Favorite OOTS Character Tournament: NO MERCY! #5 BELKAR v #1 VAARSUVIUS

[alwaysbebatman]

VOTING IS CLOSED

"THERE IS NO MERCY IN THE WORLD"

#5 BELKAR

http://i.imgur.com/rQdN3rg.png

VS

#1 VAARSUVIUS

http://i.imgur.com/4TsX3hW.png

MUST THEY? LET'S FIND OUT!

http://i.imgur.com/fkvG0Dvg.png

[Chei]

I'm proud of the halfling for beating out Roy (thanks in part to today's comic?). That said, V.

[Potatomade]

Because of the most recent strip, and because O-Chul vs Belkar would be hilarious:

BELKAR! V's a better character in almost every respect, but I just can't say no to that slow, creeping character development Belkar's got going. It's a thing of beauty.

[alwaysbebatman]

I'm proud of the halfling for beating out Roy (thanks in part to today's comic?)

4 votes were cast today, all for Belkar. He won 26/25.

So: yeah, quite possibly.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Vaarsuvius.

[Euclidodese]

Belkar beat Roy?! Praise the mighty lord Atheismo!

I'm voting for the halfling highlight reel, the one-man wrecking crew, and the good old fashioned handsome man:
Your Boy, your hook-up and your main squeeze. Mr no spells needed and no f***s given. Belkar "I'll turn your skeleton to gelatin." Bitterleaf.

[137beth]

V is my favorite character in the entire comic.

[Liquor Box]

It is an interesting contest this one. Both have been clearly (IMO) established as evil at about the midpoint of the comic (to date), and both have had an arc focussed on their redemption since.

For me, Belkar’s redemption is the more realistic, better written, and more interesting redemption story. V’s redemption is the standard and obvious story of “realise I have done something terrible , feel bad about it, and try to improve myself” – no relapses, no apparent struggles with the ‘being a better elf’ aspect of it, just plain sailing. Belkar on the other hand has taken a much more nuanced approach to redemption. Initially he merely realised it would be to his advantage to simply play the game – to pretend not to be evil for his own advantage. But, in the course of doing this it appears that he has actually become less evil, albeit with moments of regression. This strikes me as far more interesting and realistic than an immediate about turn. I mean V’s storyline can be summed up with “… then V decided to be good and lived happily ever after”, but B’s cannot.

I will refrain from voting now, so I can read other people’s posts and see if they change my mind.

[zimmerwald1915]

V’s redemption is the standard and obvious story of “realise I have done something terrible , feel bad about it, and try to improve myself” – no relapses, no apparent struggles with the ‘being a better elf’ aspect of it, just plain sailing.
Missed the entirety of Book 5, Yukyuk and all?

Also holding off voting for now.

[Mandor]

Vaarsuvius, no question.

Hippie-Vision-Quest Shojo was right about Belkar becoming a one dimensional figure. Progressing in only one direction, and not even an interesting one at that.
Yes, I have just earn max aggro with a legion of Belkar fans. I get that.

But while Belkar can have comedic gold moments, ultimately, he's a gimmicky stab machine that has no real endgame, no real goals in life other than to stab things that annoy him, has no real remorse for any of his past evil actions. He's slowly learning shame, and Mr. Scruffy is a mollifying influence on him. But he's still an unrepentant evil bastard who unlike Redcloak, doesn't even have a real clear motive for acting as he does. He's running on inertia, wtih the order because he's with the order.

V is seriously obsessive and is very quick to use his power in ruthless manner. But as after "Disintegrate! Gust of Wind!" he wanted to get them back on track to SAVING THE WORLD. And accepted the divorce and loss of custody of his children to that end. I just find him a more compelling and believeable character. I could understand a someone making all the decisions he makes, for the reasons he makes them (yes, I guess I mentally think of V as male, given the pronoun I'm using, but I know that's not certain and will never BE certain)

[alwaysbebatman]

Vaarsuvius, no question.

Hippie-Vision-Quest Shojo was right about Belkar becoming a one dimensional figure. Progressing in only one direction, and not even an interesting one at that.


The point of that scene was to point Belkar in a different direction, which he has since then.




(yes, I guess I mentally think of V as male, given the pronoun I'm using, but I know that's not certain and will never BE certain)

Do we have ANY reason to believe that elves have gender?

[Euclidodese]

Do we have ANY reason to believe that elves have gender?

Yeah, I was about to make that same point, pronouns aren't related to physical sex, so using 'he' because you guess that V's physically male doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Durokan refers to Lirian as 'she,' but she might be an oddball by Elf standards.

Probably more appropriate to use neutral pronouns, but I doubt V would care either way.

[Zaclock]

It is an interesting contest this one. Both have been clearly (IMO) established as evil at about the midpoint of the comic (to date), and both have had an arc focussed on their redemption since.

For me, Belkar’s redemption is the more realistic, better written, and more interesting redemption story. V’s redemption is the standard and obvious story of “realise I have done something terrible , feel bad about it, and try to improve myself” – no relapses, no apparent struggles with the ‘being a better elf’ aspect of it, just plain sailing. Belkar on the other hand has taken a much more nuanced approach to redemption. Initially he merely realised it would be to his advantage to simply play the game – to pretend not to be evil for his own advantage. But, in the course of doing this it appears that he has actually become less evil, albeit with moments of regression. This strikes me as far more interesting and realistic than an immediate about turn. I mean V’s storyline can be summed up with “… then V decided to be good and lived happily ever after”, but B’s cannot.

I will refrain from voting now, so I can read other people’s posts and see if they change my mind.

First, let's put in my vote: V. I vote for laughs, character development and style rather than a character being good or evil. V is the best character of the comic.

However, V's story arc is not the one you suggested. V was not evil: V was (and still is) a moral agnostic, (s)he didn't care. V cared about arcane power and arcane power only. Remember when (s)he is the only one to protest against helping the dirt farmers.

The starting point of the interpretation changes everything. V's redemption is not about becoming good. To that effect, V's scenes where (s)he controls the kobold in the desert clearly show that being a good person is still not V's objective. Regarding good and evil, V learned the hard way that these concerns *do* matter and that they should be integrated as a new parameter is his/her analyses. I doubt, however, that being "good" has become a goal.

V's redemption is about accepting that seeking arcane power was not a fulfilling life purpose and, from there, try to give a new meaning to his/her life. Saving the world is now the new objective. Before the fallout, V's life purpose was to become so powerful to make his/her own existence an end. Lines along "I endeavour to become the most powerful wizard that ever set foot on this plane" were uttered a few times. Now, V's life purpose is rather to become a (hopefully useful and efficient) means to an end that is more important than who (s)he is. That is the challenge. That is the redemption. We are stronger when working together than in isolation. Good or bad? Meh. At the moment, I'm pretty sure V would accept doing bad actions for the sake of Inkarius if, after carefully calculating all the consequences, no bad results were to follow.

Human society and philosophy tend to bring us to consider things as either good or bad. Neutral characters are much more difficult to develop. It is socially uncomfortable to think that some people think and act in this way, or we simplify those lifestyles as evil or corrupted. Moral issues in the realm of neutrality are much more difficult to understand. The Giant has done a magnificient job creating V.

[Zaclock]

(That being said, I am supremely happy that Belkar beat Roy. Belkar is a much more interesting character. Case in point: the current story arc and today's comic. Of course, he is evil. But he is evil with style.)

[alwaysbebatman]

Probably more appropriate to use neutral pronouns, but I doubt V would care either way.

I think it's well established that the elf wouldn't notice the gender of a pronoun. Or anything else for that matter.

[skaddix]

V no contest and yes I am salty.

[Liquor Box]

Missed the entirety of Book 5, Yukyuk and all?

Also holding off voting for now.

Yes, fair enough, he did do more bad stuff which I forgot. But I don't think that was presented by the comic as a relapse or part of his struggle. In fact, from memory it came before his decision to be more good (after he realised the consequences of his genocidal act).

[Liquor Box]

Yeah, I was about to make that same point, pronouns aren't related to physical sex, so using 'he' because you guess that V's physically male doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Durokan refers to Lirian as 'she,' but she might be an oddball by Elf standards.

Probably more appropriate to use neutral pronouns, but I doubt V would care either way.

Many people do use pronouns to refer to physical sex, and that use is consistent with the dictionary definition. It's fine to use pronouns to refer to gender identity, but it is not wrong to use them to refer to sex either.

[Liquor Box]

First, let's put in my vote: V. I vote for laughs, character development and style rather than a character being good or evil. V is the best character of the comic.

However, V's story arc is not the one you suggested. V was not evil: V was (and still is) a moral agnostic, (s)he didn't care. V cared about arcane power and arcane power only. Remember when (s)he is the only one to protest against helping the dirt farmers.
This is evil you describe. Caring only about power (arcane or otherwise) is a huge driver of evilness. Most people would also require evil actions (and V certainly has that in his CV), but if you look at the underlying attitude what you describe is the posterchild for evil.

Hitler is perhaps the most accepted real world example of evil, but he didn't commit his evil acts simply because he wanted to promote evil. He committed evil acts as a means to an end and that end was gain more power.


The starting point of the interpretation changes everything. V's redemption is not about becoming good. To that effect, V's scenes where (s)he controls the kobold in the desert clearly show that being a good person is still not V's objective. Regarding good and evil, V learned the hard way that these concerns *do* matter and that they should be integrated as a new parameter is his/her analyses. I doubt, however, that being "good" has become a goal.

V's redemption is about accepting that seeking arcane power was not a fulfilling life purpose and, from there, try to give a new meaning to his/her life. Saving the world is now the new objective. Before the fallout, V's life purpose was to become so powerful to make his/her own existence an end. Lines along "I endeavour to become the most powerful wizard that ever set foot on this plane" were uttered a few times. Now, V's life purpose is rather to become a (hopefully useful and efficient) means to an end that is more important than who (s)he is. That is the challenge. That is the redemption. We are stronger when working together than in isolation. Good or bad? Meh. At the moment, I'm pretty sure V would accept doing bad actions for the sake of Inkarius if, after carefully calculating all the consequences, no bad results were to follow.

Ok, so you think his purpose is not to be good, but to save the world. I'm not convinced, because that doesn't explain some of his actions (ie, giving the bird some attention). But if your interpretation were correct at least his story would be more interesting.


Human society and philosophy tend to bring us to consider things as either good or bad. Neutral characters are much more difficult to develop. It is socially uncomfortable to think that some people think and act in this way, or we simplify those lifestyles as evil or corrupted. Moral issues in the realm of neutrality are much more difficult to understand. The Giant has done a magnificient job creating V.
It is not real life philosophies of good vs evil on which I am drawing, but the rules of DnD under which the OotS world operates. Here is that definition of evil:
"Evil implies harming, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient or if it can be set up. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some malevolent deity or master."
It will be clear to you that some are evil despite not actively pursuing evil, whereas 'others' actively pursue evil. So just because V's personal philosophy is not one of pursuing evil, he can still be evil. By that definition he is evil because he failed to have compassion for others (like the innocent dragons he killed, or the kobold he enslaved) and because he used his powers without qualms because it was convenient (eg disintegrating the baddy and threatening Elan).

[Ruck]

Do we have ANY reason to believe that elves have gender?
Lirian seems to clearly identify (or at least be identified by others) as female; Vaarsuvius' gender isn't clear (nor is Inkyrius'), but the Giant did use "genderqueer" and not "agender" to describe V, so I'm assuming Elves do have genders, though not limited to the male/female binary.

[Hamste]

I vote Belkar though I do like both characters.

[Laurana]

I totally love them both. It's a tough choice but I do prefer Belkar Bitterleaf.

[drazen]

As a certain Thieves' Guild orc once said, "Screw the halfling!"

(especially for beating Roy, who I like way better...)

I vote for Vaarsuvius.

[Peelee]

Vaarsuvius

[littlebum2002]

Missed the entirety of Book 5, Yukyuk and all?

Also holding off voting for now.

YukYuk was before V came to their realization in the temple of how terrible their actions were, so not sure how that's relevant to V's redemption arc that starts after that event.

You might as well claim that Belkar killing the gnome is proof against his redemption, even though said redemption didn't start until his hippie vision quest.


This is evil you describe. Caring only about power (arcane or otherwise) is a huge driver of evilness. Most people would also require evil actions (and V certainly has that in his CV), but if you look at the underlying attitude what you describe is the posterchild for evil.


It is not real life philosophies of good vs evil on which I am drawing, but the rules of DnD under which the OotS world operates. Here is that definition of evil:
"Evil implies harming, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient or if it can be set up. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some malevolent deity or master."

I love that you give a definition for Evil, and then in the same post, give a source which proves your original definition wrong. Nowhere does the source you posted say that caring only about power is an Evil action.

In the D&D universe (as the source you yourself posted describes), thirst for power itself is not evil. Therefore, V was clearly Neutral.

[Present 2.0]

Not that Roy and V would end up head to head in the first place. V has no chance of beating Haley, not if she could barely edge out Wrecan.

Well, at least the first part came true.

Also, in what Universe is 23-13 "barely edge out"?

[KorvinStarmast]

This is evil you describe. Caring only about power (arcane or otherwise) is a huge driver of evilness. Sauron, as case in point.
This one is a bit of a puzzler for me, as I enjoy both characters for different reasons, and dislike both characters for different reasons. I was sad Roy lost to Belkar.

And then someone posted this.
I'm voting for the halfling highlight reel, the one-man wrecking crew, and the good old fashioned handsome man: Your Boy, your hook-up and your main squeeze. Mr no spells needed and no f***s given. Belkar "I'll turn your skeleton to gelatin" Bitterleaf. Since this is something like a cage match, and I have no skin in the game, and I recall some fantastic announcer riffs like this for boxing and other intros, I'll go ahead and vote for

:belkar: Belkar :belkar:

(Won't be sad if :vaarsuvius: V :vaarsuvius: wins).

[aurilee]

Belkar Bitterleaf

Favourite character.
Reason I kept coming back to this comic after I first discovered it.
Basically a halfling version of my first ever character.
Has a cat.

[Dr.Zero]

My #1 vs my #4 (IIRC), thus my vote goes to Belkar.

[Synesthesy]

Sexy Shoeless God of War. Period.

Why?
Because I have always liked Belkar, and I find his story a little bit more interesting.

While I am a fan of V too, I still prefer when a strip tell something about Belkar, and this is second only to Reddy (and maybe Haylelan), and this is instinct, I can't explein this.
Still, the Darth V ark is one of my favourite, also for the "power equals power" speach of Xykon (the speach I think say that he isn't using any rod of metamagic but it IS of high epic level, but this is about another nerdy threat :) ), and I like the faustian like story (my favourite music album is Epica from Kamelot, that is Faust inspired, for example). But it's not enough to beat Belkar.

But I have to say that, IMHO, V has always been a little evil, even before the faustian deal. V is a good example that giving a person too much power and (s)he'll use if for all the wrong reason to do wrong things. V always used Arcane Power for doing wrong things, she really thought that the size of an explosion would solve any social problem, she is easy angry and vengeful, and she hadn't been a good mate or a good parent. Too much dedition to personal power means nothing when we ignore people who love us. It's the same problem that Eugene Greenhilt had, and he clearly is not a good person.

So, I prefer the genuine evil Belkar, who IS evil and he's proud of it, then faking-neutrality V.

Then there is Belkar growth. As I said in Redcloak vs O-Chul thread, personal growth and conflict are the soul of a good story.
The key here is Mr Scruffy: before the cat, the Belkster was a one dimension CE all-murderer character. But after something changed, even before the mark of justice ark. He understan what does means love another being, he understand what is society, when you can use violence to solve problems and when you can't. The best moment is when he image himself and the cat instead of Enor and Gannji in the arena.
Then Durkon, who is not showing liking Belkar so much, sacrificied his own life to save him. And he is the only one to understand that Greg is not Durkon.

I think that Belkar is now a full character, one of the most interesting ones, and while he's still evil, he is evil at his own way.

PS: I don't think Belkie will die at all, if we consider "dieing" as "disappearing from the comic's world".

[martianmister]

Vaarsuvius all the way.

[Bob_McSurly]

Yeah, I was about to make that same point, pronouns aren't related to physical sex,



Um.... Traditionally they are? I guess in the last century it has become true that sex isn't IDENTICAL to gender, but biologically male people are still called "he" far more often than "she".

[alwaysbebatman]

Man, do we really have to bring real life politics into this? I don't wanna.

I think regardless of ones... views... on gender issues in real life, within this fantasy story it is well established that Vaarsuvius is entirely blind to the very concept of gender.

[Ornithologist]

Belkar


Mostly because I am super excited to see what happens to him now. Does he try to redeem himself? Does he die before he gets the opportunity? Does his prophecy get twisted so that he survives? (I'm hoping that the answer is no. but still!)

V's post story adventures will be at best living in a 1 bedroom apartment with a microwave and no stove. V will have 3-day a week custody of the kids and will exchange cold/ just barely polite courtesies with Inky who has allowed the up in custody only because of V's years of efforts in attempting to reconcile, plus V's role in saving the world.

Basically, I see V's future as the stereotypical divorced dad, who really doesn't have control over his life anymore.

[elros]

It's Belkar, and it's not even close. Aside from the "he never blamed me" line, he also said one of the most insightful statements about character development:
"People don't just change who they are inside an instant. It doesn't work like that. It takes time, so you don't even know you're changing. Until one day, you're just a little bit different than you used to be and you can't even tell what the hell happened (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0957.html)."
V displays none of that growth or insight. The only reason V regrets the bargain with the IFCC is that it didn't work out the way V wanted it to. V is like the criminal who is remorseful for having been caught- it is about the consequence, not the act.

And in the end, V is a jerk, but Belkar is a funny jerk. So the vote goes to the guy with the punchlines!

[Potatomade]

Strictly speaking, nothing was wrong with the IFCC deal. The terms, as laid out, aren't automatically evil. It's what V did with the power he got from the deal that was evil, and that's what V regrets. V regrets committing the crime of Familicide, not the IFCC deal, which to me is entirely appropriate. Properly used, the power from that deal could have wrapped up this entire story. The problem is that it was improperly used, and lots of people unnecessarily died, and will die, because of that.

[Joerg]

Vaarsuvius.

[Present 2.0]

The only reason V regrets the bargain with the IFCC is that it didn't work out the way V wanted it to. V is like the criminal who is remorseful for having been caught- it is about the consequence, not the act.

I really don't understand, how you came to that conclusion.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0866.html

"My doom at the hands of a legitimate revenant would have provided some small token of cosmic justice."

One of their first instincts was to let themselve get caught for justice.

I vote for V.

While I think Belkars Arc from evil to "a little bit better" is better done and more subtle, I still enjoyed the comics with V in his pit of Despair, even though it wasn't the most clean way for introspection. I also find V legitimately funnier. Belkars Humor never did it for me.

And with V we've at least some Reasons for why they did evil stuff. They got mad with power. They were ignorant of the implication of their new toy and of the possibility, that the race, that they thought to be evil wasn't totally evil. They were overprotective of their family.

Of course those Reasons don't justifie the act, but they are at least reasons. Belkar on the other hand kills people as a punchline.

StreamOfTheSky said, that they liked Belkar more because he owns up to being evil. To me, that makes him more boring. I never liked that "At least I admit"-Logic, that said evil people were somehow better, when they knew it. I like it more, to read about hypocrites. Hey, some of my Favorite Characters are even worse Hypocrites than V and think, that all their actions, aren't who they're really and that they are still a good guy deep inside, even if they really aren't. For most of the Comic, what Belkar was on the outside, was exactly what he was on the inside and that was neither interesting nor funny to me.

[Fincher]

One more for Belkar.

[Bob_McSurly]

I vote for Belkar. Why vote for the lesser evil when you can vote for the greater evil?
Also, strip 807 was one of the most emotional moments in the series, personally.

[Ruck]

Well, at least the first part came true.

Also, in what Universe is 23-13 "barely edge out"?

Zimmerwald hates Vaarsuvius so much they'll literally rewrite easily verifiable facts just to make V look worse.

The one thing I find interesting when talking about Vaarsuvius' alignment is: Are we discussing what the sum total of their actions add up to, or what perspective the character thinks from? Rich has said that when he identifies a character's alignment, he's talking about the perspective he writes the character from. Vaarsuvius may have pushed into the evil register from a "sum total of actions" point, but I still see V as someone who sees from a point of view of, or self-identifies as, a True Neutral character. Hence all the horror at discovering the widespread consequences of Familicide-- I don't think a truly evil character would feel remorse or attempt to repent. (I imagine Tarquin, for example, shrugging and saying something about how you have to break a few eggs to make a revenge omelet, and not really thinking about it again.)

Anyway, my vote is for Belkar, whose character development and discovery of qualities he didn't know he had and feelings he didn't know he was capable of haven't stopped him from being funny.

[elros]

Strictly speaking, nothing was wrong with the IFCC deal. The terms, as laid out, aren't automatically evil. It's what V did with the power he got from the deal that was evil, and that's what V regrets. V regrets committing the crime of Familicide, not the IFCC deal, which to me is entirely appropriate. Properly used, the power from that deal could have wrapped up this entire story. The problem is that it was improperly used, and lots of people unnecessarily died, and will die, because of that.
Everyone is allowed their own opinion, but I dislike V because s/he continues to make mistakes that reflect that V has not learned from prior mistakes. Just look at the current situation: V knows that the IFCC can revoke her/his soul twice more, which means that V will not be able to help the OOtS at critical times. If V really wanted to help the OOtS and save the World, V should contact his/her Master and have that person step in and take V's place. In fact, V was already given than suggestion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0634.html), and that strip shows that the Master is likely waaaay more powerful than V is right now. So why hasn't V contacted the Master? No doubt the plot is much better the way it is going, but the other reason is that V is still too arrogant to ask others for help.

[Peat]

Belkar. I'd love to be deep about his redemptive arc but nope, he just entertains me most.

[alwaysbebatman]

Everyone is allowed their own opinion, but I dislike V because s/he continues to make mistakes that reflect that V has not learned from prior mistakes. Just look at the current situation: V knows that the IFCC can revoke her/his soul twice more, which means that V will not be able to help the OOtS at critical times. If V really wanted to help the OOtS and save the World, V should contact his/her Master and have that person step in and take V's place. In fact, V was already given than suggestion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0634.html), and that strip shows that the Master is likely waaaay more powerful than V is right now. So why hasn't V contacted the Master? No doubt the plot is much better the way it is going, but the other reason is that V is still too arrogant to ask others for help.

You have a right to your opinion, we have a right to mock your opinion as absurdly biased. You're blatantly projecting what you WANT the story to be, rather than what's actually in the text.

The fiends suggested that Vaarsuvius contact their Master to handle a brief rescue. As Belkar points out in Girard's Pyramid, if there was someone else to do this job, where are they? We don't know why V's Master could have taken a half hour to rescue Kyrie and the kids, but can't stop Xykon themself, because that's never been important enough to address. But there's always a justification for why the mentor can't just do the quest themself.

It's not Vaarsuvius's call whether the remaining time outs are a good enough reason for the Order to try to find a replacement arcane caster or not: it's ROY's. And Vaarsuvius gave Roy all of the relevant information on everything that happened and the consequences specifically because the elf trusts Roy's judgment regarding the best steps to take (both strategically and morally) more than their own.

[Riftwolf]

I can't believe its come to this, but I'm voting Belkar . For no other reason than my first characters were rangers.

[Liquor Box]

I love that you give a definition for Evil, and then in the same post, give a source which proves your original definition wrong. Nowhere does the source you posted say that caring only about power is an Evil action.

In the D&D universe (as the source you yourself posted describes), thirst for power itself is not evil. Therefore, V was clearly Neutral.

I don't know what you are talking about - the two parts of my post discussing V's evilness are entirely consistent with one another. For example V's pursuit of power at any cost (including at the cost of doing something evil) is consistent with the part of the definition which talks about doing evil when it is convenient (an example of when this actually happened is when V did a deal with the devil to gain power).

There is simply no doubt that V has done some seriously evil things by the standards of the DnD universe. His only potential salvation is if he has done sufficient good to outweigh it, and I can't see where he has.

[Potatomade]

At least some of the reason I voted Belkar over V in this one (even though V was a higher pick in my original vote) is so we can finally get past arguing over V's alignment.

[Peelee]

At least some of the reason I voted Belkar over V in this one (even though V was a higher pick in my original vote) is so we can finally get past arguing over V's alignment.

You prefer us arguing about Belkar's alignment?:smalltongue:

[Potatomade]

You prefer us arguing about Belkar's alignment?:smalltongue:

Sure! At the very least there are much fewer angrily anti-Belkar people, and a lot of the people who do like Belkar like him because he's an evil bastard. It at least feels a little fresher to me.

[Liquor Box]

You prefer us arguing about Belkar's alignment?:smalltongue:

I think that's part of the point - Belkar's stated alignment and his philosophy are consistent with his in-comic actions. He's the better written character.

[alwaysbebatman]

Belkar 15/ Vaarsuvius 11...

[NamonakiRei]

I really like both characters, but Belkar's always been a favorite in a way V isn't. I shall say no more, lest I drag myself into alignment discussions.

[Synesthesy]

Strictly speaking, nothing was wrong with the IFCC deal. The terms, as laid out, aren't automatically evil. It's what V did with the power he got from the deal that was evil, and that's what V regrets. V regrets committing the crime of Familicide, not the IFCC deal, which to me is entirely appropriate. Properly used, the power from that deal could have wrapped up this entire story. The problem is that it was improperly used, and lots of people unnecessarily died, and will die, because of that.

Are we sure of it? I've always seen "selling soul" as an evil act per se... And this is demostrated by Inky reaction: she didn't want V to sell her soul at all, she find it horrible. She didn't care why V did that. And in a matter of fact, did V make the deal to save his family, or to show the world that her Arcane Power was enough to save her family, resolve azurite problems and kill Xykon (while killing countless people as corrateral damage)?

The fact, IMHO, is that I'm not in Giant's head, but I saw that V was becoming evil even before making the deal, when she killed Kubota for no reason, when she argued with Durkon, ... and only after undestanding what his familicide spell did (remember, we are in a world where killing thousands creatures is right if they are labelled as "usually evil", or at least it's some lawful good paladins' way) she started to feel sorry and to undestand what she did.... I'm not sure of DnD rules, but if evil is something you feel, V now is not, but it was for some times; if it is about what you did, V did lots of meganazis of evil.

And finally, if we would make a killcount, Belkar would need 2 or 3 lives more to even join V's league...

[Peelee]

Are we sure of it? I've always seen "selling soul" as an evil act per se

Same. V didn't sell his soul, though; he rented it, and for a damned good rate. The reasons he did it, and the actions he did, however, *those* were certainly evil.

[Dr.Zero]

killed Kubota for no reason

Well, technically there were reasons: he was clearly the main villain of that side-arc .
And, of course, he was guilty of having a very debatable taste about facial hairs (and to fail his "hide my evil alignment" skill check when he decided to grow that kind of facial hair).

This debate is age old now: some people see it as plain murder, some other as reasonable execution.

Personally I bend toward the latter: S/he executed an evil enemy, dangerous, who could have possibly gone scott free again (see again * for all these points) and who was anyway responsible of numerous deaths.

I really find hard to understand why Kubota's death must not be considered an execution but a murder and, for example, burning the Water-Trolls before they regenerated, instead of bounding them someway, should be considered differently.

Or why the elf should accept the chance to be further distracted from his quest to save the world, sparing Kubota, when the whole thing behind the order existence has been "kill evil people to complete the quest" (even if s/he was really on a quest to prove that arcane power was not useless, and getting the group together and saving the world was more of a side effect).

What makes Kubota so worth to be spared?

... and V knew because Elan had Kubota tied, and we all know Elan is not in that kind of other stuff that requires him to keep someone bound if this someone is not dangerous. Moreover V heard them talking about the "trial of the century".

[Peelee]

Personally I bend toward the latter: S/he executed an evil enemy, dangerous, who could have possibly gone scott free again (see again * for all these points) and who was anyway responsible of numerous deaths.

Let's say two people are fighting with lethal weapons. One looks to be in the wrong, so I kill him. Turns out, it was Hitler. What i did was still wrong. I wasn't correct, I was lucky. I gambled recklessly, with someone else's life as the wager. This is not ok. This is not acceptable. This is murder.

[TheBeggarDwarf]

Belkar He's funny, and it's been wonderful watching him change from a punchline machine into a fully-rounded character capable of reflection and empathy (even if most of the empathy is with a cat). I'm sometimes surprised at how invested I am in where his story goes.

Vaarsuvius is an enjoyable character. Don't know that I'd call the elf Evil. Vaarsuvius has any number of flaws: arrogance, contempt for those of with lower INT scores, a short-temper, an obsessive need to be right. And (turning to the half-fiend elephant in the dungeon) yes, Vaarsuvius committed an atrocity. An unforgivable atrocity which will probably never come close to being paid for. However (unlike, say, Xykon or Redcloak) rather than wallowing in the muck and committing further horrors, Vaarsuvius has chosen to attempt some kind of redemption. Vaarsuvius is True Neutral: unconcerned with personal morality or civic laws and, after careening drunkenly into genocide, tries to balance the scales in whatever way. Vaarsuvius is trying to hold to the center of the Alignment scales. It may not work, but you have to give the elf credit for trying. That' s more than the other Evil casters in this story have even attempted.

[Hardcore]

Belkar. Why? not so aloof maybe.

[Potatomade]

Are we sure of it? I've always seen "selling soul" as an evil act per se... And this is demostrated by Inky reaction: she didn't want V to sell her soul at all, she find it horrible. She didn't care why V did that. And in a matter of fact, did V make the deal to save his family, or to show the world that her Arcane Power was enough to save her family, resolve azurite problems and kill Xykon (while killing countless people as corrateral damage)?

I would limit the reason for doing it, at worst, to being "show the world that his/her arcane power was enough to save his/her family," because that was the primary motivating force. I get the feeling that the other stuff was more along the lines of, "well, I'm already here, so I might as well." Taking this approach, the initial reason wasn't Evil, it was just prideful. It's not Good by any stretch of the imagination, but it's probably not Evil. For example, it's no more Evil than Roy saying he would defeat Xykon mainly to prove to his dad that fighters aren't as weak as his father thought (I may be misremembering Origin of the PCs a bit, but it was something similar). And as Peelee said, it was a soul rental, not a soul sale.


The fact, IMHO, is that I'm not in Giant's head, but I saw that V was becoming evil even before making the deal, when she killed Kubota for no reason, when she argued with Durkon, ... and only after undestanding what his familicide spell did (remember, we are in a world where killing thousands creatures is right if they are labelled as "usually evil", or at least it's some lawful good paladins' way) she started to feel sorry and to undestand what she did.... I'm not sure of DnD rules, but if evil is something you feel, V now is not, but it was for some times; if it is about what you did, V did lots of meganazis of evil.

And finally, if we would make a killcount, Belkar would need 2 or 3 lives more to even join V's league...

Oh, becoming Evil beforehand, certainly. I'm not trying to argue that V was Good or even Neutral when that deal was made, just that the deal itself wasn't Evil. That whole arc was about V coming close to true Evil, causing a lot of harm, and facing the horrifying truth of it. And yes, V's Evil acts outweigh his/her Good acts by miles and miles. But as Roy said, saving the whole world might be a real good way to start fixing that.

[The Curt Jester]

Before I ever came across OOTS, my main character was a halfling who called everybody by the wrong name and was anything but a team player. Belkar is like the evil version (mine was highly chaotic).

And... not for that reason, I will still vote for Belkar. My actual reasons are my own. :P

[nbLurkerAbove]

I don't like Belkar, but I do like Vaarsuvius!

[alwaysbebatman]

Let's say two people are fighting with lethal weapons. One looks to be in the wrong, so I kill him. Turns out, it was Hitler. What i did was still wrong. I wasn't correct, I was lucky. I gambled recklessly, with someone else's life as the wager. This is not ok. This is not acceptable. This is murder.

This isn't close to being relevant. If Elan and Kubota had been fighting, ie actively trying to kill one another, there would have been no question that Vaarsuvius taking violent action against Kubota would have been considered acceptable by everybody. "Kill stealing" at worst.

The reason Elan disapproved was only because Kubota had surrendered, and Elan had accepted his surrender. However, Kubota was concurrently gloating aloud about resuming hostilities covertly. A case could be made that Kubota had invalidated his own parole.

ETA: Belkar leads 19/12.

[LogicalOxymoron]

I vote for Vaarsuvius! I wasn't going to vote and haven't in any of the one on one threads so far, but when I saw Belkar was winning I had to log in to support the elf.

[Ruck]

Let's say two people are fighting with lethal weapons. One looks to be in the wrong, so I kill him. Turns out, it was Hitler. What i did was still wrong. I wasn't correct, I was lucky. I gambled recklessly, with someone else's life as the wager. This is not ok. This is not acceptable. This is murder.


This isn't close to being relevant. If Elan and Kubota had been fighting, ie actively trying to kill one another, there would have been no question that Vaarsuvius taking violent action against Kubota would have been considered acceptable by everybody. "Kill stealing" at worst.

The reason Elan disapproved was only because Kubota had surrendered, and Elan had accepted his surrender. However, Kubota was concurrently gloating aloud about resuming hostilities covertly. A case could be made that Kubota had invalidated his own parole.

ETA: Belkar leads 19/12.

The other thing about this comparison that doesn't work is that Vaarsuvius knows the other person is Elan. V didn't stumble upon two strangers and decide to kill one; indeed, V's decision was driven largely by V's trust in Elan's ability to identify villainy.

[Peelee]

The reason Elan disapproved was only because Kubota had surrendered, and Elan had accepted his surrender. However, Kubota was concurrently gloating aloud about resuming hostilities covertly. A case could be made that Kubota had invalidated his own parole.

You should reread 596. All V overheard was that a trial would take weeks. All V saw was that Kubota was tied up, and Elan was holding the rope. If you want to claim that is justification enough to murder Kubota, feel free, but you'll arguing your case in a kangaroo court.

Not to mention that Elan also objected to V killing Kubota for such spurious reasoning, and when he made such objections, V threatened to kill Elan as well. Unless you wish to claim thay Elan was nearly invalidating his own parole as well (of the heinous crime of not kowtowing to V, of course).

[alwaysbebatman]

If you want to claim that is justification enough to murder Kubota, feel free. .

No thanks, I only said a case could be made, not that I'd argue it, or agree.

What I did make a case for was that your metaphor didn't fit the situation.

I'm not saying Vaarsuvius made the correct decision. Vaarsuvius's decision-making ability was seriously impaired following the fall of Azure City-- this is telegraphed by the narrative in every possible way.

On the other hand, nobody has addressed Dr.Zero's point that what Vaarsuvius did would have been a matter of course for a non-human sentient adversary.

[Peelee]

No thanks, I only said a case could be made, not that I'd argue it, or agree.

What I did make a case for was that your metaphor didn't fit the situation.

I'm not saying Vaarsuvius made the correct decision. Vaarsuvius's decision-making ability was seriously impaired following the fall of Azure City-- this is telegraphed by the narrative in every possible way.

On the other hand, nobody has addressed Dr.Zero's point that what Vaarsuvius did would have been a matter of course for a non-human sentient adversary.

Aha. My bad, I misread that.

[Floret]

I vote Vaarsuvius.
Despite the silly name, I find their character arc to be one of the most interesting and heart-wrenching of the comic.
And I just have a thing for elves.

[Svata]

I really like both of these characters. Vaarsuvius, I guess?

[Arkku]

I vote Vaarsuvius. The choice might be more difficult if it was V + Blackwing vs Belkar + Mr. Scruffy + Bloodfeast, but as it stands it's V for victory due to the soul splice storyline.

[littlebum2002]

You should reread 596. All V overheard was that a trial would take weeks. All V saw was that Kubota was tied up, and Elan was holding the rope. If you want to claim that is justification enough to murder Kubota, feel free, but you'll arguing your case in a kangaroo court.

Right. Kubota could have been tied up for stealing a potion for all V knew.

Heck, it's Elan. Kubota could have been tied up because he said he stole a joke and Elan misunderstood him.

[hroþila]

On the other hand, nobody has addressed Dr.Zero's point that what Vaarsuvius did would have been a matter of course for a non-human sentient adversary.
Would it, though? During Girard's illusion (granted, it didn't actually happen, but the PCs themselves still had control over their own actions within the illusion), we saw Redcloak tied up in exactly the same manner as Kubota.

[littlebum2002]

Would it, though? During Girard's illusion (granted, it didn't actually happen, but the PCs themselves still had control over their own actions within the illusion), we saw Redcloak tied up in exactly the same manner as Kubota.

V did not have control over V's actions in the illusion, because V wasn't in the room. The V in the illusion was just a shared dream of Roy, Elan and Haley.

[hroþila]

V did not have control over V's actions in the illusion, because V wasn't in the room. The V in the illusion was just a shared dream of Roy, Elan and Haley.
Well yeah, I'm talking about the Order in general, since they're the ones who'd have to object to V's nonchalantly offing Kubota and/or Redcloak.

[Dr.Zero]

Would it, though? During Girard's illusion (granted, it didn't actually happen, but the PCs themselves still had control over their own actions within the illusion), we saw Redcloak tied up in exactly the same manner as Kubota.

I brought as example the Water Trolls. They were burned instead of being taken as prisoners, even if everyone knew that they were still kinda-alive and going to regenerate, as soon as they made contact with water.
Hell, they didn't even need to tie them down or feed them, as long as they kept the trolls in a dry space. There was all the time to do whatever good people do with captive enemies.

(Which apparently is killing them nonetheless, if they don't belong to some major race; yet the forumites have issues on Kubota being executed).

ETA: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0507.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0508.html

[alwaysbebatman]

Would it, though? During Girard's illusion (granted, it didn't actually happen, but the PCs themselves still had control over their own actions within the illusion), we saw Redcloak tied up in exactly the same manner as Kubota.

"Good goblins" all share one noteworthy trait, let's not forget. The Order taking prisoner the goblin leader who caused all of this is most likely Elan's naivete influencing the illusion.

[littlebum2002]

Well yeah, I'm talking about the Order in general, since they're the ones who'd have to object to V's nonchalantly offing Kubota and/or Redcloak.

Oh, gotcha. I thought you meant that V had turned over a new leaf, since V decided to subdue Redcloak instead of kill him in the illusion

[Synesthesy]

Well, actually if killing people just because their specie is labelled as "usually evil" and trigger a supernatural radar (detect evil) is right or not is a major theme of this comic. It's what moves the action of the antagonist, because in Redcloak life the first strike was from Sapphire Guard, who didn't losed their paladinhood just because they killed some goblins and their unarmed families.

It's the same in the familicide: if there was a clause in the spell that made it kill only black dragons, there wouldn't been any problem, as black dragons are automatically labelled as "evil".

In fact, I say that V's alligment was becoming evil BEFORE the faustian deal, after the escape from Azure City; and it begin to stop being so only after it ended. Nowaday you don't even expect V to put explosive runes on some random Belkar's things... V is not evil now, but she made something that is almost impossible to redeem. A lot more then Belkar's random killstreak...

Or at least, it's my opinion. I want to repeat that I still like both, I'll vote for V in next contest if she beat Belkar now.

[Peelee]

I brought as example the Water Trolls. They were burned instead of being taken as prisoners, even if everyone knew that they were still kinda-alive and going to regenerate, as soon as they made contact with water.
Hell, they didn't even need to tie them down or feed them, as long as they kept the trolls in a dry space. There was all the time to do whatever good people do with captive enemies.

(Which apparently is killing them nonetheless, if they don't belong to some major race; yet the forumites have issues on Kubota being executed).

ETA: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0507.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0508.html

Water trolls actively and directly engaged in armed combat. Those who killed them were also participating in armed combat. They can act as judge, jury, and executioner, due to them being engaged directly with them in armed combat.

But If they took the trolls prisoner, I come up, and I see a group being held prisoner, I can t kill them based only on that. Human/nonhuman doesn't matter. It's an irrelevant point. Elsn could have let Kubota drown. Wouldn't had been Evil (though it also wouldn't have been Good). The point is that it was not V's call to make. V, coming in with no context, chose to kill. That's murder.

[Gift Jeraff]

Belkar
V talks too much and attacts too many cringy "intelligent but flawed just like me" posts.

[Sylian]

Well, actually if killing people just because their specie is labelled as "usually evil" and trigger a supernatural radar (detect evil) is right or not is a major theme of this comic.And, to be clear, it's not right. If it were then Roy would be right to kill Belkar in his sleep.


It's what moves the action of the antagonist, because in Redcloak life the first strike was from Sapphire Guard, who didn't losed their paladinhood just because they killed some goblins and their unarmed families.Some of them did fall, though Rich didn't want to show that since it would make the narrative more confusing.


It's the same in the familicide: if there was a clause in the spell that made it kill only black dragons, there wouldn't been any problem, as black dragons are automatically labelled as "evil".Not all black dragons are Evil, and even then, killing someone just because they're Evil might be Evil.

[littlebum2002]

This one is so hard, but I'm going to have to go with V.

[alwaysbebatman]

Water trolls actively and directly engaged in armed combat. Those who killed them were also participating in armed combat. They can act as judge, jury, and executioner, due to them being engaged directly with them in armed combat.

But If they took the trolls prisoner, I come up, and I see a group being held prisoner, I can t kill them based only on that. Human/nonhuman doesn't matter. It's an irrelevant point. Elsn could have let Kubota drown. Wouldn't had been Evil (though it also wouldn't have been Good). The point is that it was not V's call to make. V, coming in with no context, chose to kill. That's murder.

"Sorta-dead but they'd be fine if submerged in water" isn't really dead. It is helpless in the power of your adversary. Then burning the bodies so they don't regenerate is murdering a helpless captive because of convenience, the exact same thing Elan berates Vaarsuvius for a few pages later.

I don't mean Elan was wrong about Kubota, just that he has a blind spot in his ethics where usually-evil sapient monsters are concerned. A blind spot I don't really blame him for-- it's shared by just about all good-aligned humans not named Roy. Humanocentrism is endemic to the culture in which he was raised.

[Svata]

To be fair, they couldn't exactly do anything else with them.

[zimmerwald1915]

This one is so hard, but I'm going to have to go with V.
I have to concur. Vaarsuvius.

[alwaysbebatman]

To be fair, they couldn't exactly do anything else with them.

His do you figure? They could have just kept them dry.

It wouldn't have been the most tactically sound course of action, but "not murdering your enemies when they are helpless" rarely is.

[Dr.Zero]

To be fair, they couldn't exactly do anything else with them.

They can do with them the same they are supposed to do with a guilty Kubota, whatever it is they do in this case.

(If the reply is: they execute the guilty, then V did exactly what was eventually required, just cutting out the chances that Kubota manipulates justice; and again V knew Kubota was a villain -an enemy of some sort)

[Svata]

His do you figure? They could have just kept them dry.

It wouldn't have been the most tactically sound course of action, but "not murdering your enemies when they are helpless" rarely is.

Sure. Not like they had super limited space that would become very cluttered by adding a few dozen corpses or anything.


They can do with them the same they are supposed to do with a guilty Kubota, whatever it is they do in this case.

(If the reply is: they execute the guilty, then V did exactly what was eventually required, just cutting out the chances that Kubota manipulates justice; and again V knew Kubota was a villain -an enemy of some sort)

Kubota wasn't a few dozen large sized giants who didn't already have room allocated for them on the ships.
seriously they were on a boat. They don't exactly have a place to store them. Also, corpses, disease (Durkon only has so many spell slots, and there's a LOT of Azurites), etcetera.

[goodpeople25]

Sure. Not like they had super limited space that would become very cluttered by adding a few dozen corpses or anything.

seriously they were on a boat. They don't exactly have a place to store them.




Kubota wasn't a few dozen large sized giants who didn't already have room allocated for them on the ships.
You might even have to mix in some of the other issues with taking prisoners (And trolls at that) depends on how regeneration works in the case of sustenance. If rings of that are brought up I swear...

[Dr.Zero]

Sure. Not like they had super limited space that would become very cluttered by adding a few dozen corpses or anything.



Kubota wasn't a few dozen large sized giants who didn't already have room allocated for them on the ships.
seriously they were on a boat. They don't exactly have a place to store them. Also, corpses, disease (Durkon only has so many spell slots, and there's a LOT of Azurites), etcetera.

So the line between when it is fine to kill a prisoner and when it is not fine is the room needed to store them.
Ooook. No, really, this is what here we call "mirror climbing", but ok, let's play this game.

Becuse it is not a problem: there was plenty of additional space created by the trolls themselves: exactly a whole boat and 14 more rooms from other dead crewmen on another boat.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0508.html <- first panel.

[Peelee]

They can do with them the same they are supposed to do with a guilty Kubota, whatever it is they do in this case.

(If the reply is: they execute the guilty, then V did exactly what was eventually required, just cutting out the chances that Kubota manipulates justice; and again V knew Kubota was a villain -an enemy of some sort)

Yes. THEY can do the same as with a guilty Kubota. THEY know the crimes. V, however, DOES NOT. He wasn't right, he was lucky. For all V knew, elan just rescued a friend who was framed and had to go through a trial to prove it. V came in blind, blasted on a hunch, and got lucky. Which part of this are you having trouble with?

[TheBeggarDwarf]

His do you figure? They could have just kept them dry.

It wouldn't have been the most tactically sound course of action, but "not murdering your enemies when they are helpless" rarely is.

Two things:

1) How is keeping them in a coma better than just killing them?

2) Regeneration doesn't work that way. If they can't regenerate, they die when they reach -10 hp, and will remain dead even if thrown over the sides. Being in water prevents them from dying and allows regeneration, but they were on dry ground. The mistake that Hinjo and the others made was throwing them over before they were dead, because they thought the regeneration had been already been cancelled by fire/acid attacks.

[Malkyrie]

Belkar.

Just a personal preference. I like halflings more than elves; I like funny more than interesting. Both add a lot to the comic; I just generally enjoy the comics with Belkar more.

[white lancer]

This one's not that close to me: Vaarsuvius all the way. Belkar has gotten a lot better recently, ever since Durkon's death, but before that I thought he was one of the most overrated characters in the comic. He was never a truly necessary character, and his humor was more hit-or-miss for me. Meanwhile, Vaarsuvius to me is one of the funniest characters in the comic, and their character arc has been (and continues to be) incredibly interesting. The simple fact that their actions are so polarizing (and intentionally so, I'd wager) is a hint as to how complex of a character Vaarsuvius is, and that's why the elf has my vote.

[JBiddles]

Vaarsuvius. :vaarsuvius:

V is my favourite character overall. She's Neutral in a vaguely humanly understandable way, and exemplifies why the character flaw of being willing to do anything for friends/family can actually be, you know, a flaw. She's an example of a protagonist character having a moral crisis after actually doing something truly terrible.

And I'm a total sucker for Wizards.

[hroþila]

"Sorta-dead but they'd be fine if submerged in water" isn't really dead. It is helpless in the power of your adversary. Then burning the bodies so they don't regenerate is murdering a helpless captive because of convenience, the exact same thing Elan berates Vaarsuvius for a few pages later.
Elan didn't agree with V zapping Kubota, but he was still willing to go along with it until V admitted they had no idea what a Kubota was.

[Dr.Zero]

Yes. THEY can do the same as with a guilty Kubota. THEY know the crimes. V, however, DOES NOT. He wasn't right, he was lucky. For all V knew, elan just rescued a friend who was framed and had to go through a trial to prove it. V came in blind, blasted on a hunch, and got lucky. Which part of this are you having trouble with?


I'm not sure if I understood.
Sometimes I've problem with english, so let me get this straight.
You're saying that Elan had a guy tied, without making any effort to free him, walking him around still tied. And the aforementioned guy was talking, gloating, about a trial which would take weeks.

And V was wrong in assuming that at 100% he was an enemy, because he might have been a friend framed or something.

Because if this is it, wow... just wow.
My trouble with it is the part where this is completely ridiculous, I'd say.

Just out of curiosity, anyway.
The problem, thus, is not that V killed an evil prisoner, but that, for some (improbably and totally made up "ad hoc" story) the prisoner might have been innocent?
So, say, if V was sure Kubota was not innocent, s/he was perfectly correct in executing him as s/he has done?
Because at that point, anyway, leaving aside the "ad hoc" story, the problem stops to be ethic between Good and Evil ("You don't kill evil people, when they are helpless prisoners"), but becomes more like "You can't kill a person as long as you are not 100% sure they are Evil and guilty, which probably requires a trial, some witnesses, some divination magic, etc" which seems a matter of procedure and Law.

But I don't want to digress, derailing more the topic, because, I repeat, that question is just out of pure curiosity, because the "ad hoc" story is a moot point: following that logic of the "ad hoc" stories, they shouldn't have started any quest.

For example: who knows, maybe the dirt farmer's wife was a witch who kidnapped a baby ogre, morphing him in an adult male who then she married and the ogres were just trying to rescue their baby kid. So, who gave to the OOTS the right to go there and fight and kill the poor ogres, since they didn't evaluate this (completely unlikely and made up) possibility?



Two things:

1) How is keeping them in a coma better than just killing them?

2) Regeneration doesn't work that way. If they can't regenerate, they die when they reach -10 hp, and will remain dead even if thrown over the sides. Being in water prevents them from dying and allows regeneration, but they were on dry ground. The mistake that Hinjo and the others made was throwing them over before they were dead, because they thought the regeneration had been already been cancelled by fire/acid attacks.

1) They don't need to keep them in a coma indefinitely, just long enough to make all the preparations to give them a proper trial and prison time or whatever they do in these case. Which might include to chain them or whatever.

2) Interestingly enough, your first part of this reply might be valid (specifically: if they regenerate only if immersed in water, does their regeneration ability stop to transform damage to non-lethal damage when they are out of water and hence not regenerating? Or does it keep to transform the damage even on dry ground but just doesn't heal them?).
Luckily, debating it seems to be not necessary, just look the comic: in 507 Hinjo specifically talks about the fact that he did read troll can heal wounds "even from death" (thus wondering how they killed them without using fire and acid); Lien talks about corpses, but, most important, the trolls are shown to have the X_X for eyes, which in comic happens only for death, not when someone is unconscious and dying (compare Elan when Belkar heals him). Btw they don't even give a hint about the fact they did or didn't coup-de-grace them.

So, at least in comic, it seems that, well, it works as Hinjo says.

[LadyEowyn]

Voting for Vaarsuvius. I've always found V an entertaining character, and s/he has been one of the strip's most emptionally compelling characters from DSTP onwards.

Belkar, on the other hand, has five books of being crass, evil, and so annoying he discouraged me from reading strips where he appeared, followed by half a book of being less annoying and occasionally interesting. It doesn't remotely balance out.

And I do see a difference between "doing one incredibly evil thing under immense emotional strain and deeply regretting it and seeking to atone" and "spending your entire life murdering people for the lulz, not regretting it, but starting to feel uncomfortable about doing additional evil things". The former can conceivably be consistent with being Neutral, though opinions may legitimately differ; the latter is unquestionably still Evil.

So, no contest.

[Peelee]

I'm not sure if I understood.
Sometimes I've problem with english, so let me get this straight.
You're saying that Elan had a guy tied, without making any effort to free him, walking him around still tied. And the aforementioned guy was talking, gloating, about a trial which would take weeks.

And V was wrong in assuming that at 100% he was an enemy, because he might have been a friend framed or something.

You had it up to the last sentence there.

The problem isn't that V assumed one specific thing instead of another. The problem is that V assumed one specific thing instead of a litany of other possibilities, and up and killed him based on that assumption. As hroþila said above, Elan was upset, but willing to go along with it until he found out that V didn't know a damn thing about the situation, and only saw that dusting whatever guy was tied up was more convenient than actually talking to find out the situation.

You, the audience, know that Kubota may well deserve death. Elan knows this. The Azurites do not, which is the entire purpose of a trial. V does not, which is why he was lucky. And, for the millionth time, you are not allowed to be lucky. That doesn't fly.

Note that this is a huge parallel to On the Origin of PCs, where Roy's party is tasked with killing a group of orcs, because nobody had ever given a damn to take five ****ing seconds to find out they were just camping out for a concert. Which, o should note, is far sillier a scenario than the framed friend scenario, which again is just one of COUNTLESS possibilities. Now, everyone but Roy and Durkon there are presented as all-but-Evil; there may be no deities personally visiting anyone to let them know just how bad they are, but it's pretty unambiguously presented that they are wrong. Same with Elan, V, and Kubota. Elan wasn't happy, but didn't have any major issues with it until he found out that V was basically casually killing people on hunches, and happened to get lucky. And As a bonus, when Elan confronts V about this, V threatens to murder Elan. Those strips have all the subtlety of a sledgehammer, and yet it apparently still wasn't enough if people look at it and go, "eh, that's fine." If literally every Good protagonist who comes to a situation of "wantonly kill or find out the situation first" responds with abject horror at the "wantonly kill" option, maybe you should start to wonder if that's a clue.

And, to be rather blunt, if you think it's perfectly acceptable to up and murder people solely because they look like they need killing, then I can only wish we were better strangers.

[alwaysbebatman]

It's 21-all, people!

[lothos]

I vote Vaarsuvius.

Belkar is great, the comic wouldn't be the same without him. But V is a character who has given me so many enjoyable moments. Got to be V for me.

[BrotherClod]

I.... I vote Vaarsivius

[Bobb]

Belkar. V may have delivered more interesting story lines but Belkar tamed an alpha predator dinosaur and has a housecat as an animal companion.

Dude rocks.

[Nokrud]

Gotta toss a vote to Belkar the sexy shoeless god of war.

[alwaysbebatman]

23-all. This is crazy!

[Joerg]

Gotta toss a vote to Belkar the sexy shoeless god of war.

Joining just for the vote?

Welcome to the forum, I hope we'll see more posts from you in other threads. Even though you voted for Belkar :smallwink:

[2D8HP]

:belkar: That androgynous twit is DOOMSEALED!

:vaarsuvius: Your demise is at hand you imbecilic undersized psychopath for I wield arcane power beyond your feeble tiny brained reasoning! The forces of the very cosmos are mine to command, and yet still you cannot comprehend the dark dismal end in store for you and your wickedness. Nay! Your little brain can only leave you gasping in horror as I bend reality to my very will: The magic I wield is capable of rending asunder the universe—nay, the whole of the multiverse, and in fact is wasted on such a pitiful creature as yourself. But I shall bring it to bear nonetheless, and you shall rue the day I chose to wreak such unimaginable havoc on your life with the sheer power of my arcane works. And lo, in days and years to come, when the children come to play in the smoking crater that you once stood, they shall know nothing of your wicked deeds but all shall feel the echoes of the power wielded here today. And they shall turn to ponder the question: whence did this arcane might arise? .....

https://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/DirtFarmerM_zpsf9mvc6ni.png: Please! It's obvious that you two are hiding "the love that dare not speak it's name", Elf and Halfling!

:belkar: What? The Belkster don't have time for the fuglies!

:vaarsuvius: A Belkar who lusts after me—is too horrific to contemplate.

:durkon: Amen.

So...that explains why ye just Charmed a muskrat inta humpin' Belkar's bare feet?

:vaarsuvius: Hmm? Oh, no, that is merely for my personal amusement.

:belkar: What the—Arrgh! Get off! Wild Empathy check! WILD EMPATHY CHECK!!!

https://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/DirtFarmerM_zpsf9mvc6ni.png: Um... Nod for Vaarsuvius?

[aurilee]

Gotta toss a vote to Belkar the sexy shoeless god of war.

The power of the Belkster can even compel people to join the forums!


:belkar: That androgynous twit is DOOMSEALED!

:vaarsuvius: Your demise is at hand you imbecilic undersized psychopath for I wield arcane power beyond your feeble goblin reasoning! The forces of the very cosmos are mine to command, and yet still you cannot comprehend the dark dismal end in store for you and your wickedness. Nay! Your little brain can only leave you gasping in horror as I bend reality to my very will: The magic I wield is capable of rending asunder the universe—nay, the whole of the multiverse, and in fact is wasted on such a pitiful creature as yourself. But I shall bring it to bear nonetheless, and you shall rue the day I chose to wreak such unimaginable havoc on your life with the sheer power of my arcane works. And lo, in days and years to come, when the children come to play in the smoking crater that you once stood, they shall know nothing of your wicked deeds but all shall feel the echoes of the power wielded here today. And they shall turn to ponder the question: whence did this arcane might arise? .....

https://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/DirtFarmerM_zpsf9mvc6ni.png: Please! It's obvious that you two are hiding "the love that dare not speak it's name", Elf and Halfling!

:belkar: What? The Belkster don't have time for the fuglies!

:vaarsuvius: A Belkar who lusts after me—is too horrific to contemplate.

:durkon: Amen.

So...that explains why ye just Charmed a muskrat inta humpin' Belkar's bare feet?

:vaarsuvius: Hmm? Oh, no, that is merely for my personal amusement.

:belkar: What the—Arrgh! Get off! Wild Empathy check! WILD EMPATHY CHECK!!!

https://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/DirtFarmerM_zpsf9mvc6ni.png: Um... Nod for Vaarsuvius?

That is some quality stuff you did there, too bad it's supporting the wrong candidate ;)

[D.One]

:vaarsuvius: Vaarsuvius

Both in terms of power as in character arc.

[RatElemental]

This is a tough one, because I'm a sucker for atoners and for redemption. Belkar's has been slower and more nuanced, sure, but V has actually made personal sacrifices (see: not contesting the divorce in order to continue trying to save the world, giving up their chance at reconciliation and forgiveness).

The most recent comic has given me more hope that at some point in the comic that protection from evil cuff link isn't gonna burn Belkar anymore though, and he's got a far deeper pit to dig himself out of as well. Gotta throw in for Belkar.

[StreamOfTheSky]

I was going to mention that we have a choice between an evil character that's entertaining and at least acknowledges their own lack of compunctions but has engaged on a gradual, interesting long-term character development to become better...and also there's V. But these two posts explained it really well already:


It is an interesting contest this one. Both have been clearly (IMO) established as evil at about the midpoint of the comic (to date), and both have had an arc focussed on their redemption since.

For me, Belkar’s redemption is the more realistic, better written, and more interesting redemption story. V’s redemption is the standard and obvious story of “realise I have done something terrible , feel bad about it, and try to improve myself” – no relapses, no apparent struggles with the ‘being a better elf’ aspect of it, just plain sailing. Belkar on the other hand has taken a much more nuanced approach to redemption. Initially he merely realised it would be to his advantage to simply play the game – to pretend not to be evil for his own advantage. But, in the course of doing this it appears that he has actually become less evil, albeit with moments of regression. This strikes me as far more interesting and realistic than an immediate about turn. I mean V’s storyline can be summed up with “… then V decided to be good and lived happily ever after”, but B’s cannot.

I will refrain from voting now, so I can read other people’s posts and see if they change my mind.


It's Belkar, and it's not even close. Aside from the "he never blamed me" line, he also said one of the most insightful statements about character development:
"People don't just change who they are inside an instant. It doesn't work like that. It takes time, so you don't even know you're changing. Until one day, you're just a little bit different than you used to be and you can't even tell what the hell happened (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0957.html)."
V displays none of that growth or insight. The only reason V regrets the bargain with the IFCC is that it didn't work out the way V wanted it to. V is like the criminal who is remorseful for having been caught- it is about the consequence, not the act.

And in the end, V is a jerk, but Belkar is a funny jerk. So the vote goes to the guy with the punchlines!

And I want to respond to this:

However, V's story arc is not the one you suggested. V was not evil: V was (and still is) a moral agnostic, (s)he didn't care. V cared about arcane power and arcane power only. Remember when (s)he is the only one to protest against helping the dirt farmers.

The starting point of the interpretation changes everything. V's redemption is not about becoming good. To that effect, V's scenes where (s)he controls the kobold in the desert clearly show that being a good person is still not V's objective. Regarding good and evil, V learned the hard way that these concerns *do* matter and that they should be integrated as a new parameter is his/her analyses. I doubt, however, that being "good" has become a goal.
No. V is evil. You don't commit genocide and get to claim neutrality. Nor do you get to torture a prisoner who's of no threat to you and do so. Neutral is not the same as good-aligned, but it still has some basic standards of decency towards other sentient beings, none of which V displays.

And while you didn't say it, multi-quoting over multiple pages is tiring, so... the people who brought up that V didn't realize how far-reaching the Familicide would be (always seemed questionable defense in-comic; knowing about dragons is Knowledge Arcana...) or that "all black dragons are evil, so it's ok." Ummm...no. Just no.
Even if V thought it'd be limited to a few degrees of familial separation only, s/he's still willfully murdering a whole lot of innocent creatures, at least some of whom almost certainly had no attachment to the black dragon s/he was fighting and/or would never have been a threat to hir.
And no, not all black dragons are evil. Dragons like to sleep around w/ pretty much every creature type, and it doesn't take many generations of off-spring to go from Half-Dragon to "draconic" or "dragon-blooded". And even if V thought s/he was only murdering evil black dragons (a supposition that, given all the above about dragon breeding habits and V's prodigious knowledge, is outright preposterous to begin with), that's STILL not acceptable. Literally any D&D source book that talks about good/evil morality or paladins says it's wrong to kill a creature just for being evil-aligned. Because not every evil-aligned creature acts on its impulses/thoughts.
V knowingly murdered innocent sentient creatures wittingly and (supposedly) unwittingly committed outright genocide. V is evil, and far more so than Belkar.

...I'm voting for Belkar, by the way. :smallwink:

[Hamste]

It sounds weird but Word of Author is that V is still True neutral despite committing genocide, killing an unarmed prisoner and their wanton cruelty.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?209334-Is-Varsuuvius-Lawful-Chaotic-or-True-Neutral/page10

[Potatomade]

And while you didn't say it, multi-quoting over multiple pages is tiring, so... the people who brought up that V didn't realize how far-reaching the Familicide would be (always seemed questionable defense in-comic; knowing about dragons is Knowledge Arcana...) or that "all black dragons are evil, so it's ok." Ummm...no. Just no.
Even if V thought it'd be limited to a few degrees of familial separation only, s/he's still willfully murdering a whole lot of innocent creatures, at least some of whom almost certainly had no attachment to the black dragon s/he was fighting and/or would never have been a threat to hir.
And no, not all black dragons are evil. Dragons like to sleep around w/ pretty much every creature type, and it doesn't take many generations of off-spring to go from Half-Dragon to "draconic" or "dragon-blooded". And even if V thought s/he was only murdering evil black dragons (a supposition that, given all the above about dragon breeding habits and V's prodigious knowledge, is outright preposterous to begin with), that's STILL not acceptable. Literally any D&D source book that talks about good/evil morality or paladins says it's wrong to kill a creature just for being evil-aligned. Because not every evil-aligned creature acts on its impulses/thoughts.
V knowingly murdered innocent sentient creatures wittingly and (supposedly) unwittingly committed outright genocide. V is evil, and far more so than Belkar.


Isn't V saying this exact thing in #866 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0866.html)?



I think we've basically reached a divide: there's the camp that thinks strips like 866 mean something, and there's the camp that thinks they don't. And neither of these two camps will budge, ever, for any reason. Nobody's going to change anybody's minds, and all this discussion is doing is making everybody angry.

[2D8HP]

Nobody's going to change anybody's minds, and all this discussion is doing is making everybody angry.


https://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/DirtFarmerM_zpsf9mvc6ni.png: WHO ARE YOU CALLING ANGRY SONNY-BOY!!!'

HOW DARE YOU CALL ME ANGRY!!!

Almost as bad as accusing me of sarcasm I tell you.

Bluetext is for LOSERS!!!
Please think of the children and NEVER COMMIT VILE ACTS OF SARCASM!!!

Assuming that I've posted to the thread, it's good form to post (or Sig):"Gosh 2D8HP, you are so very correct (and also good looking). Also I hate sports."


That is some quality stuff you did there... ;)
Thanks!

[DeathChallenged]

I vote for Vaarsuvius, Belkar is warming up to me a little bit, but I prefer the elf.

[KorvinStarmast]

No. V is evil. You don't commit genocide and get to claim neutrality. Nope. You don't get to overrule Rich, and you don't get to establish a zero defects standard where one does not exist. Unlike Belkar, who has not a shred of remorse, V not only feels remorse but is serious in pursuit of restitution (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html) (even if imperfect). I offer you this strip for your edification. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0944.html) Rich has a variety of points made, both in his comments and through Roy's voice, about redemption. V is hoping to find a way there. V admits and recognizes a wrong done. V accepts that for the moment, the wages of V's sin is damnation. And V is seeking a path, however difficult or unlikely, toward something to balance out the evil of that act.

yeah, Neutral (at least in intention and as the aspiration). V a True Neutral fits what Rich has written about all of this pretty darned well.

(And now I stop, because discussion on alignment on these forums are sadly unsatisfying).

[Bobb]

Making pacts with demons for reasons of pride,
Spending a lifetime pursuing power for it's own ends,
Neglecting family and vows of companionship in pursuit of said power,
Murdering an individual for the crime of being a prisoner of the OotS and wasting time (Kubota),
Threatening to murder your compatriot (Elan) for objecting to said murder,
attacking strangers in a public place because they verbally harass you,
Committing familicide,
Showing no remorse for familicide until V sees dead humans as a result (V is smart enough to understand conceptually what they did),
Intentionally torturing enemies under mind control,

are all really bad things.


V doesn't want the world destroyed. V is loyal to the team. V feels remorse for familicide. V is not trying to weasel out of guilt for their actions.

are, moderately commendable aspects. Look, the fiends themselves calculated an even shot at ending up with V's soul forever. V has a lot of work to do. Maybe where you are on the alignment chart and which plane you end up on in the afterlife can be measured differently?


Belkar is an irredeemable git whose murderlust and casual disregard for other sapient being's rights and worth are breathtakingly horrendous. Horrendous to the point that acquiring basic empathy for animals has been cast as a compelling, gradual progression from where he was at when the comic started. Truly, the kilonazi scale was made for him.

He will die evil. He will go to one of the bad places. And heck, maybe he'll end up as functional evil rather than psycho evil.

[Mandor]

Nope. You don't get to overrule Rich, and you don't get to establish a zero defects standard where one does not exist. Unlike Belkar, who has not a shred of remorse, V not only feels remorse but is serious in pursuit of restitution (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html) (even if imperfect). I offer you this strip for your edification. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0944.html) Rich has a variety of points made, both in his comments and through Roy's voice, about redemption. V is hoping to find a way there. V admits and recognizes a wrong done. V accepts that for the moment, the wages of V's sin is damnation. And V is seeking a path, however difficult or unlikely, toward something to balance out the evil of that act.

yeah, Neutral (at least in intention and as the aspiration). V a True Neutral fits what Rich has written about all of this pretty darned well.

(And now I stop, because discussion on alignment on these forums are sadly unsatisfying).

One can certainly overrule Rich in their own personal headcanon and their own personal take on what's right / what's wrong / what's evil / what's not.
One can certainly choose to argue your points along those lines, publicly.

That said, I would certainly never expect Rich to change a single darn thing just because I was in Boisterous Debate Mode. And I wouldn't really have that much expectation of changing anyone else's mind either. But the Rich seeing it differently and even other posters seeing it differently, doesn't necessarily mean anyone else should just shut up and be quiet. They just need to temper any expectations of change.

Full Disclosure: I say this, because every so often I raise the flag of "Just because the Oracle says it, doesn't mean he can't lie, if it wasn't ON THE RECORD", and "just because Greg tells Durkon this is how vampires work, doesn't mean Greg is not lying". And I'm usually shot down mighty quick. I'll admit, them lying may be terrrrribly unlikely. But I like grains of salt with my story. As Dr House says, "Everybody Lies".

[KorvinStarmast]

One can certainly overrule Rich in their own personal headcanon If one wants to make absolutist statements like "V is evil" (as an alignment call) rather than "V committed an evil act" (which I doubt anyone will disagree with) then one ought to be challenged. (Due to being wrong). Unlike a 1e LG Paladin, V isn't governed by an alignment on / off switch. Rich has made that abundantly clear.

There is a problem, on this forum and elsewhere, with the misguided attempts to map one for one the clunky D&D alignment system and moral philosophy. It's a poor fit.

People who keep trying to do that are trying to shoehorn an elephants foot into a horseshoe. All that leads to is an upset elephant and a lot of noise. (OK, I'll stop with the attempts at figurative language.)

Your post makes some great points, thank you. :smallsmile: (And I like the grain of salt deal, it's good practice in many discussions).

[Legato Endless]

There is a problem, on this forum and elsewhere, with the misguided attempts to map one for one the clunky D&D alignment system and moral philosophy. It's a poor fit.

Honestly, mapping DnD's alignment system to pretty much anything is usually a burgeoning exercise of futility or glossing over irregularities. DnD's alignment system doesn't even map well to DnD. And that's ignoring the huge number of unsettling points the system raises that have been pointed out by many people in the past, including the Giant. (Racial alignment for a particularly well known example skewered and deconstructed by the Comic)

[KorvinStarmast]

Honestly, mapping DnD's alignment system to pretty much anything is usually a burgeoning exercise of futility or glossing over irregularities. DnD's alignment system doesn't even map well to DnD. And that's ignoring the huge number of unsettling points the system raises that have been pointed out by many people in the past, including the Giant. (Racial alignment for a particularly well known example skewered and deconstructed by the Comic)
OK, am I really on GiTP forums? Someone agrees with me about this? :smallbiggrin:

[alwaysbebatman]

This is on a razor's edge: 26/25 Vaarsuvius leads.

This semifinal started later than the other and still has 4 days left. But we'll find out tomorrow if whoever wins here will be facing O-Chul or Redcloak. (That one's close, too.)

[2D8HP]

OK, am I really on GiTP forums? Someone agrees with me about this? :smallbiggrin:


Well you did have the unfair advantage of making sense (not very sporting of you) :smallwink:.


Interesting that the Vaarsuvius or Belkar debate seems to be hinging on "who's crimes are worse".

I vehemently value V's verbosity so she got my nod, but it was close, it's not as if either of them are Greyview!

[Kish]

Well, well. Belkar, I hate you less.

[alwaysbebatman]

Is that a vote? I think that's a vote...


26-ALL!

[Legato Endless]

I demand a recount!

Eh, let's say Belkar.


OK, am I really on GiTP forums? Someone agrees with me about this? :smallbiggrin:

I mean, we have to find some common ground beyond ardently loving/hating V. :smallamused:

[bguy]

Vaarsuvius.

[alwaysbebatman]

Hahahahahahahahaha

27-All.

[Chei]

I can't tell if this is a contest of who is less polarizing or more polarizing.

Hahaha just kidding; V is more polarizing.

[Bob_McSurly]

A contest about who is more polarizing? That is...... very meta after I think about it for a minute.

[Jasdoif]

I demand a recount!Okay.


Belkar#Vaarsuvius
Potatomade1Chei
Euclidodese2Jaxzan Proditor
Hamste3137ben
Laurana4Mandor
KorvinStarmast5Zaclock
aurilee6skaddix
Dr.Zero7drazen
Synesthesy8Peelee
Ornithologist9martianmister
elros10Joerg
Fincher11Present 2.0
Bob_McSurly12nbLurkerAbove
Ruck13LogicalOxymoron
Peat14Floret
Riftwolf15Svata
NamonakiRei16Arkku
TheBeggarDwarf17littlebum2002
Hardcore18zimmerwald1915
The Curt Jester19white lancer
Gift Jeraff20JBiddles
Malkyrie21LadyEowyn
Bobb22lothos
Nokrud23BrotherClod
RatElemental242D8HP
StreamOfTheSky25D.One
Kish26DeathChallenged
LegatoEndless27bguy


Looks like it stands at a tie, alright....

[hroþila]

Thanks to Jasdoif, now I don't need to go back and check whether I had already voted, which means I can actually be bothered to vote for Vaarsuvius.

[Chei]

Thanks to Jasdoif, now I don't need to go back and check whether I had already voted, which means I can actually be bothered to vote for Vaarsuvius.

Thanks to Jasdoif, I know I'm Number One. They're really handy to have around.

[Kish]

I'm Number One.
skaddix and aurilee will be glad to finally know.

This is a really obscure joke. Don't feel bad if you don't get it.

[Rogan]

I don't mind any of those two winning. But to make things more interesting:

BELKAR

[GuySmiley1970]

Belkar. Not because he's necessarily less "evil" than Vaarsuvius, but because he's funnier, likes cats, and is generally fearless - even that time when he was near death and Roy almost kills him in a rage.

Edit: +1 for Kish's spoiler quote too

[alwaysbebatman]

29/28. Advantage: BELKAR BITTERLEAF!

[TheBeggarDwarf]

2) Interestingly enough, your first part of this reply might be valid (specifically: if they regenerate only if immersed in water, does their regeneration ability stop to transform damage to non-lethal damage when they are out of water and hence not regenerating? Or does it keep to transform the damage even on dry ground but just doesn't heal them?).
Luckily, debating it seems to be not necessary, just look the comic: in 507 Hinjo specifically talks about the fact that he did read troll can heal wounds "even from death" (thus wondering how they killed them without using fire and acid); Lien talks about corpses, but, most important, the trolls are shown to have the X_X for eyes, which in comic happens only for death, not when someone is unconscious and dying (compare Elan when Belkar heals him). Btw they don't even give a hint about the fact they did or didn't coup-de-grace them.

So, at least in comic, it seems that, well, it works as Hinjo says.

Man, this place went crazy while I went away. :belkar: I like it. Anyway, the MM states that they only regenerate in water, so one would assume that they're just taking regular damage.

Go Belkar! Or Vaarsuvius. Love 'em both.

[Kaytara]

HOW DARE YOU MAKE ME CHOOSE.

I've defended V's characterisation for years back when I was still active on this forum so my answer SHOULD be easy, but I still can't answer either way. Belkar's come so far since the Mark of Justice days. And in terms of writing, he's continued to dish out good moments lately (like today's page) while V's been largely shoved into the background since they confessed to Roy.

Ahhh the indecision.

[Goblin_Priest]

I like them both in their own way. Can't get myself to vote on this one.

[alwaysbebatman]

The undecided still have plenty of time to cogitate. This one goes till Tuesday, when the winner will go on to face Redcloak in the finals.

[Dushara]

Ooh, this is a tough one! But I ... I must vote for Belkar.

[alwaysbebatman]

30/28 Belkar.

[pearl jam]

Vaarsuvius



EDIT: Somebody get Banjo and some other sock puppets to swing this thing decisively for V. :smalltongue:

[alwaysbebatman]

30/29 Belkar.

No need to bring socks, puppets, or demigods into the matter. There were 68 votes in Redcloak vs O-Chul. Some people haven't decided. Myself included.

[Chei]

No matter how it turns out it's really a testament to the Giant that he could turn Belkar around this well. I used to hate the little jerk and now I'm not sorry to see him beat the likes of Roy.

[Rasputin]

BELKAR

It's close. V has some great lines. Though I'd have voted for Roy over V had he made it, I'd vote Belkar over either of them.

[Liquor Box]

30/29 Belkar.

No need to bring socks, puppets, or demigods into the matter. There were 68 votes in Redcloak vs O-Chul. Some people haven't decided. Myself included.

Would you consider specifying an exact time when this one will end (using PST or GMT or something) n the interests of transperancy? It would remove any suspicion that you would give one of your favourites a little more time if they were close behind (not saying you would do that, but best to avoid suspicion), or that you would allow the voting to carry on to increase drama if things are tight.

[Bob_McSurly]

or that you would allow the voting to carry on to increase drama if things are tight.
:elan: I approve of extra drama!

[Synesthesy]

Would you consider specifying an exact time when this one will end (using PST or GMT or something) n the interests of transperancy? It would remove any suspicion that you would give one of your favourites a little more time if they were close behind (not saying you would do that, but best to avoid suspicion), or that you would allow the voting to carry on to increase drama if things are tight.

http://i.imgur.com/0rxgglh.png We all know that, to increase drama, time will be slower if things are tight.

[alwaysbebatman]

That's an excellent idea. How does midnight UMT sound to everybody? So, Brits at least have until the last minute of the 19th to cast their vote.

[KorvinStarmast]

That's an excellent idea. How does midnight UMT sound to everybody? So, Brits at least have until the last minute of the 19th to cast their vote. This coincides with International Talk Like a Pirate Day, which is nice.

[2D8HP]

This coincides with International Talk Like a Pirate Day, which is nice.


No underage voting then!

This thread be rated ARRR!!!https://rlv.zcache.com/pirate_flag_jolly_roger_arrr_bumper_sticker-re8fee01f0af34e45869f4e792ca09724_v9wht_8byvr_324. jpg

[martianmister]

[B]EDIT: Somebody get Banjo and some other sock puppets to swing this thing decisively for V. :smalltongue:

I'm Martianmister's sister Mercurianmister, and I vote for VAARSUVIUS!

[Rack]

Ooh, tough one, but I must vote for the Belkster.

Belkar

[Peelee]

I'm Martianmister's sister Mercurianmister, and I vote for VAARSUVIUS!

Don't forget your other sibling, Martiansister!

[alwaysbebatman]

32/29 Belkar

[StLordeth]

My vote goes to V. One of the most well developed and powerful characters in the entire story vs the comic relief. :smallcool:

[Chobarth]

BELKAR

Despite V being a world class dragon-slayer, s/he just isn't 'Death's Li'l Helper'...

Saint Vaarsuvius, Slayer of the Ebon Quartile! March 20th, 2009 was the date of the Saint Vaarsuvius Day Massacre… light some candles for the innocent departed that V indiscriminately slaughtered, and then pop a cork and salute to the most accomplished dragon-slayer known.

[Sylian]

I was considering doing a write-up for my vote, but I'm not quite sure what's left to say that hasn't been said before? Vaarsuvius is easily one of the most well-developed characters in the comic, and one of the most intriguing as well.

[alwaysbebatman]

33/31, Belkar

[Elkad]

I like Belkar. He's had great moments.

But Vaarsuvius is the font of laughs that just keeps giving.

Vaarsuvius

[pearl jam]

Yeah. I laughed harder at the punchline today than I have in a while.

[BirdHarvester]

I might be too late... but Vaarsuvius. I just find them to be a really interesting character, and I've been enjoying their development.

[alwaysbebatman]

There are still many hours left (about 20)

And that makes it 33 All, people!

[Ortho]

I'm joining this forum just so I can vote Vaarsuvius

[RatElemental]

I honestly wouldn't be sad to see V win, but I'm still pulling for Belkar just to see that hype man from the first page come up with more nicknames for him when he goes up against Redcloak.

[newcresty]

Belkar. and some random words so i can submit my reply

[KorvinStarmast]

Now that it's International Talk Like A Pirate Day (http://talklikeapirate.com/wordpress/), make sure to correctly pronounce Vaarsuvius with piratical inflection.

Vaarrrrsuvius, more or less.

On an unrelated note, it is also the feast day of Saint Januarius. (San Gennaro). (https://www.tripsavvy.com/san-gennaro-feast-day-1547688)Some decades ago, I was in Naples and visited the Cathedral. Lovely building.

[Synesthesy]

Now that it's International Talk Like A Pirate Day (http://talklikeapirate.com/wordpress/), make sure to correctly pronounce Vaarsuvius with piratical inflection.

Vaarrrrsuvius, more or less.

On an unrelated note, it is also the feast day of Saint Januarius. (San Gennaro). (https://www.tripsavvy.com/san-gennaro-feast-day-1547688)Some decades ago, I was in Naples and visited the Cathedral. Lovely building.

And don't forget Belkaarrrrrr!

[littlebum2002]

N
On an unrelated note, it is also the feast day of Saint Januarius. (San Gennaro). (https://www.tripsavvy.com/san-gennaro-feast-day-1547688)Some decades ago, I was in Naples and visited the Cathedral. Lovely building.

Isn't that the guy with two faces?

[Dr.Zero]

Isn't that the guy with two faces?

I don't think so.
You're probably thinking of Janus (an ancient Roman God).
San Gennaro (Saint Januarius) is a catholic saint.
He is friendly nicknamed "yellow face" by some of his followers, because his statue has, well, a yellow face.
But, as far as I know, that's it, about the face.

(Then there is all the stuff about his supposed blood, ketp in an ancient reliquary, that sometimes returns to his liquid state. But there are scientific theories about it, like that it is an ancient alchemic -in the meaning of the precursor of chemistry, so no magic involved- compound based on iron).

[martianmister]

Don't forget your other sibling, Martiansister!

Actually he's voting for Belkar.

[littlebum2002]

I don't think so.
You're probably thinking of Janus (an ancient Roman God).

Ahh, that's the one! I mean, to be fair, they have very similar names...

[GimpNugs]

I barely ever post, but I feel I have to get on just to vote Belkar .

[martianmister]

Looks like Belkar is going to win this...

[dmc91356]

While I voted Belkar in the last one, I think, overall, I appreciate Vaarsuvius as a character more than the Belkster, so I vote V.

[alwaysbebatman]

Looks like Belkar is going to win this...

It's been far too close to call. 35-All at the moment. We'll see if one side or the other gets a big push in these last few hours.

[2D8HP]

Now that it's International Talk Like A Pirate Day (http://talklikeapirate.com/wordpress/),

If ye be accurrrrate 'tis be t’ speak gentleman o’ fortune day (http://metro.co.uk/2017/09/19/international-talk-like-a-pirate-day-pirate-phrases-to-say-to-ye-crew-mates-6937117/) matey!

[Peelee]

I'm speaking like a pirate. An internet pirate still counts.

[MilesBeyond]

:belkar: Belkar!

He's got everything. He's a great send-up of the Murderhobo stereotype, he's got some awesome one-liners, and his fake-but-maybe-kinda-real?-growth thing is one of my favourite character arcs. Plus every time you start thinking "Okay this character is maybe getting a bit too high on their own drama," he's always there to take them down a couple pegs.

I love V, too, but their lines are sometimes a bit awkward. Snarkiness and verbosity aren't always the best combination. I know that's part of the joke, but still.

[Jasdoif]

If ye be accurrrrate 'tis be t’ speak gentleman o’ fortune day (http://metro.co.uk/2017/09/19/international-talk-like-a-pirate-day-pirate-phrases-to-say-to-ye-crew-mates-6937117/) matey!Belay! That be closer ta Mercenary Day (http://borderlands.wikia.com/wiki/How_Marcus_Saved_Mercenary_Day), methinks.


Belkarrr#Vaarrrsuvius
Potatomade1Chei
Euclidodese2Jaxzan Proditor
Hamste3137ben
Laurana4Mandor
KorvinStarmast5Zaclock
aurilee6skaddix
Dr.Zero7drazen
Synesthesy8Peelee
Ornithologist9martianmister
elros10Joerg
Fincher11Present 2.0
Bob_McSurly12nbLurkerAbove
Ruck13LogicalOxymoron
Peat14Floret
Riftwolf15Svata
NamonakiRei16Arkku
TheBeggarDwarf17littlebum2002
Hardcode18zimmerwald1915
The Curt Jester19white lancer
Gift Jeraff20JBiddles
Malkyrie21LadyEowyn
Bobb22lothos
Nokrud23BrotherClod
RatElemental242D8HP
StreamOfTheSky25D.One
Kish26DeathChallenged
LegatoEndless27bguy
Rogan28hroþila
GuySmiley197029pearl jam
Dushara30Dronuspk
rasputin31Sylian
Rack32Elkad
Chobarth33BirdHarvester
newcresty34mjp1050
GimpNugs35dmc91356
MilesBeyond36:smalleek: (yar)

[alwaysbebatman]

36/35 with Belkar in the lead and 179 minutes remain!!

[martianmister]

Three hours remain! :smalleek:

[Keltest]

I shall vote for Vaarsuvius, for they are the superior character, and also because I like adding to the confusion.

[Hamste]

Another close match, surprisingly close considering the rank difference. Come on Belkar.

[alwaysbebatman]

36-All. If nobody breaks the tie in the next 27 mins, it will go to sudden death.

[goodpeople25]

I'm going for Belkar solely because he probably has always seen V as a thinking creature regardless of how little that means to him (or at least not being specific because of a perceived "inferiority") and doesn't pull an opposed "theory" out of his ass on the subject.

[Liquor Box]

I vote for Belkar Bitterleaf

[alwaysbebatman]

Belkar wins 38/36.

VOTING IS CLOSED

[Bob_McSurly]

I guess we are one step closer to proving correct Belkar's statement that "People tune in to watch me stab things".

[Peelee]

I guess we are one step closer to proving correct Belkar's statement that "People tune in to watch me stab things".

Well, 38 people.

[Liquor Box]

Well, 38 people.

The majority of people who tune in from this forum. Whether they are representative of the majority of all readers is anyone's guess, but I see no reason to guess it's not.

Hopefully the Giant spots this, and puts a little more spotlight on the Sexy Shoeless God of War.

[Peelee]

The majority of people who tune in from this forum. Whether they are representative of the majority of all readers is anyone's guess, but I see no reason to guess it's not.

The majority of the people who voted in this thread. I see plenty of reasons that this may not be indicative, the first being that Belkar didn't win the ranked choice poll.

[Kish]

Alternatively, maybe it says something about the shifting relative moral status of the principles of this thread.

[Liquor Box]

The majority of the people who voted in this thread. I see plenty of reasons that this may not be indicative, the first being that Belkar didn't win the ranked choice poll.

In the ranked choice poll both V and B had ten people choose them as their favourites. The difference between them was that Belkar is polarising so lots of people excluded him from their list entirely. But in terms of being their first choice (ie, the reason they tune in) the two are equal.

And I'm sure there are lots of possible reason why this poll may not be indicative, and lots of reasons why it may be indicative, or it may even understate the degree of Belkar's popularity. As I said it's anyone's guess. If you want to guess that it is not representative, that is fine, but I don't see any reason to think your guess is any more persuasive than either of the other two possibilities.

[Jasdoif]

The majority of the people who voted in this thread. I see plenty of reasons that this may not be indicative, the first being that Belkar didn't win the ranked choice poll.Borda Count (which the poll I believe you're referring to is effectively a variant of) is known for its ability to select a widely-supported compromise candidate over a more polarizing candidate's plurality of first choices. If you're looking for an actual favorite, rather than who would be the best tolerated, I'd take the exact ranking of those results with a grain of kosher salt.

[Peelee]

In the ranked choice poll both V and B had ten people choose them as their favourites. The difference between them was that Belkar is polarising so lots of people excluded him from their list entirely. But in terms of being their first choice (ie, the reason they tune in) the two are equal.

Yes, an equal number of people said they were their absolute favorite. So what? A much greater number of people said they didn't like Belkar as much as other characters when ranking them, which is more relevant when talking the votes being representative of the majority of people on the forum.

Borda Count (which the poll I believe you're referring to is effectively a variant of) is known for its ability to select a widely-supported compromise candidate over a more polarizing candidate's plurality of first choices. If you're looking for an actual favorite, rather than who would be the best tolerated, I'd take the exact ranking of those results with a grain of kosher salt.

I'm not looking for an actual favorite; rather, I'm arguing against that a given person is an actual favorite of a ridiculously large population based on a ridiculously small sample size.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Alternatively, maybe it says something about the shifting relative moral status of the principles of this thread.

I voted for the lesser evil. Belkar.

[Jasdoif]

I'm not looking for an actual favorite; rather, I'm arguing against that a given person is an actual favorite of a ridiculously large population based on a ridiculously small sample size.Oh...so you're going for how the entire population of the boards doesn't reach 10% of the regular readership and therefore treating any poll as representative of the entire readership is suspect; rather than choosing to believe one ridiculously small sample over another ridiculously small sample?

[Peelee]

Oh...so you're going for how the entire population of the boards doesn't reach 10% of the regular readership and therefore treating any poll as representative of the entire readership is suspect; rather than choosing to believe one ridiculously small sample over another ridiculously small sample?

Well, mostly. If a poll had a significant portion of the boards, then I would admit that would have a much better chance of being representative of the whole. But until then, yes, I'll go with the former.

[alwaysbebatman]

A sample size of 10% of your population is a fantastic sample size. IF you have reason to believe that the sample is representative. Maybe there are reasons that this sample is NOT representative: an echo chamber effect, or just that we're a bit more into it than the average casual reader who doesn't feel the need to discuss here. But the size of the sample is definitely not the issue.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I mean, the Forum in general is a really good sample size, but I’m not so sure that this poll, with its, what 84?, respondents, really counts as that.

Although, because you get decreasing returns from increasing your sample size, you don’t really need the whole boards, but a good random sample of the readership definitely needs more people.

[alwaysbebatman]

Good point. And even if that IS a large enough sample size, the confidence interval would certainly be much larger than the margin of victory of one or two votes that the last few matchups have all had.

The "winners" are just for fun. If you want to look at these matches as any kind of data to learn from, then the lesson to take away is that the four or five most popular characters are VERY close to equally popular.

[Jasdoif]

I mean, the Forum in general is a really good sample size, but I’m not so sure that this poll, with its, what 84?, respondents, really counts as that.Yeah, I think it's rather short of the 145,181 currently registered members.

[alwaysbebatman]

Yeah, I think it's rather short of the 145,181 currently registered members.

Yep, just plugged that into a sample size calculator and that gives about a 10% confidence interval.

So it is safe enough to say that Vaarsuvius is more favorite than Haley (just for example), but all of the close semifinals we just had only tell you the Null Hypothesis: neither of these two characters are significantly more favorite than the another.

But dramatic, close ballots are fun!

[Peelee]

Oh, it's absolutely fun. I like this tourney you got going on, it's wonderful. I just take issue with people effectively saying, "My favorite character is popular in this poll, so he therefore must be empirically the best thing in the comic and the main reason everyone keeps reading."

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Oh, it's absolutely fun. I like this tourney you got going on, it's wonderful. I just take issue with people effectively saying, "My favorite character is popular in this poll, so he therefore must be empirically the best thing in the comic and the main reason everyone keeps reading."

This.

I honestly love voting in tournaments of any kind, but it’s important not to read too deeply into them. Luckily, I also enjoy talking about polling so it’s somewhat of a win-win for me.

Also, I am now somewhat curious what a much broader survey of the readership would reveal.

[alwaysbebatman]

Hm, I'm not sure if I'm being unclear or if I'm misunderstanding.

I didn't mean to imply that anybody wasn't having fun with the tournament. Just that these razor-thin margin contests we've had lately are too close to learn anything from (because their margins are well inside their confidence interval) and are only for fun...

At the same time, I suspect that the Belkar fan (ETA: it was Bob_McSurly) who asserted that Death's lil helper is on his way to "proving" anything meant that only in a spirit of hyperbolic boosterism.

[Liquor Box]

Yes, an equal number of people said they were their absolute favorite. So what? A much greater number of people said they didn't like Belkar as much as other characters when ranking them, which is more relevant when talking the votes being representative of the majority of people on the forum.

Fair enough. So the more accurate statement would have been to say that "more people tune in to watch Belkar than any other particular character"?


I'm not looking for an actual favorite; rather, I'm arguing against that a given person is an actual favorite of a ridiculously large population based on a ridiculously small sample size.

Sure, so it's not at all conclusive, but the best indication we have (subject to Belkar beating Redcloak)?

[Peelee]

Fair enough. So the more accurate statement would have been to say that "more people tune in to watch Belkar than any other particular character"?
This line of thinking would have better standing if Belkar wins. As it is, theres still an incredibly popular goblin standing in his way thus far.

Sure, so it's not at all conclusive, but the best indication we have?
Assuming it is, "the best indication we have" does not by necessity equate to "a good indication."

[Liquor Box]

This line of thinking would have better standing if Belkar wins. As it is, theres still an incredibly popular goblin standing in his way thus far.

Yeah, I edited my last post to account for exactly that before I saw this post. So fair point.


Assuming it is, "the best indication we have" does not by necessity equate to "a good indication."

I can live with that. So (subject to Belkar beating Redcloak) we can revise the statement to "the best indication we have is that more people tune in to watch Belkar than any other character"? Happy with that?

[Peelee]

Yeah, I edited my last post to account for exactly that before I saw this post. So fair point.



I can live with that. So (subject to Belkar beating Redcloak) we can revise the statement to "the best indication we have is that more people tune in to watch Belkar than any other character"? Happy with that?

Yeah, that's hard to argue (regardless of my agreement with it). Also, I'm sorry if I'm being overly pedantic. Hard to notice ones own faults, and all that.

[Liquor Box]

Yeah, that's hard to argue (regardless of my agreement with it). Also, I'm sorry if I'm being overly pedantic. Hard to notice ones own faults, and all that.

No need to apologise. The original comment was tongue in cheek anyway - I just decided to test your objection a bit. I agree that we can't take this poll result as being anything more than a tiny indication of which is the most popular accross the entire reader group between Belkar and V.

[Peelee]

No need to apologise. The original comment was tongue in cheek anyway - I just decided to test your objection a bit. I agree that we can't take this poll result as being anything more than a tiny indication of which is the most popular accross the entire reader group between Belkar and V.

Ha! I like that. Great way to know if I need to rethink things, if I can't stick to my own guns. Glad neither of us had to worry about that.