The dominated elders have been told to "Vote 'Yes' on the main proposal"...

[rferries]

...but what if Dvalin appears to the Council and happens to phrase his question along the lines of "should I go back to the other gods and tell them to preserve the world", instead of "hey guys, should I vote to destroy the world"? The dominated elders will mindlessly vote against the vampires' interests, due to the phrasing.

Solving the problem with a trivial loophole like that (especially if the vampires hold off the OOTS long enough to appear victorious at first) might be thematically appropriate for all the detailed rules-lawyering around the Godsmoot etc this arc. Especially if Dvalin wasn't even intending to subvert the plot haha :D

[Rrmcklin]

...but what if Dvalin appears to the Council and happens to phrase his question along the lines of "should I go back to the other gods and tell them to preserve the world", instead of "hey guys, should I vote to destroy the world"? The dominated elders will mindlessly vote against the vampires' interests, due to the phrasing.

Solving the problem with a trivial loophole like that (especially if the vampires hold off the OOTS long enough to appear victorious at first) might be thematically appropriate for all the detailed rules-lawyering around the Godsmoot etc this arc. Especially if Dvalin wasn't even intending to subvert the plot haha :D

What you call "thematically appropriate" I'd call "terrible writing and a waste of the readers' time".

[woweedd]

What you call "thematically appropriate" I'd call "terrible writing and waste of the readers' time".
I wouldn't go that far, but i'm 100% sure that The Order themselves will play the main role in Hel's defeat. Possibly via the method he outlined, IE getting Davlin to rephrase the question, but still doing the work themselves rather then letting a secondary character resolve the problem. One vital rule of dramatic tension: It has to be clear that our protagonists actually changed the resolution of the problem in some way.

[Mandor]

...but what if Dvalin appears to the Council and happens to phrase his question along the lines of "should I go back to the other gods and tell them to preserve the world", instead of "hey guys, should I vote to destroy the world"? The dominated elders will mindlessly vote against the vampires' interests, due to the phrasing.

Solving the problem with a trivial loophole like that (especially if the vampires hold off the OOTS long enough to appear victorious at first) might be thematically appropriate for all the detailed rules-lawyering around the Godsmoot etc this arc. Especially if Dvalin wasn't even intending to subvert the plot haha :D

I'd actually speculated on this on the #1157 thread, somewhere on Page 7.


Logically then, all the Order needs to do is ensure the phrasing of the question is reversed.

"Should the gods destroy the world?"
to
"Should the gods continue to try to contain the Snarl in this world?"

And then the Exarch will have been massively hoist by his own petard.
Of course, exactly how you'd get the question to BE reversed.... when the gods themselves are that tightly divided on the outcome.... difficult to see a path.

But I believe Xyril's reply to me is hard to argue with.
There's just no real reason to think the phrasing of the question can be altered at this late stage, and still count as valid in any voting system.
Especially where the gods themselves are divided 50/50. You're not going to get unianimous agreement to alter the bill that's being voted on now.



It seems like the rules would disallow it. In pretty much any real life legislative process, precise phrasing is very important--ideally, we get to a resolution that best reflects the will of the body by changing the language until we get a specific law or statement that a majority can get behind. As others have argued, if it's reasonable to expect Dvalin to follow the result of a corrupted vote, that implies that he's either unaware the vote was subverted, or he feels so bound to follow the letter of the rules that he will abide by the vote despite any personal misgivings. The latter in particular would imply that he probably wouldn't break any procedural rules that exist. In particular, since the Godsmoot formulated the vote as a particularly worded proposition decided specifically by a simple up-down vote, changing the wording of the proposition to have the opposite meaning seems like precisely the sort of procedural shenanigans you'd want to have a rule against.

Moreover, while your second option would naturally preclude the original proposition--can't contain the Snarl in this world if you destroy it tomorrow--it's not strictly speaking the logical opposite. There are other options beyond "containing the Snarl in this world until the next vote" and "destroying the world immediately." They all probably suck, but they logically exist. It's like asking, "Do you vote for candidate A for this position?" and then turning around and saying "Okay, I'm entering the guys who voted 'No' as voting 'Yes' on supporting candidate B for this position, since he's the only other viable candidate." It's just not the same, and even if there's no other candidate, viable or not, politics can be weird, and someone unwilling to vote to support one option might not be willing to be seen affirmatively supporting the opposite proposition.

[Gluteus_Maximus]

But if the exarch and the vampires are going to be hiding in the room, couldn't they tell the people in the meeting to say "no" instead, since he has told them to follow any verbal commands given by a vampire?

[Keltest]

But if the exarch and the vampires are going to be hiding in the room, couldn't they tell the people in the meeting to say "no" instead, since he has told them to follow any verbal commands given by a vampire?

Only if their presence doesn't violate dwarven law. "It is forbidden for anybody not participating in a vote to enter an official voting chamber" or something like that.

[The MunchKING]

But if the exarch and the vampires are going to be hiding in the room, couldn't they tell the people in the meeting to say "no" instead, since he has told them to follow any verbal commands given by a vampire?

That's what I was thinking when I read that.

[jayem]

I wouldn't go that far, but i'm 100% sure that The Order themselves will play the main role in Hel's defeat. Possibly via the method he outlined, IE getting Davlin to rephrase the question, but still doing the work themselves rather then letting a secondary character resolve the problem. One vital rule of dramatic tension: It has to be clear that our protagonists actually changed the resolution of the problem in some way.

In story, I think there's a reasonable case for wording being always reversed. We've not seen the proposal for the dwarves, the dwarves haven't seen the god-moot. Going from the god-moot to the council will involve some changes. The important thing is that he can and does then interpret his question and answer right back into the gods-moot question and answer.
If Hel's plan flat out fails for this, that is however (subject to Rich proving us wrong) terrible story wise for the reasons. If it just forces the vampires to be on the back foot then that is better. As the vampires can just try to give verbal instructions it seems likely that this would be the case.

If the order (have anticipated or) find out the plan and inact the change that potentially is ok (again depending on the actual set-up). It wouldn't be unbelievable for the council to debate and for the final proposition to more or less be the last sentence (although in that case it wouldn't really be a proposition).

[King of Nowhere]

it would be anticlimatic for the order to lose, only for the plot to be saved by unknown characters.

on the other hand, the current predicament makes dvalin look dumb.

it is possible to save both by having the order defeat the vampires, and at the same time the revelation that the vote would have not been swayed either way.

We already have a precedent for something similar when V got his soul splice, and was about to solve a lot of plot points that got solved by other means just at the same time. I expect something like that to happen again.

[dps]

Only if their presence doesn't violate dwarven law. "It is forbidden for anybody not participating in a vote to enter an official voting chamber" or something like that.

There would have been no reason for the ex-exarch's instructions to include "and follow any verbal instructions given to you by a vampire" if some of the vampires weren't going to be in the chamber.

[Fyraltari]

Only if their presence doesn't violate dwarven law. "It is forbidden for anybody not participating in a vote to enter an official voting chamber" or something like that.

The exarch explicitly state that the vampires are going inside.

[woweedd]

it would be anticlimatic for the order to lose, only for the plot to be saved by unknown characters.

on the other hand, the current predicament makes dvalin look dumb.

it is possible to save both by having the order defeat the vampires, and at the same time the revelation that the vote would have not been swayed either way.

We already have a precedent for something similar when V got his soul splice, and was about to solve a lot of plot points that got solved by other means just at the same time. I expect something like that to happen again.
Yes, but the point of that was to show that V's maintaining their deal for one second longer then it took to save their kids was, more-or-less, pointless. Rendering the Order's role in resolving the conflict retroactively meaningless would just serve to ssuck the air out of an heroic moment.

[Synesthesy]

I'd actually speculated on this on the #1157 thread, somewhere on Page 7.


I did it too, on page 5 :P


And actually I don't find it a story problem if the day is saved with a clever use of the rules, instead of a fight, if our heroes are still involved in that use of the rules.

I don't really expect that to happen, I just was thinking that often in a democracy when there is a referendum, you should vote "no" for "yes" and "yes" for "no", so that givin an explicit order of voting yes instead of no isn't a plan that is safe if you aren't 100% sure about what the question is and how it is phrased.

[deuterio12]

Solving the problem with a trivial loophole like that (especially if the vampires hold off the OOTS long enough to appear victorious at first) might be thematically appropriate for all the detailed rules-lawyering around the Godsmoot etc this arc. Especially if Dvalin wasn't even intending to subvert the plot haha :D

The problem isn't the elders voting.

The problem is that the elders are dominated.

The elitest dwarf warriors tasked with guarding their elders are dominated.

The vampires are either dominating or converting the dwarves to vampirism at lighting speed, killing all those that resist. With their leaders and best troops under vampire control, mounting a resistance is impossible.

No matter what's the vote outcome, Hel's already won, most of the dwarven souls will neatly fall in her lap. The Oots can't hope to catch up now, the vampires are multiplying faster than can be destroyed.

[woweedd]

The problem isn't the elders voting.

The problem is that the elders are dominated.

The elitest dwarf warriors tasked with guarding their elders are dominated.

The vampires are either dominating or converting the dwarves to vampirism at lighting speed, killing all those that resist. With their leaders and best troops under vampire control, mounting a resistance is impossible.

No matter what's the vote outcome, Hel's already won, most of the dwarven souls will neatly fall in her lap. The Oots can't hope to catch up now, the vampires are multiplying faster than can be destroyed.

I...what do you mean?

[Elanasaurus]

I...what do you mean?I suppose he thinks that, even if the vampires fail, they can still pose a problem by being a significant threat to the dwarven lands, and that the even the Order would have trouble stopping them. He also seems to assume that the guards are the "elitest" for some reason, which they could possibly be, if the Council of Clans is/was considered that important.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

The problem isn't the elders voting.

The problem is that the elders are dominated.

The elitest dwarf warriors tasked with guarding their elders are dominated..

They aren’t elite guard. Anymore than the clan head bodyguards are elite guards. They are almost certainly sub-level 4 warriors, just like the soldiers of Azure city.

This is not an army that the vampires could use to take over dwarven lands. Once their surprise advantage is gone, now that they don’t have Greg, they’d fall to even low level priests and the actual dwarven armies.

Grey Wolf

[Fyraltari]

Indeed, besides their ‘success’ so far is mostly due to Malack’s spell which can only be cast by Clerics and they have only three of those (two of you assume the blue-robes one isn’t high level enough to cast it).
Most of their number already fell to the Order, most of the ennemies they could raise would be vampire spawns, inferior versions of the real deal, most non-thrall would have no reason to join this doomed fight and leave and the day staff of the Clergy of Thor is about to go to the Temple and learn what happened overnight.


But even ignoring all that, how does that help Hel? Dwarves who die in combat die with honor meaning that the vast majority of the casualties of a vampire invasion would escape Hel, like Sandstone, Minrah and Longsufferingdaughter.

[thereaper]

The vote at the godsmoot only had one proposal. So, why did Gontor's vampire specify "the main proposal"? That implies that other things might be slipped in. If Dvalin isn't from this world, it is entirely possible that the fate of the world is not the main thing for him.

I do agree, however, that victory or defeat here will most likely not be determined by Dvalin. Durkon will not solve this plot by being completely and utterly passive.

[mjasghar]

Dvalin is the first high king of dwarves in this world that’s been stated I’m pretty sure

[The MunchKING]

The vote at the godsmoot only had one proposal. So, why did Gontor's vampire specify "the main proposal"? That implies that other things might be slipped in.

Lady Complainsalot says she gets called to these things "Every few Years" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1155.html). Assuming Godsmoots and Dvalin needing to make calls isn't a common thing then there's probably loads of mundane business that the heads of the clans work out at these things. So whomever is organizing this probably has the usual business to do first and then the Dvalin thing is going to be the Main Event.


Dvalin is the first high king of dwarves in this world that’s been stated I’m pretty sure

High Priestess refers to him as "First King" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1016.html), she doesn't specifically say it's from this world. Dvalin talks like it was recently enough to be this world, but all the Gods talked like that before the reveal.

[Fyraltari]

High Priestess refers to him as "First King" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1016.html), she doesn't specifically say it's from this world. Dvalin talks like it was recently enough to be this world, but all the Gods talked like that before the reveal.

Nitpick, that's Odin speaking, not his priestess.

[SlashDash]

Also note that they can't make more vampires.

This was a big plot point of Haley noting that Greg learned the spell to raise them from the staff.

The staff is destroyed, Greg is gone and nobody had the chance to learn it.

[SlashDash]

If we're going into it, I'm pretty sure the whole "follow the orders" thing will be part of their undoing.
At some point, one of the vampires will say something metaphorically that the elders will take literally and thus it will end badly for them.


But I agree that either way, it will either be intentional on Durkon's part or that it will be as a comic relief after the situation will resolve already.


The order cannot win this situation by dumb luck, they have to "earn" their victory.
Otherwise it is just terrible writing.

[Fyraltari]

Also note that they can't make more vampires.

This was a big plot point of Haley noting that Greg learned the spell to raise them from the staff.

The staff is destroyed, Greg is gone and nobody had the chance to learn it.

"Ponchula" did (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1124.html). And "Sandy" was with her when they raised those spawns (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1087.html). I'd be really surprised if neither "Sandy" nor the Exaargh could cast that spell.

[Riftwolf]

Only if their presence doesn't violate dwarven law. "It is forbidden for anybody not participating in a vote to enter an official voting chamber" or something like that.

The elder we saw was accompanied by two guards and her daughter. If they'd be allowed in, it's unlikely only voters are allowed into the chamber, and the same rules that allow the daughter to tag along as a guest would allow the vampires in as well.

[Dion]

Durkon will not solve this plot by being completely and utterly passive.

Unless he somehow solves the problem while being turned to stone!

[EmperorSarda]

I think we are overlooking something. If the votes are fully explained, I don't think the Dwarves will vote with the vampires. Domination or not.

We already know a Paladin's domination can be broken when confronted with slaying his political ruler to whom he has sworn allegiance. How much more powerful is the threat of eternal damnation? Where they live their lives so much more honorably than a paladin because how one dies determines where they go.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I think we are overlooking something. If the votes are fully explained, I don't think the Dwarves will vote with the vampires. Domination or not.

We already know a Paladin's domination can be broken when confronted with slaying his political ruler to whom he has sworn allegiance. How much more powerful is the threat of eternal damnation? Where they live their lives so much more honorably than a paladin because how one dies determines where they go.

It has been brought up before, and I find it to lack merit, especially if the alternative scenario is given to them: "risk all dwarven and non-dwarven souls be erased from existence". Heck, the dwarves in the council might think it is their honorable duty to vote for destruction because it is better for most creatures, even if it shafts dwarves. Dwarves taking the right thing even if its cost them personally is what being a dwarf is all about, after all.

Grey Wolf

[Rrmcklin]

It has been brought up before, and I find it to lack merit, especially if the alternative scenario is given to them: "risk all dwarven and non-dwarven souls be erased from existence". Heck, the dwarves in the council might think it is their honorable duty to vote for destruction because it is better for most creatures, even if it shafts dwarves. Dwarves taking the right thing even if its cost them personally is what being a dwarf is all about, after all.

Grey Wolf

I know you're just speaking hypothetically, but I still feel the need to say I'm more skeptical of that idea than many other people seem to be. Yes, what you describe is the dwarven ideal, but the thing about ideals is that real people very rarely, if ever, actually live up to them.

And that's in situation if we're talking about an inevitable outcome, I find the idea that the Dwarven Council would be likely to send all ten million+ of their people to Hel on the chance (because remember, it's not guaranteed the world will be destroyed) that it could save the souls of every other living thing very suspect, at best.

I mean, Durkon and his mother are the dwarfiest dwarves they are, and even they can't totally live up to these standards all the time.

[Peelee]

IAnd that's in situation if we're talking about an inevitable outcome, I find the idea that the Dwarven Council would be likely to send all ten million+ of their people to Hel on the chance (because remember, it's not guaranteed the world will be destroyed) that it could save the souls of every other living thing very suspect, at best.

There is no chance that it could save all the souls. That's the default outcome. It's the definite, not the chance. The chance is that their souls will be destroyed.

[hroþila]

I interpreted what Rrmcklin was saying as "it's not even a sure thing yet that if they vote No the Snarl will unmake everybody, there's a chance it'll all work out in the end and if that were the case then they wouldn't be saving anybody by voting Yes now".

[Peelee]

I interpreted what Rrmcklin was saying as "it's not even a sure thing yet that if they vote No the Snarl will unmake everybody, there's a chance it'll all work out in the end and if that were the case then they wouldn't be saving anybody by voting Yes now".

In that case, that's one hell of a bet, especially if they don't know of any efforts to stop the world from ending.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

In that case, that's one hell of a bet, especially if they don't know of any efforts to stop the world from ending.

Indeed. I don't see why it makes any difference. I know if I was given the following choices:
A) Kill everyone immediately. 99% will go to the afterlife they fit best in, but me and 10 million others will go to Hel and be tortured
B) Risk souls being utterly destroyed - risk being defined as "the gods will do their best to save many, but can't them save all" (lets say, we don't know what exactly is the consequence of Loki's "let's wait until the Snarl is 10 minutes from being loose before we do anything")

I'm not a gambling person, so I dislike B off the bat, but oblivion is definitely a better outcome for me personally than torture. But if I grew up in a culture where doing the right thing, no matter what it costs me personally, is central to my identity, that reinforces my dislike of gambling. I'd go with A.

The thing is, we know the council is not going to be given the full pictur, because of the gag order on the Snarl, but we don't know how much of the picture they will be given. Heck, for all we know they'll be given the following: "Do you want Dvalin to vote yes on the current Godsmoot question" or even a slightly less spartan "Do you want Dvalin to vote yes on destroying the world" which means, devoid of being informed of the consequences of the vote, it's be really stupid to vote anything other than no, and maybe then -maybe- you could make a case for that breaking the domination. But we don't know what the question will be, so the idea that simply voting will break domination requires assumptions that are not necessarily true.

Grey Wolf

[rbetieh]

I dont even know how the vote can be brought up at all, without violating the "dont tell anyone about the snarl" rule. I mean if you just ask "Should the gods unmake this world and make a new one" everyone who wishes to stay alive will just vote "No".

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I dont even know how the vote can be brought up at all, without violating the "dont tell anyone about the snarl" rule. I mean if you just ask "Should the gods unmake this world and make a new one" everyone who wishes to stay alive will just vote "No".

"Do you think Dvalin should side with Heindal in the current pantheon vote? Sorry we can't tell you what the vote is about, there's a gag order need-to-know, minor-deity or above".

Grey Wolf

[Peelee]

"Do you think Dvalin should side with Heindal in the current pantheon vote? Sorry we can't tell you what the vote is about, there's a gag order need-to-know, minor-deity or above".

Grey Wolf

"The world is on the brink of destruction. It is not certain. If the cataclysm comes to be, many souls will be utterly destroyed. Some may be saved. If the gods destroy the world themselves, all will die but their souls will be saved. Shall the gods destroy the world, or risk the cataclysm?"

[Grey_Wolf_c]

"The world is on the brink of destruction. It is not certain. If the cataclysm comes to be, many souls will be utterly destroyed. Some may be saved. If the gods destroy the world themselves, all will die but their souls will be saved. Shall the gods destroy the world, or risk the cataclysm?"
Small edit: it seems the voting will be a yes-or-no question, and the vampires expect "yes" to be "world destruction immediately".

Grey Wolf

[Peelee]

Small edit: it seems the voting will be a yes-or-no question, and the vampires expect "yes" to be "world destruction immediately".

Grey Wolf

Fair. It's also way wordier than I think the actual question will be, I just wanted to demonstrate that they can represent the stakes fairly well without breaking the gag order.

[Fyraltari]

I dont even know how the vote can be brought up at all, without violating the "dont tell anyone about the snarl" rule. I mean if you just ask "Should the gods unmake this world and make a new one" everyone who wishes to stay alive will just vote "No".

If I may blow my own horn for a moment:



He could go:
"There is a high risk that the soul of every mortal will be destroyed in the next few days. While there is a chance this does not come to pass the gods are considering destroying the world and sending all of you to your respective afterlives where your souls would be safe. In the case of your kinsmen however that means Hel. Should I vote to destroy the world or not?"

[Rrmcklin]

I interpreted what Rrmcklin was saying as "it's not even a sure thing yet that if they vote No the Snarl will unmake everybody, there's a chance it'll all work out in the end and if that were the case then they wouldn't be saving anybody by voting Yes now".

Yes.


In that case, that's one hell of a bet, especially if they don't know of any efforts to stop the world from ending.

I mean, I'd imagine the very fact that it's a question instead of the gods just doing it says there is a chance. Otherwise half the gods voting against it wouldn't make much sense is it.

Although that all depends on what Davlin tells them.

Regardless, I still find the certain some people bring up the proposition of "sacrifice all dwarves, to save the souls of everything else" very bewildering. Not that we've had a comprehensive survey or anything, but has any dwarf acted as if that's a thought that's crossed their mind? It certainly doesn't seem to be how the dwarf high-priests as the moot or Durkon thought. Or even Davlin himself.

[Peelee]

I mean, I'd imagine the very fact that it's a question instead of the gods just doing it says there is a chance. Otherwise half the gods voting against it wouldn't make much sense is it.

Yeah, but there's a difference between a chance of it not happening and people actively working towards it not happening. If I live below a damn and there's a large crack, there's a chance it won't break, but if people were working on making sure it didn't break I'd feel a whole lot better, ya know?

[Rrmcklin]

Yeah, but there's a difference between a chance of it not happening and people actively working towards it not happening. If I live below a damn and there's a large crack, there's a chance it won't break, but if people were working on making sure it didn't break I'd feel a whole lot better, ya know?

I mean, yes? do you believe the assumption should automatically be that no one is working on fixing the problem? Because that also strikes me as strange, and not how I've been envisioning this.

As has been said, we don't know how this question is even going to be phrased, I'm just pointing out an issue I've had for awhile, even though it won't really matter, because the world is going to be destroyed either way.

[Peelee]

I mean, yes? do you believe the assumption should automatically be that no one is working on fixing the problem? Because that also strikes me as strange, and not how I've been envisioning this.

If I was being asked, I would assume either nobody is working on the problem or there are but there is a very good chance they'll fail. Not confidence-inspiring, I gotta say.

[Rrmcklin]

If I was being asked, I would assume either nobody is working on the problem or there are but there is a very good chance they'll fail. Not confidence-inspiring, I gotta say.

Fair enough, but I imagine a chance, however slim, goes a lot further than certain doom, for most people. My overall point is I think it's been taken for granted how your average dwarf would look at this situation, and also an implicit assumption that the Council would be more "hardcore dwarf" than that - some of them, possibly, but that's really not a mindset that should be projected on to them so easily.

[Peelee]

Fair enough, but I imagine a chance, however slim, goes a lot further than certain doom, for most people. My overall point is I think it's been taken for granted how your average dwarf would look at this situation, and also an implicit assumption that the Council would be more "hardcore dwarf" than that - some of them, possibly, but that's really not a mindset that should be projected on to them so easily.

We also have to note that the world ending is not certain doom; at least, not moreso than the world ending and being completely unmade and your soul being destroyed. It's more like asking whether to immediately retire everybody to whatever nursing home they've paid into vs not do that, but also possibly have some people retire and the rest all die.

[Rrmcklin]

We also have to note that the world ending is not certain doom; at least, not moreso than the world ending and being completely unmade and your soul being destroyed. It's more like asking whether to immediately retire everybody to whatever nursing home they've paid into vs not do that, but also possibly have some people retire and the rest all die.

I'm aware, that's not the part I'm focusing on. I'm focusing on specifically "We agree to do this, even though it means all dwarf kind gets damned to hell for eternal suffering, while all other creatures go to their proper afterlives." Some people have occasionally talked as if that position is fairly likely for the Council to take, and I'm specifically going "I really doubt it."

Yes, in a vacuum, dying but going to the proper afterlife is "better" than being unmade. Well, for a lot of people anyway, I'm sure a spirited debate could be had of the merits of ceasing to exist over eternal torture or vice-versa, but I'm not interested in having that conversation right now.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Some people have occasionally talked as if that position is fairly likely for the Council to take

Assuming that by "some people" you mean or include me, no, not at all. The only question is whether such choice would be so "Obviously self-destructive" that dominated dwarves won't vote, and I just don't see it.

(There is also whether they'd get a second saving throw due to "forced to take actions against its nature", but that one is easily brushed aside with "even with a +2, that's probably not enough to make them saving the second time likely).

Grey Wolf

[Jasdoif]

Assuming that by "some people" you mean or include me, no, not at all. The only question is whether such choice would be so "Obviously self-destructive" that dominated dwarves won't vote, and I just don't see it.

(There is also whether they'd get a second saving throw due to "forced to take actions against its nature", but that one is easily brushed aside with "even with a +2, that's probably not enough to make them saving the second time likely).I don't think "say yes" is an action that's "obviously self-destructive" or "against their nature", anyway.

[Son of A Lich!]

Just as a hypothetical -

Lets pretend that the inner chamber is something like an anti-magic field. Casting a spell in the chamber is already a moot point, but the fact that you tried is what gets you petrified when you leave the council.

The Vampires fall in line expecting the dominated thralls to do as they were told, only to find that they are acting of their own volition. (If not a anti-magic field, part of the ceremony is having enchantments removed or a protection from good/evil or what have you - The Vampires thought they were getting to dominate the thralls, but there was something that Hel didn't know about and her clerics weren't privy to in life.)

In everyone's opinion, would the clan leaders be influenced to disagree with the vampires out of spite for them trying to tamper with the voting process?

I'm asking because Hel's defining character trait is not being very forward thinking. The Sphinx pox and forgetting the incubation period, the Wager with Thor, sending Giants to stop the air ship knowing how high level the party is, etc. Hel, even the idea of not being the first to "Break the Rules" when she is literally jury tampering to get the result she wants.

I have a hard time believing that Loki isn't a few steps ahead of her, here. This plan has too many moving parts for it to go off as expected and I'm not sure I believe the Order is going to show up to stop her from faceplanting herself again. I think it's better for Hel to be hoisted by her own petard and Loki to get a chance to say "Sorry, but were not idiots dear".

[Kish]

If the clan elders vote of their own volition, they'll vote against the world ending because it would kill them and send their people to Hel, no need for spite as a motivator.

[Son of A Lich!]

Just want to point out that I posted my comment before the new comic. The gate keeper (Purple worm? Nightcrawler?) was summoned, keeping the party from entering.

Hel's inability to think through her plans was reinforced with an example I didn't even think of.

I'm betting that the Petard has been lit and shes standing reaaaly close to it right now.


If the clan elders vote of their own volition, they'll vote against the world ending because it would kill them and send their people to Hel, no need for spite as a motivator.

But more to the point - If the ballot is worded in an ambiguous way, as Grey Wolf and others have pointed out, it may be selfish and un-dwarf like to choose to save the world for your own hide. I agree that Torture is an inferior outcome to Oblivion, but Hume's guillotine keeps me from saying that the vote is moot and in Loki's Favor.

We will see. But I'm betting 20 gold on "Loki scolds his daughter for her bad scheming" with a chaser on "The Clan Elders point out that if the Vampires had to cheat to get their vote, and vote against the Vampires, in spite".