PDA

View Full Version : OOTS #1108 - The Discussion Thread



The Giant
2017-12-29, 03:31 PM
New comic is up.

Fish
2017-12-29, 03:35 PM
Hmm, fascinating.

It explains why she did not succeed in contacting him; and also provided an explanation that he may not have desired to contact her in return. And Durkula may not be aware she was even trying, if Durkon hadn’t been aware either.

BLAHMASTER
2017-12-29, 03:35 PM
Thanks! :)

10d10
2017-12-29, 03:37 PM
This confirm that Kudzu isn't Durkon's kid? Since the kid is 50% Durkon, you'd think they could use Kudzu as a focus instead of leftover vampire bite residue...

Fitzclowningham
2017-12-29, 03:38 PM
I don't know why they don't just cast Follow the Trail of (un-)Dead Dwarves. Thought this update might have more oomph to it, considering.

Keltest
2017-12-29, 03:38 PM
This confirm that Kudzu isn't Durkon's kid? Since the kid is 50% Durkon, you'd think they could use Kudzu as a focus instead of leftover vampire bite residue...

I'm kind of guessing that any part of Durkon that was used in making the kid ceased to be part of Durkon once Kudzu was born, on account of being part of Kudzu.

Grey_Wolf_c
2017-12-29, 03:39 PM
This confirm that Kudzu isn't Durkon's kid? Since the kid is 50% Durkon, you'd think they could use Kudzu as a focus instead of leftover vampire bite residue...

No, Kudzu is 100% Kudzu. This is not about looking for DNA.

ETA: Roy could score some loyalty pints from Hilgya by pointing out that Loki is the primary representative of the vote Greg is trying to subvert.

GW

Peelee
2017-12-29, 03:45 PM
I very rarely say this, but Belkar is my favorite this strip.

Dogcula
2017-12-29, 03:47 PM
Well that is a disturbing gross development. Having enough vampire juice floating around in your blood to use it to scry...euch.

Havelocke
2017-12-29, 03:49 PM
That does make sense why she couldn't find him without divine intervention. Kudzu wouldn't work since he is his own entity. I wonder if the Vampire's consciousness is what is causing her to have difficulty finding him. Durkon is still Durkon albeit dead. Not sure if scrying requires the person to have a pulse.

2D8HP
2017-12-29, 03:50 PM
:elan: "Narrative abhors a vacuum"

Words to live by!

:biggrin:

So planning to use that line!

ohkwarig
2017-12-29, 03:51 PM
New comic is up.

It looks like "vacuum" is misspelled "vaccuum". I think if I were writing without spell check, I'd make much worse mistakes.

Murk
2017-12-29, 03:53 PM
I very rarely say this, but Belkar is my favorite this strip.

I have a feeling Kudzu will be my favourite every strip he's in.

Mordokai
2017-12-29, 03:57 PM
I was close to posting a semi sarcastic/semi inquisitive topic if we're going to see another comic this year.

Glad to see Rich beating me to the punch :smallsmile: Happy holidays to ye all!

The Giant
2017-12-29, 04:06 PM
It looks like "vacuum" is misspelled "vaccuum". I think if I were writing without spell check, I'd make much worse mistakes.

Typo fixed. Also, I forgot they were using the Light spell in the darkness, so that's added.

Bluepaw
2017-12-29, 04:22 PM
Kudos for envisioning the vampiric blood drain like a mosquito's saliva injection... adds that extra horrifying je ne sais quois...

Jaxzan Proditor
2017-12-29, 04:23 PM
I’m with Haley on even the less unpleasant option. Ewwww. But it is nice that the Order has a little bit more of a plan.

Goblin_Priest
2017-12-29, 04:26 PM
And here I thought she was gonna say "the baby has some of his blood so he served as focus".

Am I missing something, I don't really understand why she wasn't able to locate him before.

Doug Lampert
2017-12-29, 04:28 PM
Hmm, fascinating.

It explains why she did not succeed in contacting him; and also provided an explanation that he may not have desired to contact her in return. And Durkula may not be aware she was even trying, if Durkon hadn’t been aware either.

Not really, try an average of 20 times and a +arbitrarily high will save still fails once.
And here I thought she was gonna say "the baby has some of his blood so he served as focus".

Am I missing something, I don't really understand why she wasn't able to locate him before.

DNA may not even exist in the D&D world, and there's no actual blood from the father in a child.

Peelee
2017-12-29, 04:29 PM
And here I thought she was gonna say "the baby has some of his blood so he served as focus".

Am I missing something, I don't really understand why she wasn't able to locate him before.

If the baby could serve as a focus, she would have found him soon as the baby was born, most likely. Possibly as soon as she found out she was pregnant, depending on how she can channel it.

Anyway, she couldn't locate him before because in Stickworld,* the scrying spell is resisted by the subject's subconscious mind. Durkon's uptight rule-worshiping little brain is apparently perfectly capable of keeping Hilgya from getting a fix on him.


Not really, try an average of 20 times and a +arbitrarily high will save still fails once.
Statistically, yes. Realistically, not necessarily. In the story, clearly not in Hilgya's case.

*Thanks, Doug Lampert!

Doug Lampert
2017-12-29, 04:33 PM
If the baby could serve as a focus, she would have found him soon as the baby was born, most likely. Possibly as soon as she found out she was pregnant, depending on how she can channel it.

Anyway, she couldn't locate him before because in Stickworld, the scrying spell is resisted by the subject's subconscious mind. Durkon's uptight rule-worshiping little brain is apparently perfectly capable of keeping Hilgya from getting a fix on him.

Scrying is "Saving Throw: Will negates"
There's a -10 modifier to the save if the person scrying has a body part.

HUMVEE Driver
2017-12-29, 04:33 PM
Finally! It's really super to peruse again Giant's enterprise!

Sniffnoy
2017-12-29, 04:39 PM
Hm. Would whatever was blocking scrying have also blocked sending? Wondering if something else is going on here.

factotum
2017-12-29, 04:55 PM
Would whatever was blocking scrying have also blocked sending?

I doubt it. Hilgya isn't really after starting up any sort of conversation with Durkon, though, so why would she Send anything to him? To her mind that would just warn him she's coming and give him time to prepare.

a1chemi
2017-12-29, 04:56 PM
Statistically, yes. Realistically, not necessarily. In the story, clearly not in Hilgya's case.


She could also only attempt once every 24 hours, so she couldn't exactly spam it.

The DeathKnight
2017-12-29, 04:57 PM
Do... Vampire 's even have siliva?

Ron Miel
2017-12-29, 04:59 PM
So, if Durkon can block scrying because he's Lawful, why didn't she try locating Belkar or Elan?

Herr Doktor
2017-12-29, 04:59 PM
Yay! A strip before the New Year. BTW, just noticed that Kudzu has a little beard. Do dwarf babies have beards already? Cute, though.

ratfox
2017-12-29, 05:03 PM
Wow! I think the comic got posted while I was catching up with Astérix and Obélix on the previous thread.

Good to see Hilgya has a good head under the horned helmet! I wonder what's her intelligence stats. She's going to be a very nice addition to the team.

I have to say, though: it's been *how long* since Durkula fed on Haley? Over 100 strips? That's a very long shot for maybe-vampire-have-something-like-saliva to still be in the body.

I mean, I don't know how much time it is in-comic. It might be hours; for us it's been a year and a half... But I guess narrative abhors a vacuum :smallbiggrin:

Stabbey
2017-12-29, 05:10 PM
Well if using Haley as a scrying medium fails, they'll just fall back to Plan A - wander around aimlessly until stumbling onto the plot.

TerrickTerran
2017-12-29, 05:14 PM
Fun one here but mostly I love Elan's comment in the end.

Nomen
2017-12-29, 05:20 PM
You know when she's not irrationally hating someone for a perceived slight she's pretty dang smart.

Dovetail
2017-12-29, 05:23 PM
Hilgya probably didn't try to scry on one of the team members because she wouldn't have been sure that Durkon would stay with the party. She projects a lot and thinks that Durkon is disloyal and hedonistic because that's what she was.

Dire Ferret
2017-12-29, 05:27 PM
So, if Durkon can block scrying because he's Lawful, why didn't she try locating Belkar or Elan?

The party had left Durkon behind, she might have assumed he wouldn't join up with them again.

hroþila
2017-12-29, 05:35 PM
So, if Durkon can block scrying because he's Lawful, why didn't she try locating Belkar or Elan?
It's not because he's Lawful, but because he has a decent Will save.

It's the same reason why Qarr advised Z to scry on Mr Scruffy in a bonus strip.

Gift Jeraff
2017-12-29, 05:54 PM
Looks like Roy Is Archon is back and enacting Roy's plan (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0664.html) in Panel 7. :smile:

Sniffnoy
2017-12-29, 06:00 PM
I doubt it. Hilgya isn't really after starting up any sort of conversation with Durkon, though, so why would she Send anything to him? To her mind that would just warn him she's coming and give him time to prepare.

Ah, yeah, that makes more sense. A sensible person would send to him rather than just immediately concluding such negative things about him, but I guess that's not Hilgya's way. So she only tried scrying on him, was blocked by will save, and thus has seen nothing of him.

oonker
2017-12-29, 06:16 PM
Looks like Roy Is Archon is back and enacting Roy's plan (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0664.html) in Panel 7. :smile:

Would you care to elaborate? I really don't know what is Roy's plan for Roy's archon, and I didn't get anything from this strip.

The_Weirdo
2017-12-29, 06:30 PM
So she DID try to contact and/or find Durkon before assuming he was shirking his duty towards her, which means she does have decent reasons to think he's a pretty crappy person, even though she's wrong!

Well, imagine that.

Dragolord
2017-12-29, 06:31 PM
Would you care to elaborate? I really don't know what is Roy's plan for Roy's archon, and I didn't get anything from this strip.

Roy asked Roy's Archon to do something unknown, which even he won't remember at this point, due to his lack of memory of the afterlife. This is irrelevant, however, as the glowing orb illuminating the Order's surroundings is a Light spell, rather than a divine being.


So she DID try to contact and/or find Durkon before assuming he was shirking his duty towards her, which means she does have decent reasons to think he's a pretty crappy person, even though she's wrong!

Well, imagine that.

Except that she admits herself that he was unconsciously resisting the spell. That says nothing about his moral character that anybody even reasonably well-balanced would take as a reason to despise him.

a1chemi
2017-12-29, 06:40 PM
Roy asked Roy's Archon to do something unknown, which even he won't remember at this point, due to his lack of memory of the afterlife. This is irrelevant, however, as the glowing orb illuminating the Order's surroundings is a Light spell, rather than a divine being.


Roy remembers what happened in the waiting area and when he was floating around down with the living.

He only doesn't remember what happened on the mountain with his mom, brother, and grandfather.

Basement Cat
2017-12-29, 06:59 PM
This looks like a Chekhov's gun to me.

The fact that tracking spells no longer work on Undead Vampire Durkon may help the team clue in to the real nature of vampires in their world: i.e. that the original souls are there but subdued by evil spirits.

Maybe this will be important to the team "saving" Durkon by dusting Durkula then Resurrecting Durkon.

Darth Paul
2017-12-29, 07:00 PM
Do dwarf babies have beards already?
Nale had a goatee as a baby, so why not?

Also, I don't think that's Roy's archon in the strip, I think it's the Light spell up near the ceiling.

hroþila
2017-12-29, 07:02 PM
So she DID try to contact and/or find Durkon before assuming he was shirking his duty towards her, which means she does have decent reasons to think he's a pretty crappy person, even though she's wrong!

Well, imagine that.
"His Will save is too good" is not a decent reason to jump to any conclusions. She only tried to find him in a way that wouldn't reveal her involvement. She didn't try to Send to him, as far as we know (and since there's no reason why Sending would fail, it's safe to assume that nope, she didn't try). I think it's more likely that she made up her mind about Durkon long before she started looking for him, and I wouldn't be surprised if the reason she avoided Sending to him is that she wanted to catch him off his guard and unprepared when she finally came to teach him a little lesson.

ellindsey
2017-12-29, 07:03 PM
I was under the impression that if you attempted to scry on someone, and they resisted the attempt via Will save, that they would be at the very least aware that they had resisted a spell being cast on them, and possibly that it was a scrying attempt. Is that a misunderstanding of the rules on my part?

SilverCacaobean
2017-12-29, 07:16 PM
I was under the impression that if you attempted to scry on someone, and they resisted the attempt via Will save, that they would be at the very least aware that they had resisted a spell being cast on them, and possibly that it was a scrying attempt. Is that a misunderstanding of the rules on my part?

I don't know how it works on d&d, but I think that's how it works here since Hilgya says they resist it subconsiously.


Also loved the strip. Everybody who opened their mouth on this strip made me laugh :smallbiggrin:

Kantaki
2017-12-29, 07:27 PM
Narrative abhors a vacuum...:smallbiggrin:

Elan still gets the best lines.

JumboWheat01
2017-12-29, 07:38 PM
Stumbling onto plot really is an effective way of adventuring.

Kish
2017-12-29, 07:41 PM
So she DID try to contact and/or find Durkon before assuming he was shirking his duty towards her, which means she does have decent reasons to think he's a pretty crappy person, even though she's wrong!

Well, imagine that.
Scry, not contact. Taking that to mean she wanted to talk to him, rather than that--as she's already stated--she's been looking for him with murderous intentions for a long time, is...kind of a big assumption.

RolkFlameraven
2017-12-29, 08:01 PM
:elan: "Narrative abhors a vacuum"

Words to live by!

:biggrin:

So planning to use that line!


Don't you mean words to Quest by?

Psychronia
2017-12-29, 08:11 PM
Kudzu looks like he's just having a great time the whole strip and he is adorable.

It really is jarring to see someone judge stiff, uptight Durkon this harshly. I guess bias is inevitable, but you have to jump pretty far before most of those accusations would even feasibly apply to him.

Well, one way or another, their reunion promises to be...dramatic.

Doug Lampert
2017-12-29, 08:40 PM
I was under the impression that if you attempted to scry on someone, and they resisted the attempt via Will save, that they would be at the very least aware that they had resisted a spell being cast on them, and possibly that it was a scrying attempt. Is that a misunderstanding of the rules on my part?


I don't know how it works on d&d, but I think that's how it works here since Hilgya says they resist it subconsiously.


Also loved the strip. Everybody who opened their mouth on this strip made me laugh :smallbiggrin:

Under D&D rules a will save vs. scrying is automatic unless you actively choose not to take one, there's no penalty for being asleep or unaware of the spell. Thus subconscious resistance is an appropriate term. Under D&D rules you always know if you have succeeded at a will save after the save is rolled (if you fail you may never know).

But you don't get any special knowledge of what caused the will save without a spellcraft roll, specifically one use of Spellcraft is: "After rolling a saving throw against a spell targeted on you, determine what that spell was. No action required. No retry." The DC is 30 for Scrying cast by a Cleric. Remember that a roll of 20 is not an automatic success on a skill check and that Spellcraft is Int based. It's entirely possible that Greg or Durkon fails that check on a natural 20.

Ergo, Durkon may have once or twice at some point resisted a spell without any good idea of what spell he had just resisted or of who had cast it. Maybe he just assumed it was Nale or someone.

Baelzar
2017-12-29, 09:00 PM
Durkon's Will save must be incredible. Considering Scrying is a Divine spell, I'd think having Durkon's lover and also his kid (if it is indeed such) would add a significant DC number.

Gods tend to factor in relations and blood. Loki especially.

Of course, even a successful Scrying or Locate Creature are of limited use. Limited sight and time.

Lord Torath
2017-12-29, 09:02 PM
Ergo, Durkon may have once or twice at some point resisted a spell without any good idea of what spell he had just resisted or of who had cast it. Maybe he just assumed it was Nale or someone.Hah! So THAT's why Durkon had to make a bunch of Will Saves and no one else did in Dragon Magazine! :smallbiggrin:

(Or Snips, Snails, and Dragon Tales if, like me, you do not have all the OotS-containing Dragon Magazines)

elros
2017-12-29, 09:14 PM
If they want to improve the chance of successful scrying, someone has to say that they have no chance that it will work, because Elan has already proven that "a one-in-a-million chance is a sure thing!" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0584.html)

SilverCacaobean
2017-12-29, 09:29 PM
If they want to improve the chance of successful scrying, someone has to say that they have no chance that it will work, because Elan has already proven that "a one-in-a-million chance is a sure thing!" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0584.html)

That strip also kind of justifies why Hilgya's attempts of scrying failed (barring Loki shenanigans). "A 10% is pretty unlikely." I'm not saying that her chance of success is 10%, just that she was much more likely to fail than succeed but her chance of success was much better than one-in-a-million. In this universe odds like that spell certain failure :smalltongue:

georgie_leech
2017-12-29, 10:15 PM
Explanation of why she couldn't find Durkon: he resisted the spell. Conclusion: Sending wouldn't work? Yeah, I know if I can't find someone over the Internet, calling them by cellphone is clearly not going to work when you know what number to dial. Sorry folks, word is still out on the reason for not sending. Could be malicious intent, could be projection, could be one of the character-driven poor choices that drive this story. Like jumping on a flying dragon with express intent to kill the flying thing in midair :smallamused:

ellindsey
2017-12-29, 10:34 PM
She didn't want to talk to him.

She wanted to find out where he was, hunt him down, and kill him, without him knowing she was coming. Scrying would have let her know at the very least what his surroundings looked like, with him unaware that she was doing so. Sending would only have sent a message, and would have let him know she was looking for him.

Rogar Demonblud
2017-12-29, 10:42 PM
Durkon's Will save must be incredible. Considering Scrying is a Divine spell, I'd think having Durkon's lover and also his kid (if it is indeed such) would add a significant DC number.

Nope. She met him briefly. That's a +0. So the DC is 15 plus Hilgya's WIS modifier (at least +3, as she needs a 15 to cast a fifth level spell), and Durkon's WILL save will be (depending on level at the time of scrying) +8 to +10, plus his WIS modifier (currently pegged at +11, see Geekery). So Durkon will make that save unless rolling a 1.

Anyway, Hilgya's being an idiot. If you don't know where someone is, going to where you know they need to go is the smartest option available generally. It's even a trope, called cutting them off at the pass.

KillingAScarab
2017-12-29, 10:57 PM
I approve of this comic, but then, I approved of this comic just from reading the title. I cannot resist a Cure pun.

MReav
2017-12-29, 11:15 PM
Thank you V for preventing the sitcom-level farce cringe.

a1chemi
2017-12-29, 11:22 PM
She didn't want to talk to him.

She wanted to find out where he was, hunt him down, and kill him, without him knowing she was coming. Scrying would have let her know at the very least what his surroundings looked like, with him unaware that she was doing so. Sending would only have sent a message, and would have let him know she was looking for him.

I find the evidence that she wants to kill him specious at best. She said once that she was looking for people who want to murder Durkon, and she hates him sure, but I fully expect there to be more of a twist coming here.

Other than that one line, which doesn't exactly state that she herself wants to kill him, she has only said since that she's been trying to find him.

brian 333
2017-12-29, 11:31 PM
Nope. She met him briefly. That's a +0. So the DC is 15 plus Hilgya's WIS modifier (at least +3, as she needs a 15 to cast a fifth level spell), and Durkon's WILL save will be (depending on level at the time of scrying) +8 to +10, plus his WIS modifier (currently pegged at +11, see Geekery). So Durkon will make that save unless rolling a 1.

Anyway, Hilgya's being an idiot. If you don't know where someone is, going to where you know they need to go is the smartest option available generally. It's even a trope, called cutting them off at the pass.

None of which matters because Durkon is dead. Durkula's will save might matter. Durkon exists only as a figment of a vampires imagination.

As a DM I might allow scrying on a vampire of someone they knew but it would be the vampire that makes the save. I might also allow scrying on Durkon's spirit but I'd treat it as if it were on another plane, the player would have to specify they are doing so, the characters would be required to have an understanding of how vampirism works, and the vampire would still get a save. Telepathy would be easier.

Anarion
2017-12-30, 01:57 AM
Should we be concerned for Roy's mental health here? He's talking a lot like Elan. :smalleek: Amusing comic though, V thinking pretty well on that front.

factotum
2017-12-30, 02:44 AM
Explanation of why she couldn't find Durkon: he resisted the spell. Conclusion: Sending wouldn't work? Yeah, I know if I can't find someone over the Internet, calling them by cellphone is clearly not going to work when you know what number to dial.

Except that's not how D&D spells work. Check the SRD--Scry has a saving throw (Will negates), whereas Sending does not; so even if someone can resist being scryed, they can't resist someone sending them a message via Sending.

georgie_leech
2017-12-30, 03:18 AM
Except that's not how D&D spells work. Check the SRD--Scry has a saving throw (Will negates), whereas Sending does not; so even if someone can resist being scryed, they can't resist someone sending them a message via Sending.

Right, hence the rest of my post speculating on why she didn't Send instead when she was upset Durkon apparently didn't take responsibility for the child he didn't know about. :smalltongue:

Ruck
2017-12-30, 04:34 AM
I find the evidence that she wants to kill him specious at best. She said once that she was looking for people who want to murder Durkon, and she hates him sure, but I fully expect there to be more of a twist coming here.
She was looking for people who want to murder him, she immediately allied with those people once she found them, and in her view, she has perfectly good cause for murdering such a degenerate hypocrite who saddled her with a child and abandoned his responsibilities afterward. I don't find that specious; indeed, I find it to be the motivation that best explains her actions since she reappeared.

There might be a twist predicated on Durkon discovering he has a son, but I don't think that's going to be because Hilgya currently has different intentions than her apparent ones.

Ironsmith
2017-12-30, 04:43 AM
Should we be concerned for Roy's mental health here? He's talking a lot like Elan. :smalleek:

I would say not. What Roy's showing now more than ever is a certain savviness for the medium he's in. Elan might not be the brightest bulb in the hardware store, but he's still more or less sane. If Roy seems to be acting uncharacteristically badly, recall that even he is prone to mistakes, and that he's trying to operate at around midnight as of right now, which is sort of hard to do unless you're already used to it and your sleep schedule's been displaced.

===

Anyway, I'm with the interpretation that Hilgya's actively out trying to, minimum, kill Durkon, since she had no objections to raise to someone else trying to do the same. Also, further proof that she's projecting/in denial... in the space of four panels, she goes from complaining about his "uptight, rule-worshipping little brain" to saying he'd probably slept with Hayley. While those two statements aren't incompatible, exactly (since "the rules" clearly allowed him to have sex, even if he didn't see any prospective partners that really interested him), they're still wildly incongruent, since one is invocative of the Durkon we know and the other describes the heartbreaker we know (and she should know) Durkon isn't.

Similarly, I do feel like there's going to be a twist coming on... if I had to guess, it'd probably be that Durkon* is far more appealing to Hilgya than Durkon is, or that the congruence between the two is going to radically affect Hilgya's thinking and therefore, the plot.


Also, pure theory territory here: she's going to get exactly the revenge she thinks she wants (killing Durkon*), only to find it devoid of any meaning (since it doesn't really fix her problems). In the absence of any other cleric capable of performing the appropriate spell, though, it'll fall on her to actually Resurrect Durkon, first edition. Naturally, she'll be reluctant, and it'll take some prodding from the rest of the group to convince her to do so. From there, I see one of several things happening.


Durkon comes back to life, sees Hilgya, and is overjoyed to see her again. Hilgya, obviously, does not feel the same way. Hilgya then proceeds to berate Durkon for all the flaws she perceives him as having, while he himself takes it stoically... with Hilgya being the hedonist she is, this only serves to infuriate her even more, since it looks to her as though Durkon simply isn't having an emotional reaction to what she's saying ("Does this mean absolutely nothing to you?!") Durkon's response will... well, it'll probably be something that subverts what she thinks of him, most likely having to do with his infant son.
Durkon comes back to life, sees Hilgya, and is torn; on the one hand, she's doing exactly what forced him to send her away in the first place: running away from her gods-given duty as a dwarf to pursue her own ambitions. On the other hand, despite witnessing definite murderous intentions on her part only moments prior, she did eventually find it in herself to bring him back. He's similarly torn on the subject of Kudzu: on the one hand, Kudzu is his son and it's his gods-given duty to care for his child, born in or out of wedlock. On the other hand, Hilgya probably still isn't going to let him near the boy. Tears and possibly (more) blood will be shed before the night is through.
Durkon comes back to life, but the added urgency of Xykon being right by Kraagor's Gate means there's not a lot of time for him and Hilgya to sort out their differences. Durkon has to leave with the Order, but this time, he promises Hilgya he'll return, if only to take care of their son. His arc concludes later, probably at roughly the same time V's business with Inkyrius, Belkar's death, Elan's (and possibly Hayley's, since her own father is involved in the conflict and she was a significant part of Elan's own troubles with papa) confrontation of Tarquin, and Roy's own business all take place.


Bonus points if in one of the above, Durkon ends up having a moment with the party that parallels his memory in this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1089.html). Not sure why, exactly, but something like that.

Peelee
2017-12-30, 08:33 AM
Anyway, Hilgya's being an idiot. If you don't know where someone is, going to where you know they need to go is the smartest option available generally. It's even a trope, called cutting them off at the pass.
When did Hilgya ever know where Durkon needed to go?

None of which matters because Durkon is dead. Durkula's will save might matter. Durkon exists only as a figment of a vampires imagination.
This is D&D, not real life. Souls are prooved to exist. Durkon still very much exists, he's just trapped between life and the afterlife.

lcavalheiro
2017-12-30, 08:43 AM
:elan: "Narrative abhors a vaccum"
I've lived to see Elan quoting (sort of... original statement is "Nature abhors a vacuum") Aristotle! Nice one, Giant!

Peelee
2017-12-30, 08:49 AM
:elan: "Narrative abhors a vaccum"
I've lived to see Elan quoting (sort of... original statement is "Nature abhors a vacuum") Aristotle! Nice one, Giant!

Aristotle was truly amazing. I think without a doubt he was the smartest person to get absolutely everything wrong.

lcavalheiro
2017-12-30, 08:53 AM
Aristotle was truly amazing. I think without a doubt he was the smartest person to get absolutely everything wrong.

It's what happens when you use logic tools to make statements about everything :smallwink:

eilandesq
2017-12-30, 09:00 AM
Unless:

--Hilgya only recently started trying (meaning that Durkon was dead and the scrying would consequently automatically fail);

--Hilgya tried for a while, but gave up after X number of attempts in spite of her certainly knowing that Durkon would automatically fail at least 1 time in 20 no matter how ridiculous his save bonus was, or;

--she did keep trying for an extended period (given the timeline if she had started casting when she was clearly pregnant, she should have had time to cast that spell hundreds of times), and Durkon still made his save every single time either due to blind luck or someone actively tampering with the situation.

, there is at the very least a large hole in her account, without even getting into "she had access to many other spells that would have done the trick or at least given her a more definitive answer, most notably Sending."

Riftwolf
2017-12-30, 09:18 AM
Quick question: do you know when you've made a will save vs scrying?
I remember reading somewhere that you know, on some level, that a spell has been cast, even if you resist all its effects and don't see or hear the caster.
But I also remember a game where a prisoner was willingly failing will saves versus scrying, with the reasoning that the only people who'd scry for him would be people planning his rescue.
That said, it's possible Durkon knew the scrying occurred, but didn't know who scryed. It could've been Xykon for all he knew.
I can see Hilgya's reasoning a bit; if I was looking for an ex I had good reason to contact, I'd probably try finding them in person before magically telephoning directly up their skull. But if scrying failed, I would've sent after.

Possible future strip: it turns out Hilgya did, but due to sendings word limit, she didn't say 'I'm pregnant' till the spell cut out. Durkon would've misunderstood her message, and told her to go back to her husband. This would explain Hilgya's bitterness to a degree.

Curupira
2017-12-30, 09:22 AM
Aristotle was truly amazing. I think without a doubt he was the smartest person to get absolutely everything wrong.

Everything except narrative theory. To this day he's the most influential thinker on that topic :)

lcavalheiro
2017-12-30, 09:40 AM
Everything except narrative theory. To this day he's the most influential thinker on that topic :)

I'm afraid I disagree. Even on Classic Athens we had more complete narrative theories (Plato and sophists, for instance) than aristotelian ones. Jumping to medievals, we had a lot of good theorists too, primarily among Arabs. Post-Renascence thinkers have added a lot on narrative theory, from Hobbes to Kant, from Hegel to Nietzsche. Plus, we had 20th century names, like Campbell or King.

I believe Aristotle is one of most influential thinker in both areas he exceled at: ethics and classical logic. Even on latter, he is outdated, since mathematical logic superseded classical one starting from 19th century.

lcavalheiro
2017-12-30, 09:44 AM
Quick question: do you know when you've made a will save vs scrying?
I remember reading somewhere that you know, on some level, that a spell has been cast, even if you resist all its effects and don't see or hear the caster.
But I also remember a game where a prisoner was willingly failing will saves versus scrying, with the reasoning that the only people who'd scry for him would be people planning his rescue.
That said, it's possible Durkon knew the scrying occurred, but didn't know who scryed. It could've been Xykon for all he knew.
I can see Hilgya's reasoning a bit; if I was looking for an ex I had good reason to contact, I'd probably try finding them in person before magically telephoning directly up their skull. But if scrying failed, I would've sent after.

Possible future strip: it turns out Hilgya did, but due to sendings word limit, she didn't say 'I'm pregnant' till the spell cut out. Durkon would've misunderstood her message, and told her to go back to her husband. This would explain Hilgya's bitterness to a degree.

As far as I can remember, by D&D rules when you make a subconscious Will save (like ones you do against Scryng), you know you did the save, but you don't know against what you did or any info about caster or spell. You just know "I passed on a Will save". But it's Stickverse, and The Giant showed us before he isn't afraid to bend or rewrite rules for drama, comic or story advancement purposes :smallwink:

Peelee
2017-12-30, 09:56 AM
Everything except narrative theory. To this day he's the most influential thinker on that topic :)

Influential is different. Aristotle is arguably the most influential person ever. His model of physics stood for a thousand years. He laid the building blocks for half the sciences. He was wrong about everything, but that's because he didn't have adequate tools to be right. He figured what I think are the best possible mechanisms to explain how the world works that anyone could have made at the time, with the tools and knowledge available.

Hence, the smartest person to be wrong about absolutely everything.

lcavalheiro
2017-12-30, 10:14 AM
(...)He figured what I think are the best possible mechanisms to explain how the world works that anyone could have made at the time, with the tools and knowledge available.

I must disagree on that. Aristarchus of Samos have conceived and mathematically demonstrated the heliocentric model a hundred years before Aristotle. Also, Erathostenes of Cyrene proved that Earth is rounded-shape, calculated the distance between Earth and Sun and tilt of Earth axial tilt, and invented the leap day at same time Aristotle was alive. So, for some topics Aristotles would have the tools he needed if he had the "classical" Philosophy formation of his time (which involved a lot of maths, a thing Aristotle couldn't bear well).

I find very fitting insinuating that Aristotle was a bard: he wrote about a LOT of things, but for ignoring some tools he had in his time some of his theories are shallow as bardic lore.

a1chemi
2017-12-30, 11:35 AM
Quick question: do you know when you've made a will save vs scrying?

Possible future strip: it turns out Hilgya did, but due to sendings word limit, she didn't say 'I'm pregnant' till the spell cut out. Durkon would've misunderstood her message, and told her to go back to her husband. This would explain Hilgya's bitterness to a degree.

Someone said earlier that you always know if you succeed at a savings throw but need to make a spell craft check to know what spell was targeting you.

I'm thinking that she didn't send because she didn't expect him to respond, given that he told her to get lost last time they saw each other.

Also, given her view of him, she also probably thinks he wouldn't believe he being pregnant, or wouldn't care, and didn't want to get his (expected to be dickish) response via sending rather than in person so that she could smack him with a hammer if she felt the need.

Also a sitcom misunderstanding isn't likely because she could have just cast send again and correct it.

Goblin_Priest
2017-12-30, 12:02 PM
Scrying is "Saving Throw: Will negates"
There's a -10 modifier to the save if the person scrying has a body part.

So... that's it? She couldn't scry him, because his will save is too high?

That's... pretty weak. A natural 1 on the will save is an automatic fail. Sure you can only do it once per day... but just keep spamming it. Makes me wonder, though, that scrying eye some speculated was from Zzdiri, maybe it was from her?

As for the DC itself, why is it even all that high? She has first-hand experience with Durkon. Heck, having actually slept with him, I'd say that qualifies as "Familiar (you know the subject well)", so he gets -5 on his will save for that. Then, there's the connection. A mere picture is enough to reduce the save even further, and she's pretty dumb if she can't even invest in having a sketch artist make one up for her. Possession or garment is another -4. Seriously... that baby's half his blood (DNA), that should absolutely qualify for a -4 on the save, or at the very least a -2. That's a potential -11 on his save. Something he should be able to fail.

On top of all this, Durkon should KNOW if he's targeted by scrying spells.


Succeeding on a Saving Throw

A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature’s saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells.

Sebastian
2017-12-30, 12:22 PM
As for the DC itself, why is it even all that high? She has first-hand experience with Durkon. Heck, having actually slept with him, I'd say that qualifies as "Familiar (you know the subject well)"

Just listen to her talking about him. do you think she knows him well?

Nomen
2017-12-30, 12:42 PM
So... that's it? She couldn't scry him, because his will save is too high?

That's... pretty weak. A natural 1 on the will save is an automatic fail. Sure you can only do it once per day... but just keep spamming it. Makes me wonder, though, that scrying eye some speculated was from Zzdiri, maybe it was from her?

As for the DC itself, why is it even all that high? She has first-hand experience with Durkon. Heck, having actually slept with him, I'd say that qualifies as "Familiar (you know the subject well)", so he gets -5 on his will save for that. Then, there's the connection. A mere picture is enough to reduce the save even further, and she's pretty dumb if she can't even invest in having a sketch artist make one up for her. Possession or garment is another -4. Seriously... that baby's half his blood (DNA), that should absolutely qualify for a -4 on the save, or at the very least a -2. That's a potential -11 on his save. Something he should be able to fail.

On top of all this, Durkon should KNOW if he's targeted by scrying spells.

My guess is she tried once or twice then gave up it fits what little we know about her character.

Grey_Wolf_c
2017-12-30, 12:45 PM
So... that's it? She couldn't scry him, because his will save is too high?

That's... pretty weak.
No, it is not.


Makes me wonder, though, that scrying eye some speculated was from Zzdiri, maybe it was from her?
No. It was Z's.


As for the DC itself, why is it even all that high? She has first-hand experience with Durkon. Heck, having actually slept with him, I'd say that qualifies as "Familiar (you know the subject well)"
She obviously does not know him at all, if he really thinks Durkon is some serial philanderer.


A mere picture is enough to reduce the save even further, and she's pretty dumb if she can't even invest in having a sketch artist make one up for her.
Where would he find a sketch artist that could paint an accurate picture of Durkon?


Possession or garment is another -4
Which she does not have any of.


Seriously... that baby's half his blood (DNA), that should absolutely qualify for a -4 on the save, or at the very least a -2.
Irrelevant. This is magic, not science. Hair has no DNA and is still the most traditional focus to us. That alone tells you that DNA is not what counts. What matters is that it was part of the person being scryed, and Kudzu is his own person, not some amalgamation of his parents. Otherwise, when you scryed for someone, you'd end up scrying his entire family, and that obviously is not what happens.


That's a potential -11 on his save. Something he should be able to fail.
No, it's a +0.


On top of all this, Durkon should KNOW if he's targeted by scrying spells.
As per the comic, he does not: it is a subconscious resistance. And even if it was per RAW, Durkon might have known someone might have tried to scry him and failed, not who did it - and there is no lack of antagonists that might have been targeting him, so from that conclude "Hilgya" is really grasping at straws.

Grey Wolf

Rogar Demonblud
2017-12-30, 01:24 PM
When did Hilgya ever know where Durkon needed to go?

Roy just told her, and she immediately discarded that as unworkable in favor of her plan, which has never worked yet.

Still, it tells us she must have a bag of holding on her to be carrying the jeweled font of holy water she needs for the forthcoming scry attempt. If she memorized the spell today.

Goblin_Priest
2017-12-30, 01:28 PM
Extra point I intended to point out: she could have targeted known low-will members of the party, like Belkar.

Grey_Wolf_c
2017-12-30, 01:35 PM
Extra point I intended to point out: she could have targeted known low-will members of the party, like Belkar.

The party that had abandoned him in the dungeon? Why would she assume Durkon had rejoined them? She didn't.


GW

Kish
2017-12-30, 01:40 PM
As per the comic, he does not: it is a subconscious resistance. And even if it was per RAW, Durkon might have known someone might have tried to scry him and failed, not who did it - and there is no lack of antagonists that might have been targeting him, so from that conclude "Hilgya" is really grasping at straws.
As someone pointed out, in one of the Dragon Magazine strips Durkon does go, "Huh, I just had to make an unexplained Will save! And another one!" At the time it just looks like setup for a single-strip joke, but it was quite a clever setup if Rich really had this in mind at the time he was writing that.

Grey_Wolf_c
2017-12-30, 02:05 PM
As someone pointed out, in one of the Dragon Magazine strips Durkon does go, "Huh, I just had to make an unexplained Will save! And another one!" At the time it just looks like setup for a single-strip joke, but it was quite a clever setup if Rich really had this in mind at the time he was writing that.

Well, if scrying is really only once per day, then that can't have been just Hilgya. If anything, it proves that passing will saves is such an occupational hazard for Durkon that one more would not exactly raise any new alarm bells.

Grey Wolf

Peelee
2017-12-30, 02:56 PM
I must disagree on that. Aristarchus of Samos have conceived and mathematically demonstrated the heliocentric model a hundred years before Aristotle. Also, Erathostenes of Cyrene proved that Earth is rounded-shape, calculated the distance between Earth and Sun and tilt of Earth axial tilt, and invented the leap day at same time Aristotle was alive. So, for some topics Aristotles would have the tools he needed if he had the "classical" Philosophy formation of his time (which involved a lot of maths, a thing Aristotle couldn't bear well).

I find very fitting insinuating that Aristotle was a bard: he wrote about a LOT of things, but for ignoring some tools he had in his time some of his theories are shallow as bardic lore.

I thought most Greeks (and most people in general, that were relatively well-educated) embraced Eratosthenes's global earth. Did Aristotle not?

Also, I've never heard of Aristarchus before. Did he really have a heliocentric model proof? Why didn't it take off like other Greek proofs did?

hamishspence
2017-12-30, 03:10 PM
Why didn't it take off like other Greek proofs did?

Mostly because Aristotle and a few others, disagreed?

dtilque
2017-12-30, 03:30 PM
I thought most Greeks (and most people in general, that were relatively well-educated) embraced Eratosthenes's global earth. Did Aristotle not?

Eratosthenes (276-194 BC) post-dated Aristotle (384-322 BC). Yet, I understand it was generally accepted by educated Greeks that the Earth was a sphere even before E's calculation of the diameter. The sphere was considered a perfect geometric figure, even moreso than the Platonic solids. After all, the Sun and Moon were spheres.

Grey_Wolf_c
2017-12-30, 03:38 PM
Mostly because Aristotle and a few others, disagreed?

To be fair, "If the Earth is moving, why don't we see star paralax?" is a rather strong counter argument to the heliocentric model pre-advanced optics (and pre-precise measurements). The answer "because the stars are ludicrously far" comes across as a post-hoc justification.

My favourite piece of Aristotelian "knowledge" was that men had more teeth than women. Because of that and similar "pearls" of Aristotelian wisdom, I am with Peelee in that would will be right more often than wrong if, you assumed everything Aristotle said is factually incorrect.

GW

SilverCacaobean
2017-12-30, 03:48 PM
My favourite piece of Aristotelian "knowledge" was that men had more teeth than women.

Haha, seriously? That's hilarious! A friend had told me the same thing some years ago, but I could not find a source, so I thought it was just an anecdote. Could you show me where you saw that?

Grey_Wolf_c
2017-12-30, 03:52 PM
Haha, seriously? That's hilarious! A friend had told me the same thing some years ago, but I could not find a source, so I thought it was just an anecdote. Could you show me where you saw that?

A quick google check tells me it's in "The History of Animals," book 2, part 1:

"Males have more teeth than females in the case of men, sheep, goats, and swine; in the case of other animals observations have not yet been made: but the more teeth they have the more long-lived are they, as a rule, while those are short-lived in proportion that have teeth fewer in number and thinly set."

I like the "in the case of other animals observations have not yet been made", given that observations were clearly not made for the first set either.

GW

SilverCacaobean
2017-12-30, 03:58 PM
A quick google check tells me it's in "The History of Animals," book 2, part 1:

"Males have more teeth than females in the case of men, sheep, goats, and swine; in the case of other animals observations have not yet been made: but the more teeth they have the more long-lived are they, as a rule, while those are short-lived in proportion that have teeth fewer in number and thinly set."

I like the "in the case of other animals observations have not yet been made", given that observations were clearly not made for the first set either.

GW

I'm not sure how I failed to find this gem last time :smallbiggrin:. Thanks.

It's like he had set out to not make a single observation at all, or something...

brian 333
2017-12-30, 04:01 PM
Heinlein once said that a history of science could be written in reverse based on the solemn pronouncements of wise men about what is impossible. Ari was not alone in being wrong. Even into modern times we still use a mathematical model of an atom with a nuclear enter surrounded by concentric electron shells. This model is very wrong, but remains useful because the chemists who developed it can still use it to calculate chemical reactions. Theories which have atoms in the shape of donuts rather than marbles more precisely predict the connections atoms can make and the shape of the final product, but they are also theories which may ultimately be wrong.

The problem with Aristotle was not how often he was wrong, but that for a thousand years people referred to his authoritative statements rather than the evidence of the world around them. Our generation struggles with this too. As an example, how many of you ever got cramps from swimming within half an hour of eating? (We used to eat while swimming back in my tubing days.) Unchallenged pronouncements of the supposedly wise allow many foolish ideas to flourish.

Grey_Wolf_c
2017-12-30, 04:02 PM
I'm not sure how I failed to find this gem last time :smallbiggrin:. Thanks.

It's like he had set out to not make a single observation at all, or something...

Like so many after him, he probably relied on others' observations. It wasn't that long ago that many people believed men had fewer ribs than women because of a prudish mistranslation of Genesis. But at least counting ribs ain't that easy. But others weren't as famously wise as Aristotle, so he gets a lot more of the blame for trusting and reporting other's observations without verifying.

GW

Peelee
2017-12-30, 04:31 PM
Mostly because Aristotle and a few others, disagreed?

So disregarding my incorrect assumption of Eratosthenes predating Aristotle, if he had proofs, then wouldn't the disagreements need to have accompanying proofs?

Standard "it's wikipedia, and all that that implies" disclaimer here, but his wikipedia entry talks about how he (incredibly accurately) measured the circumference of the Earth (which I knew), calculated the tilt of the Earth's axis, and may have calculated the distance from the Earth to the Sun (both of which I did not know, and am amazed by). It does not talk about heliocentricity at all. Plus, if the guy who figured out the size and tilt of the Earth says something about whether or not it's the center object in the solar system, I'd imagine he'd at least get the benefit of the doubt.

ETA: After re-reading the bits that brought us here, that's because Eratosthenes wasn't the one who did the heliocentric model. I am not a smart man.

hamishspence
2017-12-30, 04:37 PM
Aristarchus (pre-Aristotle), not Eratosthenes, is the heliocentric modeller.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristarchus_of_Samos

EDIT: Ninjaed.

SaintRidley
2017-12-30, 05:22 PM
Aristarchus is also post-Aristotle.

hamishspence
2017-12-30, 05:29 PM
Fair enough - the phrase "Aristotle preferred the geocentric model" made it seem like he'd heard about the heliocentric model and rejected it.

Fyraltari
2017-12-30, 06:32 PM
Yay new comic!
V you knew what you was going to happen when you phrased it like that. Well you ought to. Have you learned nothing from Elan?


Roy just told her, and she immediately discarded that as unworkable in favor of her plan, which has never worked yet.
To be fair, "let's go where our superior-in-number ennemy who had ample time to prepare itself expects us to go" isn't the brightest plan I've ever heard. Not that Hilgya's aware of any of that. Come on, lady! What happened to assessing the situation?!

Rogar Demonblud
2017-12-30, 08:46 PM
The opposite plan is "Let's wander at random and hope to bump into him". You know Team Hel needs to get to the conference room, so starting there (or near enough you can keep an eye on it) is a good plan.

Also, as noted earlier in the thread, attempting a divination means trying to get through Durkula's WILL save, and also means it'll know you're hunting with someone new when that fails.

Priceguy
2017-12-31, 02:10 AM
A quick google check tells me it's in "The History of Animals," book 2, part 1:

"Males have more teeth than females in the case of men, sheep, goats, and swine; in the case of other animals observations have not yet been made: but the more teeth they have the more long-lived are they, as a rule, while those are short-lived in proportion that have teeth fewer in number and thinly set."

I like the "in the case of other animals observations have not yet been made", given that observations were clearly not made for the first set either.

GW

I was going to mention the "Aristotle said flies have four legs and people believed it for a millennium, apparently without ever checking" thing I've heard a few times but it turns out it's not true (http://scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts/2008/09/16/aristotle-on-the-mayfly/). I love learning!

That page also says a little about the teeth thing; it's not as clear-cut as the flies but another perspective at least.

Grey_Wolf_c
2017-12-31, 03:59 AM
I was going to mention the "Aristotle said flies have four legs and people believed it for a millennium, apparently without ever checking" thing I've heard a few times but it turns out it's not true (http://scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts/2008/09/16/aristotle-on-the-mayfly/). I love learning!

That page also says a little about the teeth thing; it's not as clear-cut as the flies but another perspective at least.

From the link:
"All creatures that are capable of motion move with four or more points of motion; the blooded animals with four only: as, for instance, man with two hands and two feet, birds with two wings and two feet, quadrupeds and fishes severally with four feet and four fins. Creatures that have two winglets or fins, or that have none at all like serpents, move all the same with not less than four points of motion; for there are four bends in their bodies as they move, or two bends together with their fins. Bloodless and many footed animals, whether furnished with wings or feet, move with more than four points of motion; as, for instance, the dayfly (ephemeron) moves with four feet and four wings: and, I may observe in passing, this creature is exceptional not only in regard to the duration of its existence, whence it receives its name, but also because though a quadruped it has wings also."

The four legs thing is a bit more complicated to show how he is wrong, so it is not as pithy as the teeth thing. Essentially, Aristotle pretty much declared that every animal used four points for locomotion. Yes, he specifically referred to mayflies rather than regular flies because mayflies use only four legs for locomotion, but that doesn't stop him from being wrong: plenty of animals use more than four points for locomotion - actual flies, for example. Sure, his actual example wasn't wrong, but it still shows that once he "deduced" something, he didn't bother to verify.

There are also stretches in his logic. To make the "four points" work, he has to say humans use both arms for locomotion, which is obviously nonsense. And there are the weasel "not less than" and "more than" thrown in. The bottom line is that the statement quoted above is still wrong, except through allowances in the weasel "more than" clause, since there are animals that move with more or fewer than four points of contact (humans use two, a number of apes use three, and of course the large majority of insects use more than four). It is particularly funny that he mentions birds and mayflies in the same paragraph: however the "four points" logic is supposed to be applied (four points for flying and four points for walking vs four points total) it can't apply to both.

Still, the thing to remember is that Aristotle wrote about all this ~2400 years ago. Of course he was wrong about almost everything: he was working in a world that didn't know better. His one contribution that didn't depend on verification has, amongst other things, allowed computers to exist and put a man on the moon: formal logic, which after 2400 years has not been replaced (fuzzy logic is not a replacement). But his statements about reality? Yeah, don't trust them.

Grey Wolf

SlashDash
2017-12-31, 08:27 AM
DNA may not even exist in the D&D world

It exist or something close to it - cause that's the entire base for the familicide spell.

However, it doesn't mean anything when regards to scrying because scrying indeed does not look for "DNA"
It looks for something of the person.

Durkon's hammer, for example, may have 0 traces of his DNA if people clean it well enough (surely easy with magic), yet it's still his hammer and would work.

Doug Lampert
2017-12-31, 09:50 AM
It exist or something close to it - cause that's the entire base for the familicide spell.

However, it doesn't mean anything when regards to scrying because scrying indeed does not look for "DNA"
It looks for something of the person.

Durkon's hammer, for example, may have 0 traces of his DNA if people clean it well enough (surely easy with magic), yet it's still his hammer and would work.

If Familicide worked on DNA it would not work as shown.

Retro-viruses and can give common DNA to non-related creatures a check for any common DNA would not be a check for relationship. Similarly, a distant relationship might involve little or no DNA passed through the common line, and there is no statement in Familicide about degree of common DNA needed, instead, the secondary links required LIVING links, which can't be determined by DNA as things like identical twins, or even the fact that full siblings and parents/children have the same DNA similarity would screw it up.

Familicide works through the parent/child connections. This can't be accurately traced by DNA in all cases, but it CAN be traced by magic, which does not actually need DNA to exist.

zimmerwald1915
2017-12-31, 10:45 AM
It exist or something close to it - cause that's the entire base for the familicide spell.

However, it doesn't mean anything when regards to scrying because scrying indeed does not look for "DNA"
It looks for something of the person.

Durkon's hammer, for example, may have 0 traces of his DNA if people clean it well enough (surely easy with magic), yet it's still his hammer and would work.


If Familicide worked on DNA it would not work as shown.

Retro-viruses and can give common DNA to non-related creatures a check for any common DNA would not be a check for relationship. Similarly, a distant relationship might involve little or no DNA passed through the common line, and there is no statement in Familicide about degree of common DNA needed, instead, the secondary links required LIVING links, which can't be determined by DNA as things like identical twins, or even the fact that full siblings and parents/children have the same DNA similarity would screw it up.

Familicide works through the parent/child connections. This can't be accurately traced by DNA in all cases, but it CAN be traced by magic, which does not actually need DNA to exist.
What emerges very quickly from observations like this is a conclusion that any natural-philosophic basis for D&D/OOTS magic is more or less self-justifying bunkum, and that what's really going on in magic depends on social relations. The family, property, commodity prices (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0677.html), etc. Makes you wonder how magic would work in a society where these relations were structured differently, or not at all. And for that matter why magic seems to work the same across the very different societies we do see.

factotum
2017-12-31, 11:23 AM
The four legs thing is a bit more complicated to show how he is wrong, so it is not as pithy as the teeth thing. Essentially, Aristotle pretty much declared that every animal used four points for locomotion.

Um, no he didn't? Even the most selective reading of the text you linked disproves that. "Four *or more* points of motion". "Not less than four points of motion". So, he's saying that animals move with at least four points of motion, but more are possible.

KillingAScarab
2017-12-31, 11:53 AM
To be fair, "let's go where our superior-in-number ennemy who had ample time to prepare itself expects us to go" isn't the brightest plan I've ever heard. Not that Hilgya's aware of any of that. Come on, lady! What happened to assessing the situation?!Come to think of it, Vaarsuvius spent a large portion of the time while Roy was dead developing new ways to locate people, but was foiled by epic level magic. I wonder if V has prepared or created a scroll of Vaarsuvius' enhanced scrying (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0504.html).

georgie_leech
2017-12-31, 12:35 PM
Um, no he didn't? Even the most selective reading of the text you linked disproves that. "Four *or more* points of motion". "Not less than four points of motion". So, he's saying that animals move with at least four points of motion, but more are possible.

I wonder what he would have thought of Kangaroos.

Baphomet
2017-12-31, 12:49 PM
Durkon's Will save must be incredible. Considering Scrying is a Divine spell, I'd think having Durkon's lover and also his kid (if it is indeed such) would add a significant DC number.

Gods tend to factor in relations and blood. Loki especially.

Of course, even a successful Scrying or Locate Creature are of limited use. Limited sight and time.

Scrying someone gets easier the more you know someone and harder the less familiar you are with them, with the spell description ranging from "know nothing" at +10 to "familiar" at -5 with "met" at a net +0. I could see the argument being made that Durkon resisted the scrying more readily precisely because Hilgya has such a warped view of him. Despite having met him in person, her view of his character and behavior is almost the exact opposite of his actual personality, which might give him a bonus to save DC.

Rogar Demonblud
2017-12-31, 03:28 PM
Not a bad theory, and might be relevant now if there is a dab of saliva or whatever on Haley. Before, Durkon was at 'Only Fail On A Botch' level just from Class and Ability Mods.

Lethologica
2017-12-31, 03:35 PM
Roy just told her, and she immediately discarded that as unworkable in favor of her plan, which has never worked yet.
Retrying a previously failed spell when you've just added some substantial bonuses is a reasonable idea.

Beyond that, the tradeoff between scrying and cutting Durkon* off at the pass is not as simple as "Cutting him off at the pass is the best option and doing anything else is Hilgya being stupid." Scrying isn't guaranteed to succeed and costs time, but it gives more information about what Durkon* is currently trying and where best to cut him off.

8BitNinja
2017-12-31, 11:03 PM
Not a bad theory, and might be relevant now if there is a dab of saliva or whatever on Haley. Before, Durkon was at 'Only Fail On A Botch' level just from Class and Ability Mods.

This is a world of elves, goblins, and dragons. I'm pretty sure you can keep your disbelief suspended long enough for that to be true.

Rogar Demonblud
2018-01-01, 01:13 AM
Retrying a previously failed spell when you've just added some substantial bonuses is a reasonable idea.

Beyond that, the tradeoff between scrying and cutting Durkon* off at the pass is not as simple as "Cutting him off at the pass is the best option and doing anything else is Hilgya being stupid." Scrying isn't guaranteed to succeed and costs time, but it gives more information about what Durkon* is currently trying and where best to cut him off.

And what was Hilgya's plan before the possibility of getting a bonus on a scry check came up? Oh, that's right, she didn't have one, besides wander around and ask random people if they were the ones wanting help with murdering someone.

Face it, not only does she not have the proverbial full deck, I'm pretty sure she doesn't have enough cards to play canasta.

factotum
2018-01-01, 03:04 AM
Face it, not only does she not have the proverbial full deck, I'm pretty sure she doesn't have enough cards to play canasta.

Um, don't you need two full decks of cards to play canasta, thus making not having enough cards to do that an easier thing to achieve than just not having a full deck?

[EDIT] Or, thinking about it, did you mean to say "Not only is she not dealing from a full deck, she's trying to play canasta" which fits the "Not only X, but Y" where Y is more difficult than X?

a1chemi
2018-01-01, 03:25 PM
And what was Hilgya's plan before the possibility of getting a bonus on a scry check came up? Oh, that's right, she didn't have one, besides wander around and ask random people if they were the ones wanting help with murdering someone.

Face it, not only does she not have the proverbial full deck, I'm pretty sure she doesn't have enough cards to play canasta.

She was on her way to Thor's temple to ask for information. Durkon being a cleric of Thor (to her knowledge) reported to be in this city makes that a fair bet in searching for information.

She wasn't wandering around asking random people. She ran into high level adventurers, who immediately accosted her and provided her with the information she was looking for and a promise of assistance.

But then you seem predisposed to think the worst of her based solely on her somewhat harsh demeanor and her (totally earned) hatred of beloved doer-no-wrong Durkon.

Grey_Wolf_c
2018-01-01, 03:34 PM
She was on her way to Thor's temple to ask for information. Durkon being a cleric of Thor (to her knowledge) reported to be in this city makes that a fair bet in searching for information.

Nitpick: she was going to the temple of Thor because Loki told her that someone there was looking to murder Durkon. In general, a temple of Thor would seem an unlikely place to find a team of assassins looking to murder a follower of Thor, but given her ability to ascribe personality traits to Durkon, I'm sure she quickly devised a scenario in which this made sense. Or she's a faithful cleric, and simply trusted her god despite the unlikeliness of the information.

GW

Keltest
2018-01-01, 03:51 PM
Nitpick: she was going to the temple of Thor because Loki told her that someone there was looking to murder Durkon. In general, a temple of Thor would seem an unlikely place to find a team of assassins looking to murder a follower of Thor, but given her ability to ascribe personality traits to Durkon, I'm sure she quickly devised a scenario in which this made sense. Or she's a faithful cleric, and simply trusted her god despite the unlikeliness of the information.

GW

I mean, it makes more sense than them being in a temple of Odin. Where else would you find Thor's priests but in his temple?

Grey_Wolf_c
2018-01-01, 05:07 PM
I mean, it makes more sense than them being in a temple of Odin. Where else would you find Thor's priests but in his temple?

But she wasn't expecting to find a cleric of Thor in the temple of Thor. She was expecting to find a team of assassins wanting to murder a cleric of Thor. It's like looking for a KKK group at the NAACP headquarters. Apart from the sheer absurdity of it, how exactly did she plan to broach the subject? "Hey, I know you are more likely pro-Thor than not, but would you happen to be wanting to murder one of your fellow priests, a chap by the name of Durkon?"

Yes, it turned out to be far more plausible because Durkon is now Greg, and therefore Thor's followers aren't going to object to his re-death. But she didn't know any of that when she started walking towards Thor's Temple with the intention of asking about a group wanting to kill a powerful cleric of Thor.

GW

Keltest
2018-01-01, 05:11 PM
But she isn't expecting to find a priest of Thor priest in the temple of Thor. She is expecting to find a team of assassins wanting to murder a priest of Thor. It's like looking for a KKK group at the NAACP headquarters. Apart from the sheer absurdity of it, how exactly did she plan to broach the subject? "Hey, I know you are more likely pro-Thor than not, but would you happen to be wanting to murder one of your fellow priests, a chap by the name of Durkon?"

GW

Let me rephrase, since I think you missed the point. A team of assassins actively attempting to murder a priest of Thor would likely be in proximity to said priest of Thor, yes? And a priest of Thor in turn is likely to be in the Temple of Thor. Therefore the assassins would also be in the temple of Thor.

Grey_Wolf_c
2018-01-01, 05:21 PM
Let me rephrase, since I think you missed the point. A team of assassins actively attempting to murder a priest of Thor would likely be in proximity to said priest of Thor, yes? And a priest of Thor in turn is likely to be in the Temple of Thor. Therefore the assassins would also be in the temple of Thor.

The only way that makes sense is if she expected the assassination to be in progress, and she was rushing to lend a hand, which I can't say matches everything else, but is not exactly contradicted either.

GW

Keltest
2018-01-01, 05:23 PM
The only way that makes sense is if she expected the assassination to be in progress, and she was rushing to lend a hand, which I can't say matches everything else, but is not exactly contradicted either.

GW

I think the most obvious explanation is that Hilgya is just marching forward without giving much thought to what she's actually going to find at the temple. Having said that, finding an assassination in progress isn't implausible.

Fyraltari
2018-01-01, 05:38 PM
The only way that makes sense is if she expected the assassination to be in progress, and she was rushing to lend a hand, which I can't say matches everything else, but is not exactly contradicted either.

GW

Or she expected to find the would be killers asking questions about Durkon. Or having taken the temple personnel hostages and demanding Durkon surrender himself to them. Or setting up an ambush there. Or being held captive in a magic rune ring thingie by the priests...

Ultimately what she expected is completely irrelevant. Loki told her they'd be there, so she goes there to find them. What else should she have done (besides contacting Durkon to begin with) ?

Jasdoif
2018-01-01, 05:52 PM
The only way that makes sense is if she expected the assassination to be in progress, and she was rushing to lend a hand, which I can't say matches everything else, but is not exactly contradicted either.Unless she was optimistically "rushing to lend a hand" if the opportunity was present, without spending time locating the opportunity beforehand.


"Let's go."
"Where?"
"To find the man in black people out to kill Durkon, obviously."
"But we don't know where they are!"
"Don't bother me with trifles."

rman
2018-01-01, 07:08 PM
We are being reminded that all of the Order have been bitten by the big bad vampire. Just before a climactic confrontation, I don't need to be Elan to see that there might be some serious consequences to having been bitten.

Fyraltari
2018-01-01, 07:20 PM
We are being reminded that all of the Order have been bitten by the big bad vampire. Just before a climactic confrontation, I don't need to be Elan to see that there might be some serious consequences to having been bitten.

All the Order save Vaarsuvius. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0960.html)

Ruck
2018-01-01, 10:53 PM
And what was Hilgya's plan before the possibility of getting a bonus on a scry check came up? Oh, that's right, she didn't have one, besides wander around and ask random people if they were the ones wanting help with murdering someone.

Face it, not only does she not have the proverbial full deck, I'm pretty sure she doesn't have enough cards to play canasta.


Um, don't you need two full decks of cards to play canasta, thus making not having enough cards to do that an easier thing to achieve than just not having a full deck?

[EDIT] Or, thinking about it, did you mean to say "Not only is she not dealing from a full deck, she's trying to play canasta" which fits the "Not only X, but Y" where Y is more difficult than X?
Maybe Rogar is thinking of euchre?

DaggerPen
2018-01-01, 10:54 PM
So, if Durkon can block scrying because he's Lawful, why didn't she try locating Belkar or Elan?

In addition to the other good points above, I'm not sure Hilgya would really have remembered them well enough.

Though, on the other hand, Hilgya remembering them well enough to recognize them here may explain why she immediately volunteered the whole "I wanna help murder Durkon" thing. If she knows someone is trying to murder him and then runs into his old adventuring party (who she knows left him behind at one point), sans Durkon, she could very well make the logical leap from there to "Oh, they're the ones I'm looking for." (And logical leaps do seem to be Hilgya's specialty - in fact, she seems quite adept at leaping to conclusions most people would never have reached!)


Wow! I think the comic got posted while I was catching up with Astérix and Obélix on the previous thread.

Good to see Hilgya has a good head under the horned helmet! I wonder what's her intelligence stats. She's going to be a very nice addition to the team.

I have to say, though: it's been *how long* since Durkula fed on Haley? Over 100 strips? That's a very long shot for maybe-vampire-have-something-like-saliva to still be in the body.

I mean, I don't know how much time it is in-comic. It might be hours; for us it's been a year and a half... But I guess narrative abhors a vacuum :smallbiggrin:


You know when she's not irrationally hating someone for a perceived slight she's pretty dang smart.

Hilgya almost strikes me as a high/above average Int, low Wis type. Which is weird, because cleric.


I don't have any of these replies multi-quoted because multi-quote is behaving weirdly for me, but I am glad I am not the only one who made the connection between this and that Dragon Magazine comic where Durkon had to make all those Will saves.


(Also, I really like the idea that Hilgya's wildly erroneous ideas of Durkon gave her a further penalty to attempting to scry him.)


As for the comic itself - entertaining, but I honestly find the choice to go with the saliva thing kinda weird. It feels a little flimsy justification-wise, especially when it would have been very easy to achieve the same end by just having Roy have picked up some of the beard to use for exactly this sort of thing.

Vessyra
2018-01-02, 01:17 AM
...so the bards have philosophers now? If all bards have the same intelligence as Elan, (which they probably don't) I would love to see a bardic philosophy meeting

factotum
2018-01-02, 03:36 AM
We are being reminded that all of the Order have been bitten by the big bad vampire. Just before a climactic confrontation, I don't need to be Elan to see that there might be some serious consequences to having been bitten.

Vampires in D&D don't work that way. In order for someone to be converted to a vampire thrall they have to actually be killed by one. They can be damaged or fed on by a vampire right down to 1HP and there are no ill effects whatsoever once they've healed up. Otherwise, Durkula would have already used his power when he was fighting Roy, because I'm sure he would have fed on him before then.

a1chemi
2018-01-02, 05:35 AM
The only way that makes sense is if she expected the assassination to be in progress, and she was rushing to lend a hand, which I can't say matches everything else, but is not exactly contradicted either.

GW

Like you said, she was told by her god that she needed to go there. It doesn't really need to make sense.

Durkon went on far less when he let his party get captured and taken to the southern lands (it rained).

I also still contend that she might not really have been aiming to kill him herself, just find him for reasons that are not clear yet. Everything she's said since her dramatic entrance has been "I've been trying to find him", not "I wanna kill the bastard('s father)"

In which case she wasn't looking to join up in any assassination attempt, but purely just going there because to look for information.

schmunzel
2018-01-02, 05:42 AM
That does make sense why she couldn't find him without divine intervention. Kudzu wouldn't work since he is his own entity. I wonder if the Vampire's consciousness is what is causing her to have difficulty finding him. Durkon is still Durkon albeit dead. Not sure if scrying requires the person to have a pulse.

Thats her interpretation of why she couldnt find him.

I would go so far to state that Loki ( as the spellprovider) did not have any interest in her finding Durkon in the first place (At that time).
I presume that Kudzus' date of birth was when we saw the Loki Freya Thor interaction while Durkon was on board the fleet after the sacking of Azure city. In that case it would make complete sense that the scrying would have been prevented by divine intervention. As of Now Durkon Thundershield is dead and he cannot be found by scrying.
Albeit his body still exists - In RAW - is there a way to determine whether the person scryed is still alive or not ?? Does scrying differ between body(ly location) and mind?

sch

Fyraltari
2018-01-02, 05:59 AM
As for the comic itself - entertaining, but I honestly find the choice to go with the saliva thing kinda weird. It feels a little flimsy justification-wise, especially when it would have been very easy to achieve the same end by just having Roy have picked up some of the beard to use for exactly this sort of thing.
Yeah he could have gone "I kept it so we can use it to resurrect Durkon Classic when his vampire turns to ash."

My guess is that the bite will have some kind of significance later on (like that Durkon* can use their blood in his body for spellcasting) and this is just the comic reminding us of it. It did come up a lot so I would besurprised if it was completely irrelevant besides keeping Durkon fed.

Rogar Demonblud
2018-01-02, 10:00 AM
Albeit his body still exists - In RAW - is there a way to determine whether the person scryed is still alive or not ?? Does scrying differ between body(ly location) and mind?

sch

Scrying only works on a person, not an object. Hence why even with the epic scry boost from the fluffy clouds, Eugene and Roy couldn't scry on his body at the start of Book 4. So by RAW, it doesn't work on dead people. Also, I don't think you learn anything about why you failed, just that you did. So death, Will save or abjuration all have the same effect.

As for the body/mind question, I'd have to look up the mind jar spell. That's likely the only place it's dealt with.

Regardless, Durkon isn't dead; he's undead. So the scrying still has that 1 in 20 chance of working.

KorvinStarmast
2018-01-02, 10:05 AM
Or she's a faithful cleric, and simply trusted her god despite the unlikeliness of the information. Or she's a cleric trying to redeem herself in the eyes of her deity, given that she was unable to achieve the original mission he sent her out on (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0074.html):
I never wanted to help Nale, he's a big jerk. Loki commanded me to steal the Talisman from him so I pretended to be his friend.

That Talisman may or may not have been related to the gate directly, but to a certain extent those monsters might have been a way to protect the Gate in Durakon's dungeon/fortress.

Getting a tasking from Loki to do something important to Loki (stop Durkula) seems to be a way for Hilgya to redeem her lack of success in that earlier assignment from her deity.

I think the most obvious explanation is that Hilgya is just marching forward without giving much thought to what she's actually going to find at the temple. Or that.

Lord Joeltion
2018-01-02, 10:23 AM
Gotta love Kudzu's facial expressions. I truly find him more amusing than the dialogues at this point (not that the dialogues aren't funny on their own. Also, love the title.


This is D&D, not real life. Souls are prooved to exist. Durkon still very much exists, he's just trapped between life and the afterlife.

Then is there a chance that the scrying would focus on Durkon's trapped soul's perspective rather than his bodiliy one? What would such an even mean for both Hilgya and the Order? They know Durkon isn't himself anymore, but I think they have no reason to suspect he is also a slave of an Evil entity. And given Hilgya's record, it could fire in any direction. Or in all directions at once.


As for the comic itself - entertaining, but I honestly find the choice to go with the saliva thing kinda weird. It feels a little flimsy justification-wise, especially when it would have been very easy to achieve the same end by just having Roy have picked up some of the beard to use for exactly this sort of thing.

Why would Roy chose to keep a memento of Durkon all this time tho? If anything, he would be as disgusted by getting in contact with Nokrud's hairy parts as much as Belkar, if not more. Also, it's kind of splitting hairs a tad too much; at least with the saliva you get a joke out of it, instead of just being a plain obvious plot device. And personally, I prefer vampires when their nature is better explained. I like them being similar to any other parasitic animal from RL, instead of glittering magical undead

Manty5
2018-01-02, 12:12 PM
Or she's a cleric trying to redeem herself in the eyes of her deity, given that she was unable to achieve the original mission he sent her out on (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0074.html):

Or maybe Durkon was not the only person being manipulated into the first Xyklon dungeon by the gods, and Loki is perfectly satisfied with the results.

DaggerPen
2018-01-02, 06:28 PM
Scrying only works on a person, not an object. Hence why even with the epic scry boost from the fluffy clouds, Eugene and Roy couldn't scry on his body at the start of Book 4. So by RAW, it doesn't work on dead people. Also, I don't think you learn anything about why you failed, just that you did. So death, Will save or abjuration all have the same effect.

As for the body/mind question, I'd have to look up the mind jar spell. That's likely the only place it's dealt with.

Regardless, Durkon isn't dead; he's undead. So the scrying still has that 1 in 20 chance of working.

Well, Lirian is soul bound into a gem in Xykon's pocket, and Dorukan the Epic Wizard had no idea how to find her until Xykon flat-out told him, so that would seem to be a strike against the "Scry on the trapped soul" theory

However, given that they're specifically thinking of Durkon* with the mental asterisk, and will be using something from him as the focus, it strikes me as somewhat of a moot point.


Why would Roy chose to keep a memento of Durkon all this time tho? If anything, he would be as disgusted by getting in contact with Nokrud's hairy parts as much as Belkar, if not more. Also, it's kind of splitting hairs a tad too much; at least with the saliva you get a joke out of it, instead of just being a plain obvious plot device. And personally, I prefer vampires when their nature is better explained. I like them being similar to any other parasitic animal from RL, instead of glittering magical undead

Well, because it's a part of his dead body that can be used as a focus to resurrect him once the vampire is destroyed? Destroying vampires tends to reduce them to ash, and that has a bad habit of scattering.

Also, the saliva thing just feels cheesy to me. Like, were I DMing a game with a player who tried that, unless I really needed an excuse to feed them the next plot hook, I'd put my foot down. I'm fine with better explained vampires, but this just feels a little too off for me.


Or she's a cleric trying to redeem herself in the eyes of her deity, given that she was unable to achieve the original mission he sent her out on (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0074.html):

I doubt Loki cares all that much, tbh - he's got a lot of pots on a lot of burners, and Hilgya was fairly low-level at the time. This sort of errand strikes me as the godly equivalent of sending the intern to get a coffee.

SilverCacaobean
2018-01-02, 08:21 PM
Yeah he could have gone "I kept it so we can use it to resurrect Durkon Classic when his vampire turns to ash."

I think Rich didn't go with that to make the "I'm really glad that never occurred to you" joke, which is fine by me :smallbiggrin:

JoeyTheNeko
2018-01-02, 08:45 PM
hm, never thought of that kind of thing when it came to scrying.

KillingAScarab
2018-01-02, 11:32 PM
I doubt Loki cares all that much, tbh - he's got a lot of pots on a lot of burners, and Hilgya was fairly low-level at the time. This sort of errand strikes me as the godly equivalent of sending the intern to get a coffee.Alternately, "I didn't think you would actually do it. It was a joke. Why would I want all those useless monsters?" And then we cut to the flumphs.

Rogar Demonblud
2018-01-02, 11:42 PM
Well, Lirian is soul bound into a gem in Xykon's pocket, and Dorukan the Epic Wizard had no idea how to find her until Xykon flat-out told him, so that would seem to be a strike against the "Scry on the trapped soul" theory

Actually, that was for a (True) Resurrection spell, not scrying. Since you have to be dead before soulbinding will work, that doesn't affect the scry attempt any more than already dead does.

Anyway, there's nothing in the spell descriptions for Scrying, Magic Jar, Trap the Soul, etc that says how they interact, so I guess it'd be a GM call.

Jasdoif
2018-01-03, 12:51 AM
Also, the saliva thing just feels cheesy to me. Like, were I DMing a game with a player who tried that, unless I really needed an excuse to feed them the next plot hook, I'd put my foot down. I'm fine with better explained vampires, but this just feels a little too off for me.Bear in mind, it hasn't actually worked at this point.

eilandesq
2018-01-03, 03:01 AM
I'm going to give Hilgya the benefit of the doubt and assume that any direct inquiries she made before Loki contacted her directly was along the lines of "where can I find Durkon Thundershield?" without adding "because I want to kill him." Along with telling her where to look, Loki probably told her that she should add that last part when she told whoever she found at the temple of Thor why she was there.

oonker
2018-01-03, 07:16 AM
I doubt Loki cares all that much, tbh - he's got a lot of pots on a lot of burners, and Hilgya was fairly low-level at the time. This sort of errand strikes me as the godly equivalent of sending the intern to get a coffee.

Maybe Loki meant Hilgya to go into the dungeon of Dorukan just to get on with Durkon, and couldn't care less about the talisman. It would be a nice turn of events, if Odin, Thor and Loki plotted this whole thing together, so that they would thwart Hel's plan.

DaggerPen
2018-01-03, 07:24 AM
Actually, that was for a (True) Resurrection spell, not scrying. Since you have to be dead before soulbinding will work, that doesn't affect the scry attempt any more than already dead does.

Anyway, there's nothing in the spell descriptions for Scrying, Magic Jar, Trap the Soul, etc that says how they interact, so I guess it'd be a GM call.

Hrm. My point was more that he never successfully found her until Xykon showed him the gem, but come to think of it, I'm not sure if he'd have tried that if he knew she was dead. On the other hand, I would have expected that to be tried as a "you know what, this keeps failing, is she secretly alive and being held captive somewhere?" deal. But it's not conclusive evidence that he tried to scry for her and failed.


Bear in mind, it hasn't actually worked at this point.

Fair point!

Keltest
2018-01-03, 08:34 AM
Maybe Loki meant Hilgya to go into the dungeon of Dorukan just to get on with Durkon, and couldn't care less about the talisman. It would be a nice turn of events, if Odin, Thor and Loki plotted this whole thing together, so that they would thwart Hel's plan.

Given that Loki was grossed out by Hilgya and Durkon getting it on, I'm going to say his plans, such as they were, did not extend that far.

brian 333
2018-01-03, 08:47 AM
Something we need to consider: Few in the Stickverse are aware that Durkon is trapped in Durkula's mind.

Roy, a paragon of intelligence, has just realized that Durkula is not Durkon 2.0, and nobody in the comic has ever said anything to the effect that they are aware of a Vampire Spirit imprisoning the host body's soul.

So when considering what people in comic should know or think, keep in mind that the vast majority of the people of the Stickverse would think the vampire is just Durkon with cool new vampire abilities. Just like Roy did.

factotum
2018-01-03, 10:09 AM
Something we need to consider: Few in the Stickverse are aware that Durkon is trapped in Durkula's mind.

Roy, a paragon of intelligence, has just realized that Durkula is not Durkon 2.0

In fact, Roy may still not realise Durkon is trapped in there--he knows the corpse-that-was-Durkon is not being piloted by Durkon's soul anymore, but that doesn't tell him where Durkon's soul actually *is* right now; he might think he's gone to his rest with Thor.

Skull the Troll
2018-01-03, 10:19 AM
In fact, Roy may still not realise Durkon is trapped in there--he knows the corpse-that-was-Durkon is not being piloted by Durkon's soul anymore, but that doesn't tell him where Durkon's soul actually *is* right now; he might think he's gone to his rest with Thor.

I read it more as,' Durkon has changed and become evil.' More of an Anakin to Darth Vader thing. He doesn't know that the soul has been replaced, he just thinks it has been corrupted to the point that it no longer counts as the same being.

KorvinStarmast
2018-01-03, 10:24 AM
Maybe Loki meant Hilgya to go into the dungeon of Dorukan just to get on with Durkon, and couldn't care less about the talisman. It would be a nice turn of events, if Odin, Thor and Loki plotted this whole thing together, so that they would thwart Hel's plan.

Given that Loki was grossed out by Hilgya and Durkon getting it on, I'm going to say his plans, such as they were, did not extend that far. Yeah, I'll put the notional GP on that bet.


In fact, Roy may still not realise Durkon is trapped in there--he knows the corpse-that-was-Durkon is not being piloted by Durkon's soul anymore, but that doesn't tell him where Durkon's soul actually *is* right now; he might think he's gone to his rest with Thor.
Hmm, he did modify his You're Not Durkon At Al (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1009.html)l with more nuance in the next strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1010.html).

Fyraltari
2018-01-03, 10:53 AM
In fact, Roy may still not realise Durkon is trapped in there--he knows the corpse-that-was-Durkon is not being piloted by Durkon's soul anymore, but that doesn't tell him where Durkon's soul actually *is* right now; he might think he's gone to his rest with Thor.

He does. Note How the Thorsaken points at his head when talking about Durkon's soul (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1019.html).
Ultimately he can do nothing about it that he isn't already doing so moping about it won't be any good for anyone. Maybe he'll talk about it with Durkon on the Mechane once they're going to Kraagor's Gate but that's it.

Lord Joeltion
2018-01-03, 11:01 AM
Well, because it's a part of his dead body that can be used as a focus to resurrect him once the vampire is destroyed? Destroying vampires tends to reduce them to ash, and that has a bad habit of scattering.
That's true, but I still think it would have been OOC for Roy to act in advance for something he doesn't really care/comprehend (magic). Also, Roy said it didn't matter anyway. The point was stopping Durkon, whatever the cost (during the fight). I don't mean Roy had no reason to do so, but his reasons would have been basically metagaming, given his mental state during his showdown with the vampire.


Also, the saliva thing just feels cheesy to me. Like, were I DMing a game with a player who tried that, unless I really needed an excuse to feed them the next plot hook, I'd put my foot down. I'm fine with better explained vampires, but this just feels a little too off for me.

You see cheesy where I see "scientific" accuracy. With no fluids to prevent clotting, vampires would be unable to "feed" in a strict sense. Unless as a DM you declare they are purely magical entities, whose blood sucking is merely a means to obtain "life energy" and the blood itself is meaningless. I mean, it's possible, but it feels more like something ritualistic than monster biology.


I read it more as,' Durkon has changed and become evil.' More of an Anakin to Darth Vader thing. He doesn't know that the soul has been replaced, he just thinks it has been corrupted to the point that it no longer counts as the same being.

I don't think he stopped thinking he wasn't Durkon. "Brainwashed" is merely a technicism. He still considers Durkon* isn't the Durkon he knew any more. "Durkon turned evil" is kinda different than "Durkon being controlled/possessed by a(n undead) parasite". Anakin, on the other hand, completely change his POV, but he was still himself. He wasn't being controlled, only influnced. That is a situation that I don't think it quite fits Roy's description of his former friend.

8BitNinja
2018-01-03, 01:05 PM
I read it more as,' Durkon has changed and become evil.' More of an Anakin to Darth Vader thing. He doesn't know that the soul has been replaced, he just thinks it has been corrupted to the point that it no longer counts as the same being.

That would make sense, since don't you technically die before becoming a vampire?

KorvinStarmast
2018-01-03, 03:55 PM
That would make sense, since don't you technically die before becoming a vampire? Durkon's eyes had the X marks (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0877.html), so yes.

DaggerPen
2018-01-03, 07:43 PM
You see cheesy where I see "scientific" accuracy. With no fluids to prevent clotting, vampires would be unable to "feed" in a strict sense. Unless as a DM you declare they are purely magical entities, whose blood sucking is merely a means to obtain "life energy" and the blood itself is meaningless. I mean, it's possible, but it feels more like something ritualistic than monster biology.

Yeah, but how do you isolate it? It's trace amounts of saliva flowing through Haley's bloodstream right now. How do you pick out the vampire saliva from the Haleyness from, lbr, copious amounts of Elan's, uh, let's limit this to 'saliva', from the bits of Mr. Scruffy's fur probably all over her clothes because cat fur gets everywhere, to... well, you get it. You can say "magic", sure, but the whole point of scrying is to magically find and isolate a person's signature in the first place. It feels weird that you can basically scry Durkon*'s saliva within Haley in order to scry on Durkon* himself.

I'll grant the 'metagaming' argument, however - Roy wasn't in much condition to go "Oh, I should grab this chunk of beard so I can resurrect Durkon later".

PopeLinus1
2018-01-03, 09:06 PM
I don't know why they don't just cast Follow the Trail of (un-)Dead Dwarves. Thought this update might have more oomph to it, considering.

That would be a good strategy, if not for the fact that the trail just go up and tried to Murder them.

Vampire corpses are so hard to use as a form of proper enemy detection. It sucks.

F.Harr
2018-01-04, 02:18 AM
I fully believe that there are bards smart enough to philosophize.

Also, this would be a GREAT time for a seperate name for Vampiric Durkon.

Grey_Wolf_c
2018-01-04, 03:04 AM
Yeah, but how do you isolate it?

Actually, that's the easy part for my suspension of disbelief: it is usually trivial to detect undead material with magic. Everything else Haley may be carrying around is either positive energy or neutral: the only undead material in her veins is the one they need.

My problem is just how trace that trace saliva is at this point: it's been hours (if not days), and I'd imagine the immune system would take fast action against the anti-life particles floating around the bloodstream.

GW

Spanish_Paladin
2018-01-04, 11:04 AM
I fully believe that there are bards smart enough to philosophize.

Also, this would be a GREAT time for a seperate name for Vampiric Durkon.

Are you talking about Greg?

Goblin_Priest
2018-01-04, 11:05 AM
At this point, V could use Locate Object on the teleport orb to know where they are.

Peelee
2018-01-04, 11:09 AM
At this point, V could use Locate Object on the teleport orb to know where they are.

Assuming it would even work on a destroyed object, that would just remind V where there Godsmoot is.

Grey_Wolf_c
2018-01-04, 11:13 AM
At this point, V could use Locate Object on the teleport orb to know where they are.

It's here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1019.html). But that's not where Greg is.

Grey Wolf

Fyraltari
2018-01-04, 03:20 PM
Assuming it would even work on a destroyed object, that would just remind V where there Godsmoot is.

I kinda want them to try and end up scrying on the high priests playing go fish while they risk life and limb for the world. Their reactions would be priceless.

DaggerPen
2018-01-04, 07:40 PM
Actually, that's the easy part for my suspension of disbelief: it is usually trivial to detect undead material with magic. Everything else Haley may be carrying around is either positive energy or neutral: the only undead material in her veins is the one they need.

My problem is just how trace that trace saliva is at this point: it's been hours (if not days), and I'd imagine the immune system would take fast action against the anti-life particles floating around the bloodstream.

GW

Fair point re: detect undead, but also regarding how trace the saliva is.

I don't want this to be the whole big thing where the forum argues this back and forth until The Giant himself comes in to defend his narrative choices, though - just wanted to note that it struck me a little odd.

Also


action against the anti-life particles

DARKSEID IS.

brian 333
2018-01-04, 09:43 PM
Have faith in Rich's ability to make it all make sense and set up a punchline at the same time.

What if the saliva thing doesn't work? Everyone's supposing it will and objecting ahead of time.

Also, if you were Durkula, (or Greg,) would you not take precautions which allow you to be seen only when and where you want to be seen?

Kish
2018-01-04, 09:52 PM
I kinda want them to try and end up scrying on the high priests playing go fish while they risk life and limb for the world. Their reactions would be priceless.
I think even Belkar is mostly past the level of pettiness that would be required to look at people who they already know are trapped and unable to affect the outcome in any way, and go, "How dare they not be pacing in constant physically acted frustration!"

Goblin_Priest
2018-01-04, 11:22 PM
It's here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1019.html). But that's not where Greg is.

Grey Wolf

Ah, my bad!

Ironsmith
2018-01-06, 05:10 AM
I think even Belkar is mostly past the level of pettiness that would be required to look at people who they already know are trapped and unable to affect the outcome in any way, and go, "How dare they not be pacing in constant physically acted frustration!"


Plus it'd be pretty hypocritical (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0380.html) of them. Just sayin'.

a1chemi
2018-01-06, 10:28 AM
Also, if you were Durkula, (or Greg,) would you not take precautions which allow you to be seen only when and where you want to be seen?

So far the only scrying prevention we've seen are epic magic (cloyster) and locations that we're constructed with that specific purpose (Azure City throne room, The Mechane).

Far as I understand from the rules, there is nothing Durkula could do currently that would specifically hinder them from scrying on him.

I don't think his choice of location (a restaurant) will offer any kind of protection either.

Fyraltari
2018-01-06, 12:34 PM
I think even Belkar is mostly past the level of pettiness that would be required to look at people who they already know are trapped and unable to affect the outcome in any way, and go, "How dare they not be pacing in constant physically acted frustration!"

I was more thinking along the line of "Why did I think this was a good idea, again?".They are not exactly passed that stage. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1103.html)

Though, Belkar is still very petty, in my opinion.

martianmister
2018-01-07, 02:43 AM
I think even Belkar is mostly past the level of pettiness that would be required to look at people who they already know are trapped and unable to affect the outcome in any way, and go, "How dare they not be pacing in constant physically acted frustration!"

Nah. He would kill them all to put a smile on his own lips. Then blame them for their uselessness.

brian 333
2018-01-07, 11:37 PM
Nah. He would kill them all to put a smile on his own lips. Then blame them for their uselessness.

Actually, aren't they done with whatever they had to do? I mean, it's not like they get to hold a ceremony before the end of the world. Meanwhile, clerics tend to be hefty sacks of exp, and the SSGoW likes him some exp. And, hey, if he levels before facing Xykon, that's all for the best, right?

Damn Durkon for getting himself killed. Least he could have done is blame me for it, even though it was his own fault.

a1chemi
2018-01-08, 06:16 AM
Actually, aren't they done with whatever they had to do? I mean, it's not like they get to hold a ceremony before the end of the world. Meanwhile, clerics tend to be hefty sacks of exp, and the SSGoW likes him some exp. And, hey, if he levels before facing Xykon, that's all for the best, right?

Damn Durkon for getting himself killed. Least he could have done is blame me for it, even though it was his own fault.

Are we assuming that none of Belkar's character development matters? He's not exactly the "murder everyone machine" he once was.

Also those clerics are high level and would destroy him. Malack took him out of the fight with a single spell.

Edit: to your question, their gods still need a representative present for their vote to count, so they do still have something to do.

brian 333
2018-01-08, 05:13 PM
I should take a cue from Capt. Mercer and give up trying for the joke. It's obvious I am not as funny as I think I am.

Koeh
2018-01-09, 01:17 AM
Not sure if its been speculated already. But I could see regular Durkon getting to see the scrying attempt and choose not to resist, since he seems to act as the unconscious mind now. Not telling Durkula and allowing the group to get some advantage over the vamp.

factotum
2018-01-09, 07:25 AM
Are we assuming that none of Belkar's character development matters? He's not exactly the "murder everyone machine" he once was.

No, he's now "murder everyone except Mr Scruffy, and murder anyone who even threatens to hurt Mr Scruffy extra hard". Him liking one entity in the universe doesn't mean he views anyone else with any less disdain than he did before.

brian 333
2018-01-09, 04:17 PM
Would it not be funny to discover Mr. Scruffy is a demigod a la Gord of Greyhawk? Sjojo and Belkar are his familiars. Ever think about why Belkar's fantasy in the Pyramid centered on Mr. Scruffy?

Kish
2018-01-09, 09:16 PM
Because Belkar cares about Mr. Scruffy--cares, for the first time in his life, about another creature. Changing that to "actually, he was just mind-whammied" sounds like a ripoff to me.

(And yes, I know it's a joke.)

brian 333
2018-01-09, 10:55 PM
I really need to use emoticons. Or just stop trying go tell jokes.