[littlebum2002]

Hmmm.

Not to question Word Of Lucas, but that makes Anakin a really, really fast learner, considering the timeline.

1) Dies on the Death Star- mid-day Endor time, actually probably closer to 1800 considering battle going on for a considerable time, but let's give benefit of the doubt.
2) Appears as a spirit during party, probably no later than midnight.

So even if the battle and his death took place in the morning Endor time, that's still less than 16 hours to learn the trick of transmogrifying himself into a Force spirit.

I think I prefer my head-canon, that The Force itself transmuted him into a spirit as a reward for doing away with the Sith. (I know that might contradict what Ep III had to say at the end, that Qui-Gon learned how to do it and then taught Obi-Wan. Never said that was the only way to do it though.)

Well, he DID have an unprecedented midi-chlorian count, so that probably explains why he learned so fast.

[Darth Paul]

Well, he DID have an unprecedented midi-chlorian count, so that probably explains why he learned so fast.

And I liked what Robot Chicken Star Wars Special had to say about midichlorians (Mark Hamill himself spoke the line):

"Look, if you're not gonna take this seriously, I'm out."

[scurv]

Every time I read http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0490.html It makes me debate the value of trying vs past record, Although a few pages back it indicates there that the belkster has been significantly less evil on the graph. And Roy admits to channeling belkars efforts to good ends.

[orrion]

Every time I read http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0490.html It makes me debate the value of trying vs past record, Although a few pages back it indicates there that the belkster has been significantly less evil on the graph. And Roy admits to channeling belkars efforts to good ends.

No, that means Belkar has done significantly less evil. It's not that (at the point of that comic) he's been less inclined to do it.

[Aka-chan]

The way I see it, Belkar has been moving towards Neutral, but hasn't reached it yet. The Good-Evil alignment axis isn't a set of three dots, it's a line divided into three equal segments. Belkar is still in the Evil segment of that line, but he's been inching towards the mark that divides the Neutral and Evil segments from each other. He's still Evil, but he's moving in a Neutral-ward direction. Whether he'll actually make it over the border before he dies (or at the moment of his death, if he dies in a self-sacrificial manner) is an open question.

[Darth Paul]

I just read through books 1-4 again, and it reminded me of how far Belkar has come. There was a time when he almost took a job with Xykon (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0520.html), before he remembered that flinging Mr. Scruffy in Tsukiko's face would be more fun at that moment. I can't picture him considering that deal today, not just because the party's back together, but because Belkar's changed. He's still evil, but he's "evil with friends". Belkar doesn't just fight for himself and Mr. Scruffy any more, at least that's the impression I get. He may not admit it to himself, but he is a full member of the party in a way he has never been before.
I don't know how much that adds up to an alignment change, but it's definitely a personality change.

[veti]

I just read through books 1-4 again, and it reminded me of how far Belkar has come. There was a time when he almost took a job with Xykon (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0520.html), before he remembered that flinging Mr. Scruffy in Tsukiko's face would be more fun at that moment. I can't picture him considering that deal today, not just because the party's back together, but because Belkar's changed. He's still evil, but he's "evil with friends". Belkar doesn't just fight for himself and Mr. Scruffy any more, at least that's the impression I get. He may not admit it to himself, but he is a full member of the party in a way he has never been before.
I don't know how much that adds up to an alignment change, but it's definitely a personality change.

We'll never know for sure, but I don't think Belkar was ever serious about taking that job - I thnk he was yanking Haley's chain at that point. And he's always been a team player: he went with Roy on the starmetal quest, and he signed up straight away to rescue Elan. When the inn exploded, he could have simply walked away from the party (and the obnoxious paladin), but he chose to stick with them.

Above all else, he is - always has been - a PC. For a PC to take a job with the Big Bad would mean becoming an NPC - before the player is ready to retire - and that's a fate far worse than death.

[factotum]

Saying Belkar is a team player is ignoring a heck of a lot of stuff. He tried to kill Elan for XP, don't forget, and the only reason he's ever stuck with the team has been expediency. He stayed with them in Dorukan's Dungeon because they provided an easy way to gain phat lewt, he only signed up for the starmetal quest because Roy dared him into fighting the "super tough giants" who guarded it (and once he was out in the middle of the forest it would have been dangerous to make his way back alone), and he only stayed with them through the Azure City arc because the alternative was initially prison, and later the Mark of Justice. In fact, I'm struggling to think of any moment in the first few hundred strips where he *could* have chosen to leave apart from the starmetal quest, where he got tricked.

[veti]

Saying Belkar is a team player is ignoring a heck of a lot of stuff. He tried to kill Elan for XP, don't forget, and the only reason he's ever stuck with the team has been expediency. He stayed with them in Dorukan's Dungeon because they provided an easy way to gain phat lewt, he only signed up for the starmetal quest because Roy dared him into fighting the "super tough giants" who guarded it (and once he was out in the middle of the forest it would have been dangerous to make his way back alone), and he only stayed with them through the Azure City arc because the alternative was initially prison, and later the Mark of Justice. In fact, I'm struggling to think of any moment in the first few hundred strips where he *could* have chosen to leave apart from the starmetal quest, where he got tricked.

I just mentioned one occasion: when the inn exploded.

When Elan was kidnapped by bandits, Roy was ready to walk away from him. Belkar wasn't.

On the starmetal quest, Belkar is easier to talk around than Haley. He's more willing than Vaarsuvius to fight the ogres.

After retrieving the starmetal, it took "weeks" to haul the dragon's loot up onto the cart. That's weeks of opportunities for Belkar to fill his pockets and slip off whenever he wanted to.

Sure, you can say "He was just doing it for such-and-such reason". But that's always true, of everyone. It's a little thing called roleplaying, you rationalise your decision even though the decision itself - to stay with the party - was a foregone conclusion and everyone knows it. The real reason is "because he's a PC". It's not complicated.

[littlebum2002]

I just mentioned one occasion: when the inn exploded.

When Elan was kidnapped by bandits, Roy was ready to walk away from him. Belkar wasn't.

On the starmetal quest, Belkar is easier to talk around than Haley. He's more willing than Vaarsuvius to fight the ogres.

After retrieving the starmetal, it took "weeks" to haul the dragon's loot up onto the cart. That's weeks of opportunities for Belkar to fill his pockets and slip off whenever he wanted to.

Sure, you can say "He was just doing it for such-and-such reason". But that's always true, of everyone. It's a little thing called roleplaying, you rationalise your decision even though the decision itself - to stay with the party - was a foregone conclusion and everyone knows it. The real reason is "because he's a PC". It's not complicated.

Being forced to be a team player is not the same as being a team player. That's like praising prisoners for being good members of the team that's cleaning up the highway. If you're a team player, that means you do so of your own free will, not because a guard, or narrative, forced you to.

Roy is a team player. Durkon is a team player. V, Haley, and Elan are all slightly less dedicated, but still team players. Belkar, until recently, was just a member of the team because he was forced, either by narrative conventions or more conventional means like magic, to be a member of the team. That does not make him a team player.

The only member he showed any care for at all, once, was Elan, and that's because he found Elan funny. Suddenly caring about members of his team(Heck, caring about other living creatures in general) is an entirely new concept to his character and marks a dramatic change from his old personality.

It's the difference between doing something because someone forced you to, and doing it of your own free will. And that's a HUGE difference

[Peelee]

Being forced to be a team player is not the same as being a team player. That's like praising prisoners for being good members of the team that's cleaning up the highway. If you're a team player, that means you do so of your own free will, not because a guard, or narrative, forced you to.

Roy is a team player. Durkon is a team player. V, Haley, and Elan are all slightly less dedicated, but still team players. Belkar, until recently, was just a member of the team because he was forced, either by narrative conventions or more conventional means like magic, to be a member of the team. That does not make him a team player.

The only member he showed any care for at all, once, was Elan, and that's because he found Elan funny. Suddenly caring about members of his team(Heck, caring about other living creatures in general) is an entirely new concept to his character and marks a dramatic change from his old personality.

It's the difference between doing something because someone forced you to, and doing it of your own free will. And that's a HUGE difference

But Belkar hasn't been forced since the beginning. The contract was for Xykon. Even though Xykon is still around, Roy believed him to be vanquished, and considered the contract completed. Belkar was not forcibly compelled by any of the order after that. From the defeat of the YABD until Miko found them, Belkar could have cut and run.

[littlebum2002]

But Belkar hasn't been forced since the beginning. The contract was for Xykon. Even though Xykon is still around, Roy believed him to be vanquished, and considered the contract completed. Belkar was not forcibly compelled by any of the order after that. From the defeat of the YABD until Miko found them, Belkar could have cut and run.

He was compelled to go on that quest for his own personal satisfaction at killing giants.

After killing the black Dragon, he was compelled to stay with the group because 1/6th of a bunch of cartloads of gold is a lot more money than he would have been able to haul away on his own. So he stayed with them because of greed.

Then he stayed with him for his own personal satisfaction from trying to get a Paladin to lose their powers.

Then he stayed with them because leaving them would have made his Mark of Justice go off.

After Roy died, he stayed with Haley because she could kill people he couldn't.

And then after his hippie quest he stayed with them because he wanted to fake being reformed, because then (he hoped) the rest of the order would believe he honestly became a real team player and have his back like the rest of the team.


But that particular poster was saying that none of that mattered, and that he only stayed with the Order because narrative convention forced him to, which is a good point, but which ignores the MAJOR difference between doing something because you're forced to and because you want to.


Either way, now he is following them because he is honestly (albeit not completely) reformed, and staying with them is the right thing to do. That is a very important distinction between either of the reasons ("he was forced to by selfishness" or "he was forced to because the narrative demanded it") why he was staying with them before

[veti]

Being forced to be a team player is not the same as being a team player. That's like praising prisoners for being good members of the team that's cleaning up the highway. If you're a team player, that means you do so of your own free will, not because a guard, or narrative, forced you to.

I'm sorry, you're going to have to go into some more detail about this "difference" between "doing something of your own free will" and "being forced by narrative convention to do it".

From where I sit, everyone's actions from Strip 1 onwards could be described as "forced by narrative convention". All the phrase conveys is "he's a character in a story, hence he doesn't have free will, his actions are controlled by the author" - but that's no more true of him than it is of the others.

And if "narrative convention" is a strong enough force to rob Belkar of credit for not bailing on the party when he had (several) chances to do so, then how can you blame him for his evil actions? He had exactly as much free will about his alleged attempt on Elan's life, as he did about not walking away after the inn exploded.

[Peelee]

He was compelled to go on that quest for his own personal satisfaction at killing giants.

After killing the black Dragon, he was compelled to stay with the group because 1/6th of a bunch of cartloads of gold is a lot more money than he would have been able to haul away on his own. So he stayed with them because of greed.

Then he stayed with him for his own personal satisfaction from trying to get a Paladin to lose their powers.

Then he stayed with them because leaving them would have made his Mark of Justice go off.

After Roy died, he stayed with Haley because she could kill people he couldn't.

And then after his hippie quest he stayed with them because he wanted to fake being reformed, because then (he hoped) the rest of the order would believe he honestly became a real team player and have his back like the rest of the team.


But that particular poster was saying that none of that mattered, and that he only stayed with the Order because narrative convention forced him to, which is a good point, but which ignores the MAJOR difference between doing something because you're forced to and because you want to.


Either way, now he is following them because he is honestly (albeit not completely) reformed, and staying with them is the right thing to do. That is a very important distinction between either of the reasons ("he was forced to by selfishness" or "he was forced to because the narrative demanded it") why he was staying with them before
Let's start by keeping things simple, for my argument's sake.

Before Xykon, contract was in effect. After Xykon, he volunteered to stay to kill giants. After YABD, he had no reason to stay. After Miko, he was arrested, and shortly thereafter was made aware of Xykon's continued existence. The contract was then re-enforceable.

Unless you wish to claim that the six shares of the treasure was to be divided exactly equally (as in, if there are 6 rubies, 6 diamonds, 6 emeralds, 6 pearls, 6 jets, and 6 sapphires, each stone worth exactly 100 gp, the group would only accept each person getting one of each stone instead of picking and choosing an equitable mix-and-match), Belkar could simply have taken the most expensive small items totaling up to 1/6 of the value of the hoard and, again, cut and run. So long as 5/6th of the value remains, the rest of the party would have no obvious legitimate reason to object to this.

[littlebum2002]

I'm sorry, you're going to have to go into some more detail about this "difference" between "doing something of your own free will" and "being forced by narrative convention to do it".

From where I sit, everyone's actions from Strip 1 onwards could be described as "forced by narrative convention". All the phrase conveys is "he's a character in a story, hence he doesn't have free will, his actions are controlled by the author" - but that's no more true of him than it is of the others.

And if "narrative convention" is a strong enough force to rob Belkar of credit for not bailing on the party when he had (several) chances to do so, then how can you blame him for his evil actions? He had exactly as much free will about his alleged attempt on Elan's life, as he did about not walking away after the inn exploded.

I, personally, don't agree with the whole "narrative convention" thing. I think saying something has to happen just because the story would suck otherwise is a huge cop-out. But you're the one that said that Belkar had to stay with the group because he's a PC. So even if that was the case, now he's not staying with them because he's forced to, he's staying with them because he wants to.

I personally hate taking such a meta look at a story, and would prefer to look at the characters actions on their own merits, in which case Belkar STILL had the selfish reasons I mentioned for staying with the party, up until his "Hippie Vision Quest", after which he made his first unselfish decision to stay with the party.

If you look at it this way, then he really WOULD have taken Tsusiko's offer, because although looking at it from a meta perspective it would have ruined the group and the story, from his perspective it would have been the only foreseeable way to remove the curse, which was his top priority at that point.


Let's start by keeping things simple, for my argument's sake.

Before Xykon, contract was in effect. After Xykon, he volunteered to stay to kill giants. After YABD, he had no reason to stay. After Miko, he was arrested, and shortly thereafter was made aware of Xykon's continued existence. The contract was then re-enforceable.

Unless you wish to claim that the six shares of the treasure was to be divided exactly equally (as in, if there are 6 rubies, 6 diamonds, 6 emeralds, 6 pearls, 6 jets, and 6 sapphires, each stone worth exactly 100 gp, the group would only accept each person getting one of each stone instead of picking and choosing an equitable mix-and-match), Belkar could simply have taken the most expensive small items totaling up to 1/6 of the value of the hoard and, again, cut and run. So long as 5/6th of the value remains, the rest of the party would have no obvious legitimate reason to object to this.

The treasure was so vast it took them weeks just too haul it out of the dungeon into carts. It would have probably taken more weeks to count all of it, appraise all the magic items, then count up three most valuable items and give them to Belkar. You don't count your items in the middle of a dangerous dungeon, you count them back home where it's safe.

So Belkar's only chance to leave the group then would be to find whatever looks the most valuable, throw it in a cart, and leave in the middle of the night, but most likely he'd be taking a much smaller share.

If I were a mercenary (which I am treating Belkar as up until this point), and I was party to helping find an enormous treasure, I'd follow the party back into town, or wherever they want to count it all up, too make sure I got my fair share. I mean you already spent weeks helping get the treasure, why not wait a few more days to wait until it's all counted so you get what you're owed?

[Keltest]

I, personally, don't agree with the whole "narrative convention" thing. I think saying something has to happen just because the story would suck otherwise is a huge cop-out. But you're the one that said that Belkar had to stay with the group because he's a PC. So even if that was the case, now he's not staying with them because he's forced to, he's staying with them because he wants to.

I personally hate taking such a meta look at a story, and would prefer to look at the characters actions on their own merits, in which case Belkar STILL had the selfish reasons I mentioned for staying with the party, up until his "Hippie Vision Quest", after which he made his first unselfish decision to stay with the party.

If you look at it this way, then he really WOULD have taken Tsusiko's offer, because although looking at it from a meta perspective it would have ruined the group and the story, from his perspective it would have been the only foreseeable way to remove the curse, which was his top priority at that point.



The treasure was so vast it took them weeks just too haul it out of the dungeon into carts. It would have probably taken more weeks to count all of it, appraise all the magic items, then count up three most valuable items and give them to Belkar. You don't count your items in the middle of a dangerous dungeon, you count them back home where it's safe.

So Belkar's only chance to leave the group then would be to find whatever looks the most valuable, throw it in a cart, and leave in the middle of the night, but most likely he'd be taking a much smaller share.

If I were a mercenary (which I am treating Belkar as up until this point), and I was party to helping find an enormous treasure, I'd follow the party back into town, or wherever they want to count it all up, too make sure I got my fair share. I mean you already spent weeks helping get the treasure, why not wait a few more days to wait until it's all counted so you get what you're owed?

I think you may be missing the point. Belkar is choosing, of his own volition, to stay with the party. That he is unable to leave the story due to being a main character is beside the point, as it is completely out of universe. Belkar could choose, at any point after DCF, to cut his losses and bail out. That it may not be in his best interests to do so is irrelevant, as the option is available for him to willfully not choose. Roy is not threatening Belkar with execution if he leaves, he has no (lawful) means of persecuting him should he decide to bug out, and he certainly isn't going to waste the energy needed to force Belkar to comply.

Simply put, that Belkar's best option is to be (or pretend to be) a team player does not invalidate the other options available.

[Peelee]

Haley has a high appraise skill, and as you pointed out, weeks of hauling treasure up a vertical hole. Oh, and a deep affection for money, especially at a time when she needed a sizable amount to free her father from prison. Is it then your contention that she would not use this opportunity to keep a running count as she went?

[littlebum2002]

I think you may be missing the point. Belkar is choosing, of his own volition, to stay with the party. That he is unable to leave the story due to being a main character is beside the point, as it is completely out of universe. Belkar could choose, at any point after DCF, to cut his losses and bail out. That it may not be in his best interests to do so is irrelevant, as the option is available for him to willfully not choose. Roy is not threatening Belkar with execution if he leaves, he has no (lawful) means of persecuting him should he decide to bug out, and he certainly isn't going to waste the energy needed to force Belkar to comply.

Simply put, that Belkar's best option is to be (or pretend to be) a team player does not invalidate the other options available.

I agree. I'm just looking at his reasons for staying. Up until "hippie vision quest" they were all selfish reasons. After that, they were quasi-selfish, staying for his own benefit, sure, but choosing to benefit himself by helping others rather than benefit himself by leaving with the Cleric. Recently, they have been much less selfish and more for the well being of others.

Belkar has become, since that moment, increasingly more empathetic of others, and more willing to do things to help the team.


Haley has a high appraise skill, and as you pointed out, weeks of hauling treasure up a vertical hole. Oh, and a deep affection for money, especially at a time when she needed a sizable amount to free her father from prison. Is it then your contention that she would not use this opportunity to keep a running count as she went?

This...is a very good point. I can think of two answers.

1) she chose not to share that information, since she knew he would take his share and leave, thus leaving them only 5 people hauling loot instead of 6

2) she told him after all the loot was hauled, and he figured they're going to a city, he's going to a city, why not stay with the group for protection until they get there?

[orrion]

But Belkar hasn't been forced since the beginning. The contract was for Xykon. Even though Xykon is still around, Roy believed him to be vanquished, and considered the contract completed. Belkar was not forcibly compelled by any of the order after that. From the defeat of the YABD until Miko found them, Belkar could have cut and run.

So.. you're saying he could have abandoned a heaping load of treasure and run off. I grant you he hadn't shown much inclination toward treasure, but still. If I were going to cut and run in that situation, I'd wait til AFTER I'd stored all that loot somehow.

Also, I'd count the Mark of Justice as force.

[Keltest]

So.. you're saying he could have abandoned a heaping load of treasure and run off. I grant you he hadn't shown much inclination toward treasure, but still. If I were going to cut and run in that situation, I'd wait til AFTER I'd stored all that loot somehow.

Also, I'd count the Mark of Justice as force.

Fair point about the MoJ, I had totally forgotten about that.

[Peelee]

So.. you're saying he could have abandoned a heaping load of treasure and run off.
I am indeed saying that, if you ignore all other posts I wrote after that which clarified my argument. Of course, this would be incredibly disingenuous, but you are free to do it.

Also, I'd count the Mark of Justice as force.
I would as well. Which is why the timeline I am focusing on is before the Mark of Justice was imposed upon Belkar.

[goto124]

Another reason in #42 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0042.html) :smalltongue:

[Gusion]

I think you may be missing the point. Belkar is choosing, of his own volition, to stay with the party. That he is unable to leave the story due to being a main character is beside the point, as it is completely out of universe. Belkar could choose, at any point after DCF, to cut his losses and bail out. That it may not be in his best interests to do so is irrelevant, as the option is available for him to willfully not choose. Roy is not threatening Belkar with execution if he leaves, he has no (lawful) means of persecuting him should he decide to bug out, and he certainly isn't going to waste the energy needed to force Belkar to comply.

Simply put, that Belkar's best option is to be (or pretend to be) a team player does not invalidate the other options available.

I also think that 879 had a profound impact on Belkar's attitude and future alignment. Moreso than seems to be typically mentioned.

[brian 333]

I also think that 879 had a profound impact on Belkar's attitude and future alignment. Moreso than seems to be typically mentioned.

The ultimate joke on the Belkster:
Actions, not intentions, dictate Alignment Shifts.

If he keeps faking it long enough, and successfully enough, he will discover he has gradually changed, and nobody will know what the hell happened.

[veti]

I agree. I'm just looking at his reasons for staying. Up until "hippie vision quest" they were all selfish reasons. After that, they were quasi-selfish, staying for his own benefit, sure, but choosing to benefit himself by helping others rather than benefit himself by leaving with the Cleric. Recently, they have been much less selfish and more for the well being of others.

My argument is that what's important is that he does choose to stay with, and to the best of his ability help, the rest of the party. Pretty much all the way through. Despite several opportunities to do otherwise, even safely, even (arguably) quite profitably at times.

His reasons for doing so are immaterial. The fact is that he does, and he does so consistently. In light of that, I really don't see how it's even halfway reasonable to accuse him of "not being a team player".

And that's all I'm arguing about.

[littlebum2002]

The ultimate joke on the Belkster:
Actions, not intentions, dictate Alignment Shifts.

If he keeps faking it long enough, and successfully enough, he will discover he has gradually changed, and nobody will know what the hell happened.

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be."
-Kurt Vonnegut.

This comic constantly amazes me with how deep it really is.

[Reddish Mage]

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be."
-Kurt Vonnegut.

This comic constantly amazes me with how deep it really is.

I agree, but if he started at pretending, he hasn't been for awhile.

There's plenty of examples of Belkar being a genuinely better halfling and not just pretending to be. The latest being with his latest appearance. The party isn't present so he has no reason to pretend...

[Liliet]

+1 Insightful. I have a few quibbles (e.g. in the case of goblins at least, I see no reason to suppose that their "racial preference" is anything more than the sum of their background/education), but on the whole I think you're on the money.

I sometimes wonder whether I'm the only person in the universe who sees this, but Belkar isn't particularly evil. Yes, he's a nasty little murderer and he enjoys tormenting his enemies - but compared with, say, Xykon or Nale, or even Thog, he's barely a blip on the evildar. He tortures for revenge, but not (like Xykon) just for fun. He kills for utility (including XP), but not for laughs. Most importantly - unlike almost every other evil character in the strip (Redcloak, Xykon, Tsukiko, Samantha and her dad, Bozzok, Tarquin, Kubota, Sabine, Nale...) - he has never acquired the taste for dominating and controlling others (possibly - which would be one way of interpreting the Deva's chart - because he's been under the shadow of Roy's dominant personality all this time). He has no interest in evil. He is "indifferent evil".

The Owl's Wisdom episode shows that his evil is firmly connected to his mental stats. He does the things he does because he has no empathy. (Unlike Xykon, who has plenty of empathy and uses it to revel in the suffering of his victims, chiefly Redcloak.) His relationship with Mr Scruffy is creating that empathy, and that's slowly turning him into a significantly-less-nasty person. Both his "flashes of non-evil" (releasing the allosaurus, putting some spine into Roy, standing up for Durkon, sparing the gnome) and his "proofs of continuing evil" (torturing the kobold, desecrating Buggy Lou's corpse) are related to that fast-growing empathy.

Yep.

Belkar is unquestionably Evil regarding things he does and damage he inflicts, but it's not an important part of his identity the way it is for Xykon or Tarquin. It's more or less a side effect of his empathy-less outlook, and I agree that we are seeing that outlook changed before our eyes.
I think it makes sense for there to be two different alignment judgements - "in the moment" alignment that determines things like spell effects, and "sum total" alignment that determines your afterlife. Belkar is definitely going to Lower Planes after death, but I can see him not being hurt by that talisman by the end of his arc.
Not going higher than Chaotic Neutral, though - I actually see that as his "natural" alignment. He has no motivation to be anything else. His conscious view of his identity as I understand it is very Chaotic, which is how he relates to Shojo easier than to Tarquin. Being Good requires conscious trying and valuing the ideals of Good, which is something Belkar is not going to do in the limited timespan he has before he kicks the bucket. However, I can see his passive empathy, doing nice things to others on a whim, because he felt like it, being enough for Neutral alignment.
He doesn't derive pleasure from asserting his power over others - which might indeed be due to Roy being in charge of him. His comments on "satisfying thumps" and the like tell me more about his need for stimulation - he wants to hear, to see, to feel, to get that victory rush from overcoming an adversary much larger than him. He derives pleasure from 1) adrenalin rushes of danger, which is probably a common trait of all adventurers and not in any way Evil-specific, and 2) doing well what he does best. Which happens to be killing. Which, in the absence of any moral compass, leads his actions to be Evil. But given he is currently in a Good party doing the Good quest, does not have to.

I'm not saying the Giant will definitely give Belkar a character arc that leads to him changing alignment. I'm just saying if he does, it won't be completely illogical out of the blue.

PS Oh, and in that case I'm looking forward to a gag of Belkar activating his Protection from Evil talisman, being surprised at not being shocked, and saying that it must be broken. Cue it working and weird glances from the rest of the party as Belkar remains in steady denial.


PPS To clarify
People keep saying that high mental stats do not mean non-Evil alignment nor does empathy by itself
and they certainly don't
not for all characters
not being one-dismensional doesn't mean not being a villain
but SPECIFICALLY PERSONALLY Belkar's evil stems from his one-dismensionality
it won't work that way for pretty much any other villain we've seen in this comic (maybe Thog or Crystal, idk) but for Belkar, character development DOES mean moving up alignment-wise
and that early comic strip, while not necessarily fully canon, is evidence that Giant himself sees it this way

[orrion]

it won't work that way for pretty much any other villain we've seen in this comic (maybe Thog or Crystal, idk) but for Belkar, character development DOES mean moving up alignment-wise
and that early comic strip, while not necessarily fully canon, is evidence that Giant himself sees it this way

Or it's evidence that the Giant thought that it was funny (and he was right). The strip back then had no real plot to speak of, so I think it's a little questionable to use it to try and glean anything like that out of it.

[Liliet]

Or it's evidence that the Giant thought that it was funny (and he was right). The strip back then had no real plot to speak of, so I think it's a little questionable to use it to try and glean anything like that out of it.
Well, obviously it was a gag. However, it's worth considering that it was a gag that actually worked and that Giant decided to go with. Character-based humor usually tells us things about characters. The effect of the spell was absolutely exaggerated for funnies in a decidedly non-canon way, but the general direction is there. I doubt a similar gag would have worked with Nale, Sabine, Xykon or Redcloak. Evil through ignorance is specifically Belkar's thing.

[Keltest]

Well, obviously it was a gag. However, it's worth considering that it was a gag that actually worked and that Giant decided to go with. Character-based humor usually tells us things about characters. The effect of the spell was absolutely exaggerated for funnies in a decidedly non-canon way, but the general direction is there. I doubt a similar gag would have worked with Nale, Sabine, Xykon or Redcloak. Evil through ignorance is specifically Belkar's thing.

I don't know about "through" ignorance, specifically, as that seems to imply that he is not intentionally being evil. He absolutely is. He makes no secret of that. I know its probably not what you meant, but its as good as any a line for me to latch on to and add my own point.

Belkar finds amusement in evil, which is why he does it. Per the Giant's insights in BRITF though, I think I agree with him that Belkar is slowly coming to realize that most people don't consider the pain and suffering funny, and that he is doing horrible things to people. In other words, he is learning that maybe evil isn't a toy.

[Liliet]

I don't know about "through" ignorance, specifically, as that seems to imply that he is not intentionally being evil. He absolutely is. He makes no secret of that. I know its probably not what you meant, but its as good as any a line for me to latch on to and add my own point.

Belkar finds amusement in evil, which is why he does it. Per the Giant's insights in BRITF though, I think I agree with him that Belkar is slowly coming to realize that most people don't consider the pain and suffering funny, and that he is doing horrible things to people. In other words, he is learning that maybe evil isn't a toy.

I don't remember who, but /someone/ pointed out that Evil doesn't seem to have quite the same stigma as IRL attached to it in OotSworld. There are folks like Miko who consider it enough for summary execution, but those are the extremist weirdos not representing even their own alignment.

So yeah, Belkar was doing Evil knowing that it was Evil, but not knowing what Evil was. If this makes sense? He did not think about / realize the implications of his actions, actually consider the fact that other people are more than just objects. Tarquin, Xykon, Nale, etc consider it and use it to their advantage and glee. Belkar has this entering his awareness, and suddenly "bad enough I was..." enters his lexicon.

[Keltest]

I don't remember who, but /someone/ pointed out that Evil doesn't seem to have quite the same stigma as IRL attached to it in OotSworld. There are folks like Miko who consider it enough for summary execution, but those are the extremist weirdos not representing even their own alignment.

So yeah, Belkar was doing Evil knowing that it was Evil, but not knowing what Evil was. If this makes sense? He did not think about / realize the implications of his actions, actually consider the fact that other people are more than just objects. Tarquin, Xykon, Nale, etc consider it and use it to their advantage and glee. Belkar has this entering his awareness, and suddenly "bad enough I was..." enters his lexicon.

I think a good analogy is that Belkar is a little boy playing with some Legos or action figures. Sometimes its fun to smash things together, especially when you don't have the attention span to take the time to actually build anything. But you don't consider that maybe you shouldn't be breaking your toys like that, because the toys cant care. Theyre interchangeable and replaceable. Belkar is treating people like his toy chest, not realizing the impact that his actions have on people.

But slowly, he is experiencing some of that impact himself. His bond with Mr Scruffy. Durkon sacrificing himself for Belkar. Belkar is suddenly understanding what his actions do to people, and he isn't necessarily comfortable with that.

[Liliet]

I think a good analogy is that Belkar is a little boy playing with some Legos or action figures. Sometimes its fun to smash things together, especially when you don't have the attention span to take the time to actually build anything. But you don't consider that maybe you shouldn't be breaking your toys like that, because the toys cant care. Theyre interchangeable and replaceable. Belkar is treating people like his toy chest, not realizing the impact that his actions have on people.

But slowly, he is experiencing some of that impact himself. His bond with Mr Scruffy. Durkon sacrificing himself for Belkar. Belkar is suddenly understanding what his actions do to people, and he isn't necessarily comfortable with that.

I guess I'm just really not comfortable with your preferred way of describing this...
but yeah, overall, we don't disagree. Belkar's Evil comes from lack of awareness, char dev => more awareness => less Evil.

I think this talisman appearing makes it much more likely that Belkar WILL switch alignments. Not because he'll decide to, but because it's a perfect setup for /revealing/ his alignment change in an off-handed, easy-to-miss, not cheesy, but unambiguous way.

[Keltest]

I guess I'm just really not comfortable with your preferred way of describing this...
but yeah, overall, we don't disagree. Belkar's Evil comes from lack of awareness, char dev => more awareness => less Evil.

I think this talisman appearing makes it much more likely that Belkar WILL switch alignments. Not because he'll decide to, but because it's a perfect setup for /revealing/ his alignment change in an off-handed, easy-to-miss, not cheesy, but unambiguous way.

Indeed, although I think it will stand out when he uses it without burning because any circumstance that warrants its use it going to be immediately visible to us as such, and he wont be on fire when he uses it.

[Liliet]

Indeed, although I think it will stand out when he uses it without burning because any circumstance that warrants its use it going to be immediately visible to us as such, and he wont be on fire when he uses it.

I think it was pretty clearly shown that "on fire" was an audience-only visual effect - the gnome seemed to only have Belkar's reactions to go by.
And the situation of him activating it without pain is
a) likely to be a part of an intense action sequence (my guess here);
b) expressed in something NOT happening. Him not being successfully dominated, him not being in pain. In the middle of intense action sequence? Even Belkar himself might not take notice beyond "huh" of that. I mean, the forumites certainly would notice, and that's why I said "unambiguous".
But by "cheesy" and so on I meant something like Grand Judgement Heaven Scene or Belkar sacrificing his life to save a teammate (not saying it won't happen, I just think the change of alignment should be before and separate from that) or pretty much any scene (unobstructed Detect Evil?) that warrants immediate reactions from the whole party a la "GASP! Belkar not Evil?! Drama!"

[rodneyAnonymous]

I think it was pretty clearly shown that "on fire" was an audience-only visual effect - the gnome seemed to only have Belkar's reactions to go by.

Has there ever been an audience-only visual effect?

[Liliet]

Has there ever been an audience-only visual effect?

Giant said (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?384629-OOTS-968-The-Discussion-Thread&p=18433180#post18433180) that he intended swirly eyes to be audience-only, but shot himself in the foot with 4th wall breaking jokes.

Note how the gnome asked what was wrong after Belkar activated the amulet, and he had to explain that it hurt. You'd think with fire starting around him it would be visually obvious for her, but either fire is an effect that is there regardless of whether it is actively hurting someone (which I doubt), or she didn't perceive it.
Then, Belkar pretended to /not/ be in pain any more on the third fire panel. It's pretty obviously fake, but the gnome seems to have bought it and thought it was the amulet being broken and not Belkar being Evil - which requires that she not see the fire. I doubt Belkar's Bluff check is Haley-with-potion-of-Glibness levels.

Also, all movement lines are I think audience-only, for example? Like Crystal punching Elan off-panel in the latest strip.

[Keltest]

I think it was pretty clearly shown that "on fire" was an audience-only visual effect - the gnome seemed to only have Belkar's reactions to go by.
And the situation of him activating it without pain is
a) likely to be a part of an intense action sequence (my guess here);
b) expressed in something NOT happening. Him not being successfully dominated, him not being in pain. In the middle of intense action sequence? Even Belkar himself might not take notice beyond "huh" of that. I mean, the forumites certainly would notice, and that's why I said "unambiguous".
But by "cheesy" and so on I meant something like Grand Judgement Heaven Scene or Belkar sacrificing his life to save a teammate (not saying it won't happen, I just think the change of alignment should be before and separate from that) or pretty much any scene (unobstructed Detect Evil?) that warrants immediate reactions from the whole party a la "GASP! Belkar not Evil?! Drama!"
Oh, I see, youre referring to not obvious in the in-comic sense, not to us as an audience.

[Liliet]

Oh, I see, youre referring to not obvious in the in-comic sense, not to us as an audience.

Given the number of questions I saw regarding why Belkar wasn't burned by the clasp the second time?
I'm pretty sure it won't be obvious to the entirety of the audience, either :smallbiggrin:

[Darth Paul]

I think a good analogy is that Belkar is a little boy playing with some Legos or action figures. Sometimes its fun to smash things together, especially when you don't have the attention span to take the time to actually build anything. But you don't consider that maybe you shouldn't be breaking your toys like that, because the toys cant care. Theyre interchangeable and replaceable. Belkar is treating people like his toy chest, not realizing the impact that his actions have on people.

But slowly, he is experiencing some of that impact himself. His bond with Mr Scruffy. Durkon sacrificing himself for Belkar. Belkar is suddenly understanding what his actions do to people, and he isn't necessarily comfortable with that.

In real life, someone with this level of "lack of empathy" would probably be considered a sociopath, and in fact I think Belkar has been described as that at least a few times in the comic. Since his pathology was 1) in a comic strip, 2) played for laughs 99% of the time, and 3) aimed at appropriate targets 99% of the time, we were generally untroubled by it, as were his teammates. But as you point out, Belkar is now something of a recovering sociopath, due to his fake character development becoming real character development via his relationship with Mr. Scruffy. True sociopaths usually never genuinely care about anyone other than themselves and experience no empathy, ever (and for an example, we need turn no further than Xykon); somehow, Belkar seemingly found the beginnings of a cure.

[Liliet]

In real life, someone with this level of "lack of empathy" would probably be considered a sociopath, and in fact I think Belkar has been described as that at least a few times in the comic. Since his pathology was 1) in a comic strip, 2) played for laughs 99% of the time, and 3) aimed at appropriate targets 99% of the time, we were generally untroubled by it, as were his teammates. But as you point out, Belkar is now something of a recovering sociopath, due to his fake character development becoming real character development via his relationship with Mr. Scruffy. True sociopaths usually never genuinely care about anyone other than themselves and experience no empathy, ever (and for an example, we need turn no further than Xykon); somehow, Belkar seemingly found the beginnings of a cure.

Are you qualified to talk about mental illness?

I'm not, I only feel comfortable discussing the effects I directly see in characters' actions on-panel, not their root causes in brain chemistry or controversial definitions.

[GM_3826]

I seriously doubt that Belkar will become anything more than a very dark shade of Chaotic Neutral. Then again, I suppose most of you feel the same way.
Belkar doesn't necessarily have to always be evil, but as a generalization he will always be dangerously close.