Goblin souls

[CJG]

The Dark One is of a new color, suggesting that he did not rise to join a pantheon, but rose to create his own. This is likely because he was risen up by goblins, a race that was built to be little chunks of XP.

That known, did goblins have souls before the ascent of The Dark One? Because that seems like a lot of god-food to just leave lying around, whether you like them or not.

Do goblins have souls now, or is The Dark One powered by some other essence gathered from his people? They don’t seem to go an inhabit a plane based on their alignment like other mortals, but instead join a growing army beside The Dark One himself.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

That known, did goblins have souls before the ascent of The Dark One? Because that seems like a lot of god-food to just leave lying around, whether you like them or not.

All souls go to the plane corresponding to their alignment. Some, like Roy, simply don't go to a specific god's court, and instead power all gods of that alignment, in general.


They don’t seem to go an inhabit a plane based on their alignment like other mortals, but instead join a growing army beside The Dark One himself.

Why wouldn't that army be congregated in a plane? The followers of the Dark One don't want a mountain and a tavern of one-night stands they get to take to their mom's homes, or the beer hall of eternal drinking, carousing and food fights. They want to join the Dark One. So they do.

Grey Wolf

[hamishspence]

All souls go to the plane corresponding to their alignment. Some, like Roy, simply don't go to a specific god's court, and instead power all gods of that alignment, in general.

There's a certain amount of flexibility for strongly devoted worshippers, at least according to Complete Divine. A cleric of a deity may go to that deity's domain despite their alignment being one step away.

A NG cleric or LN cleric of a LG deity residing in Celestia for example, will get into Celestia despite the alignment mismatch. Possibly an extremely devoted non-divine-caster may do so as well.

[xroads]

The Dark One is of a new color, suggesting that he did not rise to join a pantheon, but rose to create his own. This is likely because he was risen up by goblins, a race that was built to be little chunks of XP.

That known, did goblins have souls before the ascent of The Dark One? Because that seems like a lot of god-food to just leave lying around, whether you like them or not.

Do goblins have souls now, or is The Dark One powered by some other essence gathered from his people? They don’t seem to go an inhabit a plane based on their alignment like other mortals, but instead join a growing army beside The Dark One himself.

Interesting question. Perhaps the goblins did not have souls at first? But they thought they did (or perhaps other races thought they did). And much like the astral plane, those thoughts influenced reality. And so goblins formed souls.

Or maybe goblins always had souls, but having no place to go after death, stayed around to provide the quiddity that was needed to allow one of their own to ascend.

[CJG]

All souls go to the plane corresponding to their alignment. Some, like Roy, simply don't go to a specific god's court, and instead power all gods of that alignment, in general.



Why wouldn't that army be congregated in a plane? The followers of the Dark One don't want a mountain and a tavern of one-night stands they get to take to their mom's homes, or the beer hall of eternal drinking, carousing and food fights. They want to join the Dark One. So they do.

Grey Wolf


Soul-food is so important to the gods that Hel has gone mad not getting her fair share. Why would the gods create a, uh, “high turnover” race full of souls and never try to buddy up and claim them? Are there any other gods complaining that they lost out on goblin souls when TDO ascended?

I don’t think that it’s so cut and dry to assume that Goblins were built like humans et. al. and not as soulless creatures.

(I am for the record not equating the ownership of a soul with personhood or intelligence)

[Grey_Wolf_c]

There's a certain amount of flexibility for strongly devoted worshippers, at least according to Complete Divine.

I'm basing my statement on what the Giant has said about OotS afterlives, which would override whatever the manuals say.

On the other hand, both Durkon (a Thor follower) and Hilgya (a Loki follower) expect to end up in the same exact place, a CG location despite them being LG and CE respectively, so it's anyone's guess how it actually works.

To the point of the topic, though:: goblin souls went somewhere, merged with some plane, and fed some deities and not others, I'd imagine.

Grey Wolf

[woweedd]

Why are we assuming the Dark One's abode could not be located in an existing Outer Plane, as is common for Gods? The description could easily fit Acheron (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acheron_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons)), the plane of those who were Lawful Neutral tending towards Evil, and a world where endless battles take place among massive armies, with no peace or victory to be reached. Sounds like his kinda place, alright.

[wumpus]

Why wouldn't that army be congregated in a plane? The followers of the Dark One don't want a mountain and a tavern of one-night stands they get to take to their mom's homes, or the beer hall of eternal drinking, carousing and food fights. They want to join the Dark One. So they do.
Grey Wolf

The exact nature of the lower planes is typically where D&D cosmology breaks down. In OOTS, we have it from Xykon that "the big fire below" is to be avoided at all costs, but his "knowledge: the planes" rank is questionable (and might have been fed entirely by Red Cloak for his own interests).

The lower planes are almost always described in terms of punishment, but worship of the "gods below" and even 1e alignment descriptions involved working for evil out of real loyalty (and presumably expecting a reward afterword as well as in life). OOTS seems to have taken the route of "lower planes are punishment", but this is one of the ways D&D cosmology really doesn't work.

To be honest, Miko would certainly like Arcadia far more then Celestia. The Giant isn't saying if she wound up there (or lower). I can't see Belkar anywhere else but the Battlefield of Hades (CE side), working his way up to get the needed divine rank to be the "sexy shoeless god of war". Valhalla doesn't seem right for Elan and Haley, but presumably there's more to it than just the northern pantheon.

Red Cloak may accept the Nine Hells, but I doubt he will enjoy them.

[hamishspence]

I'm basing my statement on what the Giant has said about OotS afterlives, which would override whatever the manuals say.

On the other hand, both Durkon (a Thor follower) and Hilgya (a Loki follower) expect to end up in the same exact place, a CG location despite them being LG and CE respectively, so it's anyone's guess how it actually works.

That's one of the things that make me think that, at least in some cases, "deity worshipped" matters more, and that some deities reside on planes that don't match their alignment perfectly.

[Fyraltari]

Why wouldn't that army be congregated in a plane? The followers of the Dark One don't want a mountain and a tavern of one-night stands they get to take to their mom's homes, or the beer hall of eternal drinking, carousing and food fights. They want to join the Dark One. So they do.
Ironically enough, joining their god as an army preparing for a future battle is as valid a description of Walhalla as "Beeer hall of eternal drinking".

The lower planes are almost always described in terms of punishment, but worship of the "gods below" and even 1e alignment descriptions involved working for evil out of real loyalty (and presumably expecting a reward afterword as well as in life). OOTS seems to have taken the route of "lower planes are punishment", but this is one of the ways D&D cosmology really doesn't work.

This is not necessarily contradicting. Any place populated obnly by people living their (after)lives according to an evil philosophy is going to be a terrible place to be. Xykon may be rightly guessing that the Archfiends wont have his best interest in mind when they will take decisions regarding whatever place he would be (after)living in and that he can't just take them on (yet).

[Riftwolf]

They might have worshipped Demons or CE Gods like Fenrir, which seems like a dumb move with D&D alignments but it was the only move available before TDO ascended. Without a God willing to scoop them out of the Abyss/Hades/Gehenna/Wherever, their souls would've been background monster mush, as we can assume other NPC races without a God end up being.
It's worth remembering that the teen goblins family didn't specify worship of TDO, bit some Demon Prince. It could be 'early strip so didn't happen', or it could be some goblins still worship Demons (for some reason?).

[hamishspence]

It's worth remembering that the teen goblins family didn't specify worship of TDO, bit some Demon Prince. It could be 'early strip so didn't happen', or it could be some goblins still worship Demons (for some reason?).

Or they might simply be unclear on what the Dark One actually is - believing him to be a Demon Prince when he's actually a regular deity.

[Fyraltari]

Or the "big demon guy" is TDO and the teen just cares that little about his family's religion.

Edit: ninja'd.

[Kish]

I see no reason to believe that it's possible to be sapient and not have a soul in the OotS universe.

When Roy was in the afterlife, events were taking place that are normally spoken of that way: "Roy was in the afterlife." Not "Roy was rotting and being made into a bone golem, and meanwhile something of Roy's that only some sapient entities have was kicking around Celestia."

Curse of Strahd stinks like a dead badger (and if there is such a thing as a soul, then the badger had one when it was alive, despite probably not being sapient).

(If the third paragraph is confusing you, don't worry about it; the first two paragraphs stand on their own.)

[LadyEowyn]

I would guess that, prior the Dark One, goblinoid's souls went to whichever plane most closely matched their alignment. Which, most of the time, would have been one of the Evil planes - not a good fate.

Jirix's account of the current goblin afterlife stands out because it doesn't appear to be unpleasant. This stands in strong contrast to the general D&D description of the other evil afterlives (and in contrast to Xykon's general characterization of them as somewhere you do not want to go, in his lecture to Vaarsuvius). So there's definitely be an improvement in their afterlife situation with the appearance of The Dark One.

[hamishspence]

(and if there is such a thing as a soul, then the badger had one when it was alive, despite probably not being sapient).

It's not like spells such as Trap The Soul or Soul Bind have a "creature must be INT 3 or higher/ creature must have been INT 3 or higher in life" restriction, after all.

[Kish]

I would guess that, prior the Dark One, goblinoid's souls went to whichever plane most closely matched their alignment. Which, most of the time, would have been one of the Evil planes - not a good fate.

Jirix's account of the current goblin afterlife stands out because it doesn't appear to be unpleasant. This stands in strong contrast to the general D&D description of the other evil afterlives (and in contrast to Xykon's general characterization of them as somewhere you do not want to go, in his lecture to Vaarsuvius).
Knowledge (Religion) and Knowledge (Planes) are both cross-class for Xykon. What would he know of any afterlife?

(Also, he was lying by implication when he suggested that he had done "anything to avoid the Big Fire Below"; he had kept right on aging merrily into the Venerable age category until proto-Redcloak talked him into becoming a lich for an unrelated reason.)

[CJG]

I just reread the bits where Roy had just come back from the dead and it meantions that goblins can be resurrected. So they do have souls, at least at this point in time.

[Niblog]

Aren't the High Priests of Tyr and Fenrir goblinoids? Even Oona said to Redcloack that her bugbear clan doesn't really worship The Dark One.

I'm sure goblinoids worshipped gods before and after TDO becoming a god.

[hamishspence]

Aren't the High Priests of Tyr and Fenrir goblinoids?

Fenrir's has a tail. May be something else (a wererat?). Tyr's looks like an orc or half-orc:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Aren't the High Priests of Tyr and Fenrir goblinoids?

No? TYr's looks Orcish to me, and Fenrir's has a tail. Whatever he is, I don't think he's goblinoid.

Grey Wolf

[Fyraltari]

By the way does anyone know what it is that Fenrir's delegate is wearing on his head under the skull, some kind of mask or what?

[hamishspence]

some kind of mask or what?

Seems likely - something like a Zorro mask.

[Kantaki]

By the way does anyone know what it is that Fenrir's delegate is wearing on his head under the skull, some kind of mask or what?

I always thought it looked like a human face.
Which begs the question why- and who -the HpoF is wearing it as a mask.:smalleek:

Is it part of the traditional Highpriest get-up?
Did it belong to a enemy? A friend?:smallconfused:

[Rrmcklin]

The Dark One is of a new color, suggesting that he did not rise to join a pantheon, but rose to create his own. This is likely because he was risen up by goblins, a race that was built to be little chunks of XP.

That known, did goblins have souls before the ascent of The Dark One? Because that seems like a lot of god-food to just leave lying around, whether you like them or not.

Do goblins have souls now, or is The Dark One powered by some other essence gathered from his people? They don’t seem to go an inhabit a plane based on their alignment like other mortals, but instead join a growing army beside The Dark One himself.

How do you define "most likely"? Because I'd consider it more likely he didn't join one of the other pantheons because goblins didn't worship them, rather the specific reason the goblins were created.

Why wouldn't they have souls? As others have said, not worshipping a god doesn't mean a person doesn't have soul or won't go to the correct alignment plane.

Yes, goblins clearly do have souls, otherwise they wouldn't be able to talk about, and actual raise them, like Redcloak did for Jirix, and has mentioned wanting to do for other goblins.

[hroþila]

Aren't the High Priests of Tyr and Fenrir goblinoids? Even Oona said to Redcloack that her bugbear clan doesn't really worship The Dark One.

I'm sure goblinoids worshipped gods before and after TDO becoming a god.
I don't think that's what Oona hinted at. I think she simply meant that the bugbears do worship the Dark One (i.e. they consider him their patron deity), but it simply doesn't play a huge role in their society. To illustrate, you can have a country that's big on secularism and another one with a theocracy, both sharing the same religion.

My guess would be that the goblinoids had a shamanistic non-deistic religion before the Dark One.

[hamishspence]

I think she simply meant that the bugbears do worship the Dark One (i.e. they consider him their patron deity), but it simply doesn't play a huge role in their society. To illustrate, you can have a country that's big on secularism and another one with a theocracy, both sharing the same religion.

My guess would be that the goblinoids had a shamanistic non-deistic religion before the Dark One.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1038.html

Bugbears still have shamans. Possibly these shamans are "of the Dark One" and "shaman" is just another word for cleric in this case.


After some of the other gods broke ranks to defend him, he took control of the goblinoids and established regular worship among them. So he's been building his power for a few centuries since then, and unlike other gods, he doesn't have to share his species' worship with several competing deities.

Malack, in life, was a shaman - but mechanically, he was a cleric:


"Shaman" is just a descriptive term, used to paint a picture of what sort of life he had. He was still a cleric, mechanically speaking. He would have switched gods because whatever nature-oriented barbarian deity he used to worship no longer granted spells to a vampire that was keeping his former cleric's soul hostage.

[Linneris]

Why would the gods create a, uh, “high turnover” race full of souls and never try to buddy up and claim them? Are there any other gods complaining that they lost out on goblin souls when TDO ascended?

Goblins were created as XP fodder for clerics - and didn't know that until the Dark One ascended. Word of Giant is that they worshipped no God's before the Dark One. We don't know why, but my guess is that no god would risk angering other gods by granting spells to members of a race designed to be killed by their clerics for XP. Or make their own clerics' jobs harder.

So before the Dark One, nearly all goblin souls would just go to alignment-appropriate afterlives rather than specific gods, thus giving shares of their soul power to all gods of that alignment. Given that the OOTS gods don't punish non-theists (unlike, say, the Forgotten Realms gods with their Wall of the Faithless), the arrangement probably suits them.

[hroþila]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1038.html

Bugbears still have shamans. Possibly these shamans are "of the Dark One" and "shaman" is just another word for cleric in this case.



Malack, in life, was a shaman - but mechanically, he was a cleric:
Yeah, I was using "shamanistic" in its real-world sense, not merely using "shaman" as a flavour-text variant of "cleric".

[Fyraltari]

Seeing as you can be a Cleric of the elemental Earth itself, the distinguo is rather thin.

[martianmister]

Goblins are one of the cannon fodder monster races, not the only ones. Lizardfolk and Kobolds too were created in same way and purpose, yet they actually worship these gods. There is no reason to believe that goblins were different.

[hamishspence]

Goblins are one of the cannon fodder monster races, not the only ones. Lizardfolk and Kobolds too were created in same way and purpose, yet they actually worship these gods. There is no reason to believe that goblins were different.

We know that goblins worshipped nobody before The Dark One came into being:



The goblins, on the other hand, worshipped no one before the Dark One.

[The MunchKING]

They COULD have worshiped someone though, they just as a culture chose not to.

[Devils_Advocate]

I must wonder why goblins wouldn't have all of the normal reasons for mortals to worship gods, what reasons they would have to not worship them, and, on a related note, how well The Giant thought through some above-quoted statements before making them.

I recall that Rich once backed off of an early reference of his to Vaarsuvius as Good-aligned, with a note that nothing is actually part of the official story until it appears in the comic.

This would seem to me to be yet another non-canonical author explanation. That said, two supporting quotes years apart do suggest to me that Rich has this point fairly established in his mind, and that there is some yet-to-be-revealed setting element at work here.

Or maybe this is just a "cultures are allowed to be unrealistically homogeneous in Dungeons & Dragons" thing, who knows.


Soul-food is so important to the gods that Hel has gone mad not getting her fair share. Why would the gods create a, uh, “high turnover” race full of souls and never try to buddy up and claim them? Are there any other gods complaining that they lost out on goblin souls when TDO ascended?

I don’t think that it’s so cut and dry to assume that Goblins were built like humans et. al. and not as soulless creatures.
But the flip side of that is, it's hard to see how making goblins soulless would help the gods' goal of acquiring more ensouled followers, either.

There are three options here:

(1) Give goblins souls and cultivate worship among them, as normal.
(2) Give goblins souls and neglect them, for some reason.
(3) Don't give goblins souls.

Even if Option 3 is better than Option 2 for some reason, maybe because making souls takes divine energy that the gods would prefer not to spend, that doesn't explain choosing Option 3 over Option 1. One would expect Option 1 to have the usual expected net gain. Why would it not, in the particular case of goblins?

Regardless, I'm pretty sure that goblins have souls in every setting of D&D in which the matter is addressed, and I find it highly unlikely that Rich would choose to depart from his source material in the way you suggest in this particular case.

Besides, if goblins couldn't empower a deity through their devotion, the Dark One's ascension wouldn't have happened. So, y'know, there's that.


I'm basing my statement on what the Giant has said about OotS afterlives, which would override whatever the manuals say.

On the other hand, both Durkon (a Thor follower) and Hilgya (a Loki follower) expect to end up in the same exact place, a CG location despite them being LG and CE respectively, so it's anyone's guess how it actually works.
Well, dwarves are already a special case. It could be that mortals generally go to the planes corresponding to their alignments, but dwarves generally go to Hel, but they generally go to Valhalla instead if they die with honor. (But their souls generally get trapped if they're turned into vampires, but...)

Exception-based rulesets sure can get complicated!

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Well, dwarves are already a special case. It could be that mortals generally go to the planes corresponding to their alignments, but dwarves generally go to Hel, but they generally go to Valhalla instead if they die with honor.

Their special case starts and end with Hel's dibs. If they pass Hel's gauntlet (because they died with honour), they are supposed to go to the plane of their alignment (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html).

Grey Wolf

[Devils_Advocate]

Ah, I see. In that case, I guess that the souls of the gods' respective clergies instead simply go to them regardless of where they live, and neither cleric bothers to mention this due to their mutual knowledge of this exception.

[hamishspence]

I recall that Rich once backed off of an early reference of his to Vaarsuvius as Good-aligned, with a note that nothing is actually part of the official story until it appears in the comic.

This would seem to me to be yet another non-canonical author explanation.

The thread in question was very old - old enough the links to it no longer work.

However, this was one of the earliest examples of it being quoted:





Huh. Well, I guess I did say it.

Lucky for me, my comments on the message board aren't canon and I'm allowed to change my mind later.

Nyah nyah. :P



Since then, The Giant has made a vast number of comments on the message board that have been treated as "canon" - explanations of how Familicide works, etc.

Even using the word "canon" sometimes:


4.) Explicitly, I am going to say that no black dragon, ever, in the history of the world, ever mated with any human being until Girard's grandparents. Some black dragons mated with other species, and some other colors of dragon mated with humans. But black dragons and humans? One time only in the history of OOTS-world. That's canon now. Done.

So, "nothing is officially part of the story until it appears in the comic" is no longer true, even if the Giant might have said it once long ago. And there do exist "canonical author explanations".

[woweedd]

Ah, I see. In that case, I guess that the souls of the gods' respective clergies instead simply go to them regardless of where they live, and neither cleric bothers to mention this due to their mutual knowledge of this exception.
That is true, by D&D rules. Devoted followers of specific Gods go to their God's place, regardless of their own alignment. By definition, the religious devotion needed to become a full Cleric qualifies, although sources disagree as to whether particularity devoted non-Clerics also join their God in death. Usually, it's a moot point, since people tend to follow Gods who match their alignment anyway, but, ya know.

[Fyraltari]

The thread in question was very old - old enough the links to it no longer work.

However, this was one of the earliest examples of it being quoted:



Since then, The Giant has made a vast number of comments on the message board that have been treated as "canon" - explanations of how Familicide works, etc.

Even using the word "canon" sometimes:



So, "nothing is officially part of the story until it appears in the comic" is no longer true, even if the Giant might have said it once long ago. And there do exist "canonical author explanations".
So he changed his mind about being allowed to change his mind? :smallbiggrin:

[Kish]

I think mainly he recognized that "it is possible for no one to expect what I say on the forum to be binding for the comic" was pure wishful thinking and anything he said would be repeated as authoritative unless he specifically said that individual thing was not authoritative.

[wumpus]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1038.html
Malack, in life, was a shaman - but mechanically, he was a cleric:

If you really wanted to push mechanical purity, you could make the "living Malack" a 1st level adept and assume that the vampire gained the rest of the levels in cleric. Adding any more levels in adept would mean half of them (including the 2nd) would effectively be "dead levels" casting-wise so should be avoided.

Note: I going by a "not so official" online d20 srd that doesn't match my vague memories of the adept class. My memories of the adept class include both cleric and wizard spells (with slow advancement, not useful for fast theruge tricks) that would make terrifying "wand whippers" especially as henchmen to more powerful (and rich) NPCs.

[Kish]

That's "pushing mechanical purity" (apparently meaning "you can't call an actual cleric a shaman") at the expensive of explicit Word of the Author, so blurk.

There's an entirely official SRD here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/cleric.htm), so why would you use another one?

[Fyraltari]

:miko: Why is it so difficult (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0209.html) to believe that he could be a shaman without having a class with the word "shaman" in the title?? Can there be no facets of life that are not defined solely by class?

[CJG]

:miko: Why is it so difficult (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0209.html) to believe that he could be a shaman without having a class with the word "shaman" in the title?? Can there be no facets of life that are not defined solely by class?

And so my thread has come to Miko. ITS THE CIRCLE OF LIIIIIIFE!

[Fyraltari]

Ironically, mikos (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miko) might be Clerics as well, in game terms.

[mjasghar]

The comic has established the pantheons have major control over their own continents - so why don’t a large portion of the dwarves simply emigrate so they are under the auspices of other pantheons and no longer under the Hel bet. The majority are too honourable to give up that way but there must be loads of others.
Durkon wasn’t regarded as some new race in the West so surely some dwarves live there

[Grey_Wolf_c]

The comic has established the pantheons have major control over their own continents - so why don’t a large portion of the dwarves simply emigrate so they are under the auspices of other pantheons and no longer under the Hel bet. The majority are too honourable to give up that way but there must be loads of others.
Durkon wasn’t regarded as some new race in the West so surely some dwarves live there

Because dwarf souls are not continents. They are still dwarf souls, and that means that Hel gets dibs on all non-honorable deaths. Once they pass that gauntlet, for all we know, they can still end in some Western or Southern god's realm, but that doesn't stop Hel from having dibs.

Grey Wolf

[Devils_Advocate]

The pantheons don't just control different parts of the world, they made the various parts of the world, and it's entirely likely that dwarf souls are designed to go to Hel by default.


Since then, The Giant has made a vast number of comments on the message board that have been treated as "canon" - explanations of how Familicide works, etc.

Even using the word "canon" sometimes:

So, "nothing is officially part of the story until it appears in the comic" is no longer true, even if the Giant might have said it once long ago. And there do exist "canonical author explanations".
Well, I'm no linguist, but the impression I had gotten is that "canon" refers to the work under examination. In which case all of the online strips are canon, and other strips in books are maybe canon, but author commentary doesn't seem like it qualifies. It certainly doesn't seem to qualify as part of the story. It has no place in the relevant chronology, existing as it does in our own universe with its own timeline.

That said, "the death of the author" does not strictly apply to works that have not yet been completed. The author's opinion doesn't change the contents of a completed work, but the totality of an ongoing story includes future material, and an author's present opinion can have significant impact on what will and will not be included in a story.

If Rich goes so far as to declare that something is "canon", that may not make it part of the story proper, but it does make it very likely that everything in the story will at least be consistent with his statement. On the other hand, if Rich gives an explanation but doesn't call it canon or similar, well, that's the sort of thing that he might yet call backsies on.

It's a bit unfair to authors to take as commitments statements that weren't intended as such. On the other hand, it's a bit unfair to mislead one's audience. So, in order to minimize communication, we should recognize that writers' statements aren't always meant to be authoritative, and therefore we should not treat them as such; but we should also recognize that some members of our audiences will assume that our statements are meant to be authoritative, and therefore we should give appropriate disclaimers regarding how official our remarks on our own work generally aren't.


So he changed his mind about being allowed to change his mind? :smallbiggrin:
Ho ho! (https://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/psa/)


Why is it so difficult (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0209.html) to believe that he could be a shaman without having a class with the word "shaman" in the title?? Can there be no facets of life that are not defined solely by class?
More to the point, while the Cleric class may not be particularly shamanistic, neither is the Adept class (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/npcClasses/adept.htm), and there are rules for Clerics without deities.

[hamishspence]

I don't think The Giant needs to say "canon" every time


Hinjo is red-green colorblind. CANON.


for a comment he makes about the story or characters within the story to be authoritative.

He might "call backsies" but until he does, the statement, whatever it is, should be assumed to be accurate till proven otherwise.

Such as, that most people in Azure City, worship the Twelve as a pantheon, and that Tsukiko is one of those people.

[The Pilgrim]

Soul-food is so important to the gods that Hel has gone mad not getting her fair share. Why would the gods create a, uh, “high turnover” race full of souls and never try to buddy up and claim them?

Because to send their clerics to spread their faith among Goblinoids, would mean giving such Goblinoids equal status with other races, and thus defeat the sole purpose for which Goblinoids were created: to serve as cannon fodder for the Clerics to harvest.

In a nutshell: Because for the Gods, goblins have more value as PX cattle to empower their Clerics, than as followers providing "soul power".

It is not like in our own reality we haven't seen plenty of regimes legally discriminating a part of their population, when not plain expelling, slaughtering, or mass convicting it, because that part of the population has, for that regime, more value as scapegoats, common enemy, or slave workforce, than as citzens. (I will not provide actual examples because, that would be discussing issues of our own world and as such be against the Rules. So, please, people replying to this message, do not provide specific historic or real life examples either).

[Fyraltari]

Because to send their clerics to spread their faith among Goblinoids, would mean giving such Goblinoids equal status with other races, and thus defeat the sole purpose for which Goblinoids were created: to serve as cannon fodder for the Clerics to harvest.

In a nutshell: Because for the Gods, goblins have more value as PX cattle to empower their Clerics, than as followers providing "soul power".

They can be both. I doubt that having some Clerics of "Fenrir, God of Monsters" would give them equal standing with the PC races.

[The Pilgrim]

They can be both. I doubt that having some Clerics of "Fenrir, God of Monsters" would give them equal standing with the PC races.

Mmmh... let me put it this way:

Can humans eat cats? Yes.
Can humans eat dogs? Yes.
Can humans eat pigeons? Yes.

But, as far as there is plenty of chicken around, the number of humans hunting cats, dogs or pigeons for food is greatly reduced. And thus the God of cats, dogs and pigeons is pleased.

Take the chickens out, because for example an army passes through the town and requises all chickens. What happens? Famine strikes and cats, dogs and pigeons quickly vanish, hunted down for food. The Cat-Dog-Pigeon God isn't happy.

Now, if another God decides to start protecting the chicken, and chicken win equal standing with other animals, what happens? More cat, dog and pigeon is slayed for food. The CatDogPigeon God isn't pleased.

For an unfair system to work, you always need someone at the bottom, to serve as butt-monkey for everyone else. You may be number 2 under the thumb of number 1, but you will roll with it as far as you have a number 3 beneath you to squash.

Luckly for the CDP God, there is a hardcore pact among Gods that forbids all Deities from taking chickens under their portfolio. But those damned chickens ruined it all by creating a God of their own to fill up the vacuum.

(tl;dr: Odin, Thor and PC races are number 1. Fenrir and Monsters are number 2. Goblinoids are number 3. Number 2 is glad to have number 3 around to get the worst of the violence from number 1).

[hamishspence]

the impression I had gotten is that "canon" refers to the work under examination. In which case all of the online strips are canon, and other strips in books are maybe canon, but author commentary doesn't seem like it qualifies. It certainly doesn't seem to qualify as part of the story. It has no place in the relevant chronology, existing as it does in our own universe with its own timeline.

That said, "the death of the author" does not strictly apply to works that have not yet been completed. The author's opinion doesn't change the contents of a completed work, but the totality of an ongoing story includes future material, and an author's present opinion can have significant impact on what will and will not be included in a story.

When I do a search for "Death of the Author" comments on this forum, it's fairly consistent that it has to do entirely with interpretations, not "authorial statements".

You can use "Death of the Author" to say that Dumbledore comes across as straight, or bi, or pan, or whatever".


But you can't use Death of the Author to say

"Dumbledore is straight in my opinion, and Rowling stating otherwise is only an opinion, and no more valid than my opinion is" -

because that's not how opinions work in the first place.

And you can't say "Hinjo has normal color vision, and The Giant stating otherwise on the forum can be ignored in debates" because The Giant is entitled to make that kind of statement, and debaters are entitled to use Word of Giant to settle debates - there's no inherent restriction to "only what's shown in the strip itself".


Or at least, you can't do so and still expect to be taken seriously.

[Kish]

"Death of the Author" is a literary theory which 1) is far more complicated than the people who invoke it to mean "I don't have to care what the author thinks!" treat it as saying, and 2) is not somehow inherently authoritative, even if it was being used correctly.

[martianmister]

In the same post Rich said that goblins worship the Dark One and they worshipped no one before him, he also said that elves worship elven gods aditive to western pantheon. If we count that post as a proof that goblins are unable to worship other gods, then same is true for elves too.

[hamishspence]

It's proof that the goblins haven't worshipped anyone else, not that they can't.

[wumpus]

That's "pushing mechanical purity" (apparently meaning "you can't call an actual cleric a shaman") at the expensive of explicit Word of the Author, so blurk.

There's an entirely official SRD here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/cleric.htm), so why would you use another one?

The main point in giving the living Malack a different class than the Vampire cleric is to emphasize that they are different people with different souls. The early one was primitive and forgotten, especially compared to the sophisticated vampire. From the offhand comments from Malack, his mortal predecessor sounds closer to an adept than a cleric.

The main problem with "pushing mechanical purity" is that this would involve details to tiny for players/readers to see (unless you gave him enough adept levels to start to nerf him). It all depends on if the Giant really cares about that type of backstory: from various descriptions it appears that the Giant likes *less* detail and leaves things a mystery (I think V's gender went from "known but never revealed" to "indeterminate").

And for the second comment, duckduckgo didn't find the official one (but it appears the same).

[Peelee]

Being unable to worship a god is not something I would expect anyone familiar with this story would argue.

[Fyraltari]

Mmmh... let me put it this way:

Can humans eat cats? Yes.
Can humans eat dogs? Yes.
Can humans eat pigeons? Yes.

But, as far as there is plenty of chicken around, the number of humans hunting cats, dogs or pigeons for food is greatly reduced. And thus the God of cats, dogs and pigeons is pleased.
You obviously have been eating at the wrong tables. :smallwink:


Take the chickens out, because for example an army passes through the town and requises all chickens. What happens? Famine strikes and cats, dogs and pigeons quickly vanish, hunted down for food. The Cat-Dog-Pigeon God isn't happy.

Now, if another God decides to start protecting the chicken, and chicken win equal standing with other animals, what happens? More cat, dog and pigeon is slayed for food. The CatDogPigeon God isn't pleased.

For an unfair system to work, you always need someone at the bottom, to serve as butt-monkey for everyone else. You may be number 2 under the thumb of number 1, but you will roll with it as far as you have a number 3 beneath you to squash.

Luckly for the CDP God, there is a hardcore pact among Gods that forbids all Deities from taking chickens under their portfolio. But those damned chickens ruined it all by creating a God of their own to fill up the vacuum.

(tl;dr: Odin, Thor and PC races are number 1. Fenrir and Monsters are number 2. Goblinoids are number 3. Number 2 is glad to have number 3 around to get the worst of the violence from number 1).

This is all well and good but it assumes that the God actually gives two ****s about his followers; Thor does, but Thor seems more like (one of) the exception(s) than the rule. The goblins are set up to be slaughtered anyway and each god (Hel excluded) already has enough soul input from elsewhere not to worry about starving. So if a community of gobbos decide to worship one evil or neutral deity or another why would they refuse the extra souls?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

So if a community of gobbos decide to worship one evil or neutral deity or another why would they refuse the extra souls?

I know I'm pulling out this card a lot lately, but a plausible assumption is that the pre-world agreements are in effect: that they all agreed to create a race for easy XP, and baked into those rules is that no god would grant them spells, to ensure they remained an easy XP race.

Grey Wolf

[The Pilgrim]

This is all well and good but it assumes that the God actually gives two ****s about his followers; Thor does, but Thor seems more like (one of) the exception(s) than the rule. The goblins are set up to be slaughtered anyway and each god (Hel excluded) already has enough soul input from elsewhere not to worry about starving. So if a community of gobbos decide to worship one evil or neutral deity or another why would they refuse the extra souls?

True, but, why worship a God if that God refuses to give spells to your shamans? It is better for the goblin shamans to stick to worshipping the elements and get spells from Elementals like the Creed of Stone does.

And, if one God begins to answer to goblin shamans and grant them spells, other Gods would do the same. So probably no God thought it was worthy to begin a fight with other Gods for possession of the goblinoid portfolio. It is an educated assumption that all Gods may had, in fact, an understanding, ruling that the cannon fodder gets to be shunned by all deities.


You obviously have been eating at the wrong tables. :smallwink:

The culinary choices of my cultural background are not on trial here. :smalltongue:
(Bonus XP for your "Knowledge: GitP Lore" skill if you get the reference)

[Kish]

The main point in giving the living Malack a different class than the Vampire cleric is to emphasize that they are different people with different souls. The early one was primitive and forgotten, especially compared to the sophisticated vampire. From the offhand comments from Malack, his mortal predecessor sounds closer to an adept than a cleric.

The main problem with "pushing mechanical purity" is

that that's a ridiculously flattering term to use for "ignoring what Rich said and everything that either the comic or D&D supports in favor of something that you like better."

Greg was a cleric of Durkon's level. Malack was a cleric. The living lizardfolk who was turned into the vampire Malack was a cleric.

[martianmister]

In the ninth panel of strip 999 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html) there is a Western pantheon priest with goblin-like head.

[Fyraltari]

I know I'm pulling out this card a lot lately, but a plausible assumption is that the pre-world agreements are in effect: that they all agreed to create a race for easy XP, and baked into those rules is that no god would grant them spells, to ensure they remained an easy XP race.
I don't get this. What is it about Clerics that makes having them incompatible with being XP-fodder? Wouldn't that be more about how many Hit Dice, HP or bonuses you get, and more importantly about wether the cosmos would consider murdering you an evil action/having a "usually evil" alignemnt slapped on your face?

The goblins have warriors, psions and beastmasters as seen on the comic, since those aren't dependent on religion it seems fair to assume they had those before the Dark One's apotheosis no? If so then this whole "xp-fodder race" thing is not about wether they can become adventurers is it?

True, but, why worship a God if that God refuses to give spells to your shamans?
Who said anything about that?

It is better for the goblin shamans to stick to worshipping the elements and get spells from Elementals like the Creed of Stone does.
Going by the current attitude of the Dark One towards Gobbotopia relative to Redcloak's mission that's probably true regardless.



And, if one God begins to answer to goblin shamans and grant them spells, other Gods would do the same.
And? Goblins that are harder to kill give more XP don't they?

So probably no God thought it was worthy to begin a fight with other Gods for possession of the goblinoid portfolio.
What's that to do with anything?
Dvalin's portfolio is "First King of the Dwarves" and yet most Dwarves don't seem to worship him.


It is an educated assumption that all Gods may had, in fact, an understanding, ruling that the cannon fodder gets to be shunned by all deities.
It's a possibility, yes, but I don't see what makes it more likely than the alternative (well some gods would have issues with treating their followers as like that, but certainly not all).

[martianmister]

It's proof that the goblins haven't worshipped anyone else, not that they can't.

They're not a hive-mind, I can't see how none of the goblins before the Dark One tried to worship a deity, unless they're unable to do it.

[Fyraltari]

That probably is an excessively strict reading of the quote. That the goblins as a people did not worship anyone does not mean that no goblin had ever worshipped anyone before the Dark One.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I don't get this. What is it about Clerics that makes having them incompatible with being XP-fodder?
Cleric is a tier 1 class. Note that the other usual tier-1 class, the wizard, is also nerfed for the goblins. And they culturally don't go for druids.


wether the cosmos would consider murdering you an evil action/having a "usually evil" alignemnt slapped on your face?
Two thirds of the gods don't care if their clerics kill non-evil creatures.


And? Goblins that are harder to kill give more XP don't they?
There are other monsters at that point. Goblins are low-level enemies to get your first couple of levels with.

Grey Wolf

[Devils_Advocate]

I suppose that a shared religion can serve as a civilization-building tool, and thus elevate a people above easily-exterminated pest status. Heck, didn't the Dark One make goblinoids dangerous by rallying them when he was mortal? It's probably not about needing a deity in order to enable the Cleric class specifically.


the other usual tier-1 class, the wizard, is also nerfed for the goblins. And they culturally don't go for druids.

I remember Redcloak commenting in Start of Darkness that it's hard to find a skilled goblin wizard, but I don't recall any indication that that's any less of a cultural thing than below-average druidism. OotS goblins obviously aren't straight out of the SRD -- They're Medium! -- but they don't seem to have an Intelligence penalty nor a Level Adjustment.


In the ninth panel of strip 999 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html) there is a Western pantheon priest with goblin-like head.
Bald and with pointy ears, you mean? I'm pretty sure that that's supposed to be a bald elf.


But you can't use Death of the Author to say

"Dumbledore is straight in my opinion, and Rowling stating otherwise is only an opinion, and no more valid than my opinion is" -

because that's not how opinions work in the first place.
What's not how opinions work?

Do you think that Dumbledore is an actual person of whom Rowling has factual knowledge? I think you'll find that that's a contentious perspective. Common practice seems to be to talk about works of fiction as though they describe actual events without believing that those events really happened. Passionate fans may temporarily forget that the subjects of their obsessions are imaginary, but entirely losing track of the distinction between fiction and non-fiction seems rare. At the very least, I recommend trying to remember that a lot of muggles don't really believe in magic. That's sort of an important point to bear in mind.


And you can't say "Hinjo has normal color vision, and The Giant stating otherwise on the forum can be ignored in debates"
That seems neither logically nor physically impossible. In what sense do you intend to claim that it can't be done? Is there some Rule of Posting I'm not familiar with?


The Giant is entitled to make that kind of statement, and debaters are entitled to use Word of Giant to settle debates - there's no inherent restriction to "only what's shown in the strip itself".
Does anything give anyone any more right to treat any of The Giant's statements as authoritative than they have to treat the very same statement as not being authoritative? If so, what, and how?


Or at least, you can't do so and still expect to be taken seriously.
I would go so far as to say that, as a general rule, one should not expect to be taken seriously when one tells people what non-actual events they are and are not allowed to imagine and discuss. Having such pronouncements taken seriously by most of those aware of them probably requires authority fairly close to the "roving death squads" level. Control over a discussion forum, for example, seems far insufficient to successfully thought police a fandom; most likely, they'll just go somewhere else to laugh at you (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SmallNameBigEgo).

Not that I'm accusing Rich of attempting that. On the contrary, if anything, you seem to be making that accusation, which seems uncharitable. If you aren't, then you seem to be making such a pronouncement on your own initiative, in which case I feel inclined to frankly advise you that your own level of relevant authority could be aptly described as comical.


I don't think The Giant needs to say "canon" every time for a comment he makes about the story or characters within the story to be authoritative.

He might "call backsies" but until he does, the statement, whatever it is, should be assumed to be accurate till proven otherwise.
I don't claim that only statements explicitly intended as official should be treated as having any weight, but I do think that defaulting to treating all writer commentary as authoritative does a bit of a disservice to writers. I get that it's possible to incorporate an offhand remark into your understanding of a work without considering it a promise, but that doesn't mean that other fans will make that distinction, so it may be for the best not to popularize the interpretation of such remarks as being part of The LoreTM. A lot of people do tend to develop unwarranted senses of entitlement about things. (See above!)

[hamishspence]

I would go so far as to say that, as a general rule, one should not expect to be taken seriously when one tells people what non-actual events they are and are not allowed to imagine and discuss.

I'm trying to say that people who, as Kish puts it, are:


"ignoring what Rich said and everything that either the comic or D&D supports in favor of something that you like better."

and using "Death of the Author" as their excuse, and object loudly when their statements are not taken seriously, are a common forum problem.

(Why is it a problem? Because it poisons debate and leads to bad feeling).

As Kish said:


"Death of the Author" is a literary theory which 1) is far more complicated than the people who invoke it to mean "I don't have to care what the author thinks!" treat it as saying, and 2) is not somehow inherently authoritative, even if it was being used correctly.

the term is not supposed to be used that way, and does not work the way they think it does.




In the ninth panel of strip 999 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html) there is a Western pantheon priest with goblin-like head.

Bald and with pointy ears, you mean? I'm pretty sure that that's supposed to be a bald elf.

"Elf-like being with hairstyle exposing at least one ear" is seen on the far left (purple hair, green cape). Another, in the back row, to the left of the aisle, has purplish hair tied with a green band. There is also a drow, in the back row, to the right of the aisle. The ear does not look as wide, proportionally, on all three.

Compare the brown-skinned pointy-eared cleric to Redcloak seen from behind:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0701.html

I wouldn't rule out the possibility that the pointy-eared cleric on the right is some kind of goblinoid.

[Fyraltari]

Cleric is a tier 1 class. Note that the other usual tier-1 class, the wizard, is also nerfed for the goblins.
It is? How? Do they have less spell slots?

And they culturally don't go for druids.
According to this (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/38201/what-are-tiers-and-what-tier-is-each-class), that still leaves Archivist, Artificer and Erudite (Spell to Power variant). And that's only for tier-1.
Take a look at Oona, she's a Ranger (I think, can't find Beastmaster on this list) so tier 3-4 and yet she can keep up with Team Evil in a dungeon full of monster so powerful some of them gave our resident humanoid abomination XP.



Two thirds of the gods don't care if their clerics kill non-evil creatures.
My point was that it would make Good and Neutral mortals more blasé about killing them, as it makes it a culturally acceptable thing.


There are other monsters at that point. Goblins are low-level enemies to get your first couple of levels with.
While I get that logic, well, see above about Oona and those other monsters have actual godly protectors in Fenrir, Thrym, Surtur and Tiamat for example.

[woweedd]

It is? How? Do they have less spell slots?

According to this (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/38201/what-are-tiers-and-what-tier-is-each-class), that still leaves Archivist, Artificer and Erudite (Spell to Power variant). And that's only for tier-1.
Take a look at Oona, she's a Ranger (I think, can't find Beastmaster on this list) so tier 3-4 and yet she can keep up with Team Evil in a dungeon full of monster so powerful some of them gave our resident humanoid abomination XP.


My point was that it would make Good and Neutral mortals more blasé about killing them, as it makes it a culturally acceptable thing.


While I get that logic, well, see above about Oona and those other monsters have actual godly protectors in Fenrir, Thrym, Surtur and Tiamat for example.
(Emphasis mine.)
Goblins typically have low INT, which is the stat that powers Wizard's spells, making it harder for them to learn high level spells, as well as limiting their spells-per-day and save DC.

[Fyraltari]

Oh, so it is a stat thing, okay.

[Emanick]

Oh, so it is a stat thing, okay.

I don't think it is, actually. Goblins have a listed Intelligence score of 10, at least in-universe. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0090.html) That's perfectly average.

Redcloak does mention something about goblinoids not exactly being predisposed towards arcane magic (I don't remember the exact quote, and as I've loaned out my copy of Start of Darkness, I can't check it), but that's not the same thing as being too stupid to be good wizards.

[mjasghar]

In the ninth panel of strip 999 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html) there is a Western pantheon priest with goblin-like head.
Look again - that panel shows a lot of elves and the ears lol more like the other elves so it’s more likely a bald brown skinned elf
In the panel showing the Twelve there’s also a green skinned green haired priest - not sure if that’s a goblinoid (the twelve area seems to be a grab bag of every earth culture that isn’t European or sand and sandals (even then azure city wasn’t that oriental))

[Fyraltari]

He has hair though, so I think he is a (Half-?)Orc possibly from one of the islands.

[Kish]

Goblins have generally awful stats compared to PC races, but nothing that specifically cripples them as wizards. Their ability score modifiers are +2 Dexterity, -2 Strength, -2 Charisma.

[woweedd]

In the panel showing the Twelve there’s also a green skinned green haired priest - not sure if that’s a goblinoid (the twelve area seems to be a grab bag of every earth culture that isn’t European or sand and sandals (even then azure city wasn’t that oriental)
Um...They're basically fantasy Japan. What are you talking about? Plus, we've seen before (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0501.html) that the South has pastiches of pretty much every Asian culture. Also, i'm pretty sure that guy, who, for reference, is Pig's High Priest, is an Orc or Half-Orc, as is the priest of Tyr, I would guess. Goblins are smaller, and their skin is a different shade of green.

Goblins have generally awful stats compared to PC races, but nothing that specifically cripples them as wizards. Their ability score modifiers are +2 Dexterity, -2 Strength, -2 Charisma.
Exactly. The goblin's problem isn't not having access to Tier One classes. It's having stats that are two points behind the PC races, and, thus, not generally being able to take full advantage of ANY class levels, let alone PC class levels, until they've already leveled up enough to get some stat boosts. Add the fact that their population is thinned very frequently by hordes of overpowered meatheads looking for XP(better known as adventurers), and the result is that they just don't have enough time to build up power, or organize their society beyond the tribal level.

[Fyraltari]

Also, i'm pretty sure that guy, who, for reference, is Pig's High priest

How do you know that?

[woweedd]

How do you know that?
They're sitting in the same circle as the Twelve Gods when they showed up to Miko, and they match. Compare:
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0407.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html
Notice how the rat man is sitting in the same position as the god Rat? Or how the High Priest at the top mirrors Dragon, who is the leader of the pantheon? The green guy matches Pig's position.

[Fyraltari]

That is neat if true (which it probably is) but what make you say the guy on top (I assume you mean in front of us, circles have no top) is the High Priest of Dragon?

EDIT: Huh, there's a colouring mistake on him, you can make out the tree behind him through his face and hat.

[woweedd]

That is neat if true (which it probably is) but what make you say the guy on top (I assume you mean in front of us, circles have no top) is the High Priest of Dragon?

EDIT: Huh, there's a colouring mistake on him, you can make out the tree behind him through his face and hat.
Inference. He's in the same position as Dragon, and his position at the head of the table would suggest he's "in charge", so to speak.

[Fyraltari]

Inference. He's in the same position as Dragon, and his position at the head of the table would suggest he's "in charge", so to speak.

It's a round table, all positions are the same.

You've used his being the High Priest of Dragon as an argument for why their seats are important. And now, you use his seat as a the reason why he's Dragon's High Priest. That's

*puts on suglasses

circular reasonning.

YEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!

[Kish]

Either he's in the same position as Dragon in the other strip woweedd linked, or the anthropomorphic rat is not Rat's high priest.

I think "you can deduce which priest goes with which god by comparing these strips and assuming the rat is Rat's priest" is a pretty strong case, for my part.

[Fyraltari]

Either he's in the same position as Dragon in the other strip woweedd linked, or the anthropomorphic rat is not Rat's high priest.

I think "you can deduce which priest goes with which god by comparing these strips and assuming the rat is Rat's priest" is a pretty strong case, for my part.

Oh yeah, I totally agree about that, and I think it's neat, I was just confused as to why woweedd used this guy being Dragon's priest as an argument for their seating order being relevant.

Also that these guys are the only priests who decided to do the whole thing sitting down is funny to me, but I don't know why.

[martianmister]

Look again - that panel shows a lot of elves and the ears lol more like the other elves so it’s more likely a bald brown skinned elf
In the panel showing the Twelve there’s also a green skinned green haired priest - not sure if that’s a goblinoid (the twelve area seems to be a grab bag of every earth culture that isn’t European or sand and sandals (even then azure city wasn’t that oriental))

Their ears don't look like elf ears though, compared to other elves in the same panel.

[woweedd]

Oh yeah, I totally agree about that, and I think it's neat, I was just confused as to why woweedd used this guy being Dragon's priest as an argument for their seating order being relevant.

Also that these guys are the only priests who decided to do the whole thing sitting down is funny to me, but I don't know why.
Yeah, i'll cop, that was circular reasoning.

[Linneris]

Redcloak does mention something about goblinoids not exactly being predisposed towards arcane magic (I don't remember the exact quote, and as I've loaned out my copy of Start of Darkness, I can't check it), but that's not the same thing as being too stupid to be good wizards.

Here's the quote in question (SoD page 30).

Right-Eye: OK, then, shall I reintroduce you to the most powerful goblin wizard we have met since the town was burned?
Goblin Wizard: pork!
Redcloak: Fine, I admit that maybe our people aren't exactly genetically predisposed to be masters of arcane magic — but then let's find a kobold half-dragon or an ogre mage or a...a...an awakened chipmunk! Anything but a human!

[The Pilgrim]

It's a possibility, yes, but I don't see what makes it more likely than the alternative (well some gods would have issues with treating their followers as like that, but certainly not all).

Good morning. Sorry for the late reply, but in the last days I did not have enought time to deliver a proper one.

Ok. Let's recap from the beggining.

We know that the Goblins did not worship anyone before the ascension of the Dark One.

The OP raises the question of whenever the Goblins had souls before that, because he finds hard to understand why the Gods would neglect to harvest so many perfetly valid "soul power".

My answer to the question of why the Gods ignored the Goblins as a source of "soul power" is:

Because the goblins were created as cannon fodder. And in the eyes of the Gods they were more valuable in that role than as a potential source of "soul power".

Why not have both?

Because allowing the Goblins to be followers of the Gods would raise a lot of inconveniences.

For example, the message "you can freely kill goblins for XP" is a lot easier to understand and follow than the message "before you kill a goblin, you need to check if they are followers of mine or not. Because even as I am an Evil God and I do not care about them, I still prefer that you slaughter Goblins following other Gods. And by the way, check that they aren't followers of that God or that other one because either I am good pals with him or I do not want to risk him retaliating on my more worthy followers. And..."

Nah, that would be needlesy complicated.

A further complication is if a God decides to grab the goblins, and initiates a fight with other Gods trying to do the same. That could escalate into a full divine war. For control of... the things that were supposed to be cannon fodder.

Nah.

And in any case, if clerics begin to preach and convert goblins, the final result will be that goblins will be viewed by other races as equals, instead than as cannon fodder. So what would the Gods have to do? Create another cannon fodder race?

Nah.

Better leave the goblins as godless beasts, free for clerics to hunt without fear of consequences.

[Adeptus]

Or maybe goblins always had souls, but having no place to go after death, stayed around to provide the quiddity that was needed to allow one of their own to ascend.

I like this interpretation.

[Fyraltari]

Yeah, i'll cop, that was circular reasoning.
Happens to the best of us.

Good morning. Sorry for the late reply, but in the last days I did not have enought time to deliver a proper one.
Hello!


Ok. Let's recap from the beggining.

We know that the Goblins did not worship anyone before the ascension of the Dark One.

The OP raises the question of whenever the Goblins had souls before that, because he finds hard to understand why the Gods would neglect to harvest so many perfetly valid "soul power".

My answer to the question of why the Gods ignored the Goblins as a source of "soul power" is:

Because the goblins were created as cannon fodder. And in the eyes of the Gods they were more valuable in that role than as a potential source of "soul power".

Why not have both?

Because allowing the Goblins to be followers of the Gods would raise a lot of inconveniences.

For example, the message "you can freely kill goblins for XP" is a lot easier to understand and follow than the message "before you kill a goblin, you need to check if they are followers of mine or not. Because even as I am an Evil God and I do not care about them, I still prefer that you slaughter Goblins following other Gods. And by the way, check that they aren't followers of that God or that other one because either I am good pals with him or I do not want to risk him retaliating on my more worthy followers. And..."
But your followers dying is how the gods get soul power. And evil gods tend to see infighting in a social darwinist light don't they? As in "well if minion A beat the crap out of minion B then that means minion B wasn't very valuable to begin with". And I don't see good or netral gods trying to get followers from a group they sent to the chopping block.




A further complication is if a God decides to grab the goblins, and initiates a fight with other Gods trying to do the same. That could escalate into a full divine war. For control of... the things that were supposed to be cannon fodder.

Nah.
They are not warring over the humans are they?


And in any case, if clerics begin to preach and convert goblins, the final result will be that goblins will be viewed by other races as equals,
Actually I can totally see it go the other way:
"Why can't we just live in peace with the goblins?
-They worship a chaotic evil god! They could attack us at any moment, we have to destroy them!"



Better leave the goblins as godless beasts, free for clerics to hunt without fear of consequences.
Clerics fight other Clerics all the time without fear of consequence.


Does that sound irrational and impractical to you?

[real world religions and slavery]

So, in the end, the prospect is not as weird. Has happened before in our world.
Hohohohohoho. I am not touching that with a ten-meter pole, thankyouverymuch.

[The Pilgrim]

Hohohohohoho. I am not touching that with a ten-meter pole, thankyouverymuch.

You are right. Better if I cut that part out. Thank you.

[Rrmcklin]

Interesting question. Perhaps the goblins did not have souls at first? But they thought they did (or perhaps other races thought they did). And much like the astral plane, those thoughts influenced reality. And so goblins formed souls.

Or maybe goblins always had souls, but having no place to go after death, stayed around to provide the quiddity that was needed to allow one of their own to ascend.


I like this interpretation.

Having a soul has nothing to do with worshipping a god or not, and people who don't worship gods still pass on to the afterlife.

Roy isn't a devoted worshipper of any gods, but he still went to the Lawful Good afterlife for Northerners.

[woweedd]

Having a soul has nothing to do with worshipping a god or not, and people who don't worship gods still pass on to the afterlife.

Roy isn't a devoted worshipper of any gods, but he still went to the Lawful Good afterlife for Northerners.
Um..Your afterlife doesn't vary at all based on what Gods you worshipped, unless you were a Cleric. Heck, we see Southerners climbing the mountain with Roy!

[Kish]

Exactly, and thus going from "they didn't worship anyone" to "they didn't have souls" is a huge, insupportable, and grotesque jump. Neutral Evil goblin dies before the Dark One ascends: Neutral Evil goblin goes to Hades. Neutral Good goblin dies before the Dark One ascends: Neutral Good goblin goes to Elysium.

[Fyraltari]

Um..Your afterlife doesn't vary at all based on what Gods you worshipped, unless you were a Cleric. Heck, we see Southerners climbing the mountain with Roy!

Wait is it only Clerics or deeply religious people in general who join their deity of choice in the afterlife? Because if it's only the Clerics, well that's kind of arbitrary, and kind of sucks for the Clerics who are separated from loved ones, the laypeople believers who don't get to join their god and the gods who get a small fraction of the souls who worship them?

And if it's every deeply religious person, I can totally see those Azurites climbing besides Roy representing Azure City irreligious population. Except for the Bandana Paladin but he had a Blue Archon with him, so I think there was something going on there.

[Rrmcklin]

Um..Your afterlife doesn't vary at all based on what Gods you worshipped, unless you were a Cleric. Heck, we see Southerners climbing the mountain with Roy!

I thought there was something about people from different continents crawling different sides of the mountain or something? I'm sure I had heard that before.

If not, I stand correct it, but that wasn't the main point of the post. The main point is that Roy isn't a devout worshiper of any god, and yet he still went to an alignment plane after death. We've been given no reason to assume the same wouldn't be true for goblins pre-The Dark One.

[Kish]

Except for the Bandana Paladin but he had a Blue Archon with him, so I think there was something going on there.
Can you clarify this? What do you mean by "something going on"? Having an archon with you in Celestia is entirely expected.

[Rrmcklin]

Also, we don't exactly know how souls work here. Are the gods directly creating them or is it just something that just sort of... pops into existence with mortals?

Because we know the gods get power from souls, but if they're the ones creating the souls, at least on the surface the whole process seems a bit circular.

[Fyraltari]

Can you clarify this? What do you mean by "something going on"? Having an archon with you in Celestia is entirely expected.

Yes but his was blue (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0493.html), contrary to everybody else who get a yellow one, so it looks like his situation is different from everybody else's.

I know next to nothing about DnD, so maybe it's just that being a paladin means you get a blue archon who's only difference with the yellow one is color and +3 holy damage against all ambidextrous undead every second thurday of the month. Or maybe it means he's from another plane and has been sent on a mission. I dunno.

[LadyEowyn]

Yes but his was blue (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0493.html), contrary to everybody else who get a yellow one, so it looks like his situation is different from everybody else's.

I know next to nothing about DnD, so maybe it's just that being a paladin means you get a blue archon who's only difference with the yellow one is color and +3 holy damage against all ambidextrous undead every second thurday of the month. Or maybe it means he's from another plane and has been sent on a mission. I dunno.

Yellow's the colour of the Northern Gods, blue's the colour of the Southern Gods. Roy, with the yellow archon, is from the northern continent; the guy from Azure City, on the southern continent, has a blue archon.

Seems like a person's archon matches the colour of their continent's pantheon.

[LadyEowyn]

Um..Your afterlife doesn't vary at all based on what Gods you worshipped, unless you were a Cleric. Heck, we see Southerners climbing the mountain with Roy!

A person's afterlife doesn't appear to be generally dependent on which pantheon they follow, but there do appear to be some species-specific exceptions.

Durkon would (if he stayed dead) go to Valhalla rather than Celestia despite being Lawful Good. That may be dwarf-specific. It also seems, from Jirix's account of the afterlife, that goblins who follow the Dark One go to a goblin-specific afterlife, or a goblin-specific section of one of the main afterlifes.

[Fyraltari]

Yellow's the colour of the Northern Gods, blue's the colour of the Southern Gods. Roy, with the yellow archon, is from the northern continent; the guy from Azure City, on the southern continent, has a blue archon.

Seems like a person's archon matches the colour of their continent's pantheon.

How much you wanna bet that the guy who was born under the sign of Pig, third panel, bottom (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0493.html), was from the South?

[LadyEowyn]

How much you wanna bet that the guy who was born under the sign of Pig, third panel, bottom (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0493.html), was from the south?

Valid point.

[woweedd]

Wait is it only Clerics or deeply religious people in general who join their deity of choice in the afterlife? Because if it's only the Clerics, well that's kind of arbitrary, and kind of sucks for the Clerics who are separated from loved ones, the laypeople believers who don't get to join their god and the gods who get a small fraction of the souls who worship them?

And if it's every deeply religious person, I can totally see those Azurites climbing besides Roy representing Azure City irreligious population. Except for the Bandana Paladin but he had a Blue Archon with him, so I think there was something going on there.
First of all, I think also the deeply religious, yes. Secondly, even if it were only Clerics, the Gods would till get fuel. In D&D if a non-religious person dies, then they go to an alignment plane which fuels...Every deity who shares that alignment. Not as much as a full worshipper, but still a bit.

A person's afterlife doesn't appear to be generally dependent on which pantheon they follow, but there do appear to be some species-specific exceptions.

Durkon would (if he stayed dead) go to Valhalla rather than Celestia despite being Lawful Good. That may be dwarf-specific. It also seems, from Jirix's account of the afterlife, that goblins who follow the Dark One go to a goblin-specific afterlife, or a goblin-specific section of one of the main afterlifes.
Durkon's a Cleric. They go to the plane of whatever God they worshipped, regardless of their own alignment. Also, i'm fairly certain Jirix just went to The Dark One's personal headquarters, located within one of the alignment planes, probably Acheron (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acheron_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons)), if I had to guess. Presumbly, Goblins who get sorted there naturally gravitate towards The Dark One, for obvious reasons.

[hamishspence]

Durkon would (if he stayed dead) go to Valhalla rather than Celestia despite being Lawful Good. That may be dwarf-specific.

I would say it's Thor-specific rather than dwarf-specific - Thor resides in Valhalla, so Durkon goes to Valhalla.


. Roy, with the yellow archon, is from the northern continent; the guy from Azure City, on the southern continent, has a blue archon.

Seems like a person's archon matches the colour of their continent's pantheon.

Roy's archon is orange and speaks in orange text. The vast majority of archons we see in-strip are yellow and speak yellow text:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0194.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0486.html

except for that paladin's one. Maybe it's more a way of making it clear that this particular archon is the one assigned to Roy, when multiple archons are present?

[martianmister]

How much you wanna bet that the guy who was born under the sign of Pig, third panel, bottom (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0493.html), was from the South?

Maybe he worships a northern god?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I would say it's Thor-specific rather than dwarf-specific - Thor resides in Valhalla, so Durkon goes to Valhalla.



Roy's archon is orange and speaks in orange text. The vast majority of archons we see in-strip are yellow and speak yellow text:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0194.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0486.html

except for that paladin's one. Maybe it's more a way of making it clear that this particular archon is the one assigned to Roy, when multiple archons are present?

Yeah, based on the three reference points we seem to have, including how the vast majority of the dead are yellow, I'd posit that a more parsimonious explanation is that colour indicates class levels. Yellow: none, merely NPC levels. Orange: fighter. Blue: Paladin.

Not sure I buy it as a theory - I agree the blue would be connected to the Southern gods - so maybe its a bit more "servants of a god get an archon of the appropriate quiddity colour", and Roy got orange... no idea.

Grey Wolf

[martianmister]

Maybe Roy got orange because he's a D&D world version of an Atheist?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Maybe Roy got orange because he's a D&D world version of an Atheist?

I would expect most of the people climbing the mountain at the same time as Roy to be civilians from Azure city, not Northerners. There was no queue on Roy's side of the mountain, after all, so the vast majority of the dead of that day were from the South, for obvious reasons.

Grey Wolf

[martianmister]

I would expect most of the people climbing the mountain at the same time as Roy to be civilians from Azure city, not Northerners. There was no queue on Roy's side of the mountain, after all, so the vast majority of the dead of that day were from the South, for obvious reasons.

Grey Wolf

Other than two Azurites, there is one Halfling, one Dwarf and one blonde woman. Doesn't look like typical civilians from Azure City.

[Larre Gannd]

I would expect most of the people climbing the mountain at the same time as Roy to be civilians from Azure city, not Northerners. There was no queue on Roy's side of the mountain, after all, so the vast majority of the dead of that day were from the South, for obvious reasons.

Grey Wolf

The only one we know was from Azure city had a blue archon, so I am guessing that it would be northerners with yellow and Azurites (which means blue) with blue

[Fyraltari]

Roy's archon is orange and speaks in orange text. The vast majority of archons we see in-strip are yellow and speak yellow text:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0194.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0486.html

except for that paladin's one. Maybe it's more a way of making it clear that this particular archon is the one assigned to Roy, when multiple archons are present?
Good catch the mystery thickens.

Maybe he worships a northern god?
I'm not really sure on what would be the point to add a tweak like that to a(n almost literal) spear-holder without adressing it, especially if it makes something else more confusing. If the rule is "followers of Southerner gods get blue and Northener get yellow/orange" why go to the trouble of having a visually Southern bit-character worship a northern god without telling us?


I would expect most of the people climbing the mountain at the same time as Roy to be civilians from Azure city, not Northerners. There was no queue on Roy's side of the mountain, after all, so the vast majority of the dead of that day were from the South, for obvious reasons.

Grey Wolf
I don't see what that has to do with Roy being a sort of atheist (apatheist?).

The only one we know was from Azure city had a blue archon, so I am guessing that it would be northerners with yellow and Azurites (which means blue) with blue
Ahem.


How much you wanna bet that the guy who was born under the sign of Pig, third panel, bottom (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0493.html), was from the South?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I don't see what that has to do with Roy being a sort of atheist (apatheist?).

For Orange to be the colour of atheism, yellow and blue must be the colours of worship of north and south. Which would mean that climbing the mountain at the same time as Roy we see one single southerner worshiper, and everyone else is a northerner worshiper. Given that the South just had a catastrophic battle and there are massive queues, it seems unlikely there aren't more southern worshiper on the mountain.

Grey Wolf

[Fyraltari]

For Orange to be the colour of atheism, yellow and blue must be the colours of worship of north and south. Which would mean that, climbing the mountain at the same time as Roy we see one single southerner worshiper, and everyone else is a northerner worshiper. Given that the South just had a catastrophic battle and there are massive queues, it seems unlikely there aren't more southern worshiper on the mountain.

Grey Wolf

Okay, I get it.

But then maybe orange is atheism, yellow is religious laypeople and blue is clergypeople (either as a Paladin or Cleric, Favored Soul or whatever).

[woweedd]

Okay, I get it.

But then maybe orange is atheism, yellow is religious laypeople and blue is clergypeople (either as a Paladin or Cleric, Favored Soul or whatever).
Why exactly does there need to be a pattern? If I remember correctly, Lantern Archons in D&D can be whatever color they want, and even change color at will.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Why exactly does there need to be a pattern? If I remember correctly, Lantern Archons in D&D can be whatever color they want, and even change color at will.

Because this is the Lawful (something) plane, and it is likely that there are rules for everything. Written into their 10 foot tall, ablaze in holy fire Book. And that if it really was "the most appropriate colour for the individual", I'd expect a bit more variation in the yellows.

Grey Wolf

[hamishspence]

If I remember correctly, Lantern Archons in D&D can be whatever color they want, and even change color at will.

Pathfinder Lantern Archons, yes:

https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/outsiders/archon/lantern-archon/

A lantern archon always glows, usually as bright as a torch. They have total control over the color of light they shed, and take great pleasure in modulating their colors and brightness in time to music or to entertain other creatures.

Possibly not so much in 2e-era material:

http://www.rilmani.org/timaresh/Lantern_archon

The color of a lantern archon is the only convenient way for a mortal to tell them apart; while they're hardly as unique as fingerprints, they are at least a constant for any given one.

can anyone confirm if the wiki is right or not in this case?


3e material, as far as I can tell, doesn't say anything about their colour or colour variance.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

But then maybe orange is atheism, yellow is religious laypeople and blue is clergypeople (either as a Paladin or Cleric, Favored Soul or whatever).

Sure, that works. It's as good as, if not better than, my own "based on your class" guess. But that's all it is.

Grey Wolf

[Fyraltari]

Yes, that is the idea.

[wumpus]

Durkon's a Cleric. They go to the plane of whatever God they worshipped, regardless of their own alignment. Also, i'm fairly certain Jirix just went to The Dark One's personal headquarters, located within one of the alignment planes, probably Acheron (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acheron_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons)), if I had to guess. Presumbly, Goblins who get sorted there naturally gravitate towards The Dark One, for obvious reasons.

Clerics can only be one degree "off" their god's alignment, so under the normal rules Durkon wouldn't go to Valhalla. More likely it is either due to the dwarf specific system or the Giant just wants Thor in Valhalla and would have had to use some different pantheon if he wanted to stay in the rules. Thanks to a recent callback, I think it has been asserted that Durkon worshiping Thor predates the change from OOTS being a "silly sendup of D&D rules to drive people to the Playground" to "an amazing epic work by the Giant that became the basis of the Playground", so I'm guessing just ignoring the rules became the obvious option.

[hamishspence]

Clerics can only be one degree "off" their god's alignment, so under the normal rules Durkon wouldn't go to Valhalla.

There are plenty of notable exceptions in D&D splatbooks though. So there was already precedent.

[Linneris]

It was established that Durkon was a cleric of Thor way back in #9, before the comic even had a plot, and probably before Rich decided on the Order's alignments. There are indeed exceptions to the "at most one alignment away" rule, and we probably should just assume that Thor allowing LG clerics (at least among dwarves) is one of them. If you need an in-universe reason, it's probably because Thor is well-respected in dwarven culture because he told them about Hel's bet, thus sowing the seeds for the honor society that made dwarves Usually Lawful.

[hamishspence]

There are indeed exceptions to the "at most one alignment away" rule, and we probably should just assume that Thor allowing LG clerics (at least among dwarves) is one of them. If you need an in-universe reason, it's probably because Thor is well-respected in dwarven culture because he told them about Hel's bet, thus sowing the seeds for the honor society that made dwarves Usually Lawful.

Thor is well-respected enough that there are more dwarven Thor worshippers out there than human Thor worshippers:


A human can worship Thor if he wants, certainly, but he is much more popular among the dwarves.

[Rrmcklin]

There's only a conflict if you assume Thor is Chaotic Good. Which he easily could be, but there's been no direct confirmation of that, and you could probably spin "Neutral with Chaotic leanings" or something just as easily.

But either way, does Thor's alignment actually matter to the story (well, besides being good)?

[Linneris]

Well, while not explicitly stated in the comic, it seems a reasonable assumption that OOTS's Valhalla is located in Ysgard, which is the Chaotic Good-ish Outer Plane. Though... Does a god's Outer Plane of residence need to match their alignment?

[The Pilgrim]

It always seemed to me that the "one-step" rule was intended to keep Players from deviating the behaviour of their Cleric PCs from the philosophy of the God they were supposed to follow. Given the amount of power players around, something had to be done to stop players from trying to play a CE character following a LG deity.

However in the case of OOTS, Thor has pretty strong reasons to allow LG dwarven followers. In fact, it could be argued that one of the main objectives of Loki's prank was to force Chaotic Thor to raise the most Lawful-driven society on all the planet.

[hamishspence]

Does a god's Outer Plane of residence need to match their alignment?

Nope.

Grummsh, in standard 3.5 D&D, is CE. Maglubiyet is NE (with mild Chaotic tendencies - he offers the Chaos domain). Both reside in Acheron (LN with Evil tendencies plane).

[Linneris]

In fact, it could be argued that one of the main objectives of Loki's prank was to force Chaotic Thor to raise the most Lawful-driven society on all the planet.

Nice theory - and it certainly sounds like something Loki would do, just for the Hel of of it.

[Larre Gannd]

Clerics can only be one degree "off" their god's alignment, so under the normal rules Durkon wouldn't go to Valhalla. More likely it is either due to the dwarf specific system or the Giant just wants Thor in Valhalla and would have had to use some different pantheon if he wanted to stay in the rules. Thanks to a recent callback, I think it has been asserted that Durkon worshiping Thor predates the change from OOTS being a "silly sendup of D&D rules to drive people to the Playground" to "an amazing epic work by the Giant that became the basis of the Playground", so I'm guessing just ignoring the rules became the obvious option.

I never fully understood why clerics of gods are not simply always lawful, but obey the Good, Neutral or Evil aspect. My reasoning is that a cleric obeys their god, and even if their god is chaotic, making them act chaotic, that still is following their god’s wishes, making them lawful. It is often forgotten that the alignment system (Law neu cha) is not based on laws of the country, necessarily. If someone is a hit man for a living, then they are lawful, since they are following the orders of their client, for instance.

[Rrmcklin]

Because that's a pretty reductive view of Law and Chaos.

Being Chaotic doesn't mean you can't believe in a cause or have people you're willing to follow. Otherwise Hailey and Elan wouldn't be Chaotic.

[Devils_Advocate]

I'm guessing that Roy's Archon is a non-standard color to distinguish the plot-relevant character from background characters, and the blue archon is blue simply in keeping with some archons having non-standard colors, as has been established by... Roy's Archon having a non-standard color.


I'm trying to say that people who, as Kish puts it, are "ignoring what Rich said and everything that either the comic or D&D supports in favor of something that you like better", and using "Death of the Author" as their excuse, and object loudly when their statements are not taken seriously, are a common forum problem.
What does "not taken seriously" mean in this context? I ask because if it means "decried as impermissible heresy", I think I'm kinda on their side here.


(Why is it a problem? Because it poisons debate and leads to bad feeling).
Dissenting opinions about a webcomic shouldn't poison debate and lead to bad feelings. If they do, that's an indication that something's pretty wrong, and trying to silence the dissenting opinions is treating the symptom and not the disease. Maybe the problem is with how those opinions are expressed. Maybe it's with how they're received. Maybe it's both, or neither. I dunno, man, but it's hard to see how dissenting opinions about a webcomic could be a problem except in the context of other, bigger problems. There shouldn't even be an issue with people discussing hypothetical scenarios that plainly directly contradict the story!

And if you do insist on putting so much weight on Rich's word... Well, you helpfully (meta)quoted Rich earlier saying that his comments on the message board aren't canon! There have been specific exceptions since then, but a specific exception only trumps the general rule in that specific case. That's what makes the general rule the general rule! (You seem familiar enough with D&D 3.5 to be well-acquainted with this principle.) So barring an explicit reversal of this position, I'm going to assume that The Giant generally wants his comments not to be considered canon. At the very least, it seems remarkably dubious to assume that he generally does want his comments to be considered canon.


the term is not supposed to be used that way, and does not work the way they think it does.
I'm sure that we could have a lengthy discussion of the relative merits of linguistic prescriptivism and linguistic descriptivism, but that seems like it warrants its own thread, so for now I'll just note that not everyone subscribes to the former perspective.


"Elf-like being with hairstyle exposing at least one ear" is seen on the far left (purple hair, green cape). Another, in the back row, to the left of the aisle, has purplish hair tied with a green band. There is also a drow, in the back row, to the right of the aisle. The ear does not look as wide, proportionally, on all three.

Compare the brown-skinned pointy-eared cleric to Redcloak seen from behind:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0701.html

I wouldn't rule out the possibility that the pointy-eared cleric on the right is some kind of goblinoid.

Their ears don't look like elf ears though, compared to other elves in the same panel.
Especially given the context, I think that it's more likely that that elf's ears were just drawn differently due to baldness than that that was supposed to be a goblinoid. I think that someone once noted that bald characters tend to have their eyes positioned higher up, presumably just because there's more room for them there. Or positioned differently, anyway.

That said, we do see a goblin with hair whose ears look typical (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0105.html). Maybe this particular effect just doesn't work the other way around, though.


Huh, there's a colouring mistake on him, you can make out the tree behind him through his face and hat.
I didn't realize this when I first saw this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html), but I think he's meant to be translucent, like the floating figure on another page helpfully recently linked (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0501.html). He isn't engulfed in the blue glow around him; it's behind him from our perspective, like everyone else's. The difference is, we can see through him!

Other things that I've noticed now that I examine that panel more closely:

- The figure in the 5 o'clock position has significantly smaller hands than the neighboring ones, and is presumably a halfling or gnome.
- There's a pool of water in the table they're sitting around.

(I'm sure that some more attentive readers are wondering how I could have missed those things in the first place. Look, I dumped Wisdom, okay? My attention to detail is definitely not the best.)


allowing the Goblins to be followers of the Gods would raise a lot of inconveniences.
I suppose that accepting goblin worshipers could create a sort of conflict of interest for the gods, given the goblins' intended role. So maybe it's forbidden on those grounds.


Because this is the Lawful (something) plane, and it is likely that there are rules for everything. Written into their 10 foot tall, ablaze in holy fire Book.
"There's only one right way to do anything" is Mechanus's deal, not Celestia's. (And I certainly hope that even that's an exaggeration. It's appropriate to be indifferent to some things, which ought to register with those who prize appropriateness.)


Maybe Roy got orange because he's a D&D world version of an Atheist?

I don't see what that has to do with Roy being a sort of atheist (apatheist?).
I think the applicable description is just "not all that religious".


I thought there was something about people from different continents crawling different sides of the mountain or something? I'm sure I had heard that before.
The worshipers of different pantheons are processed in different locations. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0486.html)


Wait is it only Clerics or deeply religious people in general who join their deity of choice in the afterlife? Because if it's only the Clerics, well that's kind of arbitrary, and kind of sucks for the Clerics who are separated from loved ones, the laypeople believers who don't get to join their god and the gods who get a small fraction of the souls who worship them?
An alignment-segregated afterlife also separates people from their loved ones. Mind you, I don't think we've seen much evidence of how easy or hard it is for a soul to move from one Outer Plane to another. We have seen Roy's and Eugene's souls visit the Material Plane, albeit as incorporeal spirits, which means that they're at least not completely stuck. So that's encouraging.

Anyway, maybe it's just that individuals devoted to individual gods go their their respective gods, whereas someone who just worshiped a pantheon as a whole does not. The high priest of the Twelve Gods (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0456.html) shows up in line with everyone else (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0486.html), so it doesn't seem to be strictly based on class nor piety.


Does a god's Outer Plane of residence need to match their alignment?

Nope.

Grummsh, in standard 3.5 D&D, is CE. Maglubiyet is NE (with mild Chaotic tendencies - he offers the Chaos domain). Both reside in Acheron (LN with Evil tendencies plane).
Yep. The "one step" rule is only for deities and their clerics, not for deities and their planes of residence. A god can jolly well set up shop in a plane of opposing alignment, and this is most likely for a pantheon's headquarters, where the pantheon's members live presumably because that's where their family or superior(s) or whatever live; in such a case, the plane probably wouldn't be every member's first pick if they all had independent realms.

Thor doesn't have to be personally Chaotic to live in Valhalla.


I never fully understood why clerics of gods are not simply always lawful, but obey the Good, Neutral or Evil aspect. My reasoning is that a cleric obeys their god, and even if their god is chaotic, making them act chaotic, that still is following their god’s wishes, making them lawful. It is often forgotten that the alignment system (Law neu cha) is not based on laws of the country, necessarily. If someone is a hit man for a living, then they are lawful, since they are following the orders of their client, for instance.
A creature's alignment represents its general moral and personal attitudes. Saying "I get to pick which rules I follow" indicates a general disregard for rules.


It also seems, from Jirix's account of the afterlife, that goblins who follow the Dark One go to a goblin-specific afterlife, or a goblin-specific section of one of the main afterlifes.
If "afterlife" means "place where souls of the dead go", a goblin-specific afterlife can easily be a goblin-specific section of one of the main afterlives. That is, in fact, how divine realms work in the Great Wheel.


we know the gods get power from souls, but if they're the ones creating the souls, at least on the surface the whole process seems a bit circular.
That just means that this particular revenue stream is not a product of Project BIFF.

https://assets.amuniversal.com/71727e809fb4012f2fe600163e41dd5b

[Peelee]

"There's only one right way to do anything" is Mechanus's deal, not Celestia's. (And I certainly hope that even that's an exaggeration. It's appropriate to be indifferent to some things, which ought to register with those who prize appropriateness.)

If you equate a dress code or uniform with totalitarianism, then yes, you would be making a good argument there.

[mjasghar]

There’s been inconsistencies in the game relating to who gets into godly domains and general dead people of that alignment - which leads to people being allowed into planes that don’t match their alignment since worshipper alignment can often fall well out of the 1 step
Roy is LG but not religious so gets put outside any realm as seemingly does his mother
Meanwhile the dwarves seem to all go to domains - but then they also seem to be a much more religious society, which may be an author thing that he doesn’t want to portray the protagonists as religious for whatever reason.

[Peelee]

There’s been inconsistencies in the game relating to who gets into godly domains and general dead people of that alignment - which leads to people being allowed into planes that don’t match their alignment since worshipper alignment can often fall well out of the 1 step
Roy is LG but not religious so gets put outside any realm as seemingly does his mother
Meanwhile the dwarves seem to all go to domains - but then they also seem to be a much more religious society, which may be an author thing that he doesn’t want to portray the protagonists as religious for whatever reason.

...what?

Roy (and his mother) got into Celestia. And Durkon, a protagonist, is extremely religious.

[Devils_Advocate]

If you equate a dress code or uniform with totalitarianism, then yes, you would be making a good argument there.
Had I equated a dress code or uniform with totalitarianism, your response would have made sense. As it is, it's rather out of left field, isn't it?

"There's only one right path" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1138.html) doesn't trouble me because it involves regulating appearance. I thought that it went without saying that there are other reasons someone might find that troubling.


...what?
Some souls go to afterlives based on their alignments, others based on religion.

[Peelee]

Had I equated a dress code or uniform with totalitarianism, your response would have made sense. As it is, it's rather out of left field, isn't it?
Not at all; you equated a pattern or prescripted guide to "there is only one way to do something." Given that we know that Celestia does things by the book, which refers to an actual factual book, that seemed like an odd position to take, to say the least. The Book could well contain an outline on how temhe various colors worked, but you assumed it to instead mean "one way or the highway," and disregarded the idea based on that assumption.

Some souls go to afterlives based on their alignments, others based on religion.

I would argue that souls go where they believe they should at first. Roy could have been kicked over to a different afterlife despite being Lawful Good. But he went to Celestia first because that's his desired afterlife, while Durkon went to Valhalla first because that was his desired afterlife, despite them both being Lawful Good. It seems more like the desired afterlife gets first crack at the soul, to accept or reject as they see fit.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

"There's only one right way to do anything" is Mechanus's deal, not Celestia's. (And I certainly hope that even that's an exaggeration. It's appropriate to be indifferent to some things, which ought to register with those who prize appropriateness.)

I can't decide if you are fighting a strawman, or you are actually saying that if there are any rules - such as, I don't know, the need to evaluate Roy regardless of any mitigation circumstances that may or may not be in effect - then it must be Mechanus where Roy ended.

Either way, I fail to see what point you think you are making, or how it in any way negates my suggestion that each supplicant gets a specific colour of archon based on whatever rules are written into the Book, just as it is certainly in there that the archon is named <supplicant's name>'s archon.

Grey Wolf

[Devils_Advocate]

it is likely that there are rules for everything.
Is the above quote only visible to me, or what?

I don't take "there are rules for everything" to be equivalent to "there are any rules". It's not that I'm unaware that people often engage in absurd hyperbole in whichever direction suits them, it's that I'd rather treat 9 insincere statements as sincere than treat 1 sincere statement as insincere.

If you want me to reply to what you mean, then I advise you to say what you mean and mean what you say.


Not at all; you equated a pattern or prescripted guide to "there is only one way to do something."
I equated "There are rules for everything" to "There's only one right way to do anything". If you want to dispute that by arguing that those assertions aren't equivalent, then go ahead. You'll then be criticizing something I actually did instead of something you only imagined I did, which would be progress.

If you equate "a pattern or prescripted guide" to "rules for everything", well, I disagree.


Given that we know that Celestia does things by the book, which refers to an actual factual book, that seemed like an odd position to take, to say the least. The Book could well contain an outline on how temhe various colors worked, but you assumed it to instead mean "one way or the highway," and disregarded the idea based on that assumption.
I didn't do that. You're not going to convince me that I did. I can read the quote that you responded to and see that I didn't do what you claim I did. It's not something that you're going to be able to trick me about.


I would argue that souls go where they believe they should at first. Roy could have been kicked over to a different afterlife despite being Lawful Good. But he went to Celestia first because that's his desired afterlife, while Durkon went to Valhalla first because that was his desired afterlife, despite them both being Lawful Good. It seems more like the desired afterlife gets first crack at the soul, to accept or reject as they see fit.
I never got the impression that Roy would have been declined entry for being "not Lawful Good enough" rather than "upon examination, actually Neutral Good". Also, a soul doesn't necessarily want to go where it thinks it should go; those are two different considerations.

But other than that, I think that that's the only model that I've seen anyone suggest where someone judging the soul, as we saw with Roy, really serves any purpose. If going to the most appropriate afterlife were automatic, the relevant assessment of character would already be done when they got there.

So... Yeah, I suppose that that's most probable.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

If you want me to reply to what you mean, then I advise you to say what you mean and mean what you say.

Physician, heal thyself. Have fun beating that strawman of yours. You won't get any help from me.

Grey Wolf

[Devils_Advocate]

Physician, heal thyself.
Where was I insincere?

It has been my experience that it is difficult to successfully guess what someone is trying to communicate. Trying to do so can leave people understandably annoyed when positions that they never expressed are falsely attributed to them.

As an example: Pelee responded to something that I did not state nor imply, as though it were a position of mine, and this irritated me.

In order to avoid that problem, I often respond to the plain meaning of someone's words, rather than attempt to interpret them non-literally. That way I at least respond to what was said. And if people say things other than what they mean, well, that's not really my fault that I can see.

Me responding to something that someone posted should not generally be taken as an insinuation that anyone believes it. I simply like to share my thoughts about, or inspired by, what has been posted.

[Peelee]

I equated "There are rules for everything" to "There's only one right way to do anything".
Oh, i getcha. That makes this way easier.

That's ridiculous, and you're clearly wrong. For example, let's say I get a speeding ticket. There are rules for how to handle this, but there's a lot of ways to do it; I could fight it in court, I could go and plead guilty to try to get a fine only and no points, I could go pay it in person, I could go to their website and pay online, I could...


Don't needlessly equate "rules exist" to "and so there is only one way to do everything" and you'll be fine.

[Fyraltari]

Pelee responded to something that I did not state nor imply.
Peelee

Sorry, but a man's gotta eat.