Why the heroes should explain things to Xykon

[Alex Warlorn]

Xykon isn't unintelligent, and he understands the 'rules' the heroes play by (EDIT: NOT like Elan's dad understands the 'rules' of a narrative. He condescendingly knows heroes are too stupid to lie through their teeth at the final fight, which he's been on the losing end during his mortal life more than once.

If they told him 'The Snarl is gonna eat the world ANYWAY, if you blackmail the gods or not!' he'd know it wasn't a bluff!
Xykon is a sadistic murderer who places no value on the lives of anyone, but he's made clear that he doesn't mind the idea of eventually losing to a band of heroes... after he's seared himself into the memories of the world forever with a tenure as world dictator. He can't HAVE a legacy if the world and all souls there-in are unmade by the Snarl!

Sure, Redcloak is preparing to betray Xykon, and Xykon is readying himself for the moment Redcloak does the deed... But it would be more practical for the heroes to spell it out that NEITHER villain is going to archive their end goal no matter who wins! Same as Durkon trying to get Redcloak to tell his master that the Snarl is going to destroy everything unless he works WITH the other gods!

EDIT: Xykon was willing to let Roy leave and level-up and become more of an actual challenge for him.
And Xykon explicitly said he wants his LEGACY to be 'ruled the world.'

ALSO EDIT: Elan's dad wanted to rule part of the world from the shadows and die of old age, and didn't mind being an unknown to history as long as he lived a life of luxury in the mean time, and had a cold view what 'should' and 'shouldn't' happen in this adventure.

[Fyraltari]

Are you confusing Xykon and Tarquin?
Xykon has made it repeatedly clear that he doesn’t intend to be beaten by ANYONE.

[GloatingSwine]

If Xykon is presented with the options of win, flip the table, or throw the game he's going to go for a or b every time.

Throwing the game just isn't in his nature.

[factotum]

Yeah, I think you're confusing villains here. I'm pretty sure Xykon would take grim delight in watching the world burn from the safety of his fortress on the Astral Plane.

[martianmister]

That sounds like Tarquin.

[Gluteus_Maximus]

You're definitely mistaking with Tarquin. And, while I am of the (probably nonexistant) camp that says Tarquin will show up in the next book headed north with what remains of the Vector Legion, to help his son because he's thought of the consequences of his actions, and probably also "redemption arcs are catching on these days", Tarquin will never be convinced by someone else. He is the convincer, not the convincee.

[SirSoliloquy]

An anticlimax is the perfect ending for a villain whose chief concern is plot structure, so I think we're never going to see Tarquin again.

[Squire Doodad]

It sounds much more like what would happen if Tarquin was the big bad; he values his life moreso than being victorious - part of why he has flipped sides so often.
Xykon is smart enough to know that if his victory means his own death, it isn't worth it. However, that won't stop him. He knows he can just pop out to his fortress and survive, so he's probably going to just roll with it.

Explaining has a chance of working for both Xykon and RC, but Xykon is more likely to just burn everything if he is told his last few decades were pointless, whereas RC will go through a traditional panic attack and might end up not ending all things.

[CriticalFailure]

I think explaining things to Xykon will work if they tell him that the ritual won't give him anything and only helps TDO. In which case Xykon presumably adopts a new hobby of goblinoid genocide, starting with the one in the red cloak.

I think explaining things to Redcloak has a lot of ways it could go awry. In particular, if Xykon is told that the ritual won't help him and Redcloak doesn't know that TDO won't survive between worlds, it's very likely he'll destroy the final gate as a last ditch effort for plan B. Overall, I think it's very likely the last gate will fall and Redcloak being the one to do it in an attempt to salvage the plan also seems pretty likely.

[The Pilgrim]

Overall, I think it's very likely the last gate will fall and Redcloak being the one to do it in an attempt to salvage the plan also seems pretty likely.

There is only one small problem for that theory, though...
Redcloak already blew up the first Gate, and so far each Gate has been blown up by a different person.

[Morty]

The premise of the thread seems to be right for the wrong reasons. It would benefit the Order to reveal Redcloak's treachery to Xykon, simply because that makes a two-side fight into a three-side fight even if Xykon can't just obliterate Redcloak in short order.

This has nothing to do with legacy or anything else, though. Xykon was willing to let Roy level up because it'd be more interesting this way. His major motivation a lot of the time is simple boredom and lack of anything that'd challenge him.

[Reboot]

The premise of the thread seems to be right for the wrong reasons. It would benefit the Order to reveal Redcloak's treachery to Redcloak, simply because that makes a two-side fight into a three-side fight...

Yeah. Redcloak would be beside himself with anger ;)

[Fyraltari]

But they need to work with Redcloak in order to re-seal the Gates. Getting on his bad side is counter-productive.

[martianmister]

The premise of the thread seems to be right for the wrong reasons. It would benefit the Order to reveal Redcloak's treachery to Xykon, simply because that makes a two-side fight into a three-side fight even if Xykon can't just obliterate Redcloak in short order.

This has nothing to do with legacy or anything else, though. Xykon was willing to let Roy level up because it'd be more interesting this way. His major motivation a lot of the time is simple boredom and lack of anything that'd challenge him.

But they want to make an alliance with Redcloak and his god, ratting him out to Xykon is a terrible way to do that.

[Morty]

True, I sort of assumed a situation where they would want to fight Redcloak for some reason and forgot that Thor's mission for Durkon precludes that. In this case yeah, they're not going to want to do it.

Then again, I will be surprised if anything goes as smoothly as Thor told Durkon it would.

[tomandtish]

...If they told him 'The Snarl is gonna eat the world ANYWAY, if you blackmail the gods or not!' he'd know it wasn't a bluff! ...

Except remember that our heroes have no reason to assume he is operating from different info than they are. As far as they know, Xykon and Redcloak know exactly what will happen and don't care. They don't really know WHAT the villains' plan is, so they don't know that about the blackmail scheme.

[Plus_C]

People keep saying they should turn Xykon against Redcloak by telling him the truth, have you not been reading the comic? They need Redcloak (or at least the Dark One) to help stop the Snarl, being pasted by Xykon would put a dampener on that.

[Fyraltari]

Except remember that our heroes have no reason to assume he is operating from different info than they are. As far as they know, Xykon and Redcloak know exactly what will happen and don't care. They don't really know WHAT the villains' plan is, so they don't know that about the blackmail scheme.

They do actually. Xykon was pretty clear about wanting to rule the world, not destroy it (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0442.html), and Thor told them about the "Plane-shifting the Gates" part of the plan (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1142.html).

The rest is pretty simple inferences to make.

[CriticalFailure]

What do you think of the possibility that they don't realize that Redcloak has been lying but they accidentally end up revealing it when trying to parlay with Redcloak?

[tomandtish]

They do actually. Xykon was pretty clear about wanting to rule the world, not destroy it (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0442.html), and Thor told them about the "Plane-shifting the Gates" part of the plan (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1142.html).

The rest is pretty simple inferences to make.

Yep. You are right. I had forgotten that bit. I stand corrected.

[Finagle]

Even if Redcloak wins, Xykon doesn't get killed. He gets a comfy retirement in Goblinoid Paradise and likely a leading role in The New Plan: enslave everyone who's not a goblinoid.

[Fyraltari]

Even if Redcloak wins, Xykon doesn't get killed. He gets a comfy retirement in Goblinoid Paradise and likely a leading role in The New Plan: enslave everyone who's not a goblinoid.

No, I'm pretty sure that Redcloak wants Xykon deader than dead at this point.

[Morty]

Yeah, I'm not sure why we should assume that what Redcloak said before Xykon even became a lich is remotely true. If Redcloak doesn't try to kill Xykon once he can actually do it and justify it to himself, it won't be for a lack of wanting to.

[Fyraltari]

Yeah, I'm not sure why we should assume that what Redcloak said before Xykon even became a lich is remotely true. If Redcloak doesn't try to kill Xykon once he can actually do it and justify it to himself, it won't be for a lack of wanting to.

Oh, I’m sure he was being honest at the time. But their relationship turned out very differently from what he was picturing.

[Wizard_Lizard]

No, I'm pretty sure that Redcloak wants Xykon deader than dead at this point.

deader than dead dead?

[Morty]

Oh, I’m sure he was being honest at the time. But their relationship turned out very differently from what he was picturing.

That's my point, yes. At that moment, he was probably really willing to give Xykon a cushy retirement in the new goblin nation. Not so much now.

[Wizard_Lizard]

That's my point, yes. At that moment, he was probably really willing to give Xykon a cushy retirement in the new goblin nation. Not so much now.

A cushy retirement in Carceri.

[Fyraltari]

deader than dead dead?

Ain’t no coming back from the Snarl.

[Wizard_Lizard]

Ain’t no coming back from the Snarl.

unless plot magic.

[Finagle]

No, I'm pretty sure that Redcloak wants Xykon deader than dead at this point.
I haven't seen anything in-comic that would suggest that. Where did that idea come from?

[Squire Doodad]

unless plot magic.

Rich has made it explicitly clear that the Snarl is a one-way trip; the only way one could survive the Snarl is if either they weren't actually killed, or the Snarl stores the souls somewhere. Even True Resurrection (which Rich has gone out of his way to establish is not going to appear) will not be able to bring someone back.

[Morty]

I haven't seen anything in-comic that would suggest that. Where did that idea come from?

Is there anything in-comic to support the cushy retirement option?

[JeenLeen]

Do we have any reason to think Xykon couldn't retreat to his astral hide-away if the Snarl breaks free?

I could see him rampaging (kill Redcloak) and just plan on hiding away and planning to start his legacy on the new world. It seems like just the material plane gets obliterated, and thus he'd be safe on the astral, though that doesn't feel right.

[Squire Doodad]

Do we have any reason to think Xykon couldn't retreat to his astral hide-away if the Snarl breaks free?

I could see him rampaging (kill Redcloak) and just plan on hiding away and planning to start his legacy on the new world. It seems like just the material plane gets obliterated, and thus he'd be safe on the astral, though that doesn't feel right.

Assuming he always has a spell in place to permit him to flee to the fortress (which given most estimates of his level is likely), then it seems unlikely unless he uses it up at the same time a Dimensional Anchor gets thrown on or something. There's no way for him to not be able to without adding in preexisting circumstances which makes it highly speculative.

[Jasdoif]

It seems like just the material plane gets obliterated, and thus he'd be safe on the astral, though that doesn't feel right.I have doubts that the entire Eastern Pantheon was on the Material Plane when the Snarl killed them.

[Squire Doodad]

I have doubts that the entire Eastern Pantheon was on the Material Plane when the Snarl killed them.

I mean, if the gods can hide away somewhere very, very far, and Xykon has hidden his in the deeper areas of the Astral Planes, then he could conceivably survive assuming he doesn't a) get his memories wiped/spontaneously killed by something the gods do to stop the Outsiders from going mad or b) goes mad of his own lack of things to do.

[factotum]

I have doubts that the entire Eastern Pantheon was on the Material Plane when the Snarl killed them.

The other three pantheons explicitly hit from the Snarl in their "Outer Planes homes", so we know the Snarl can't get that far, and in fact the entire Plan involves moving gates into the homes of the gods so the Snarl can reach them, further corroborating that. It's unclear if it can reach the Astral or Ethereal Planes when free--I would say that the Gods felt able to build their planetary gravestones on the Astral means it, at least, is probably safe from the Snarl, but I have no proof of that, obviously.

Thinking about it, since the Eastern Pantheon is pretty clearly based on Greek mythology, isn't it possible that they made their homes on top of a honkin' great mountain on World #1 rather than away in the Outer Planes like the other pantheons?

[Jasdoif]

The other three pantheons explicitly hit from the Snarl in their "Outer Planes homes", so we know the Snarl can't get that far....We only know the Snarl didn't get that far. We don't know how they explicitly hid, nor if the Snarl even had the capability of finding them in spite of their hiding, nor if the Snarl would be able to get them if it found them. And as you were saying, the Astral Plane isn't one of the Outer Planes, so those things wouldn't necessarily apply even if we did know them.


Thinking about it, since the Eastern Pantheon is pretty clearly based on Greek mythology, isn't it possible that they made their homes on top of a honkin' great mountain on World #1 rather than away in the Outer Planes like the other pantheons?It's certainly possible. Just as it's possible all the gods were in exactly the same general area in the same Outer Plane when the Snarl revealed itself; and the Snarl hated the "color" of green quiddity so it killed the Eastern Gods in preference to the world (which contained green quiddity) in preference to the other gods...who had fled by that point.

"Possible" isn't going to get us very far, I'm afraid....Which is kind of why "Xykon'd be safe in his astral plane fortress" is an unwarranted claim.

[factotum]

We only know the Snarl didn't get that far. We don't know how they explicitly hid, nor if the Snarl even had the capability of finding them in spite of their hiding, nor if the Snarl would be able to get them if it found them.

I think there's enough evidence to suggest the Snarl definitely can't get to the Outer Planes. There have been countless worlds since the beginning of time, and after each one the Snarl is freed for however long it takes the Gods to make the next world. If it hasn't been able to get to the gods in the Outer Planes in all that time, I think it's reasonably safe to assume that it cannot. Plus, as I mentioned, the whole point of the Plan is to enable the Snarl to attack the gods in the Outer Planes--why would that be necessary if it could get there anyway?

My reasoning for the Snarl not being able to get to the Astral Plane either is that the "graveyard" for the worlds is there. I suppose it's possible that the Gods don't create the marker for the previous world until the Snarl is safely imprisoned in the next one, but I personally believe it more reasonable that they create the marker very soon after the world's destruction, while the Snarl is still free, and why would they risk doing that if they were in a location where it could get at them? You would think they'd put the markers in the Outer Planes if that were the case.

[ijuinkun]

In regards to Xykon possibly fleeing to his Astral fortress in the event of the world's destruction, there is the little matter that, currently unknown to him, Redcloak has pulled a switcheroo on his phylactery and thus the one being protected in the fortress is not the real article. Thus, if Xykon flees without first discovering and recovering his real phylactery, then it will be destroyed along with the world (probably when Redcloak is destroyed if he is keeping it on him).

[factotum]

In regards to Xykon possibly fleeing to his Astral fortress in the event of the world's destruction, there is the little matter that, currently unknown to him, Redcloak has pulled a switcheroo on his phylactery and thus the one being protected in the fortress is not the real article. Thus, if Xykon flees without first discovering and recovering his real phylactery, then it will be destroyed along with the world (probably when Redcloak is destroyed if he is keeping it on him).

That doesn't actually matter, at least not if we believe what Xykon says in SoD:


Redcloak threatens to destroy the phylactery and Xykon tells him to go ahead, because "I'm not in there right now". Destroying the phylactery does not destroy Xykon unless his body has already been destroyed and his soul has been forced to take refuge.

[Finagle]

Is there anything in-comic to support the cushy retirement option?
Yes, Redcloak discusses the upcoming betrayal and says they can give him a cushy retirement is the new goblin nation.

[Morty]

Yes, Redcloak discusses the upcoming betrayal and says they can give him a cushy retirement is the new goblin nation.

So you did read Start of Darkness. This conversation happens when Redcloak had just met Xykon, is his employer/accomplice rather than slave and generally has no idea when he's getting into. And he clearly acknowledges they might need to have the Dark One kill him anyway. That's before Xykon had abused and humiliated Redcloak for decades, including the very end of Start of Darkness.

[Jannoire]

I think there's enough evidence to suggest the Snarl definitely can't get to the Outer Planes. There have been countless worlds since the beginning of time, and after each one the Snarl is freed for however long it takes the Gods to make the next world. If it hasn't been able to get to the gods in the Outer Planes in all that time, I think it's reasonably safe to assume that it cannot. Plus, as I mentioned, the whole point of the Plan is to enable the Snarl to attack the gods in the Outer Planes--why would that be necessary if it could get there anyway?

So it can get where the Gods are?
You don't win hide&seek by hiding in a room where the seeker can't enter, you win by hiding where he can't find you. I don't think the snarl is unable to go to the outer planes. He just doesn't do it. Why would he? There's nothing for him there...
The whole purpose of the ritual is to give TDO control over the gate so he can put it directly behind the other gods.

[factotum]

I don't think the snarl is unable to go to the outer planes. He just doesn't do it. Why would he? There's nothing for him there...

You mean, other than the Gods he hates and wants to see destroyed?

[Reboot]

You mean, other than the Gods he hates and wants to see destroyed?

That's assigning a level of motive to the Snarl that there's not yet any evidence for. With the info we have, it seems like a fly aiming at the nearest "light source", even if the consequences are very different.

[Kish]

I haven't seen anything in-comic that would suggest that.
That is a truly remarkable display of not seeing.

[Dion]

I can’t see an ending to this comic that involves Xykon being alive (err... or not destroyed, or whatever you do to undead to make them stop waking around).

He’s a sadistic, impulsive, half-mad epic level lich who wants to rule the world. I don’t see a way to integrate him into a the world of the future in a way that resolves the conflict.

He *might* be convinced to allow himself be destroyed, but that seems very unlikely.

I think he’s going down with a fight.

[Squire Doodad]

I can’t see an ending to this comic that involves Xykon being alive (err... or not destroyed, or whatever you do to undead to make them stop waking around).

He’s a sadistic, impulsive, half-mad epic level lich who wants to rule the world. I don’t see a way to integrate him into a the world of the future in a way that resolves the conflict.

He *might* be convinced to allow himself be destroyed, but that seems very unlikely.

I think he’s going down with a fight.

Or at least being destroyed. It's possible that he will go down just the way he was originally going to- everyone gets into fighting position, Roy charges, Xykon tells RC to cast a spell or do something, RC stops for a moment, thinks and then


"Disrupt" on Roy's blade, Xykon's gone. No lengthy fight rife with one-liners and reversals, just a brief 2 round defeat.

[Reboot]

Or at least being destroyed. It's possible that he will go down just the way he was originally going to- everyone gets into fighting position, Roy charges, Xykon tells RC to cast a spell or do something, RC stops for a moment, thinks and then

"Disrupt" on Roy's blade, Xykon's gone. No lengthy fight rife with one-liners and reversals, just a brief 2 round defeat.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/disruptingWeapon.htm

On the face of it, that was always impossible in the first instance, and still is even with RC (who can cast ninth level spells) now. Xykon must have more hit dice than RC has caster levels...

[Kish]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/disruptingWeapon.htm

On the face of it, that was always impossible in the first instance, and still is even with RC (who can cast ninth level spells) now. Xykon must have more hit dice than RC has caster levels...
The spell Durkon cast was Disruption, not Disrupting Weapon.

There are (at least) two ways to read that.

1) D&D rules uber alles: Durkon meaninglessly said the spell name wrong, Roy's sword was never actually a threat to Xykon.
2) Knowledge you have to look up in a D&D book, which isn't suggested in the comic, is probably invalid: Durkon cast Disruption, a spell which could have destroyed Xykon's body. It's found in the same book as Tsukiko's Amazing Wight-Making Spell.

I think pushing option #1 suggests a lack of attention to Rich's creative process.

[Fish]

They could pass Xykon a note.


Do you want to help not destroy the world? If so, check this box.

[. ] yes

P.S. Redcloak is going to betray you.

[Reboot]

The spell Durkon cast was Disruption, not Disrupting Weapon.

There are (at least) two ways to read that.

1) D&D rules uber alles: Durkon meaninglessly said the spell name wrong, Roy's sword was never actually a threat to Xykon.
2) Knowledge you have to look up in a D&D book, which isn't suggested in the comic, is probably invalid: Durkon cast Disruption, a spell which could have destroyed Xykon's body. It's found in the same book as Tsukiko's Amazing Wight-Making Spell.

I think pushing option #1 suggests a lack of attention to Rich's creative process.

3) In the Azure City fight - despite casting a bunch of last-minute buffs on Roy before he jumped, and expecting Xykon to be amongst the invaders (and thus having motive to prepare it) - Durkon did not cast "Disruption" on Roy's sword. Almost as if he knew it wouldn't have helped, whatever he said the prior time...

[Jasdoif]

Plus, as I mentioned, the whole point of the Plan is to enable the Snarl to attack the gods in the Outer Planes--why would that be necessary if it could get there anyway?Because sending the Snarl directly after gods without giving them time to prepare for it drastically impacts those gods' preparedness for it (the sudden attack worked well enough in Snarl-vs-Eastern-Pantheon). And the Snarl's already not on the Material Plane (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0275.html); it's clearly able to operate beyond a single plane on its own.


My overall Snarl theory hypothesis at this point is that the Snarl and rifts can span multiple planes, much like how a 3D sphere intersects multiple 2D planes. And that, like a sphere, their cross section is bigger on planes closer to their origin point. And that the rifts are where a transplanar line expands out on onto a plane, and a big enough rift on the Material Plane means there are smaller rifts on adjoining planes. And that the Gate ritual doesn't actually move the line that's the the center of the trans-planar rift, but magically shifts the rift along that line to the corresponding point another plane...resulting in an explosive growth unlike that ever seen before from the perspective of that plane, which could well be enough to put gods in reach of the Snarl. This would handily explain why they keep trapping the Snarl rather than making a new world somewhere else, as well as why the Gate ritual can't move the rift to another spot on the same plane.

That is, of course, highly conjectural; particularly since the only known case of the Snarl killing gods is from before there was anything intended to contain/restrict the Snarl...which is a good reason not to use it as a foundation for calling something "safe".


My reasoning for the Snarl not being able to get to the Astral Plane either is that the "graveyard" for the worlds is there.It'd certainly be a reasonable conclusion that if Xykon's astral tomb thingy was in there with the monuments that have been safe from the Snarl, that it's probably safe from the Snarl. Since it's not, we're back at the point where I don't see not enough certainty to warrant the word "safe" in "just get off the Material Plane and you're safe". If nothing else, it's unclear if the barrier (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1139.html) plays any role at all, nor if there's some factor of the planar geography that Xykon wouldn't have any knowledge of when he chose the site for his fortress-tomb-thingy.

I mean, if we were going to go with "well we haven't seen it happen in all these eons, so it's safe to assume it can't happen" for the Snarl getting to the Outer Planes, I think the same logic would have to apply to unliving creature living enduring Snarlmageddon to see the next world. Why haven't we seen that? And why wouldn't we have seen that in a way that doesn't apply to why we haven't (explicitly) seen gods annihilated by the Snarl on an Outer Plane?

[thereaper]

3) In the Azure City fight - despite casting a bunch of last-minute buffs on Roy before he jumped, and expecting Xykon to be amongst the invaders (and thus having motive to prepare it) - Durkon did not cast "Disruption" on Roy's sword. Almost as if he knew it wouldn't have helped, whatever he said the prior time...

Xykon's will save is too high for that spell, but they didn't know that the first time they fought him.

[factotum]

If nothing else, it's unclear if the barrier (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1139.html) plays any role at all, nor if there's some factor of the planar geography that Xykon wouldn't have any knowledge of when he chose the site for his fortress-tomb-thingy.


The barrier, as far as described, is just an illusion that hides the monuments rather than any sort of impediment to progress, although, given the Astral is an infinite plane, I suppose "The Snarl hasn't found this bit yet" is always a possibility. I just think it's a risk the Gods have no reason to take, however infinitesimally small the chances of a problem become.

As for the Snarl not being on the material plane right now, that's the "tiny demiplane" that forms its prison. It hardly went there of its own volition! It can travel out of it by breaking its prison, but that doesn't mean it can make any other planar journeys.

As for the Snarl: I think the fact it chose to destroy the Eastern Gods first, *then* the planet, implies it has some particular hatred for the gods who created it. Yes, it desires destruction of anything, but there are priorities there.

[Kelenius]

As for the Snarl: I think the fact it chose to destroy the Eastern Gods first, *then* the planet, implies it has some particular hatred for the gods who created it. Yes, it desires destruction of anything, but there are priorities there.

If the gods were on the planet, that order of events is expected.

[Fyraltari]

I haven't seen anything in-comic that would suggest that. Where did that idea come from?

There (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0548.html), there (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html) and there (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0831.html). Oh and the fact that Xykon hijacked Redcloak's plan and caused the death of counless (hob)goblins including
tricking Redcloak into killing his own little brother.

Redcloak loathes Xykon.

[Squire Doodad]

If the gods were on the planet, that order of events is expected.

To add onto that, it could easily be plenty smart enough to recognize the way that quiddity makes things more durable, and so went ahead and killed off all of one pantheon to prevent it from being able to be permanently trapped. In such a case, the Eastern Gods were simply closest and/or most convenient.

[factotum]

To add onto that, it could easily be plenty smart enough to recognize the way that quiddity makes things more durable, and so went ahead and killed off all of one pantheon to prevent it from being able to be permanently trapped.

Except, not only was the Snarl not trapped at this point (it was world #2 that was its first prison), it explicitly states in the strip that "The Snarl was a thing born of chaos. It did not understand the pattern of the threads, even as it watched them take form around him." Until it was actually imprisoned for the first time it didn't know the Gods could even do that, so it seems unlikely that it planned ahead to that extent!

[Kelenius]

To add onto that, it could easily be plenty smart enough to recognize the way that quiddity makes things more durable, and so went ahead and killed off all of one pantheon to prevent it from being able to be permanently trapped. In such a case, the Eastern Gods were simply closest and/or most convenient.


Except, not only was the Snarl not trapped at this point (it was world #2 that was its first prison), it explicitly states in the strip that "The Snarl was a thing born of chaos. It did not understand the pattern of the threads, even as it watched them take form around him." Until it was actually imprisoned for the first time it didn't know the Gods could even do that, so it seems unlikely that it planned ahead to that extent!

My personal theory is that Snarl is drawn to the gods that created it for some reason, and the Eastern Pantheon was on the material plane when it broke free, so it went after them.

[Lacuna Caster]

So you did read Start of Darkness. This conversation happens when Redcloak had just met Xykon, is his employer/accomplice rather than slave and generally has no idea when he's getting into. And he clearly acknowledges they might need to have the Dark One kill him anyway. That's before Xykon had abused and humiliated Redcloak for decades, including the very end of Start of Darkness.

There (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0548.html), there (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html) and there (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0831.html). Oh and the fact that Xykon hijacked Redcloak's plan and caused the death of counless (hob)goblins including
tricking Redcloak into killing his own little brother.

Redcloak loathes Xykon.
I don't know. Redcloak is taking reasonable precautions against the day when Xykon finds out he's been duped, but they've also been the only constant in eachother's lives for several decades at this point. It's taken from a little earlier in the strip, before various events put more strain on the relationship, but one can see glimpses (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0462.html) of a certain camaraderie between the two here and there. (They did occasionally share a good belly-laugh about disposable minions (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0376.html), et cetera.) Maybe that's not affection, exactly, but it's more complicated than hate.

[deuterio12]

My personal theory is that Snarl is drawn to the gods that created it for some reason, and the Eastern Pantheon was on the material plane when it broke free, so it went after them.

Considering what we've seen of the gods, it could've just been "Weeee look at that snarl thing butchering the eastern pantheon isn't that funny? Also more souls for us yay! Wait, is it coming after us now AAAAHHHH!!!!"


I don't know. Redcloak is taking reasonable precautions against the day when Xykon finds out he's been duped, but they've also been the only constant in eachother's lives for several decades at this point. It's taken from a little earlier in the strip, before various events put more strain on the relationship, but one can see glimpses (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0462.html) of a certain camaraderie between the two here and there. (They did occasionally share a good belly-laugh about disposable minions (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0376.html), et cetera.) Maybe that's not affection, exactly, but it's more complicated than hate.

As they say, love and hate are sides of the same coin and can easily shift from one to another. Hel(l) had no fury like a woman scorned and stuff.

[martianmister]

Xykon and Redcloak had a love-hate kind of relationship. Redcloak's plans for Xykon would depend on their emotional attachment at the time.

[Squire Doodad]

Xykon and Redcloak had a love-hate kind of relationship. Redcloak's plans for Xykon would depend on their emotional attachment at the time.

Roll to save versus Platonic Friendship.

[Kyutaru]

You're correct in thinking that Xykon is intelligent. But that's also why he will not help the heroes. He knows that even if he releases the Snarl and dooms the world, the heroes will still figure out a way to make it all work out in the end. That's their job, they're heroes. It doesn't matter how badly Xykon messes things up, someone will clean up his mess. That's the logic that keeps him going. It's someone else's problem and they exist purely to solve problems so he's confident that they will.

Or he's taking a gamble considering he doesn't know many times the universe has imploded.

[Kelenius]

I don't know. Redcloak is taking reasonable precautions against the day when Xykon finds out he's been duped, but they've also been the only constant in eachother's lives for several decades at this point. It's taken from a little earlier in the strip, before various events put more strain on the relationship, but one can see glimpses (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0462.html) of a certain camaraderie between the two here and there. (They did occasionally share a good belly-laugh about disposable minions (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0376.html), et cetera.) Maybe that's not affection, exactly, but it's more complicated than hate.


Xykon and Redcloak had a love-hate kind of relationship. Redcloak's plans for Xykon would depend on their emotional attachment at the time.

Redcloak's opinion on Xykon (and undead in general) is crystal clear (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html). Redcloak tolerates him. There's no emotional attachment.

[martianmister]

Redcloak's opinion on Xykon (and undead in general) is crystal clear (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html). Redcloak tolerates him. There's no emotional attachment.

Of course he tries to deny it, but how true he was to himself?

Redcloak: Oh my god--I'm turning into XYKON! (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0451.html)

Xykon: ...we really had a shot at the prize there for a minute, didn't we?
Redcloak: Yeah. Yeah, we did. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0462.html)

[Morty]

Redcloak's views on Xykon are several layers of resentment, self-delusion and fear, because the real reasons he follows him are a) because he has to pretend it'll all be worth it and b) because Xykon will kill him if he doesn't.

[factotum]

Redcloak's views on Xykon are several layers of resentment, self-delusion and fear, because the real reasons he follows him are a) because he has to pretend it'll all be worth it and b) because Xykon will kill him if he doesn't.

And by this stage, I think the first reason is far more important than the second one. Redcloak's so deep into the sunk cost fallacy that he's practically submerged.

[Kelenius]

Of course he tries to deny it, but how true he was to himself?

Redcloak: Oh my god--I'm turning into XYKON! (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0451.html)

Xykon: ...we really had a shot at the prize there for a minute, didn't we?
Redcloak: Yeah. Yeah, we did. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0462.html)

First reaction is negative, second one happens when they're moments away from being killed, and neither shows any attachment. On the other hand, Redcloak consistently hates Xykon for killing goblins left and right for fun among other reasons. They have absolutely no concern for each other (good example: Xykon's reaction here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0662.html) - mind you, Redcloak was almost killed a couple of minutes before).

[martianmister]

There is different kinds of emotional attachments. One between Xykon and Redcloak is an obviously toxic one. Despite of his denials, Redcloak is well aware of this flaw and warns his apprentice about his past mistakes:

Redcloak: I know he seems funny and charming, but believe me...you will never sleep well again. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0548.html)

[Kelenius]

There is different kinds of emotional attachments. One between Xykon and Redcloak is an obviously toxic one. Despite of his denials, Redcloak is well aware of this flaw and warns his apprentice about his past mistakes:

Redcloak: I know he seems funny and charming, but believe me...you will never sleep well again. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0548.html)

On that page, Redcloak explains, in great details, why Xykon is a terrible person and why goblins shouldn't trust Xykon, and that... proves... that they have an emotional attachment? Where are you seeing it?

[martianmister]

Where are you seeing it?

I already highlighted where I see it.

[Kelenius]

I already highlighted where I see it.

The full quote is: "I know he seems funny and charming, but believe me, when you see for yourself the depths to which he'll sink— —you will never sleep well again."

That's not emotional connection. He's warning Jirix that Xykon is charismatic (because he's a sorcerer, geddit?), but he's a terrible person.

[martianmister]

The full quote is: "I know he seems funny and charming, but believe me, when you see for yourself the depths to which he'll sink— —you will never sleep well again."


That's not emotional connection. He's warning Jirix that Xykon is charismatic (because he's a sorcerer, geddit?), but he's a terrible person.

You can have an emotional connection with someone terrible and hated, that's why I called it a toxic relationship. Redcloak's warning to Jirix, his terrible realization about turning into Xykon, etc. This all shows that there is an insidious attachment growing between them, much to Redcloak's horror.

[Kelenius]

You can have an emotional connection with someone terrible and hated, that's why I called it a toxic relationship. Redcloak's warning to Jirix, his terrible realization about turning into Xykon, etc. This all shows that there is an insidious attachment growing between them, much to Redcloak's horror.

Not really. The only thing Redcloak warning Jirix shows is that Redcloak is warning Jirix. He does not have a single good thing to say about Xykon. He doesn't even say that Xykon is funny and charming, he says that he seems to be.

Similarly, "I am becoming similar this person" != "I am emotionally attached to this person".

[Wizard_Lizard]

I think that at the start RC znd Xykon were at least friendly, but later RC has been moving away.

[deuterio12]

Redcloak's views on Xykon are several layers of resentment, self-delusion and fear, because the real reasons he follows him are a) because he has to pretend it'll all be worth it and b) because Xykon will kill him if he doesn't.

According to stod, mostly second. Redcloak already tried to go out to buy cigarrettes and even was about to settle down and start a family, but then Xykon tracked him down and made it pretty clear he only knows two kinds of goblins: those who obey Xykon and goblin corpses.

[martianmister]

Not really. The only thing Redcloak warning Jirix shows is that Redcloak is warning Jirix. He does not have a single good thing to say about Xykon. He doesn't even say that Xykon is funny and charming, he says that he seems to be.

Don't you think he's talking from experience? Like, we see many strips with them acting like enjoying each other's company.

[Kelenius]

Don't you think he's talking from experience? Like, we see many strips with them acting like enjoying each other's company.

In the early strips? Possibly. And that would imply that Redcloak has no emotional attachment to Xykon now.

[Lacuna Caster]

Redcloak's opinion on Xykon (and undead in general) is crystal clear (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html). Redcloak tolerates him. There's no emotional attachment.
I... don't really know how to make a clearer case here, given you seem to be basically blind to emotional affect and subtext, even in a strip with explicit smiley-faces. I'll allow that Xykon & RC's dynamic has shifted over time, but 'crystal clarity' is not what I'd call it.


And by this stage, I think the first reason is far more important than the second one. Redcloak's so deep into the sunk cost fallacy that he's practically submerged.
Yeah, I'm increasingly unclear on how the text actually supports that conclusion. Redcloak's actually been successful at conquering large territories for goblin use and is about to be engaged by Durkon/Thor in negotiations for repairing the rifts which will presumably result in further long-term concessions to goblin interests. In short, his strategies of murderous pragmatism and existential brinkmanship will be essentially vindicated and the benefits to his people will have enormously outweighed the costs. The way it's headed, Xykon (and perhaps RC himself) will just be one more casualty of The Plan.

[Morty]

Don't you think he's talking from experience? Like, we see many strips with them acting like enjoying each other's company.

Yes, acting like it. Xykon made it clear at the end of SoD that he would let Redcloak pretend he doesn't own him, as long as Redcloak obeys him.



Yeah, I'm increasingly unclear on how the text actually supports that conclusion. Redcloak's actually been successful at conquering large territories for goblin use and is about to be engaged by Durkon/Thor in negotiations for repairing the rifts which will presumably result in further long-term concessions to goblin interests. In short, his strategies of murderous pragmatism and existential brinkmanship will be essentially vindicated and the benefits to his people will have enormously outweighed the costs. The way it's headed, Xykon (and perhaps RC himself) will just be one more casualty of The Plan.

The territory Redcloak has conquered is directly under a steadily growing rift, and we saw the Snarl explode out of another one at the end of the last book. To say nothing of whatever else can happen before now and the end; I'll be very surprised if Durkon negotiating with Redcloak goes nearly as smoothly as Thor thinks it will. Calling Redcloak vindicated is, to put it mildly, premature.

[Kelenius]

I... don't really know how to make a clearer case here, given you seem to be basically blind to emotional affect and subtext, even in a strip with explicit smiley-faces. I'll allow that Xykon & RC's dynamic has shifted over time, but 'crystal clarity' is not what I'd call it.

On the contrary, I believe you are seeing things that aren't there in their relationship. Redcloak absolutely hates Xykon. The only times when he acts friendly towards Xykon is around Xykon. He's only sincere with Jirix and Tsukiko before killing her.

[Lacuna Caster]

The territory Redcloak has conquered is directly under a steadily growing rift, and we saw the Snarl explode out of another one at the end of the last book. To say nothing of whatever else can happen before now and the end; I'll be very surprised if Durkon negotiating with Redcloak goes nearly as smoothly as Thor thinks it will. Calling Redcloak vindicated is, to put it mildly, premature.
I'm sure the road ahead is far from smooth, but given the author's obvious political sympathies I suspect the odds of this story ending with a return to the status quo for the goblin people is basically zero. Which means that Redcloak and the Dark One basically get what they want.


On the contrary, I believe you are seeing things that aren't there in their relationship. Redcloak absolutely hates Xykon. The only times when he acts friendly towards Xykon is around Xykon...
When they're both on the brink of death and fully expect not to survive the next ten rounds, Redcloak has the opportunity to basically spit in Xykon's face with zero repercussions. Instead, he reciprocates an expression of mutual solidarity between them. It's indirect evidence, sure, but it's not zero evidence.

[Morty]

I'm sure the road ahead is far from smooth, but given the author's obvious political sympathies I suspect the odds of this story ending with a return to the status quo for the goblin people is basically zero. Which means that Redcloak and the Dark One basically get what they want.

Sure, if you treat "Redcloak and the Dark One get what they want" and "return to the status quo in regards to goblinoids" as the only two options. I see no particular reason to.

[Lacuna Caster]

Sure, if you treat "Redcloak and the Dark One get what they want" and "return to the status quo in regards to goblinoids" as the only two options. I see no particular reason to.
The author has bent over backwards to generate sympathy for the general plight of goblinkind and make it absolutely clear that their status as ambulating XP-sachets for PC consumption is morally unacceptable. It's also clear that RC's conquests have pushed at least some of the Gods to try and negotiate to a degree they would previously have been unwilling to. Unless the net condition of the goblin people goes back to where it was before, or worse, Redcloak and the Dark One will basically get what they want. The odds of that seem extremely low to me.

[B. Dandelion]

What gods are now willing to negotiate with the Dark One who weren't before he started the Plan? From the looks of it the opposite happened with at least one deity, Skadi. Thor didn't change his tune because of the Plan, he just didn't realize the full implications of a new color showing up until Loki pointed it out to him.

[woweedd]

The author has bent over backwards to generate sympathy for the general plight of goblinkind and make it absolutely clear that their status as ambulating XP-sachets for PC consumption is morally unacceptable. It's also clear that RC's conquests have pushed at least some of the Gods to try and negotiate to a degree they would previously have been unwilling to. Unless the net condition of the goblin people goes back to where it was before, or worse, Redcloak and the Dark One will basically get what they want. The odds of that seem extremely low to me.
Given the scene of RC starting at himself in the mirror, made up in such a way as to look like his brother whom he killed in cold blood in pursuit of The Plan, saying "it'll all be worth it"...Let's just say the framing makes me doubt the story will conclude that it was.

[Lacuna Caster]

Given the scene of RC starting at himself in the mirror, made up in such a way as to look like his brother whom he killed in cold blood in pursuit of The Plan, saying "it'll all be worth it"...Let's just say the framing makes me doubt the story will conclude that it was.
Yes, I'm sure that the author would never ever write himself into a corner in such a way as to lead to confused or nonsensical moral messaging.

[woweedd]

Yes, I'm sure that the author would never ever write himself into a corner in such a way as to lead to confused or nonsensical moral messaging.
We are not starting this debate again, I swear to God...

[Morty]

The author has bent over backwards to generate sympathy for the general plight of goblinkind and make it absolutely clear that their status as ambulating XP-sachets for PC consumption is morally unacceptable. It's also clear that RC's conquests have pushed at least some of the Gods to try and negotiate to a degree they would previously have been unwilling to. Unless the net condition of the goblin people goes back to where it was before, or worse, Redcloak and the Dark One will basically get what they want. The odds of that seem extremely low to me.

God, singular. At least some other gods have been motivated by Redcloak and Xykon to wipe the slate clean and make another world. And Thor was very conspicuously silent on the reason the Dark One became a god, or Redcloak's true motives. Once again, the two options aren't "TDO and Redcloak get what they want" and "status quo is restored".

[Lacuna Caster]

God, singular. At least some other gods have been motivated by Redcloak and Xykon to wipe the slate clean and make another world. And Thor was very conspicuously silent on the reason the Dark One became a god, or Redcloak's true motives. Once again, the two options aren't "TDO and Redcloak get what they want" and "status quo is restored".
I'm sorry, but those kind of are the only two options. Either things wind up the same or worse for the goblins- which the author clearly considers morally intolerable- or they get better- in which case TDO & Redcloak get what they ostensibly want, thereby vindicating The Plan.

[Squire Doodad]

I'm sorry, but those kind of are the only two options. Either things wind up the same or worse for the goblins- which the author clearly considers morally intolerable- or they get better- in which case TDO & Redcloak get what they ostensibly want, thereby vindicating The Plan.

You are misrepresenting what that means. What is being said is that the two options aren't [Redcloak blackmails the gods into making things work better] and [Redcloak is felled, and nothing new happens for the next endless amount of worlds].

[Morty]

I'm sorry, but those kind of are the only two options. Either things wind up the same or worse for the goblins- which the author clearly considers morally intolerable- or they get better- in which case TDO & Redcloak get what they ostensibly want, thereby vindicating The Plan.

Unless the status of the goblins changes in a way that the Plan doesn't help with or actively hinders. Or one that Redcloak goes out of his way to sabotage because it would mean (in his eyes, at least) that he's done all that he has for nothing. Or Xykon pulls one over Redcloak and ruins the Plan after finding out he was duped. Or something else happens that we can't predict, like we couldn't predict there had been millions of worlds. Plenty of options beyond this false dichotomy you insist on for some reason.

Not to mention we don't know what TDO actually does want, because our only source is the explicitly unreliable crayon section.

[Lacuna Caster]

Unless the status of the goblins changes in a way that the Plan doesn't help with or actively hinders.
Meaning what? We're going to have a situation where the other Gods sit down to make nice-nice with the Dark One and everyone is going to politely pretend this had aaaabsolutely nothing to do with his appointed champion destroying Azure City and successfully pushing the current world to the brink of destruction? When they have had centuries beforehand to extend an olive branch and never effectively did? Yeah, good luck with that.

Look, I just don't see any way that the story frames Redcloak as this key component of a plan to save the universe and bring about mutual cooperation and harmony among the races, yet somehow frames all the actions that put him in a position to negotiate as being futile and misguided. Redcloak is basically going to get everything he wants, yet he's the loser here?

[woweedd]

Meaning what? We're going to have a situation where the other Gods sit down to make nice-nice with the Dark One and everyone is going to politely pretend this had aaaabsolutely nothing to do with his appointed champion destroying Azure City and successfully pushing the current world to the brink of destruction? When they have had centuries beforehand to extend an olive branch and never effectively did? Yeah, good luck with that.

Look, I just don't see any way that the story frames Redcloak as this key component of a plan to save the universe and bring about mutual cooperation and harmony among the races, yet somehow frames all the actions that put him in a position to negotiate as being futile and misguided. Redcloak is basically going to get everything he wants, yet he's the loser here?
Didn't his destruction of Azure City specifically turn the Southern Gods further AGAINST The Dark One?

[Morty]

Meaning what? We're going to have a situation where the other Gods sit down to make nice-nice with the Dark One and everyone is going to politely pretend this had aaaabsolutely nothing to do with his appointed champion destroying Azure City and successfully pushing the current world to the brink of destruction? When they have had centuries beforehand to extend an olive branch and never effectively did? Yeah, good luck with that.

I am reasonably certain this deliberately absurd caricature of a scenario isn't going to happen, yes. I'm not sure what this is meant to prove. Any number of things can happen instead, and the Dark One, other gods or Redcloak may or may not be involved.

You can certainly assume the story is going to end in a nonsensical and unsatisfying way - that's your prerogative. But as an argument it's rather flimsy.


Look, I just don't see any way that the story frames Redcloak as this key component of a plan to save the universe and bring about mutual cooperation and harmony among the races, yet somehow frames all the actions that put him in a position to negotiate as being futile and misguided. Redcloak is basically going to get everything he wants, yet he's the loser here?

The story doesn't frame Redcloak this way. Thor does, when he gives Durkon the plan and claims it's totally going to work. While, once again, very conspicuously omitting the Dark One's origin and motives and his alleged part in them. And the world inside the rifts - in this case, because he simply has no idea it's there. But that just goes to show there are things the gods don't know and don't expect.

[Kelenius]

And it's not even Redcloak, per se, that is framed as such, it's more his spells, which is all the gods need.

[factotum]

In short, his strategies of murderous pragmatism and existential brinkmanship will be essentially vindicated and the benefits to his people will have enormously outweighed the costs. The way it's headed, Xykon (and perhaps RC himself) will just be one more casualty of The Plan.

But that's agreeing with what I said? If Redcloak were to look at Gobbotopia and put all his efforts into making *that* work, you would have a point, but that's not what he's doing--he's carrying on with the Plan regardless of any advances he's already made. That's why it's a sunk cost fallacy; he's lost so much of himself and killed so many goblinoids following the Plan that he doesn't see any other way to continue, because to do so would be to admit that at least some of those goblinoids died in vain.

Oh, and all the stuff about Thor etc. wanting to talk to Redcloak is irrelevant, because Redcloak doesn't know about it. If he changes his behaviour in *any way* when he does learn about it, then you can consider yourself to have made a relevant point. Until that moment, we don't know how he'll react.

[Joerg]

Redcloak may get what he wants (if he really wants a better life for the goblinoids), but the situation may be more like: "The Dark One won't get a Gate to control, and if the world is destroyed, he won't get a say in the creation of the next one, despite what he believed. Your Plan has failed. But here's a better one: ..."

[martianmister]

In the early strips? Possibly. And that would imply that Redcloak has no emotional attachment to Xykon now.

I think we're understanding different things from the term "emotional attachment"? As I said, Redcloak's hating him doesn't mean that they weren't attached to each other. Till Jirix and Tsukiko come around, they were the closest things to being friend for each other. We're talking about years worth of storytelling here.


Yes, acting like it. Xykon made it clear at the end of SoD that he would let Redcloak pretend he doesn't own him, as long as Redcloak obeys him.

Of course, that's how he likes it. Xykon is always obsessed with "power," existence and lack of it. I think that's why he keep Tsukiko around, a better, more submissive version of Redcloak, as a possible replacement.

[CriticalFailure]

Things Redcloak wants:


Better position for goblinoid races
Vindication for the suffering and death he has directly and indirectly caused pursuing The Plan in order to avoid having to cope with the guilt over it.


Things Redcloak will get:


Better position for goblinoid races.


Things Redcloak won't get:


Vindication for the suffering and death he has directly and indirectly caused pursuing The Plan in order to avoid having to cope with the guilt over it.


Also I'm not sure why being able to joke with Xykon means he doesn't hate him.

[Kelenius]

I think we're understanding different things from the term "emotional attachment"? As I said, Redcloak's hating him doesn't mean that they weren't attached to each other. Till Jirix and Tsukiko come around, they were the closest things to being friend for each other. We're talking about years worth of storytelling here.

I'm starting to get the same feeling. The point I am arguing is that Redcloak wouldn't hesitate to pull Tsukiko on Xykon if he didn't need Xykon for the plan and that there's no emotional attachment between then that would stop him.

[Jasdoif]

The point I am arguing is that Redcloak wouldn't hesitate to pull Tsukiko on Xykon if he didn't need Xykon for the plan and that there's no emotional attachment between then that would stop him.Well, sort of....If Redcloak completes the Gate ritual without Xykon, that means he has nothing to show for killing Right-Eye. And not feeling quite as bad about being the monster who murdered his baby brother is Redcloak's primary motivation; completing the Plan (that he rated above Right-Eye's life) is a subgoal of that.

Short of Redcloak overcoming his emotional attachment to what's left of his original self-image...Xykon would have to cease being an option for completing the Plan, before Redcloak would willingly consider alternatives.

[B. Dandelion]

Meaning what? We're going to have a situation where the other Gods sit down to make nice-nice with the Dark One and everyone is going to politely pretend this had aaaabsolutely nothing to do with his appointed champion destroying Azure City and successfully pushing the current world to the brink of destruction? When they have had centuries beforehand to extend an olive branch and never effectively did? Yeah, good luck with that.

You're insisting that Redcloak and the Plan have pushed the gods to the negotiating table, and your main evidence in favor of this, which you think needs a lot of luck to be disputed, is that Thor laid out his plans to Durkon after the fall of Azure City? Post hoc ergo propter hoc (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc) isn't Latin for "the killer argument that never fails".

We know why Thor had trouble "extending the olive branch". It was explained in great detail that the Dark One has no place for safe communication in the godsmoot, melts emissaries sent to him, and can't be met with in person by another god without running the risk of creating a new mini-Snarl. Furthermore Thor needed to wait for a follower of his who already knew about the Snarl through other means.

Nothing points to any of the gods having become more inclined to cooperating with the Dark One as a result of his schemes, and we've heard of two gods, Skadi and Rat, who have become more hostile toward him instead. There isn't even any reason why it should make sense that pushing the world to the brink of destruction makes the gods more desperate to reach a compromise with TDO. We know now that the Dark One very likely dies of starvation if the plug gets pulled, and his and Redcloak's antics have made some gods more anxious to go that route, which does not carry a similar risk to themselves. They've gone through billions of worlds and losing one more is not, for the greater part of them, that big of a deal.


Look, I just don't see any way that the story frames Redcloak as this key component of a plan to save the universe and bring about mutual cooperation and harmony among the races, yet somehow frames all the actions that put him in a position to negotiate as being futile and misguided. Redcloak is basically going to get everything he wants, yet he's the loser here?

The point about Redcloak that is hammered in over and over again in the pages of Start of Darkness is that his pursuit of the Plan, rooted as it is now in his own ego, guilt, and sunk costs, has been entirely to the detriment of the goblin people he is ostensibly acting on behalf of. If the goblins achieve equality through some method that doesn't actually require or justify Xykon's survival (and the sacrifices Redcloak has made to ensure Xykon's safety), then he isn't vindicated for having stuck behind him for so long. How can he tell his reflection it was worth it if his greatest atrocity was committed to protect a monster who was completely irrelevant to the eventual salvation of their people?

So far as I see it, two possibilities for Redcloak going forward are either that he:

A) Completely refuses to admit wrongdoing or abandon the Plan, does not work with Thor and Durkon, and is not actually linked to the eventual goblin salvation at all. (He might possibly have a link to Xykon's ultimate destruction, although he gets no real credit for this being beneficial to goblins because Xykon was his creation in the first place.) He ends up a very tragic character this way because he COULD HAVE been a great hero not just to goblins but to all living beings, but his flaws lead him to reject the chance to achieve all he once believed he ever wanted.

B) Realizes the error of his ways, turns his back on the Plan, and accepts that the lives thrown away in the pursuit of a glorified blackmail scheme are lost forever and cannot be made meaningful by continuing to throw more lives after them. In this scenario he does ultimately help his people, but it's only by giving up on the idea of "vindication" and instead seeking "repentance".

There's no outcome where his methods are regarded as "ruthless, but ultimately successful and perhaps necessary".

[deuterio12]

You're insisting that Redcloak and the Plan have pushed the gods to the negotiating table, and your main evidence in favor of this, which you think needs a lot of luck to be disputed, is that Thor laid out his plans to Durkon after the fall of Azure City? Post hoc ergo propter hoc (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc) isn't Latin for "the killer argument that never fails".

We know why Thor had trouble "extending the olive branch". It was explained in great detail that the Dark One has no place for safe communication in the godsmoot, melts emissaries sent to him, and can't be met with in person by another god without running the risk of creating a new mini-Snarl. Furthermore Thor needed to wait for a follower of his who already knew about the Snarl through other means.


You know, it's kinda pointless to extend an olive branch to somebody when you are covered in the fresh viscera of their people.

If the other other gods really wanted the Dark One to open up, they should start by telling everybody "HEY ADVENTURERS STOP GOING INSIDE GOBLIN HOMES AND KILLING THEM ALL BECAUSE YOU WANT EASY XP, GOBLINS ARE PEOPLE TOO K THNKX" and that would certainly do more wonders to improve relationship with the Dark One than any fancy emissaries or olive branches.

Who cares if the evil gods like it? The "good" gods could start doing to set an example. But nope, we've got paladin orders raiding goblin villages to kill every last green woman and green child, all with the full blessing of the "good" gods.

So alas while the other god's emissaries keep approaching covered in goblin blood and guts, the Dark One will keep melting them for the insult.



Nothing points to any of the gods having become more inclined to cooperating with the Dark One as a result of his schemes, and we've heard of two gods, Skadi and Rat, who have become more hostile toward him instead. There isn't even any reason why it should make sense that pushing the world to the brink of destruction makes the gods more desperate to reach a compromise with TDO. We know now that the Dark One very likely dies of starvation if the plug gets pulled, and his and Redcloak's antics have made some gods more anxious to go that route, which does not carry a similar risk to themselves. They've gone through billions of worlds and losing one more is not, for the greater part of them, that big of a deal.


The point about Redcloak that is hammered in over and over again in the pages of Start of Darkness is that his pursuit of the Plan, rooted as it is now in his own ego, guilt, and sunk costs, has been entirely to the detriment of the goblin people he is ostensibly acting on behalf of. If the goblins achieve equality through some method that doesn't actually require or justify Xykon's survival (and the sacrifices Redcloak has made to ensure Xykon's safety), then he isn't vindicated for having stuck behind him for so long. How can he tell his reflection it was worth it if his greatest atrocity was committed to protect a monster who was completely irrelevant to the eventual salvation of their people?

So far as I see it, two possibilities for Redcloak going forward are either that he:

A) Completely refuses to admit wrongdoing or abandon the Plan, does not work with Thor and Durkon, and is not actually linked to the eventual goblin salvation at all. (He might possibly have a link to Xykon's ultimate destruction, although he gets no real credit for this being beneficial to goblins because Xykon was his creation in the first place.) He ends up a very tragic character this way because he COULD HAVE been a great hero not just to goblins but to all living beings, but his flaws lead him to reject the chance to achieve all he once believed he ever wanted.

B) Realizes the error of his ways, turns his back on the Plan, and accepts that the lives thrown away in the pursuit of a glorified blackmail scheme are lost forever and cannot be made meaningful by continuing to throw more lives after them. In this scenario he does ultimately help his people, but it's only by giving up on the idea of "vindication" and instead seeking "repentance".

There's no outcome where his methods are regarded as "ruthless, but ultimately successful and perhaps necessary".

They both are justified.

Because since Redcloak's been appointed the high priest of the Dark One, he's been living through in a "kill or be killed" maxim as the champions of the other gods and paladins and whatnot all want to take his head.

And if nothing else it has earned Redcloak the levels needed to cast 9th level spells needed to make Thor's plan work. If Redcloak hadn't gone in a life of murdering spree adventure, he would never become strong enough to matter. Just like goblins are used as nice chunks of xp by the adventurers of the other races, so does Redcloak uses non-goblins to power up, fair's fair.

[B. Dandelion]

You know, it's kinda pointless to extend an olive branch to somebody when you are covered in the fresh viscera of their people.

If the other other gods really wanted the Dark One to open up, they should start by telling everybody "HEY ADVENTURERS STOP GOING INSIDE GOBLIN HOMES AND KILLING THEM ALL BECAUSE YOU WANT EASY XP, GOBLINS ARE PEOPLE TOO K THNKX" and that would certainly do more wonders to improve relationship with the Dark One than any fancy emissaries or olive branches.

Who cares if the evil gods like it? The "good" gods could start doing to set an example. But nope, we've got paladin orders raiding goblin villages to kill every last green woman and green child, all with the full blessing of the "good" gods.

So alas while the other god's emissaries keep approaching covered in goblin blood and guts, the Dark One will keep melting them for the insult.

I'm trying to argue a fairly narrow point. I don't think that Thor wanting Durkon to talk to Redcloak means that the gods have been successfully pressured to the negotiating table by the Plan and by Redcloak's conquest of Azure City.

You are fixating on the fact that I mentioned the melted emissaries and trying to explain why that's completely morally justified given the gods' hypocrisy and their crimes against the goblins at large. I'm not trying to defend the gods! I am saying the evidence that they have become willing to negotiate and make concessions because of the damage Redcloak has wrought is flimsy.




They both are justified.

Because since Redcloak's been appointed the high priest of the Dark One, he's been living through in a "kill or be killed" maxim as the champions of the other gods and paladins and whatnot all want to take his head.

And if nothing else it has earned Redcloak the levels needed to cast 9th level spells needed to make Thor's plan work. If Redcloak hadn't gone in a life of murdering spree adventure, he would never become strong enough to matter. Just like goblins are used as nice chunks of xp by the adventurers of the other races, so does Redcloak uses non-goblins to power up, fair's fair.

"Redcloak couldn't possibly have reached level 17 without following the Plan and serving Xykon" isn't especially ironclad an argument either. If he wasn't a high enough level yet, Thor could send Durkon to quest with him or something.

[Kelenius]

"Redcloak couldn't possibly have reached level 17 without following the Plan and serving Xykon" isn't especially ironclad an argument either. If he wasn't a high enough level yet, Thor could send Durkon to quest with him or something.

Wouldn't work. TDO would promptly stop giving Redcloak his spells and he'd become a fighter-with-d8-hit-die-without-bonus-feats.

[woweedd]

You know, it's kinda pointless to extend an olive branch to somebody when you are covered in the fresh viscera of their people.

If the other other gods really wanted the Dark One to open up, they should start by telling everybody "HEY ADVENTURERS STOP GOING INSIDE GOBLIN HOMES AND KILLING THEM ALL BECAUSE YOU WANT EASY XP, GOBLINS ARE PEOPLE TOO K THNKX" and that would certainly do more wonders to improve relationship with the Dark One than any fancy emissaries or olive branches.

Who cares if the evil gods like it? The "good" gods could start doing to set an example. But nope, we've got paladin orders raiding goblin villages to kill every last green woman and green child, all with the full blessing of the "good" gods.

So alas while the other god's emissaries keep approaching covered in goblin blood and guts, the Dark One will keep melting them for the insult.



They both are justified.

Because since Redcloak's been appointed the high priest of the Dark One, he's been living through in a "kill or be killed" maxim as the champions of the other gods and paladins and whatnot all want to take his head.

And if nothing else it has earned Redcloak the levels needed to cast 9th level spells needed to make Thor's plan work. If Redcloak hadn't gone in a life of murdering spree adventure, he would never become strong enough to matter. Just like goblins are used as nice chunks of xp by the adventurers of the other races, so does Redcloak uses non-goblins to power up, fair's fair.
The Neutral Gods probably won't be big fans either. Politics be like that. Also, only Clerics are under official godly dominion. And the gods can't just go smiting people willy-nilly, because then the Evil gods would do the same, and, if it was aggression on the Good Gods' part, possibly convince enough Neutral gods to outnumber them.

[Fyraltari]

I don't know. Redcloak is taking reasonable precautions against the day when Xykon finds out he's been duped, but they've also been the only constant in eachother's lives for several decades at this point. It's taken from a little earlier in the strip, before various events put more strain on the relationship, but one can see glimpses (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0462.html) of a certain camaraderie between the two here and there. (They did occasionally share a good belly-laugh about disposable minions (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0376.html), et cetera.) Maybe that's not affection, exactly, but it's more complicated than hate.
Do you read El Goonish Shive"? 'Cause I'm reminded of this (http://egscomics.com/comic/2018-03-26).
Sirleck... was a life-destroying literal monster... I hated him. I hated everything about him. I planned to kill him from the day I met him. But... He was the only one I could talk to for months. He was like a friend to me. How messed up is that?
It's entirely possible to superficially enjoy somebody's company (especially when they're the only company you get for years) and find them funny while also hating their guts. I don't deny that Redcloak and Xykon have their momentd, but their relationship is fundamentally broken and unhealthy.


If the other other gods really wanted the Dark One to open up, they should start by telling everybody "HEY ADVENTURERS STOP GOING INSIDE GOBLIN HOMES AND KILLING THEM ALL BECAUSE YOU WANT EASY XP, GOBLINS ARE PEOPLE TOO K THNKX" and that would certainly do more wonders to improve relationship with the Dark One than any fancy emissaries or olive branches.
Thor can't get his own Clerics to stop hating trees, I really doubt the gods are actually capable of changing the other races perception of goblins. Also only Thor and some gods want to negotiate with the Dark One, not a majority nor "the good gods" in general. Hell, most of the gods involved of that plan that we know of (Loki, Tiamat and Rat) are evil.

[deuterio12]

I'm trying to argue a fairly narrow point. I don't think that Thor wanting Durkon to talk to Redcloak means that the gods have been successfully pressured to the negotiating table by the Plan and by Redcloak's conquest of Azure City.

You are fixating on the fact that I mentioned the melted emissaries and trying to explain why that's completely morally justified given the gods' hypocrisy and their crimes against the goblins at large. I'm not trying to defend the gods! I am saying the evidence that they have become willing to negotiate and make concessions because of the damage Redcloak has wrought is flimsy.


The japanese back in World War II became quite happy to negotiate after getting two nukes dropped on them.

Sometimes you just need to raze a city to the ground or two to get the other guys to show up at the negotiation table.

In particular when they were trying their hardest to kill you. Show them that you can kill them back. That you will kill them back unless they stop attacking you and negotiate.



"Redcloak couldn't possibly have reached level 17 without following the Plan and serving Xykon" isn't especially ironclad an argument either. If he wasn't a high enough level yet, Thor could send Durkon to quest with him or something.

Dwarves were literally shaped by the gods to kill goblins (racial bonus to attack and damage). Adventuring with a goblin would be as dishonorable as it gets for a dwarf, and dwarfs are all "death before dishonor".


The Neutral Gods probably won't be big fans either. Politics be like that. Also, only Clerics are under official godly dominion. And the gods can't just go smiting people willy-nilly, because then the Evil gods would do the same, and, if it was aggression on the Good Gods' part, possibly convince enough Neutral gods to outnumber them.

"All it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing".

And clerics in particular have immense power among their people. They're the ones who:
-Talk directly to the gods.
-Can heal most bad stuff.
-Can inflict a lot of bad stuff (like colon cancer).
-Can even bring back people from the dead.
-Can power up into clericzilla if push comes to shove.

So all it takes is for, say, Thor clerics to go "we won't heal/bring back people from any clan that attacks goblins with no provocation", and you'll see people's tunes change pretty fast.



Thor can't get his own Clerics to stop hating trees, I really doubt the gods are actually capable of changing the other races perception of goblins. Also only Thor and some gods want to negotiate with the Dark One, not a majority nor "the good gods" in general. Hell, most of the gods involved of that plan that we know of (Loki, Tiamat and Rat) are evil.

Evil deities get a say in paladin powers now? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0407.html)

This is, the Rat was pretty pissed at the Saphire Order being slaughtered. If it was Evil, shouldn't it be delighted at the death of all those goody-two-shoes?

Said paladins are always going " PRAISE TWELVE GODS THIS" and " HOLY TWELVE GODS THAT". Twelve, not eleven, and why would dudes of the class that specifically needs to be LG be praising an evil god?

As for Loki, he's the only one offering the dwarves an out of forced crossbow marriages, so he can't be that bad. If anything Loki was the one leading the "let's give this world another chance" voting. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0998.html)

The worst we've seen from Oots Tiamat is supporting a mother wanting to avenge her dead son by striking back at the one who killed him for his personal fun and profit. THE HORROR! THE COMPLETE UNMITIGATED EVIL! But when the good guys do it is righteous revenge or something, go figure. Oh wait, the good guys will just slaughter your family for the exp, no need for revenge excuse.

[HorizonWalker]

Evil deities get a say in paladin powers now? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0407.html)

This is, the Rat was pretty pissed at the Saphire Order being slaughtered. If it was Evil, shouldn't it be delighted at the death of all those goody-two-shoes?

Said paladins are always going " PRAISE TWELVE GODS THIS" and " HOLY TWELVE GODS THAT". Twelve, not eleven, and why would dudes of the class that specifically needs to be LG be praising an evil god?

The Southern Pantheon is worshipped as a pantheon, rather than individually, no exceptions. There's a Giant quote floating around for it somewhere, but I can't be bothered digging it up right now.

[hamishspence]

The Southern Pantheon is worshipped as a pantheon, rather than individually, no exceptions. There's a Giant quote floating around for it somewhere, but I can't be bothered digging it up right now.

That would be this one:




Southern Gods:
In certain campaign settings, you can be a cleric of a whole pantheon, and this doesn't necessarily influence your alignment. Obviously, unless the majority of the pantheon (or at least those holding the majority of the power) are of an opposite alignment from you, you may have some challenges advancing in the church hierarchy. Even in FR, am I remembering wrong, or is there at least one prestige class that worships the whole Morndinsamman?


Also, this. The Twelve Gods are worshipped as a pantheon, by everyone, including evil characters like Kubota and Tsukiko.

[factotum]

This is, the Rat was pretty pissed at the Saphire Order being slaughtered. If it was Evil, shouldn't it be delighted at the death of all those goody-two-shoes?


It was said Rat was furious at what happened to Azure City, not what happened to the Sapphire Guard. As the largest city in the South and thus a major focus of Twelve Gods worship I think it's entirely fair for him to be annoyed about its loss, even it *was* being defended by a bunch of folk who don't share his alignment.

[Fyraltari]

The japanese back in World War II became quite happy to negotiate after getting two nukes dropped on them.

Sometimes you just need to raze a city to the ground or two to get the other guys to show up at the negotiation table.

In particular when they were trying their hardest to kill you. Show them that you can kill them back. That you will kill them back unless they stop attacking you and negotiate.
You do realize that that action got Rat out of the "let's talk things out with the Dark One" camp, right? Rat, the guy who told the Dark One about the Snarl? Not exactly a resounding success.

Then again the Dark One is not willing to negotiate, is he? His plan is to get powerful enough so that the other side will have to unilateraly comply with his demands. That's extortion, not negotiation.



Dwarves were literally shaped by the gods to kill goblins (racial bonus to attack and damage). Adventuring with a goblin would be as dishonorable as it gets for a dwarf
This does not follow.


"All it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing".

And clerics in particular have immense power among their people. They're the ones who:
-Talk directly to the gods.
-Can heal most bad stuff.
-Can inflict a lot of bad stuff (like colon cancer).
-Can even bring back people from the dead.
-Can power up into clericzilla if push comes to shove.
Yet for some reason it looks like the universe is enforcing some kind of balance between those who can shape reality and those who cannot.
Also:
"Talk directly to the gods." The vast majority of Clerics can't as demonstrated by the fact that Durkon had to freaking die before Thor could tell him what he wanted him to know.

Talk directly to the gods.So all it takes is for, say, Thor clerics to go "we won't heal/bring back people from any clan that attacks goblins with no provocation", and you'll see people's tunes change pretty fast.[/Quote]
You mean buy stocks in the healing potion industry? Or go to Cklerics of Tyr for healing.
Also the only way for Thor to do that would be to take away Clerical powers form Clerics who help people who kill goblins which would require:
-Constant monitoring of the entire Northern population (it's not like people have "goblin-kkiller" written on their foreheads) which I'm not sure Thor can do.
-Falling most of his clergy for other people's actions before anyone gets the pattern which would be both unjust and considerably weaken him in realation to the other gods and be also unfair to the people who depended on those Clerics and didn't do anything.




Evil deities get a say in paladin powers now? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0407.html)
Looks like.


[QUOTE=deuterio12;23983834]This is, the Rat was pretty pissed at the Saphire Order being slaughtered. If it was Evil, shouldn't it be delighted at the death of all those goody-two-shoes?
And evil is a big happy family? The idea that someone evil would automatically be happy at the death of someone good because of their respective alignments is dumb. The Paladins served him too.
Furthermore, Rat was pissed at the destruction of Azure City, not the destruction of the Sapphire Guard, the City hld half a million people including people like Kubota so yes, I ma sure Rat had plenty of interest in "one of the major trading hubs of the South".


Said paladins are always going " PRAISE TWELVE GODS THIS" and " HOLY TWELVE GODS THAT". Twelve, not eleven, and why would dudes of the class that specifically needs to be LG be praising an evil god?
Because the Southern Pantheon is more tight-knit than the other two.


As for Loki, he's the only one offering the dwarves an out of forced crossbow marriages, so he can't be that bad.
Are you even... LOKI WAS THE ONE WHO PUT THEM IN THIS SITUATION!"
Tht's like thanking the mob boss for offering you to not have your legs broken by his thugs for money!

Besides, we don't know that anything in the dwarven honor code allows for marriage under threat of death and all we have for Loki's loophole is Hilgya's word and she has a creative relationship to truth.

If anything Loki was the one leading the "let's give this world another chance" voting. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0998.html)
He didn't really take this position from the goodness of his heart did he? His argument wqs that they caon still kill everybody later so they can afford to wait, and it later turned out that his other reason is wanting to use the Dark One to get rid of the monster that continuously threaten to kill him. I'd put him here (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PragmaticVillainy).


The worst we've seen from Oots Tiamat is supporting a mother wanting to avenge her dead son by striking back at the one who killed him for his personal fun and profit. THE HORROR! THE COMPLETE UNMITIGATED EVIL!
Striking back at the innocent family of the person who kille,d him, you mean. The ABD doesn't exactly have the moral high-ground before familicide. Oh, and you forget that Tiamat is taotally okay with forgiving the killing of 1/20th of her protectees on the condition that five times as many of the dragons on the other side bites it. Why, it's almost as if she only cares for them as pawns in her plans.

But when the good guys do it is righteous revenge or something, go figure. Oh wait, the good guys will just slaughter your family for the exp, no need for revenge excuse.
Name one good guy who does that. And no Gin-Jun and Miko are not good guys.

[CriticalFailure]

Dwarves having a racial bonus to killing goblins is pretty good evidence that they really chuffing hate goblins. For it to be a racial thing every dwarf possesses it must be pretty ingrained in their culture. It's the most reasonable assumption to make unless it's explicitly spelled out that it's a just a rule and dwarves don't really know why they get it, or that bonus is retconned out of this particular universe.

[Fyraltari]

Dwarves having a racial bonus to killing goblins is pretty good evidence that they really chuffing hate goblins. For it to be a racial thing every dwarf possesses it must be pretty ingrained in their culture. It's the most reasonable assumption to make unless it's explicitly spelled out that it's a just a rule and dwarves don't really know why they get it, or that bonus is retconned out of this particular universe.

It really is just rule and dwarves don't really know why they get it. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0034.html)

[CriticalFailure]

That doesn't suggest that dwarves don't hate orcs and goblinoids. Roy actually says the modifier exists for that exact reason. It just says that Durkon is bad at remembering to add modifiers in general. That comic supports my argument completely.

[Rrmcklin]

Dwarves having a racial bonus to killing goblins is pretty good evidence that they really chuffing hate goblins. For it to be a racial thing every dwarf possesses it must be pretty ingrained in their culture. It's the most reasonable assumption to make unless it's explicitly spelled out that it's a just a rule and dwarves don't really know why they get it, or that bonus is retconned out of this particular universe.


It really is just rule and dwarves don't really know why they get it. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0034.html)

Whatever the reason, I doubt killing goblins is it, since it seems likely that the goblins were created after the dwarves and most other major races. The whole point of "XP fodder" was that the gods already had people serving them, but they couldn't level up, so then someone came up with the idea to just make sentient targets for the stuff.

[Fyraltari]

That doesn't suggest that dwarves don't hate orcs and goblinoids. Roy actually says the modifier exists for that exact reason. It just says that Durkon is bad at remembering to add modifiers in general. That comic supports my argument completely.

If you can’t remember that you hate something then you don’t hate it. Durkon, or any other dwarf for that matter, never once in the entire comic shows any kind of hatred towards goblinoids. The joke is (partially) that these modifiers are arbitrary and don’t necessarily map to the characters’ actual personality. OOTS makes many jokes on how nonsensical D&D rules can be, so if you want to argue that dwarf have ‘‘hate goblinoids’’ as a part of their culture you are going to need something more than ‘‘they far a bonus against them’’.

[georgie_leech]

If you can’t remember that you hate something then you don’t hate it. Durkon, or any other dwarf for that matter, never once in the entire comic shows any kind of hatred towards goblinoids. The joke is (partially) that these modifiers are arbitrary and don’t necessarily map to the characters’ actual personality. OOTS makes many jokes on how nonsensical D&D rules can be, so if you want to argue that dwarf have ‘‘hate goblinoids’’ as a part of their culture you are going to need something more than ‘‘they far a bonus against them’’.

See also :smalltongue: (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0219.html)

[deuterio12]

If you can’t remember that you hate something then you don’t hate it. Durkon, or any other dwarf for that matter, never once in the entire comic shows any kind of hatred towards goblinoids.

The comic starts with Durkon slaughtering his way inside a goblin lair with no provocation, including approving of killing goblins in their sleep that never did anything wrong to him.

It's even deeper than hate, dwarves just seems goblins as exp bits to be collected, and the gods themselves blessed their whole race with a bonus to murderize them. It's on a quite subconcisous level like breathing, which you can forget to do when you're too focused on something else.


Whatever the reason, I doubt killing goblins is it, since it seems likely that the goblins were created after the dwarves and most other major races. The whole point of "XP fodder" was that the gods already had people serving them, but they couldn't level up, so then someone came up with the idea to just make sentient targets for the stuff.

Sooo, the gods can create a whole new race, but can't change the existing ones?

And what purpose besides killing goblins would a bonus to attack/damage against goblins serve? It's not even a defensive bonus like the one against giants. It's the gods literally telling the dwarves "KILL ALL THOSE FILTHY GOBS!"

[Morty]

That's a rather lengthy discussion about a strip firmly from the comic's "loosely-related D&D jokes" era.

[Fyraltari]

The comic starts with Durkon slaughtering his way inside a goblin lair with no provocation, including approving of killing goblins in their sleep that never did anything wrong to him.
The goblins that serve an evil lich and were attacking nearby villages in the prequel? That's not provocation?


It's even deeper than hate, dwarves just seems goblins as exp bits to be collected, and the gods themselves blessed their whole race with a bonus to murderize them. It's on a quite subconcisous level like breathing, which you can forget to do when you're too focused on something else.
Okay but no. First you claimed that the bonus was evidence of their hatrred and now that you admit that the bonus is arbitrarily god-given (and therefore not a reflection of any given individual's belief) you claim that the hatred is subconscious which apparently means it exists without having to manifest in any form? Because again Durkon never once showed any eagerness to fight goblins because they are goblins, mistrusted goblins (like the goblin teeanagers) because they are goblins, racially insulted goblins (as in "dam dirty gobs" or somesuch) or expressed any kind of misgiving at having to work with goblins. And neither have any other dwarf in comic.[/QUOTE]

[Squire Doodad]

The goblins that serve an evil lich and were attacking nearby villages in the prequel? That's not provocation?


Okay but no. First you claimed that the bonus was evidence of their hatrred and now that you admit that the bonus is arbitrarily god-given (and therefore not a reflection of any given individual's belief) you claim that the hatred is subconscious which apparently means it exists without having to manifest in any form? Because again Durkon never once showed any eagerness to fight goblins because they are goblins, mistrusted goblins (like the goblin teeanagers) because they are goblins, racially insulted goblins (as in "dam dirty gobs" or somesuch) or expressed any kind of misgiving at having to work with goblins. And neither have any other dwarf in comic.

So there's this one guy in the Azure City army, he's actually a dwarf, but really tall for one...

I actually can't think of any instance of a dwarf hating on goblins because they are goblins. Humans yes, but not dwarves. And we've seen a goodly amount lately.