Hilgya: Xykon-level evil?

[Luna_Mayflower]

I don't need prophetic powers to tell that Hilgya is one of the most evil characters we've seen so far. "If I hurt you worse than you hurt me, good. That means I win." That's the kind of thing I'd expect from Xykon! I'm surprised Roy and the others are just letting her walk away. She's an unrepentant murderer. Haley took out Crystal for that sort of attitude. Hilgya will hurt more people. Is it just for Kudzu's sake that they're letting her go? She at least should face dwarven justice for her scam.

I'd appreciate it if someone could explain her thought processes on Durkon's proposal and why it was shallow and thoughtless? I've even seen a few people saying he deserved the Flame Strike! From what he was saying, it didn't sound thoughtless at all. He was sorry for his mistakes and wanted to fix them. The proposal was as much for Kudzu's sake as anything else. I mean sure, maybe Hilgya didn't want Durkon's help, but maybe her answer should've been "no" over "Flame Strike".

Sorry for not having a prophecy this time. I actually really liked Hilgya to begin with. But these last two strips have turned her into one of my most hated characters. I mean, at least Xykon is light-hearted and funny with his evil. Redcloak is doing what he thinks is right for his people. Hilgya reminds me of some of the Azure City nobles. Out for herself with little regard for others. Maybe this is me overthinking it, but remember that she didn't snap out of her domination gaze when the vampire took her child from her. Either she's got absolutely awful wisdom, or Kudzu is just another tool to her.

I guess I'll need to find a new waifu. :( At least Jake the Snake (Malack) is still my bae. :3

[hroþila]

No, Hilgya is not worse than Xykon. If you hurt her, she'll hurt you worse. Xykon doesn't need any pretext to hurt you.

Durkon was thoughtless in that he only considered what he wanted and not what Hilgya would want. He told her he would change her. That's bad. And yes, definitely, Hilgya's response was way out of line and totally Evil.

[Kish]

Let the record state that Luna finds the philosophy of Lawful Evil, as stated by Malack, preferable to that of Chaotic Evil, as stated by Hilgya.

[Luna_Mayflower]

No, Hilgya is not worse than Xykon. If you hurt her, she'll hurt you worse. Xykon doesn't need any pretext to hurt you.

Durkon was thoughtless in that he only considered what he wanted and not what Hilgya would want. He told her he would change her. That's bad. And yes, definitely, Hilgya's response was way out of line and totally Evil.

Definitely not worse than Xykon, but I would say her actions and attitude are on par. What I meant was that, as a character, she's less appealing than Xykon. Xykon's comedy helps to highlight that this is just a comic and his evil actions are cathartic. People like Xykon don't exist, or if they do they're very rare. Hilgya's attitude is one that's quite common nowadays, of vindictive retribution and feeling better as someone else suffers. Maybe not via a flame strike, but certainly in other ways. Durkon did not deserve a flame strike, no matter how thoughtless she believed him to be.

Maybe it hit home with me, though, as I've been "burnt" by people with Hilgya's attitude IRL.

I would say that Durkon was narrow minded, but not thoughtless. He wanted to help her. He never said he'd make her change. He accepted he made a mistake and, in his lawful good way, did what he thought was right to fix it. Sure, he didn't look at things from her point of view, but maybe he wanted to believe there was good in her, not just an unrepentant murderer.


Let the record state that Luna finds the philosophy of Lawful Evil, as stated by Malack, preferable to that of Chaotic Evil, as stated by Hilgya.

Wait, I can't remember if you're a fan or a foe! Hmm, but yes, yes I do. It doesn't help that Malack is so dreamy! Maybe if we'd actually seen Malack murder thousands to his god, I'd feel very different. Hmm...

[Peat]

No, Hilgya is not worse than Xykon. If you hurt her, she'll hurt you worse. Xykon doesn't need any pretext to hurt you.

Durkon was thoughtless in that he only considered what he wanted and not what Hilgya would want. He told her he would change her. That's bad. And yes, definitely, Hilgya's response was way out of line and totally Evil.

This.

Although I suppose Hilgya didn't need any motive of revenge when with the Linear Guild. I don't think she's Xykon, but she's clearly not all that nice.

I'd love to see Xykon's reaction if watching this though.



As for why they're letting her walk? I'm kinda curious as to why they're not making a bigger issue of Durkon's kid walking off with a pretty bad person and seemingly negligent parent. But then, they do have a world to save, and they haven't had the time to pool all their info on Hilgya, and all in all, it seems legit to me.


Definitely not worse than Xykon, but I would say her actions and attitude are on par. What I meant was that, as a character, she's less appealing than Xykon. Xykon's comedy helps to highlight that this is just a comic and his evil actions are cathartic. People like Xykon don't exist, or if they do they're very rare. Hilgya's attitude is one that's quite common nowadays, of vindictive retribution and feeling better as someone else suffers. Maybe not via a flame strike, but certainly in other ways. Durkon did not deserve a flame strike, no matter how thoughtless she believed him to be.

Maybe it hit home with me, though, as I've been "burnt" by people with Hilgya's attitude IRL.


I can get this though.

[Fyraltari]

This thread should prove to be... interesting.

Haley took out Crystal for that sort of attitude.No she took out Crystal for being a mass-murderer.

Hilgya will hurt more people. Is it just for Kudzu's sake that they're letting her go? She at least should face dwarven justice for her scam.
Why do people think she's gone? Do you really think she's just going to walk away into the sunset mid page? That the Order went to do some team strategizing doesn't mean they're done with her. For once Durkon won't let her go until they reach a solution regarding Kuzdu and for twice Roy explictly siad they're "tabl it, [I]for now".


I'd appreciate it if someone could explain her thought processes on Durkon's proposal and why it was shallow and thoughtless? I've even seen a few people saying he deserved the Flame Strike! From what he was saying, it didn't sound thoughtless at all. He was sorry for his mistakes and wanted to fix them. The proposal was as much for Kudzu's sake as anything else. I mean sure, maybe Hilgya didn't want Durkon's help, but maybe her answer should've been "no" over "Flame Strike".
Besides the fact that their one and only date ended in tears? These two are definitely not right for each other and marrying for the sake of the child in that case is a discutable strategy at best.
Also, proposing to someone by appealing to their sense of familial duty when you know they poisoned their former family-chosen spouse is definitely thoughtless. :smallwink:

All this speech really did was demonstrating that Durkon doesn't know Hilgya at all. Worse he thinks/thought he does, saying "I can fix you"to someone who hasn't asked for help is immensely condescending and frankly quite insulting.

Basically, it came from the right place but the delivery was all wrong and the proposal was just out of place.

Thats suree doesn't deserve a flame strike, but had Hilgya chosen to verbally chew him out, I'd have applauded.


Sorry for not having a prophecy this time. I actually really liked Hilgya to begin with. But these last two strips have turned her into one of my most hated characters.
I had about the same thing with Andi. Well I don't hate her but she seemed to have a few good points until it turned out she just had massive entitlement issues.

I mean, at least Xykon is light-hearted and funny with his evil.
Except when he's terrifying.

Redcloak is doing what he thinks is right for his people.
Debatable.

Hilgya reminds me of some of the Azure City nobles. Out for herself with little regard for others.
Yep she's the flavour of bad guy that most readers would have experience with in real life.

Maybe this is me overthinking it, but remember that she didn't snap out of her domination gaze when the vampire took her child from her. Either she's got absolutely awful wisdom, or Kudzu is just another tool to her.
She doesn't get additional will saves for reacting to her environment. As long as Durkon* didn't ask for her help in taking Kudzu off of her she wouldn't have a chance to break the Domination, no matter how much she cares for him.

[hroþila]

This.

Although I suppose Hilgya didn't need any motive of revenge when with the Linear Guild. I don't think she's Xykon, but she's clearly not all that nice.
Yes, absolutely, "you hurt me first" is not the only pretext she can work with - "someone else hurt me and sorry but you were in the way of my revenge" and "I have a mission, nothing personal" seem to work too. We haven't seen her go out of her way to hurt anyone just for s*** and giggles, though, which makes her a pretty different brand of Evil compared to Xykon or Belkar.

And yeah, what Luna said about Xykon being "less real" does make sense.

[MartianInvader]

If you think Hilgya's actions are on par with Xykon, I'd encourage you to compare their body counts. (Heck, if you don't count bodies that were already dead, and were to count raises/resurrections as anti-kills, Hilgya's count would be negative).

In any case, Hilgya is extremely chaotic, so I wouldn't expect any philosophy or set of rules to govern her behavior too closely, other than the high value she places on her personal freedom.

[TheTinyMan]

All praise the Mayflower!

Yeah...Hilgya is Chaotic with a capital C, and Evil with a capital E as far as I'm concerned. Maybe she's not exactly scenery-chewing levels of bad guy, but she pings pretty clearly to me.

But clearly her heart is so black that it interrupts the Prophetic Visions with its foulness! Perhaps with focus we can overcome it! What might exist in this fell creature's future, I wonder?

[Dopameanie]

I de-lurked for this:

I went from meh to fave character on hilgya. I love watching her character. I would invite her to bars and listen to her insult the people who hit on her. I would listen to her stories while drinking coffee as she dumps yet another packet of sugar in her cup. I would enjoy being in her life superficially and invite her to all my parties.

I do not want to be related to her, date her, or be her roommate. I feel pity for both Kudzu and Durkon.

But MAN what a good show to watch! “I reserve the right to respond to stupidity with cleansing divine fire” that’s a spectacular line! Y’all don’t have any small-doses friends? You’ve never enjoyed dating someone whom you KNOW is gonna leave a mess in 3 months? You’ve never had to try to justify your decisions to a bored looking police officer even ONCE?

I get it, she isn’t LG, not a role model for children, sure, but I don’t get all the hate. Hilgya is awesome. From a distance. Which, as spectators to a fictional story, we have the correct amount of distance to enjoy her!

[kiapet]

Naw, I feel like a comparison doesn't do justice to either flavor of Evil. Hilgya is basically selfish- she'll look out for her own self-interest, and doesn't really care who else suffers because of it. Hurt her, and she'll hurt you worse. Xykon actively revels in others' suffering and deaths, and goes out of his way to cause it whenever possible. It's a difference in motivation and scale.

[sleepy hedgehog]

Now I agree that doing so was an evil act. But definitely not Xykon-level evil.

After a point, I feel like high level DnD doesn't mesh as well with normal morality since death is so minor.
Effectively, her ranting at Durkon for 10 minutes about how he's stupid, and her killing and resurrecting Durkon (and maybe greater restoration for the negative level)
Are only different in the amount of divine magic being used.

Heck, it's not to hard to justify that it's better.
Since Durkon died to a vampire, it's likely he's in Valhalla.
If he only came back because of her/their kid, it's going to be a waste of time, and risky to his immortal soul, since he may not die in combat in the future.
So she killed him with flame strike, in combat.
And it's giving a second chance to decide to ignore the resurrection and chill in Valhalla.

Hilgya's life goal is to get people into Valhalla.
That's why she's a cleric of Loki.
So I don't think it's too farfetched.

[Rrmcklin]

Short answer, no. Though you don't need to be as evil as Xykon to still be pretty evil. (Although as far as evil characters in the series go, I'd say she's pretty low on the totem pole.)

[The Pilgrim]

Hilgya is on par of evilness with pre-lich Xykon. However, undeath brought Xykon to a point no living creature can reach. Xykon as an human was mean, petty, self-serving, and enjoyed to kill people, much like Hilgya. But was still human and could enjoy the little things in life, like a cup of coffe. After undeath, Xykon became a sadist who can literally only experience pleasure by watching people die.

A similar comparation can be done with Crystal, who was an evil foul assasin in life but only became a True Monster with capital letters after being turned into a Golem.

If Hilgya is ever turned into a Construct, it is pretty much guaranteed that she will inmediately become an abomination as foul as Xykon.

[Mordar]

I don't need prophetic powers to tell that Hilgya is one of the most evil characters we've seen so far. "If I hurt you worse than you hurt me, good. That means I win." That's the kind of thing I'd expect from Xykon! I'm surprised Roy and the others are just letting her walk away. She's an unrepentant murderer. Haley took out Crystal for that sort of attitude. Hilgya will hurt more people. Is it just for Kudzu's sake that they're letting her go? She at least should face dwarven justice for her scam.


No she took out Crystal for being a mass-murderer.

Wait, is that right? I thought it was because Crystal was trying to kill her...the fact that she was killing others along the way was a secondary consideration, wasn't it? Leading to a secondary killing :smallbiggrin:

- M

[Kish]

The first time Haley killed Crystal, Crystal was not trying to kill her at that time (as had vast moral importance in the eyes of a baffling number of people); she was free to leave town, if she was willing to let Crystal get away with her previous attempts to kill her.

The second time Haley killed Crystal, Crystal was acting perfectly friendly toward her, even treating her as a leader to follow blindly, and she spelled out that the killing was "because you're a sadistic unrepentant murderer who's a danger to, like, everyone."

[Synesthesy]

I agree that they are similar, the same way a nazist is similar to Hitler. They aren't in the same league, but who knows what a powerfull cleric will do (and what she did in the past).

Durkon didn't do anything warrant death, even known that it isn't a permanent problem (but it still is a level when the whole world is dependant on their power), because being lawfull stupid is not a crime. Not one that can't be answered with that word that begins with "f" and ends with "you".


In fact, I'm curious about Kuzdu's destiny.

[Mordar]

The first time Haley killed Crystal, Crystal was not trying to kill her at that time (as had vast moral importance in the eyes of a baffling number of people); she was free to leave town, if she was willing to let Crystal get away with her previous attempts to kill her.

The second time Haley killed Crystal, Crystal was acting perfectly friendly toward her, even treating her as a leader to follow blindly, and she spelled out that the killing was "because you're a sadistic unrepentant murderer who's a danger to, like, everyone."

I thought the first time was in Greysky after Haley re-leaves the guild, plugging Crystal full of arrows after she got out of the shower, and then stealing her knife. And I thought the second time was when Crystal was a flesh golem and was trying to kill Haley first, and then failing started killing the gnomes of Tinkertown to get her to come back and fight. Am I missing another iteration?

Re: first kill: Yup, it was certainly an ambush example of...um...preemptive self-defense, but I don't want to sidetrack this other than to ask if I am missing anything else.

Thanks
- M

[Kish]

Not missing another iteration, but apparently skipping from the middle of both sequences to the end. If this is genuine incomprehension, I'd suggest rereading them; the first sequence starts at #601 and the second sequence starts at #970.

[MartianInvader]

Hilgya is on par of evilness with pre-lich Xykon.
Pre-lich Xykon

killed his own parents for letting someone into his room. Then he animated their corpses and used them as foot-soldiers. We've never seen Hilgya do anything that evil. Unless you think "parents" is on par with "man who left you after sleeping with you and hearing you love him", and ALSO think "animating your victim as a mindless slave" is on par with "bringing your victim back to life", in which case I guess it's only twice as evil since Xykon did it to both parents.

[Mordar]

Not missing another iteration, but apparently skipping from the middle of both sequences to the end. If this is genuine incomprehension, I'd suggest rereading them; the first sequence starts at #601 and the second sequence starts at #970.

I just completed a re-read on the Tinkertown segment, and I'm still of the opinion that Haley's actions wouldn't even be considered "preemptive" self defense...but I do agree that the "mass-murderer" bit plays more into it than I had thought before.

It's like an active killer that is pausing to banter with the cops before returning to gnome head crushing killing innocents. As soon as Haley knows Crystal is still set on violence (even if slightly delayed), she makes use of the pause to lure her to the "kill zone" much like a hostage negotiator getting the kidnapper into the sniper's line of sight with faux-friendliness, and despite the middle bit (section 2, panels 2-5) being a sort of soliloquy on Haley's growth, the whole of the action is only seconds removed from Crystal brutalizing Bozzok's corpse...which is seconds removed from killing two passersby. I don't think Crystal is following her as a friendly, or a leader, but just as a somewhat confused creature who only has one anchor to follow.

In short, I think 981 is a brief pause in the action and because Haley knows Crystal still wants to kill her (as well as any random folk in arm's reach) she continues the fight using distraction as a weapon, and lava as a coup de grace.

- M

[Kish]

That strikes me as gratuitously long-winded. Fyraltari had said:
No she took out Crystal for being a mass-murderer. which you contradicted with:
I thought it was because Crystal was trying to kill her...the fact that she was killing others along the way was a secondary consideration, wasn't it? Bolding mine.

Now you seem to be blurring attacking Haley and attacking the gnomes together, and arguing with the statement no one made (that's called a strawman) that Crystal had become nonviolent. Do you wish to maintain that Haley killed Crystal because Crystal was trying to kill Haley and not because Crystal was a mass-murderer?

[Liquor Box]

Going to jump on the bandwagon and say Xykon is eviler than Hilgya. Enjoying torturing that paladin he captured was a good example Xykon merely going beyond killing people who offended him.

As I said in the other thread, I think Hilgya is more comparable to Belkar (prior to any away-from-evil swings Belkar has undergone recently).

[woweedd]

Hmm...H's "moment", as I like to know it, the moment all great villains have, where the villain shows their true depths of their being, their evil...Well, I guess killing Durkon after having just Ressercuted him arguably counts, but, overall, she hasn't had anything on the scale of Xykon's Moment, which, for me, was the famous "follow the bouncy ball" scene. Miko stabbing Shojo, Tarquin's burning of the slaves, V's Familicide, depending on who you ask. H hasn't had anything of that level.

[Grytorm]

For the first death of Crystal I remember the giant t saying something about a cut sequence that would have made clear that Bozzok and Crystal were not standing by the deal and were trying to kill Haley. Something something pacing issues.

As for Hilgya's evilness I find it hard to judge. We have seen her, try to poison her dimwitted husband, join the Linear Guild and participate in nebulously defined villainy, financially ruin her family and briefly murder Durkon. Some of that stuff is pretty bad and shows a very vindictive worldview. But she does not harm others out of indiscriminate malice nor with sociopathic self interest. Reay she seems like a different sort of evil than most other characters we have seen so far.

Bozzok, Elan's dad and Kubuto hurt others from a desire to elevate themselves. Thog, Xykon and I had another hurt others because they can. Redcloak does it from a combination of ideology, othering and sunk cost fallacies. Tsukiko and Malack, I think maybe ideologies. Actually the closest type of evil we have seen might be Nale which is appropriate given their mutual origins.

[Mordar]

That strikes me as gratuitously long-winded. Fyraltari had said: which you contradicted with: Bolding mine.

Now you seem to be blurring attacking Haley and attacking the gnomes together, and arguing with the statement no one made (that's called a strawman) that Crystal had become nonviolent. Do you wish to maintain that Haley killed Crystal because Crystal was trying to kill Haley and not because Crystal was a mass-murderer?

Absolutely not. I believe it is "and", and was of that position at the start of the discussion. Before, however, I had thought it was more like 75/25, which really is why I used the "secondary" term. Now I think they are probably about the same, but something still pushes me slightly in favor of self-defense. Haley killed Crystal because Crystal was trying to kill Haley and because when she stopped trying to actively kill Haley she made it clear she was going to keep killing people.

If Crystal hadn't killed those (minimum 2) gnome bystanders and then made it clear to Haley that she would likely keep doing that, I think Haley might have just bailed because of other priorities and knowing she had the means to quickly vacate Tinkertown in a way that Crystal couldn't follow. If Haley had to stick around, though, I'd wager she would have recognized that she had to handle Crystal eventually and would have done it as quickly as possible.

I really am not trying to be long-winded for its own sake, or trolly, or anything of that nature. I am invested in the conversations as well as the specifics, and I'm trying to spell that out as best I can in this format so it can foster interaction. Clearly it hasn't been working lately. I will try to do better, but not necessarily shorter.

I didn't understand why you indicated Crystal was "acting perfectly friendly toward her, even treating her as a leader to follow blindly" if you didn't mean it to indicate cessation of hostilities and that Crystal was no longer a threat to Haley. That's why I re-read and partially confirmed what I had thought/remembered along with moving the needle on the relative contribution of each element (murdering her/murdering lots of random others). That's why I explained my rationale - I thought it was responsive to your point.

I think either trying to murder Haley (even if it is temporarily paused, given recency and frequency, and, you know, questionable ethics in a killing-machine body) or murdering gnome bystanders (also temporarily paused, but with promise of resumption) are independently totally valid reasons for the dunk in the lava, and in conjunction seem to make it an imperative.

- M

[KorvinStarmast]

For the first death of Crystal I remember the giant t saying something about a cut sequence that would have made clear that Bozzok and Crystal were not standing by the deal and were trying to kill Haley. Something something pacing issues. The additional strips in Don't Split The Party address that, as does Giant's commentary.

[Teioh]

It’s a shame we didn’t get much a hint of that in the main strip; without it, it seems a really dark moment for Hayley.

[lio45]

It’s a shame we didn’t get much a hint of that in the main strip; without it, it seems a really dark moment for Hayley.I'd imagine Rich sees his books as "his main work".

The website could shut down eventually; the books are out there pretty near irreversibly.

[mjasghar]

If you think Hilgya's actions are on par with Xykon, I'd encourage you to compare their body counts. (Heck, if you don't count bodies that were already dead, and were to count raises/resurrections as anti-kills, Hilgya's count would be negative).

In any case, Hilgya is extremely chaotic, so I wouldn't expect any philosophy or set of rules to govern her behavior too closely, other than the high value she places on her personal freedom.

Wrong since you’re forgetting the numerous murders she participated in with the linear guild
And she must have done some major killing to get to her current high level

[KorvinStarmast]

Wrong since you’re forgetting the numerous murders she participated in with the linear guild. And she must have done some major killing to get to her current high level Yes, as will any adventuring party.

[vegetalss4]

I'd imagine Rich sees his books as "his main work".

The website could shut down eventually; the books are out there pretty near irreversibly.

I don't know, his commentary for those strips do seem to express the opinion that cutting everything showing that they where trying to kill Haley from the webcomic was a mistake (if one made for otherwise good reasons).

[dps]

In 601 Crystal does say that she'll get Haley despite the deal, but in 648 it looks like Haley is killing her just because they're rivals. So, yeah, without the supplemental stuff, it really does show Haley in a bad light.

[Sloanzilla]

I think there's a very good case that Haley is the least good of the four good party members. Likely more Ysgard than Arborea.

[Dragonus45]

I do not want to be related to her, date her, or be her roommate. I feel pity for both Kudzu and Durkon.

But MAN what a good show to watch! “I reserve the right to respond to stupidity with cleansing divine fire” that’s a spectacular line! Y’all don’t have any small-doses friends? You’ve never enjoyed dating someone whom you KNOW is gonna leave a mess in 3 months? You’ve never had to try to justify your decisions to a bored looking police officer even ONCE?

Those kind of small doses friends are one thing. But when it comes to vindictive domestic violence I am more then willing to cut people off fast. Just because she knows how to throw out a good one liner after you track down and murder someone you hooked up with for rejecting you doesn’t change how fundamentally abhorrent it is.


As for a comparison between Hilgya and Xykon, I think the real difference is a matter of scale. Hilgya in a moment to moment vindictive way can be just as evil as the worst of them. But she doesn’t seem inclined to do so in a big way. Her evil is motivated by petty and base narcissism as opposed to Xykons big flashy megalomaniacal villainy that hits lots of people. Yea she probably is Xykon level evil in just how low she would be willing to sink but she isn’t as motivated or even as capable at doing it and so falls short compared to him in actual results.

[Roland Itiative]

I do believe Kudzu is the only reason Hilgya may get out of this arc unscathed, or the fact that she may yet be helpful in stopping the greater threat of the Snarl. But she's definitely Evil, though not as gleefully Evil as the likes of Xykon. She's more like Nale, taking disproportionate retribution for any slight offense (though Nale also dipped into evil for evil's sake, which we haven't seen Hilgya do yet).

As for how Durkon was thoughtless in his proposal, he was clearly proposing to marry someone he doesn't love (and who doesn't love him), just for the sake of their kid, and thinking about changing her, at that. And, given Hilgya's history with unhappy forced marriages, this was just a repeat of that, with a baby being used for coercion instead of a crossbow. She was entirely justified in being outraged by the proposal, it's just the way she acted out on said outrage that was Evil.

Durkon should, at best, have offered to help raising Kudzu in any way possible, with no strings attached. Now, that might also have incurred in a murderous reaction from Hilgya, but at least he would have said the right thing (to the wrong person).

[Jack Of Rivia]

No.
Xykon likes to hurt everyone. Hilgya "only" those who crossed her. If X is comparable to a.mass murder, Hylgia is more of a mob boss, willing to punish everyone who disrespect her.

[Synesthesy]

As for how Durkon was thoughtless in his proposal, he was clearly proposing to marry someone he doesn't love (and who doesn't love him), just for the sake of their kid, and thinking about changing her, at that. And, given Hilgya's history with unhappy forced marriages, this was just a repeat of that, with a baby being used for coercion instead of a crossbow. She was entirely justified in being outraged by the proposal, it's just the way she acted out on said outrage that was Evil.


Only one point: Hilgya may have loved Durkon, even if just for one night or little more. And Durkon too.
If Durkon was a little more expert about women and about love, he could have done a lot better and maybe (maybe!) in time they could have formed some relationship that is not fake. With a lot of time, of course, but I don't think that it was impossible from the beginning. The presence of a child helps a lot, too.
Instead Durkon did something stupid and Hilgya reacted with something evil, and now I don't think there is a possible future for Durkylga anymore, except fan fictions.

[Ildirin]

While I won't say that a good relationship between Hilgya and Durkon was impossible before Durkon spoke, I am highly skeptical. One person seeking to harm the other more than they've been harmed is something I don't think you can build any kind of lasting relationship on.

I also think it would be very unfair to say that Durkon should try. You're basically telling him to enter a relationship where the other party has told him that intend to use physical violence if they're displeased and Durkon just has to be careful about what he says to not make her mad. Nothing about this sounds healthy for anyone involved.

[MartianInvader]

In #1113, Hilgya says:

"Every dwarf I convert is saved not just from Hel, but from the tyranny of honor that limits who and what we can be."

That certainly seems to indicate a desire to help her fellow dwarves (in an extremely Chaotic way). Xykon has, I believe, never indicated a desire to help anyone but himself.

[understatement]

Saying Hilgya has negative traits is like saying Belkar is murderous, but I can't imagine her massacring a bunch of soldiers for fun or tearing an innocent bystander in half because she was in the wrong mood. She's more of a "localized" evil.

Also, is she going to stick around with the Order or not?

[MartianInvader]

Also, is she going to stick around with the Order or not?
I would place a large number of quatloos on "not". EDIT: Let's list some reasons!

In-universe:
-The order just watched her kill Durkon. They are probably mad at her and don't want her around any more.
-The order just watched her kill Durkon. They probably don't want to team up with someone who might kill them because she thinks they said something stupid.
-Most of the order probably wants to limit further danger to Kudzu and so wouldn't want to bring Hilgya into battle.
-She doesn't seem to care much about the whole end-of-the-world thing.

Narratively:
-Having two clerics in the party would be boring role-wise.
-Hilgya isn't part of the order! It would be weird and feel jarring to suddenly tack on a 7th main character who lasts multiple books.

[Kish]

Saying Hilgya has negative traits is like saying Belkar is murderous, but I can't imagine her massacring a bunch of soldiers for fun or tearing an innocent bystander in half because she was in the wrong mood. She's more of a "localized" evil.

Also, is she going to stick around with the Order or not?
She might go to fight the Exarch with them, but the odds of her joining the Order for Book 7 are nil.

[Ruck]

I think there's a very good case that Haley is the least good of the four good party members. Likely more Ysgard than Arborea.

I think it's made all but explicit in the strip, although she is getting better than in the early days (when it was very clear, and even she appended "-ish" to her description of her alignment).

[Aquillion]

Hilgya feels the need to rationalize her evil actions. And not in a Lawful Evil rules-lawyer sense, but in the sense that I genuinely feel she does have a moral compass, no matter how beaten down; she's just gotten good at finessing it.

No matter how weak her justifications are, she's still better than Xykon, who is a completely unrepentant mass-murderer without even the slightest hint of a desire to justify himself and no indication that he has any potential for compassion at all.

[nmphuong91]

Why bother to think about that? She can cast Turn Undead, so she can't be evil. Also, the entire current strip was about "People don't change overnight", she shouldn't be evil at the moment (Have a night passed since the last time she turns undead?). Look at Miko, I don't think it's right to judge or police someone else's action. I get that many of you do not agree with how Hilgya handles thing, but that's not right to judge people's alignment with you yourself as the moral compass. Let the multiverse do it instead. If she is truly evil, the Giant would tell us, in a post or in the story.
About the killing incident, I'd say that since she rezzed him, it may or may not count as an evil action. Again, I don't think it's right for people who don't have access to resurrection to impose their morality on those who do.

[Aquillion]

Why bother to think about that? She can cast Turn Undead, so she can't be evil.Some gods grant Turning regardless of alignment, especially ones that particularly hate undead. And she specifically says a few pages later that Loki particularly hates undead (while her son chants "turn undead" to make the point clear, no less.)

Also, even if she was neutral, she would still be forced to get Rebuke unless Loki himself was neutral as well; but Loki was previously established as Evil in one of the side-books. So he must be one of those deities that always grants Turning regardless.

[Heksefatter]

I don't recall Hilgya killing or torturing someone solely for the lulz. She's still less evil than Xykon, though that's not saying much.

[Kish]

Turn Undead is not a spell.

[dps]

I think it's made all but explicit in the strip, although she is getting better than in the early days (when it was very clear, and even she appended "-ish" to her description of her alignment).

Yeah, I don't think that there's much doubt that she's the least Good of the 4 Good-aligned members of the Order, but she's probably more Good than she started out.

[Ruck]

Yeah, I don't think that there's much doubt that she's the least Good of the 4 Good-aligned members of the Order, but she's probably more Good than she started out.

Certainly, yes.

[Knaight]

Wrong since you’re forgetting the numerous murders she participated in with the linear guild
And she must have done some major killing to get to her current high level

That applies just as much to Xykon, who is somewhat higher level - and that's before getting into all the killing that wouldn't even apply here. Besides, rivals level up for free anyways.

I'm more than willing to peg Hilgya as evil, but she's not anywhere near Xykon-level. We don't see the same sort of casual malice (e.g. torturing people for entertainment), we don't see the same sort of scale (she's done a lot less murder), we don't see anything like Xykon's habit of killing his own people, the list goes on. She's more on par with Bozzok, just significantly more chaotic, which by OotS villain standards makes her one of the better ones. Xykon is worse, Malack is worse, Tarquin is worse, Kubota is worse, most of the rest of the Linear Guild seems to be worse (though that could just be more screen time), and that covers the bulk of them.

[5crownik007]

Short answer: No.

Long answer: Nooooooo.

Xykon is far more dangerous and has caused more damage to the world.

She does deserve to face Dwarven Justice.

EDIT:

I de-lurked for this:

I went from meh to fave character on hilgya. I love watching her character. I would invite her to bars and listen to her insult the people who hit on her. I would listen to her stories while drinking coffee as she dumps yet another packet of sugar in her cup. I would enjoy being in her life superficially and invite her to all my parties.

I do not want to be related to her, date her, or be her roommate. I feel pity for both Kudzu and Durkon.

But MAN what a good show to watch! “I reserve the right to respond to stupidity with cleansing divine fire” that’s a spectacular line! Y’all don’t have any small-doses friends? You’ve never enjoyed dating someone whom you KNOW is gonna leave a mess in 3 months? You’ve never had to try to justify your decisions to a bored looking police officer even ONCE?

I get it, she isn’t LG, not a role model for children, sure, but I don’t get all the hate. Hilgya is awesome. From a distance. Which, as spectators to a fictional story, we have the correct amount of distance to enjoy her!

The hate comes from the fact that she's an actual danger to people around her. She's malicious. I do my best to hate no one, but if I knew someone like Hilgya in real life, I would definitely call the police and child services as fast as my fingers could dial. She's a violent, felonious criminal who is a danger to others and her child.

I wouldn't find it fun to watch her injure people, insult people or being even superficially part of her social group. I do not find pleasure in watching others suffer.

[Aquillion]

Wrong since you’re forgetting the numerous murders she participated in with the linear guild
And she must have done some major killing to get to her current high level
We don't actually know how long she was with the Linear Guild. Given how casually she left them, it seems to have just been a gig, possibly for just that one dungeon crawl.

We also don't know how she leveled up (the OOTS did the same, and they weren't all evil.) But it seems extremely unlikely, based on her characterization, that she was indiscriminately murdering innocents for fun, so she does pass the extremely low bar set by Xykon.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Hilgya attempted to murder her husband way back when. More recently, when Durkon threatened to become almost exactly the same thing, she killed and resurrected him. Throw in being an accessory to some of Nale's crimes and you have Hilgya's entire rap sheet.
An attempted murder, a reversed murder, some fraud, and helping Nale...I don't think Hilgya's as evil as Belkar, let alone Xykon. She's done less harm (and for better reasons) than most of the Linear Guild, Redcloak, Kubota, Tarquin, and basically every antagonist the Order as faced (with the exception of the black dragon kid, and arguably his mom).

...Also, yeah, Hilgya/Durkon was never going to work. Durkon isn't as stuffy about his Lawfulness as he used to be, but he's still Hilgya's good opposite. He means well, but he still can't wrap his head around Hilgya. This isn't surprising; they knew each other for one day, then spent at least a year apart. That's roughly equivalent to how well Anna and Prince Hans knew each other, and while Durkon is wiser than Anna and Hilgya less deceptive than Hans, it's still not a good foundation for a relationship.

[Hemoparty]

Regarding Hilgya's level of evil : Definitely not Xykon. I honestly consider her small-time evil, lower than that of the Empire of Blood. She theoretically won't attack without reason, though she's perfectly capable of inventing a reason and doesn't need to be targeting you specifically to hurt you. Evil is a means to an end for Hilgya, and she probably doesn't even see herself as Evil. For Xykon, Evil is the end.

Regarding Hilgya as a character : Entertaining? Yes, especially at this distance. Do I hate her? No, though I can see why people do. She's absurdly callous, will readily self-delude, and will take any excuse to casually do terrible things.

Regarding Haley's lack of Good-ness, and her first killing of Crystal : Hm. Haley is scarily pragmatic and, while she seems to be stealing less now that the whole ransom thing is more or less dealt with, she's still a career criminal who takes joy in her work. That said, she's a gun pointed at worse people and, unlike Belkar, it doesn't take much for her to stay trained on them and shoot. I'll readily admit that I probably haven't looked at her through a moral lens as much as I should, but is it really such an Evil thing to kill someone who has repeatedly tried to kill you and your allies? As far as I'm concerned, human Crystal was essentially a recurring random encounter that probably shouldn't have been allowed to live as long as she had. Not killing her would've been more Lawful, sure, but I'm not sure it would be Good.

[Caerulea]

About the killing incident, I'd say that since she rezzed him, it may or may not count as an evil action. Again, I don't think it's right for people who don't have access to resurrection to impose their morality on those who do.
Permanently draining a level from somebody just for trying to propose to you in a dumb way seems pretty evil to me.

[Knaight]

Hilgya attempted to murder her husband way back when. More recently, when Durkon threatened to become almost exactly the same thing, she killed and resurrected him. Throw in being an accessory to some of Nale's crimes and you have Hilgya's entire rap sheet.
An attempted murder, a reversed murder, some fraud, and helping Nale...I don't think Hilgya's as evil as Belkar, let alone Xykon. She's done less harm (and for better reasons) than most of the Linear Guild, Redcloak, Kubota, Tarquin, and basically every antagonist the Order as faced (with the exception of the black dragon kid, and arguably his mom).

I'd also add some theft in there with the fraud, but it's still a pretty minor history by comparison to anyone else on that list. I didn't mention Redcloak on my otherwise pretty similar list, but he definitely belongs on it.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Permanently draining a level from somebody just for trying to propose to you in a dumb way seems pretty evil to me.
I'm inclined to agree. Don't get me wrong, Hilgya's no saint, but I'd categorize her as "casually evil" rather than "actively villainous".

Also, I just realized that technically, Miko Miyazaki is an antagonist who is less evil than Hilgya, albeit more of an a-hole for worse reasons.

[The_Weirdo]

"Is Hilgya as Evil as Xykon?" is begging the question, really.


She does deserve to face Dwarven Justice.

Dwarves accept forced marriages, ergo their entire judicial system is completely illegitimate.

[GreatWyrmGold]

"Is Hilgya as Evil as Xykon?" is begging the question, really.
I don't see how. You can't commit a logical fallacy by asking a question. The logical fallacies take a few sentences to kick in. (I'm thinking "That's the kind of thing I'd expect from Xykon!"?)


Dwarves accept forced marriages, ergo their entire judicial system is completely illegitimate.
Look, I agree that forced marriages are bad, but I think the parts of their judicial system which don't have anything to do with marriage are fine.
...Actually, the parts dealing with their other eccentricities are probably a little warped. But that still leaves that parts that have nothing to do with alcohol, trees, definitions of honor, airspace rights...

[The_Weirdo]

I don't see how. You can't commit a logical fallacy by asking a question. The logical fallacies take a few sentences to kick in. (I'm thinking "That's the kind of thing I'd expect from Xykon!"?)

As in, it assumes Hilgya is Evil at all. It's what the fallacy of begging the question means. Like asking someone that hasn't been proven to have killed his wife "why did you kill your wife".


Look, I agree that forced marriages are bad, but I think the parts of their judicial system which don't have anything to do with marriage are fine.
...Actually, the parts dealing with their other eccentricities are probably a little warped. But that still leaves that parts that have nothing to do with alcohol, trees, definitions of honor, airspace rights...

Airspace rights?

[hamishspence]

As in, it assumes Hilgya is Evil at all. It's what the fallacy of begging the question means.



We have Word of Giant that she was Evil as of Dungeon Crawling Fools (War & XPs commentary). Since there's been no evidence to suggest she's changed significantly since then...

[The_Weirdo]

We have Word of Giant that she was Evil as of Dungeon Crawling Fools (War & XPs commentary). Since there's been no evidence to suggest she's changed significantly since then...

Still arguable, not something that should be taken as fact.

[GreatWyrmGold]

As in, it assumes Hilgya is Evil at all. It's what the fallacy of begging the question means. Like asking someone that hasn't been proven to have killed his wife "why did you kill your wife".
Not really. "Evil" is not a quality exclusive to those who have Evil alignments. Vaarsuvius, for instance, is a bit evil—less evil than Xykon, Belkar, Hilgya, or even Hobgoblin Cleric #2 (probably), but more evil than Elan, Haley, or Roy. Of course, non-Evil characters generally have less evil characters than Evil characters, but it's still a comparison that can be made.
...Also, Hilgya worships a CE god, tried to murder her husband, assisted Nale's evil, and killed Durkon for what was admittedly a pretty serious faux pas, but still only a faux pas. If it looks like a demon, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's probably a fiendish duck.


Airspace rights?
I'll admit I only remember because I binge-read the archives yesterday, but dwarves don't think anything above the ground is actually in their territory (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1090.html).

[The_Weirdo]

Not really. "Evil" is not a quality exclusive to those who have Evil alignments. Vaarsuvius, for instance, is a bit evil—less evil than Xykon, Belkar, Hilgya, or even Hobgoblin Cleric #2 (probably), but more evil than Elan, Haley, or Roy. Of course, non-Evil characters generally have less evil characters than Evil characters, but it's still a comparison that can be made.

Fair.


...Also, Hilgya worships a CE god, tried to murder her husband, assisted Nale's evil, and killed Durkon for what was admittedly a pretty serious faux pas, but still only a faux pas. If it looks like a demon, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's probably a fiendish duck.

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/elgoonishshive/images/2/2e/Demon_Duck.gif/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/310?cb=20090929193346


I'll admit I only remember because I binge-read the archives yesterday, but dwarves don't think anything above the ground is actually in their territory (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1090.html).

Oh, right, that.

[Paschendale]

Who precisely would Hilgya be a danger to? She gets on in normal Dwarf society and holds down a job as a priestess of Loki. She commits whatever the normal amount of evil for a Loki-ite is, as she isn't punished by secular authorities, or gone too far and been evicted from the temple. And whatever that normal amount of evil is, it's little enough that Dwarven society doesn't drive Loki worship underground. Her evil is a normal amount for the society she lives in. Meanwhile, Hilgya simply has no ambitious or desires to commit serious acts of evil. She has acted on some personal grudges, but poses no threat to the masses. Belkar, the casual murderer, is more dangerous! And he's one of the heroes. Hilgya leads no armies. She has no evil plan. She has no aspirations to even take over the temple of Loki, or Dwarvish society, let alone the world.

Hilgya may be a jerk, but she's not a villain.

[Onyavar]

she must have done some major killing to get to her current high level
Yeah but only monsters. You know, flumphs, sylphs and a good-aligned dragon, once.


I would place a large number of quatloos on "not". EDIT: Let's list some reasons!

In-universe:
-The order just watched her kill Durkon. They are probably mad at her and don't want her around any more.
-The order just watched her kill Durkon. They probably don't want to team up with someone who might kill them because she thinks they said something stupid.
-Most of the order probably wants to limit further danger to Kudzu and so wouldn't want to bring Hilgya into battle.
-She doesn't seem to care much about the whole end-of-the-world thing.

Narratively:
-Having two clerics in the party would be boring role-wise.
-Hilgya isn't part of the order! It would be weird and feel jarring to suddenly tack on a 7th main character who lasts multiple books.
She might go to fight the Exarch with them, but the odds of her joining the Order for Book 7 are nil.

Oh, I don't know, we had support characters crossing the boundaries of books before. Like Miko, Hinjo, Celia, Bandana. Or, on the evil side of things, Tsukiko. I can imagine Hilgya as a supporting character in book 7 alright... but if so, she won't stick to the order till the end.
The people who said that "character X won't remain as a party member", these people were always right before.

Since she's still around currently (!) my guess is a chance of 40 to 60 that she will die soonish and Durkon has to take over raising Kudzu. That's in my opinion the longest-term impact she can still have on the narrative - aside from punchlines or supporting the party against the exarch and the council.

[D.One]

Still arguable, not something that should be taken as fact.

It's even less confirmed that dwarven law accepts forced marriage, and that it was not something arranged beetween (the leaders of) the two families.

[The_Weirdo]

It's even less confirmed that dwarven law accepts forced marriage, and that it was not something arranged beetween (the leaders of) the two families.

If it doesn't, why is it that Hilgya would even have to fight for the divorce in the courts, had she not seen to it that the Sexualpredators didn't contest it?

[hroþila]

If it doesn't, why is it that Hilgya would even have to fight for the divorce in the courts, had she not seen to it that the Sexualpredators didn't contest it?
Presumably because she would still need to substantiate her claim that it was a forced marriage, and that's not necessarily easy. Or convenient, since we're dealing with Hilgya here.

Forced marriages are a thing. Legal forced marriages, usually, not so much.

[The_Weirdo]

Presumably because she would still need to substantiate her claim that it was a forced marriage, and that's not necessarily easy. Or convenient, since we're dealing with Hilgya here.

Forced marriages are a thing. Legal forced marriages, usually, not so much.

Possible.

To be sure, though, even if she had wanted to marry Ivan, it's ridiculous that Ivan or his family can contest the divorce at all. I mean, a marriage should be a thing that gets dissolved when one of the parties doesn't want it anymore.

[D.One]

If it doesn't, why is it that Hilgya would even have to fight for the divorce in the courts, had she not seen to it that the Sexualpredators didn't contest it?

Ok, let me be clear, cause you tend to generalize.

First, I'm not defending a forced marriage. It's awful, it's unethical, and the opposite of what I think a marriage should be about.

Second, the same way you are disputng that Hylgia is Evil, with the premise that we don't have proof that she didn't change alignment since she departed in Book 1, what I'm saying is that you have zero proof that dwarven laws support the idea of a forced marriage.

It's highly possible that dwarven law assumes the couple marries in free will, and even has any legal device against a forced marriage. However, Hylgia and Ivan's marriage might have been arranged by their families, who took care of the legal matters through their lawyers (possibly Jones and/or Rodrigues). Hylgia would have to fight for the divorce in court because, as far as the law was concerned, her marriage was a regular one.


To be sure, though, even if she had wanted to marry Ivan, it's ridiculous that Ivan or his family can contest the divorce at all. I mean, a marriage should be a thing that gets dissolved when one of the parties doesn't want it anymore.

Usually, the contest isn't as much about the dissolution per se, but about money and rights involved. It's less about the WHAT, and more about the HOW.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Possible.

To be sure, though, even if she had wanted to marry Ivan, it's ridiculous that Ivan or his family can contest the divorce at all. I mean, a marriage should be a thing that gets dissolved when one of the parties doesn't want it anymore.
. .

"How delightfully informal ! Then this other rumor, about how simple
it is to get a divorce on the Moon. I daresay that's true, too?"

"No, madam, wouldn't say divorce is simple. Too much to untangle.
Mmm. . . take a simple example, one lady and say she has two husbands--"

"Two?"

"Might have more, might have just one. Or might be complex
marriage. But let's take one lady and two men as typical. She decides to
divorce one. Say it's friendly, with other husband agreeing and one she
is getting rid of not making fuss. Not that it would do him any good.
Okay, she divorces him; he leaves. Still leaves endless things. Men might
be business partners, co-husbands often are. Divorce may break up
partnership. Money matters to settle. This three may own cubic together,
and while will be in her name, ex-husband probably has cash coming or
rent. And almost always are children to consider, support and so forth.
Many things. No, madam, divorce is never simple. Can divorce him in ten
seconds but may take ten years to straighten out loose ends. Isn't it
much that way here?"

[The_Weirdo]

. .

Settling money matters and not being married anymore are two different things.

[Fyraltari]

Surprised that it took 2 pages before the inevitable happened, really.

Who precisely would Hilgya be a danger to? She gets on in normal Dwarf society and holds down a job as a priestess of Loki. She commits whatever the normal amount of evil for a Loki-ite is, as she isn't punished by secular authorities, or gone too far and been evicted from the temple. And whatever that normal amount of evil is, it's little enough that Dwarven society doesn't drive Loki worship underground. Her evil is a normal amount for the society she lives in. Meanwhile, Hilgya simply has no ambitious or desires to commit serious acts of evil. She has acted on some personal grudges, but poses no threat to the masses. Belkar, the casual murderer, is more dangerous! And he's one of the heroes. Hilgya leads no armies. She has no evil plan. She has no aspirations to even take over the temple of Loki, or Dwarvish society, let alone the world.

Hilgya may be a jerk, but she's not a villain.
You sound very confident that the Dwarves are not driving worship of Loki underground.

"That's why it's important (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1113.html) for me to spread the word of Loki to other Dwarves so they know they can opt out of this terrible system too" She sounds more like a missoniary than your friendly neighbourhood priest. Especially since she says (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1114.html) it's humans who taught her to worship Loki in the first place.

[The_Weirdo]

Surprised that it took 2 pages before the inevitable happened, really.

Are you calling me an inevitable??? :smallfurious:

What did I ever do to you? :smallfrown:

[GreatWyrmGold]

Yeah but only monsters. You know, flumphs, sylphs and a good-aligned dragon, once.
When did she kill a Good dragon?
(Also, we need to give her credit for the monster-fighting she did with Durkon. They didn't technically kill anything on-panel, but I'm pretty sure they earned XP.)


Since she's still around currently (!) my guess is a chance of 40 to 60 that she will die soonish and Durkon has to take over raising Kudzu. That's in my opinion the longest-term impact she can still have on the narrative - aside from punchlines or supporting the party against the exarch and the council.
I really hope that doesn't happen. Hilgya might not be the best parent, and definitely isn't the most Good parent, but she's been parenting Kudzu. Maybe it's just me, but I feel like it would be weird to have Durkon adopt Kudzu by default just because he had a one-night-stand with his mommy ages ago.
Also:
:durkon: Most o' all, I know tha I need ta be thar fer me boy. Na ev'ryone gets more'n one parent. Na ev'reyone ev'n gets one! If'n I can make it so 'e's one those tha does, I need ta try.
I don't think Durkon wants to be Kudzu's single parent, any more than he wants Hilgya to be. My hope is that he and Hilgya work out some kind of coparenting thing where Durkon babysits and otherwise helps out with raising Kudzu, while respecting Hilgya's boundaries.



It's even less confirmed that dwarven law accepts forced marriage, and that it was not something arranged beetween (the leaders of) the two families.
Um, it was arranged between the families. That's confirmed. It's also confirmed that Hilgya was not onboard with that arrangement, which is what The_Weirdo meant by "forced marriage". Of course, Weirdo probably should have used "arranged marriage," which is not only less-ambiguous but also the technically accurate term.

[D.One]

Settling money matters and not being married anymore are two different things.

Not when the money matters are part of the marriage clauses, or are somehow related to the marriage situation. But please don't take my word, talk with any lawyer that deals with this kind of matter.

I'm divorced, my divorce was as friendly as one can be, we agreed on everything about the kids, we had no money dispute and one single lawyer for both of us to deal with the legal matters, and still took 6 months to the get the divorce.

[The_Weirdo]

Not when the money matters are part of the marriage clauses, or are somehow related to the marriage situation. But please don't take my word, talk with any lawyer that deals with this kind of matter.

I'm divorced, my divorce was as friendly as one can be, we agreed on everything about the kids, we had no money dispute and one single lawyer for both of us to deal with the legal matters, and still took 6 months to the get the divorce.

Sure, but I don't think you could go and say "I don't want you to have the divorce, I'll fight to force you to remain legally married to me", could you?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Um, it was arranged between the families. That's confirmed.

Yes? That's not what D.One is highlighting. We know that it was arranged. We know it was forced. We do not know if dwarven law finds the first legal, and if it does, whether it finds the second legal.

Most likely, the first is not illegal (i.e. dwarven law doesn't care who makes the arrangements for the marriage), while the second one is likely illegal (i.e. dwarven law requires both participants to agree, just like it is necessary for any other contract to hold - signing a contract under false pretenses or under duress voids it). But Hilgya would need to prove she was coerced, and she probably doesn't have a lot of evidence in that regard, other than her word.

Grey Wolf

[GreatWyrmGold]

Not when the money matters are part of the marriage clauses, or are somehow related to the marriage situation. But please don't take my word, talk with any lawyer that deals with this kind of matter.

I'm divorced, my divorce was as friendly as one can be, we agreed on everything about the kids, we had no money dispute and one single lawyer for both of us to deal with the legal matters, and still took 6 months to the get the divorce.
I don't think any modern divorce lawyer knows much about medieval divorce law, let alone quasi-medieval fantasy divorce law.

If I had to guess, though...marriage is, at heart, a contract.* In the modern world it's a contract formed between husband and wife, but that wasn't always the case. For instance, our modern marriage tradition can be traced back centuries and millennia to contracts between son-in-law and father-in-law (this was, after all, when women were generally treated as property). Hilgya's arranged marriage probably involved a contract of some sort between Hilgya's family and...the other guy's family, so divorce would probably require the agreement of said families (or at least the heads of their households). It sounds like Hilgya didn't get much say in the initial marriage, so she probably wouldn't get a formal say in the divorce (though she obviously had the ability to bring it up to her family and in-laws).

*Which isn't to say it isn't an expression of romantic love and whatnot. The contract just keeps the marriage's metaphorical cells oxygenated and removes their metaphorical waste.
...This isn't a very good metaphor, is it?

[The_Weirdo]

Hilgya's arranged marriage probably involved a contract of some sort between Hilgya's family and...the other guy's family, so divorce would probably require the agreement of said families (or at least the heads of their households). It sounds like Hilgya didn't get much say in the initial marriage, so she probably wouldn't get a formal say in the divorce (though she obviously had the ability to bring it up to her family and in-laws).

Because they were so open and willing to take her will into account the first time around? Bearing in mind that there'd likely still be people complaining in the forum if she had done so by threat of divine fire.

[Fyraltari]

Are you calling me an inevitable??? :smallfurious:
No, no, no, your disagreeing that Hilgya is Evil and arguing with a dozen posters or so, I am calling inevitable.

You, I am calling predictible.


What did I ever do to you? :smallfrown:
To me? Nothing.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

marriage is, at heart, a contract.*

*Which isn't to say it isn't an expression of romantic love and whatnot. The contract just keeps the marriage's metaphorical cells oxygenated and removes their metaphorical waste.
...This isn't a very good metaphor, is it?

Marriage is two things at once. From the point of view of the law, it's just another type of contract. And like any contract, breaking it is a lot more complicated than what T_W would like to believe.

It is also, from the PoV of society, a social bond. And like any other social bond, breaking it is a lot more complicated than what T_W would like to believe.

So I think "it is a beating heart" is good metaphor: a thing that is ridiculously simple to describe but can mean two things ("a muscle that pumps blood" and "the emotional center of the personality"), and easy to describe as broken, but "broken" means two things at once, neither of which is good or simple to solve. About the only thing that mismatches is that, Simpsons jokes aside, breaking a heart doesn't usually mean breaking both meanings at once.

Grey Wolf

[D.One]

Sure, but I don't think you could go and say "I don't want you to have the divorce, I'll fight to force you to remain legally married to me", could you?

I'm no expert on the matter, but I do know that one of the parties is able to delay the whole thing greatly, generally not in the terms of "I won't let you divorce me", but in the terms of "I'll fight for every condition of the divorce agreement".

I assume (and may be in error) you never lived through a divorce, and hope you never have to, but things can get very messy for both parts.

[The_Weirdo]

Marriage is two things at once. From the point of view of the law, it's just another type of contract. And like any contract, breaking it is a lot more complicated than what T_W would like to believe.

It is also, from the PoV of society, a social bond. And like any other social bond, breaking it is a lot more complicated than what T_W would like to believe.

So I think "it is a beating heart" is good metaphor: a thing that is ridiculously simple to describe but can mean two things ("a muscle that pumps blood" and "the emotional center of the personality"), and easy to describe as broken, but "broken" means two things at once, neither of which is good or simple to solve. About the only thing that mismatches is that, Simpsons jokes aside, breaking a heart doesn't usually mean breaking both meanings at once.

Grey Wolf

I'm not claiming it's easy to break. I'm pointing out that it's ridiculous for there to be the possibility of one party trying to force the other into not breaking it, in the case of marriage.

And the point of view of society does not and should not matter with regards to whether or not someone chooses to stay married.


I'm no expert on the matter, but I do know that one of the parties is able to delay the whole thing greatly, generally not in the terms of "I won't let you divorce me", but in the terms of "I'll fight for every condition of the divorce agreement".

I assume (and may be in error) you never lived through a divorce, and hope you never have to, but things can get very messy for both parts.

Well, only from the point of view of the child of one. And sure, one thing is delaying. The other is "I want you to stay married to me and I'll ask the courts to force you to".


No, no, no, your disagreeing that Hilgya is Evil and arguing with a dozen posters or so, I am calling inevitable.

You, I am calling predictible.


To me? Nothing.

Oh, okay. Carry on, then. But you owe me some good camembert. :smallbiggrin:

[D.One]

I'm not claiming it's easy to break. I'm pointing out that it's ridiculous for there to be the possibility of one party trying to force the other into not breaking it, in the case of marriage.

And the point of view of society does not and should not matter with regards to whether or not someone chooses to stay married.

And again, I must say, the main problem is not the WHAT, it's the HOW.

[The_Weirdo]

And again, I must say, the main problem is not the WHAT, it's the HOW.

Answered in the previous post. There's a difference between delaying and averting, in that the delay can theoretically be for good reasons.

Also, mods, remember I and D.One merely have the same avatar and nationality; we aren't the same person, so neither I nor him are chain-posting.

[Fyraltari]

Oh, okay. Carry on, then. But you owe me some good camembert. :smallbiggrin:

No, I do not.

[The_Weirdo]

No, I do not.

Pleeeeeeease. :smallfrown:

[5crownik007]

Dwarves accept forced marriages, ergo their entire judicial system is completely illegitimate.

That is a non sequitur.

[Ruck]

So I think "it is a beating heart" is good metaphor: a thing that is ridiculously simple to describe but can mean two things ("a muscle that pumps blood" and "the emotional center of the personality"), and easy to describe as broken, but "broken" means two things at once, neither of which is good or simple to solve. About the only thing that mismatches is that, Simpsons jokes aside, breaking a heart doesn't usually mean breaking both meanings at once.

Grey Wolf

Heh, I just realized that The Simpsons season four contains an episode where a heart breaks literally as well as one (two, now that I think about it) where a heart breaks metaphorically.

[MartianInvader]

Even if we suppose that forced marriage is illegal in dwarven society - pretend for a moment that someone does something illegal to Hilgya, like stealing her diamonds for example. Given what we know of her, do we really think her reaction would be to press charges against them?

[GreatWyrmGold]

Because they were so open and willing to take her will into account the first time around? Bearing in mind that there'd likely still be people complaining in the forum if she had done so by threat of divine fire.
That is why she went through all the trouble with the gelatinous cube race, yes. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1114.html)



I'm not claiming it's easy to break. I'm pointing out that it's ridiculous for there to be the possibility of one party trying to force the other into not breaking it, in the case of marriage.

And the point of view of society does not and should not matter with regards to whether or not someone chooses to stay married.
The point of view of society doesn't matter with regard to whether or not someone wants to stay married. It does, however, matter for whether or not they do stay married. The obvious example would be Henry the Eighth (it's the eighth who had to start a new church just to get a divorce, right?), but it shows up in modern times, too. Not formally, anymore, in many parts of the world, but there are certainly informal pressures against divorce in many situations, and those can press just as hard.


...I also find it odd that we've drifted from whether or not Hilgya's the biggest villain in the comic to her divorce proceedings. I expected we'd wander farther off-topic by now.

[The_Weirdo]

...I also find it odd that we've drifted from whether or not Hilgya's the biggest villain in the comic to her divorce proceedings. I expected we'd wander farther off-topic by now.

Well, we are discussing Shakespeare in the comic thread. Wanna join?

[martianmister]

I'd imagine Rich sees his books as "his main work".

Actually, he said the opposite.

Yeah, I don't think that there's much doubt that she's the least Good of the 4 Good-aligned members of the Order

I would put Roy beneath her.

[Kereminde]

All "Evil" is not made alike. Not even all "Lawful Evil" is made alike. Each person has their own views within that single sliver of alignment which allows so many options to behave "true to the alignment".

. . . of course, this comes from someone who treats alignment as a guideline for behavior and not a rule about how they must behave.

[GreatWyrmGold]

I would put Roy beneath her.
...That's the sort of statement most people would want to bundle with at least a brief explanation of why, if only to be polite and save the other forum-goers the trouble of asking it.

[Ruck]

Actually, he said the opposite.

Source? Because he's definitely said he writes the webcomic with the intent of it being published in book form one day.

[martianmister]

Source? Because he's definitely said he writes the webcomic with the intent of it being published in book form one day.

I'm not sure what you mean by that, but it is common knowledge that the books are bonus content and plot related thing have to appear in online strip, eventually. That's why he said that not including Crystal's attempts to kill Haley was a mistake.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=59680&postcount=22

...That's the sort of statement most people would want to bundle with at least a brief explanation of why, if only to be polite and save the other forum-goers the trouble of asking it.

For starters, he didn't abandon one of her friends to bandits.

[woweedd]

I'm not sure what you mean by that, but it is common knowledge that the books are bonus content and plot related thing have to appear in online strip, eventually. That's why he said that not including Crystal's attempts to kill Haley was a mistake.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=59680&postcount=22


For starters, he didn't abandon one of her friends to bandits.
V and BELKAR also went to save Elan. Plus, Roy's developed since then.

[GreatWyrmGold]

For starters, he didn't abandon one of her friends to bandits.
While that's certainly his greatest failure (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0488.html), it's still not enough to get him chucked out of LG. After all, it's just one mistake, and one which he recognized pretty quickly.
You could argue that Haley hasn't performed any single comparable evil act, but she has a much more consistent pattern. In the olden days when Roy was abandoning bards, Haley was doing things like seriously contemplating slavery (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0171.html) and non-consensually groping Elan (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0088.html). Even post-character-development, she still robs children, (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0673.html) displays a cavalier attitude towards pointless murder and criticism for pacifism, (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0540.html) and murders rivals in less-than-honorable circumstances. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0648.html)
I think Haley hit it on the head when she called herself "Chaotic Good...ish". She certainly acts good most of the time (now), but she has to work at it, and backslides more often than, to pick a random example, Roy.

[martianmister]

While that's certainly his greatest failure (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0488.html), it's still not enough to get him chucked out of LG. After all, it's just one mistake, and one which he recognized pretty quickly.

Unless you mean that LG is more good than CG, I don't see the relation of this to my post.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Unless you mean that LG is more good than CG, I don't see the relation of this to my post.
I don't. I mean only that that one act isn't enough to make him not good, which brings into question why that singular act would make someone significantly less good than someone else.
Alone, that's a pretty terrible argument, which is why I didn't leave it on its own. I included other arguments about Haley, pointing out a pattern of un-Good actions which I suggest would cause her to be less Good than Roy. I'm not sure why you ignored them, seeing as they were the meat of my argument.
I'm getting the feeling that you're not invested in the discussion so much as you want to find easy points to tear apart. Is that accurate?

[Sir_Norbert]

I'm not sure what you mean by that, but it is common knowledge that the books are bonus content and plot related thing have to appear in online strip, eventually.

That is far from being the "opposite" of the claim 'Rich sees his books as "his main work"'; it isn't even evidence one way or the other as to whether that claim is true. Rich is aware that more people read the webcomic than buy the books, and wants to accommodate those readers by making sure they don't miss anything integral to understanding the plot.

[Ruck]

I'm not sure what you mean by that, but it is common knowledge that the books are bonus content and plot related thing have to appear in online strip, eventually. That's why he said that not including Crystal's attempts to kill Haley was a mistake.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=59680&postcount=22

I am not clear what you are trying to say here, so let's take it from the top.


It’s a shame we didn’t get much a hint of that in the main strip; without it, it seems a really dark moment for Hayley.


I'd imagine Rich sees his books as "his main work".

OK, I think I see the problem. Teioh is right in that the online strips are the "main strip" as in the main canon, and that the rest is bonus material. But I also think it's correct in a different sense that Rich sees the strip as his "main work"; he has said that he writes the comic with the intent of publishing it in book form and prioritizing that as the medium he wants it to work best in.

[martianmister]

Alone, that's a pretty terrible argument, which is why I didn't leave it on its own. I included other arguments about Haley, pointing out a pattern of un-Good actions which I suggest would cause her to be less Good than Roy. I'm not sure why you ignored them, seeing as they were the meat of my argument.

I wasn't aware that you were serious about these, considering you just claimed there that Haley "seriously contemplated slavery."

[GreatWyrmGold]

I wasn't aware that you were serious about these, considering you just claimed there that Haley "seriously contemplated slavery."
I was referring to the time Haley seriously contemplated selling Samantha into slavery (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0171.htm). I didn't want to spend too much time dwelling on that one instance, since that would risk implying that single incident was more critical to a judgement of Haley's alignment than I wanted to imply, but I realize now that it was kinda ambiguous. So I decided to explain what I meant, link to the strip, and suggest that you engage with the argument. Which I have now done.