List of loose ends

[heavyfuel]

Since next book is the last book, what loose ends still need closure?

From the top of my head we have:
- Xykon
- The last gate
- The Snarl
- The ocean /world inside the gate
- Tarquin & Co.
- The FCC / V's last 2 removals from the game
- The vampire

And yeah? What have I missed / forgotten?

[facw]

Probably a bunch of things including the ultimate resolution of the Godsmoot and the fate of not-Thad

For a deeper, but outdated dive, you can look here: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?207236-Unresolved-plot-point-collection-thread, which obviously hasn't been updated in a while.

I don't recall if anyone has made an updated version, but I didn't see one in a quick search.

Edit: Updated: Unresolved Plot Point Collection Thread Revisited (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?585069-Unresolved-Plot-Point-Collection-Thread-Revisited)

[InsamNonsoon]

Re: other loose ends: Roy’s Archon’s plan in 644, panel 2.

Re: vampire: Possibly not, I think she would just be mentioned in the epilogue, not having much impact on the main plot.

[Aidan]

As an add-on to Xykon mentioned above, specifically his astral fortress.

Currently I'm unsure how that will ultimately tie in, if at all. If not for Redcloaks switcheroo with the phylactery, it would be the obvious spot for the final battle between the Order and Team Evil, especially since Xykon would come back to life (well sort of) there if the Order beat him, but with Redcloaks trick, I don't know if we'll ever see it again.

[The Pilgrim]

- Monster in the Darkness
- Redcloak
- Gobbotopia and the New Azure City colony
- Eugene Greenhilt's final destination
- Belkar's death
- V's after-familicide backlash
- Sigdi's arm restoration (or lack of thereof)
- Sabine
- The Real Story Behind the Breakdown of the Order of the Scribble

[Brumagris]

-Sphinx Pox perhaps?

[Quebbster]

Leeky Windstaff and Pompey (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0399.html) have been unaccounted for for about 800 strips. That's way less than Hilgya, so I am not counting them out yet.

[brian 333]

Julia should be leveling up a bit by now.

Not-Thad has been mentioned.

[ti'esar]

Leeky Windstaff and Pompey (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0399.html) have been unaccounted for for about 800 strips. That's way less than Hilgya, so I am not counting them out yet.

I think there's a pretty clear-cut difference there, tho.

[Emanick]

Julia should be leveling up a bit by now.

Not-Thad has been mentioned.

Pretty sure she’s 17 and still in school. Seems unlikely that you get a lot of XP from going to class - this is Warthog’s School, not Hogwarts.


Leeky Windstaff and Pompey (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0399.html) have been uunaccounted for for about 800 strips. That's way less than Hilgya, so I am not counting them out yet.

I don’t think that counts as a loose end. They explicitly decided to quit the Linear Guild.

[Quebbster]

I don’t think that counts as a loose end. They explicitly decided to quit the Linear Guild.
So did Hilgya. Just saying it's not impossible for them to pop up again, though I am not holding my breath waiting for it either.

[Finagle]

Meeting the rest of the Vector Legion, like Barbarian Guy.
The ultimate fate of Serini Toormuck.
Laurin Shattersmith's city in the desert.
Kudzu's custody arrangements/Hilgya Firehelm's plans for the rest of her life.
With Bozzok gone, who's in charge of the Greysky City Thieves' Guild?


Xykon's astral fortress won't come into it at all. Nobody on OOTS could ever find it without divine intervention, and I think there's been enough of that already. Moreover it has absolutely nothing in it but a cheap piece of jewelry, which is about as valuable as a cheap plastic imitation of the Amulet of Yendor. It's had its one and only appearance in the strip.

[Schroeswald]

Something that could return if Rich felt like having them return is not the same thing as a loose end, a loose end is a plot point that hasn't been fully resolved, Leeky and Pompey's story has been resolved, it could be added onto but that doesn't make it a loose end.

EDIT: Oh, I'm responding to Quebbster specifically here, as I typed this someone else posted and for once I didn't check to see if anything else had been posted.

[Gauntlet]

Xykon's astral fortress won't come into it at all. Nobody on OOTS could ever find it without divine intervention, and I think there's been enough of that already. Moreover it has absolutely nothing in it but a cheap piece of jewelry, which is about as valuable as a cheap plastic imitation of the Amulet of Yendor. It's had its one and only appearance in the strip.

The Astral fortress has been hinted at here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1137.html), which I feel means it's showed up enough that it's not going to get completely dropped. Also, Durkon can cast Plane Shift.

[MossyMeow]

It depends on how you define a loose end in this context. I’d say that something like the new leadership of the thieves’ guild isn’t really a loose end per say, since it doesn’t matter to the plot. I’d also only call something a loose end if it has actually been implied to have some sort of significance to the overall story, or if it’s been implied to have some sort of continuation (like the fate of Tarquin’s empires).

[Mike Havran]

I´ll add a few:

- What happens with Niu
- What happens with that wierd dwarven psion who now keeps rolling in Tartarus.
- What did TDO really learn about the goblinoids before he, like, started the whole thing.


I think Tarquin and VL plotline will not be finished within the main storyline, but as a separate book such as GDGU.

[Quizatzhaderac]

It is foreshadowed that Redcloak will betray Xykon and MitD will try to eat RedcloakXykon's real phylactery needs to be addressed.
MitD's reveal.
MitD's character arc needs to complete somehow, likely with him turning against Xykon.
Durkon needs to negotiate with Redcloak about the seal deal.
Belkar needs to die/fulfill prophecy.

small/iffy ones
Minrah needs to reveal her embarrassing secret.
Someone needs to try to restrict Xykon's movement.
Order tryies to meet up with Lien and O'Chul.
Oder is forced to seperate/ not meet Lien and O'Chul.
Sphynx pox needs to be cured/ manifest.
Daigo Da- needs to reveal his true name.
Specifics about Redcloak's niece's fate.

Plain stupid
Hinjo's colorblindness needs to come up.
The Mechane's fuel lines need to freeze/ burst/ whatever.
Drukon will need to use all of his sixth level spell slots today/ or regenerate someone who isn't his mother.
We find out how Haley's cousin stays in business.
We find out what's on the other side of the world.
Elan's mom marries Julio Scoundrel.
Banjo and giggles manifest the orange quiddity.

[MossyMeow]

I’d also add “seeing Kazumi and Daigo’s baby” to the list of minor/fun details to be revealed. Maybe in an epilogue.

[The Pilgrim]

Meeting the rest of the Vector Legion, like Barbarian Guy.
The ultimate fate of Serini Toormuck.
Laurin Shattersmith's city in the desert.
Kudzu's custody arrangements/Hilgya Firehelm's plans for the rest of her life.
With Bozzok gone, who's in charge of the Greysky City Thieves' Guild?


1) We don't really need to meet the Vector Legion again. They remain as material for a sequel, probably involving the "Team B" (Captain Amon-Zora, Ian Starshine and The Bounty Hunters. Sabine could be a fitting addition).

2) Yep, that's something that will probably be adressed together with "the truth about the Order of the Scribble".

3) That project got wrecked the very moment the Snarl emerged from the Rift. Looks like Laurin's daughter isn't getting the job of her lifetime.

4) Already adressed enough. Durkon and Hilgya seem to have come to some minimal sort of understanding. Devolving further in that relation would lead to too many pages of unnecesary drama.

5) Hank.

[nolongeralurker]

I’d also add “seeing Kazumi and Daigo’s baby” to the list of minor/fun details to be revealed. Maybe in an epilogue.
If you haven't already, go take a look at the thread containing photos of art Rich made for people who backed the Kickstarter. There's a crayon drawing of their baby in there :) (I'd link but I'm on my phone)

[Alabenson]

Regarding Tarquin and Co, given Tarquin's obsession with being the main villain I think it would be a fitting victory if he was finally beaten off-screen with his defeat relegated to a brief mention in the epilogue.

[Finagle]

The Astral fortress has been hinted at here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1137.html), which I feel means it's showed up enough that it's not going to get completely dropped. Also, Durkon can cast Plane Shift.
But WHY would OOTS go there? Even if they found it, and defeated the traps, and got inside...there's no treasure. Nothing worth all the trouble. The phylactery is in Redcloak's possession and will likely be used in a betrayal after Xykon's body is destroyed by OOTS.


Devolving further in that relation would lead to too many pages of unnecesary drama.
I dunno, I get the idea that people love this family drama stuff. I used to wonder why soap operas were popular...after the dwarf storyline I don't wonder any more. People love it.

[Riftwolf]

Also, Durkon can cast Plane Shift.

Plane Shift isn't a precision spell; also given he doesn't know the location (and its probably shielded against divination so he can't find it), he'll need more than a blind jump to get there.

[Staysilver]

I won't even mention the obvious monster in the dark, or Belkars death, since others have pointed it out, (though seriously, who could forget those) but less obvious would be varsuvius's marriage to (his/her?) Mate. I know V chose not to contest the divorce,
but I cant imagine the author leaving V without reconciliation and redemption. And what role do the three "devils"(?) play. Also, will we ever find out whether the elf if is a him or her? Not sure if we will be forever left hanging but I'd still like to know. Also, Haley's father's arc needs completing.

[Schroeswald]

I won't even mention the obvious monster in the dark, or Belkars death, since others have pointed it out, (though seriously, who could forget those) but less obvious would be varsuvius's marriage to (his/her?) Mate. I know V chose not to contest the divorce,
but I cant imagine the author leaving V without reconciliation and redemption. And what role do the three "devils"(?) play. Also, will we ever find out whether the elf if is a him or her? Not sure if we will be forever left hanging but I'd still like to know. Also, Haley's father's arc needs completing.

1. I do feel like V's arc in relation to Inky isn't over, we saw them looking at their photo earlier in the book.

2. The IFCC only consists of one devil, it also has a daemon and a demon (with an imp and succubus as minions).

3. V is genderqueer (from BRITF commentary), the question him or her is misguided, because they're not really either (and if I were to guess what flavor of genderqueer I'd say agender).

[Peelee]

If you haven't already, go take a look at the thread containing photos of art Rich made for people who backed the Kickstarter. There's a crayon drawing of their baby in there :) (I'd link but I'm on my phone)

If only a smart and incredibly good looking person has a link to that thread in their signature! :smallwink:

[CriticalFailure]

The FAQ says V’s gender won’t be revealed. So it’s up to every reader’s opinion.

[Peelee]

The FAQ says V’s gender won’t be revealed. So it’s up to every reader’s opinion.

The FAQ also says the site sidebar contains the sections:


The Giant
Function
Form
Campaigns
Post
Go
Home

I think it's safe to say the FAQ is fairly outdated.

[woweedd]

The FAQ also says the site sidebar contains the sections:


The Giant
Function
Form
Comics*contains the Order of the Stick, naturally.
Campaigns
Post
Go
Home

I think it's safe to say the FAQ is fairly outdated.
V's gender HAS been revealed, if we take BRITF commentary as canon.

[Hardcore]

V's gender HAS been revealed, if we take BRITF commentary as canon.

Hmm, need a direct quote on that one since my books are elsewhere.

[Peelee]

Hmm, need a direct quote on that one since my books are elsewhere.

If you have the PDFs, it's in the author commentary after strip 917.

V's gender HAS been revealed, if we take BRITF commentary as canon.
Indeed, I just took on "but the FAQ says X".

[hamishspence]

The Giant, Blood Runs in the Family, pag. 322

It’s no accident that he’s a wealthy old straight white man losing his marbles over the fact that the tale he is experiencing doesn’t focus on the other straight white man at the expense of the black man, the woman, the genderqueer person, and even the Latino guest star.

[Peelee]

The Giant, Blood Runs in the Family, pag. 322

I swear, it's like you're a human Inevitable encyclopedia for texts.

[hamishspence]

I swear, it's like you're a human Inevitable encyclopedia for texts.

Heh. I used the Search engine and found The Pilgrim had already posted it not long ago:





The Giant's words

So, yes, the arc with Tarquin did include a statement about white male culture.

[CriticalFailure]

Isn’t that just what Tarquin thinks of V? I don’t take that to mean V necessarily is genderq***r.

Edit: I have read that passage about V but never took it to contradict the decision to not reveal V’s gender.

[hamishspence]

"Latino" seemed like an out-of-universe description of Julio.

To paraphrase Miko "What is this "Latino" you speak of?"

[CriticalFailure]

"Latino" seemed like an out-of-universe description of Julio.

To paraphrase Miko "What is this "Latino" you speak of?"

Exactly, it read like an out of universe description of how someone like Tarquin might perceive these characters. There’s no reason to assume someone with an androgynous appearance would want to be called gender q***r but it’s an assumption someone like Tarquin might make.

[The Pilgrim]

Heh. I used the Search engine and found The Pilgrim had already posted it not long ago:

Yes. Dear forumite fellows who access this site by smartphone, don't blame hamishspence for the weird line formatting. Don't blame me either. Blame the copy-paste-text-from-a-PDF function.

[Quizatzhaderac]

"Latino" seemed like an out-of-universe description of Julio.

To paraphrase Miko "What is this "Latino" you speak of?"Also, V would correct that by pointing out it's spelt "latīnus". Unless (of course) one means "Latino Americano", in which case we now need to ask "What is this America you speak of?"

[MossyMeow]

...Why is the word ‘queer’ asterisked out like it violates the filter? I know it was once a slur, but that’s not its primary meaning anymore. Besides, I’m pretty sure I’ve seen it used before.

[Peelee]

q***r

For the record, while that's not a word that triggers the board filter, doing that for words which are is a poor idea; it's called masking, and is against the Forum Rules. It's always better to just write it out in full and let the filter catch it.

[Fyraltari]

For the record, while that's not a word that triggers the board filter, doing that for words which are is a poor idea; it's called masking, and is against the Forum Rules. It's always better to just write it out in full and let the filter catch it.

Just be sure you didn’t make a typo while writing in full as that accidentally circumvents the filter which is punishable.

[Peelee]

Just be sure you didn’t make a typo while writing in full as that accidentally circumvents the filter which is punishable.

Unfortunately, yes. That's why I said "better," since "best" would be to avoid such a word entirely and be completely risk-free. :smallwink:

But I don't think anyone expects everyone to be saints, so double checking the soelling is probably a good idea.

[MossyMeow]

Unfortunately, yes. That's why I said "better," since "best" would be to avoid such a word entirely and be completely risk-free. :smallwink:

But I don't think anyone expects everyone to be saints, so double checking the soelling is probably a good idea.

...Did you just intentionally misspell spelling?

[Peelee]

...Did you just intentionally misspell spelling?

No, that was just irony being amazingly well-placed. Not gonna change that.

[Emanick]

No, that was just irony being amazingly well-placed. Not gonna change that.

I assumed it was a clever, if subtle, joke, and will choose to continue to believe as much.

[The Pilgrim]

Now if only the words "Miko", "Familicide" and "Star Wars" were added to the filter, most of the thread derrailments in this place would be prevented.

[Peelee]

I assumed it was a clever, if subtle, joke, and will choose to continue to believe as much.

As Napoleon said, "never interrupt someone when they believe you are smart."

[MossyMeow]

Now if only the words "Miko", "Familicide" and "Star Wars" were added to the filter, most of the thread derrailments in this place would be prevented.

I’m pretty sure that would eliminate 90% of activity on this forum.

[CriticalFailure]

I’m not sure her best way to avoid using the term when others are, clearly it it doesn’t trigger the filter but id rather be safe. Is using asterisks for non-filtered words not permitted? I thought the rule was not to use asterisks to get around the filter, not an all purpose ban on words that are currently allowed but could be questionable.

[Peelee]

Is using asterisks for non-filtered words not permitted?

If it wasn't, you'd probably know by now.:smallwink:

I just wanted to toss that out there as a just-in-case, like if someone saw that and assumed it was good for filtered words as well. Ounce of prevention and all.

[CriticalFailure]

That makes sense thanks.

[Staysilver]

1. I do feel like V's arc in relation to Inky isn't over, we saw them looking at their photo earlier in the book.

2. The IFCC only consists of one devil, it also has a daemon and a demon (with an imp and succubus as minions).

3. V is genderqueer (from BRITF commentary), the question him or her is misguided, because they're not really either (and if I were to guess what flavor of genderqueer I'd say agender).

Ok, and now if you can accurately explain the difference between a devil, demon and daemon I'll really be impressed.

[Peelee]

Ok, and now if you can accurately explain the difference between a devil, demon and daemon I'll really be impressed.

It's mostly the soelling.:smallwink:

[MossyMeow]

Ok, and now if you can accurately explain the difference between a devil, demon and daemon I'll really be impressed.

Devils are Lawful Evil, demons are Chaotic Evil, and daemons are Neutral Evil. Ha ha! I win!

[The Pilgrim]

Demons love to break and destroy mortal bodies. Devils love to corrupt and enslave mortal minds. Daemons don't love. They just consume your life force and destroy your soul into nothingness.

This is why Devils are LE, Demons are CE, and Daemons are NE.

[ericgrau]

Re: vampire: Possibly not, I think she would just be mentioned in the epilogue, not having much impact on the main plot.

That's a total Chekhov's gun. You don't mention something like that if it's not important to the plot. That vampire is going to come back to bite them in the butt somehow. At minimum it's there to occupy some dwarves for a little while, perhaps district them from other actions. And possibly something worse.

[Peelee]

That's a total Chekhov's gun. You don't mention something like that if it's not important to the plot.

There's two quotes by the Giant that I find super applicable here ("Conservation of Detail is overrated," and "I love the certainty expressed here"), but I can't seem to find either of them. So, in lieu of those, I'll just say that I disagree.

[Ruck]

The Giant, Blood Runs in the Family, pag. 322

Pardon my ignorance, but does this count as V's gender being "revealed"? As I understand it, the term "genderqueer" is more generally referring to non-binary / non-conforming gender identities than to one specific gender.

[Anymage]

Ok, and now if you can accurately explain the difference between a devil, demon and daemon I'll really be impressed.

You know how D&D doesn't just have good vs. evil, but also a law vs. chaos axis? So you could have lawful good, neutral good, and chaotic good all in the same party with different ideas about what "good" is? The same applies for lawful, neutral, and chaotic versions of evil. The usual catch-all term for all these flavors of evil outsiders is "fiends".


Pardon my ignorance, but does this count as V's gender being "revealed"? As I understand it, the term "genderqueer" is more generally referring to non-binary / non-conforming gender identities than to one specific gender.

Since English often uses "gender" to refer to physical sex (because referring to it as "sex" brings up all sorts of jokes on its own), V's thoughts on gender vs. V's particular bits are two separate questions.

From repeated gags in the strip, V's local village probably treats physical bits as of minimal importance and doesn't really grasp the idea of gender as a social construct. So asking what gender V is would be like demanding to know what caste a person belongs to in a casteless society like most western ones. V's physical sex, meanwhile, is about as likely to be answered as specifics about any other character's genitalia are. Basically not going to happen.

[hamishspence]

Pardon my ignorance, but does this count as V's gender being "revealed"? As I understand it, the term "genderqueer" is more generally referring to non-binary / non-conforming gender identities than to one specific gender.

Personally, my view is that it is a broad enough term that it could be said that V's gender, especially V's "biological gender" has still not been revealed, nor has what gender V "identifies as".

It simply rules out that V is "male identifying as male" or "female identifying as female" but still many possibilities remain.

[CriticalFailure]

I agree that V’s sex won’t be revealed and that asking what she identifies as is meaningless since it seems like elves have retroactively been written as both mostly androgynous and having a genderless society.

[Sir_Norbert]

So, I have a question about this thread.

For quite a while, I've had a plan that when book 6 ended, I would reboot the old "Unresolved Plot Point Collection", with basically a copy of the old list but I would mark off those that have now been resolved, and keep the list updated as book 7 progressed.

Would it still be okay to do this? I don't want to be seen as needlessly duplicating an existing thread, but on the other hand, the original poster of this thread doesn't seem to be maintaining the list. I think it would be good for people to have a maintained list in a single post they could easily refer to.

Any thoughts?

[Riftwolf]

So, I have a question about this thread.

For quite a while, I've had a plan that when book 6 ended, I would reboot the old "Unresolved Plot Point Collection", with basically a copy of the old list but I would mark off those that have now been resolved, and keep the list updated as book 7 progressed.

Would it still be okay to do this? I don't want to be seen as needlessly duplicating an existing thread, but on the other hand, the original poster of this thread doesn't seem to be maintaining the list. I think it would be good for people to have a maintained list in a single post they could easily refer to.

Any thoughts?

There seems to be a lot of debate over what constitutes a plot point. I'm still waiting for Qarrs chalice to come back.

[Sir_Norbert]

All other maintained threads (e.g. MitD; Number of Character Appearances; Index of the Giant's Comments; etc. etc.) have a lot of debate, too. That doesn't mean it's not worthwhile to maintain them.

[Quizatzhaderac]

V's physical sex, meanwhile, is about as likely to be answered as specifics about any other character's genitalia are.Well, we have been given an answer to one such specific question.

You call it the trouser titan?

[littlebum2002]

So, I have a question about this thread.

For quite a while, I've had a plan that when book 6 ended, I would reboot the old "Unresolved Plot Point Collection", with basically a copy of the old list but I would mark off those that have now been resolved, and keep the list updated as book 7 progressed.

Would it still be okay to do this? I don't want to be seen as needlessly duplicating an existing thread, but on the other hand, the original poster of this thread doesn't seem to be maintaining the list. I think it would be good for people to have a maintained list in a single post they could easily refer to.

Any thoughts?

This absolutely should be done. "Unresolved plot threads" and "number of days until Belkar's death" are two threads that need to come back.

[D.One]

This absolutely should be done. "Unresolved plot threads" and "number of days until Belkar's death" are two threads that need to come back.

I don't know how much Mass Raise Thread that would be, but what about a "Threads that need to come back" thread?... :smallbiggrin:

[Staysilver]

You know how D&D doesn't just have good vs. evil, but also a law vs. chaos axis? So you could have lawful good, neutral good, and chaotic good all in the same party with different ideas about what "good" is? The same applies for lawful, neutral, and chaotic versions of evil. The usual catch-all term for all these flavors of evil outsiders is "fiends".



Since English often uses "gender" to refer to physical sex (because referring to it as "sex" brings up all sorts of jokes on its own), V's thoughts on gender vs. V's particular bits are two separate questions.

From repeated gags in the strip, V's local village probably treats physical bits as of minimal importance and doesn't really grasp the idea of gender as a social construct. So asking what gender V is would be like demanding to know what caste a person belongs to in a casteless society like most western ones. V's physical sex, meanwhile, is about as likely to be answered as specifics about any other character's genitalia are. Basically not going to happen.

Got it, understand now, ty. I am now more curious though about the nature of belief systems of "fiends" though, love to know how a "lawful" fiend would differ from chaotic or neutral in terms of actions and... well... laws. Wonder what kind of "laws" fiends have. Being rather new to all this I have to say I'm finding D&D more and more interesting the more I learn.

[HorizonWalker]

Got it, understand now, ty. I am now more curious though about the nature of belief systems of "fiends" though, love to know how a "lawful" fiend would differ from chaotic or neutral in terms of actions and... well... laws. Wonder what kind of "laws" fiends have. Being rather new to all this I have to say I'm finding D&D more and more interesting the more I learn.

One thing I'm sure you'll learn on your own but I feel obligated to tell you about anyways is that there's a great many different interpretations of the Alignment system, and what it means to be Lawful or Chaotic. Good and Evil provoke some debates, too, but not that many- it's Lawful vs Chaotic that produces the most.

And the reason for that is that there's been a lot of different definitions of Lawful Vs Chaotic over the various editions of D&D. Originally, Lawful vs Chaotic was there because it was in the Sword & Sorcery books that most of D&D's bones are really drawn from- Law and Chaos were abstract, cosmic principles that were inhuman and amoral, and also in conflict with one another. Of course, there's an obvious problem with this model: Most people don't read Sword & Sorcery books, and so Law vs Chaos wasn't a particularly accessible conflict to wrap their heads around.

So then, it was expanded to the nine-point alignment grid we know and perhaps tolerate today, but with a different rationale. See, Lawful Good and Lawful Evil had more in common than Lawful Good and Chaotic Good- Lawful Good and Lawful Evil were both aligned with the cosmic principle of Law, and it just so happened that Lawful Good was personally a lot nicer about it than Lawful Evil was. And wouldn't you know it, this was still not particularly accessible to a wider audience.

Well, then came something of a flip. Instead of Law and Chaos as the "cosmic principles" axis, and Good and Evil as the "personal inclinations" axis, the designers switched to Good and Evil as the "cosmic principles" axis, and Law and Chaos as the "personal inclinations" axis. This was much more accessible to wider audiences- pretty much everyone knows what a fight between the forces of Good and Evil looks like. Law and Chaos, meanwhile... well, what does a Champion of Law look like? A Champion of Chaos? Good has Angels and Evil has Demons, but what do Law and Chaos get? In D&D's cosmology at least, the answer to that question is "robot dice and giant frogs."(They're called Modrons(robot dice) and Slaads(giant frogs)) Which is cool and funky, but also... well, funky. It's weird. And weird is not a bad thing, but it is, generally, a little inaccessible.

Anyhow, the end result of all this is you've got some people thinking Law and Chaos are cosmic principles, other people who think they're personal inclinations that are relative to societal norms, and probably some third and fourth interpretations I haven't mentioned but are nonetheless incompatible with either interpretation, and for the most part, not very many of them realize that they're having this fundamental disconnect, which is why alignment debates have a reputation for getting very ugly, very fast.

If you want my advice? I suggest you politely ignore everything to do with Alignment. It isn't worth the trouble.

[Squire Doodad]

Personally, my view is that it is a broad enough term that it could be said that V's gender, especially V's "biological gender" has still not been revealed, nor has what gender V "identifies as".

It simply rules out that V is "male identifying as male" or "female identifying as female" but still many possibilities remain.

"Him" was used as shorthand for a person of no specific gender for a long time, but I feel like Rich using male pronouns for V is, at most, toying with the longstanding standard of "V being called a certain gender doesn't mean anything". As in, it's no different than Roy calling V "him" in one comic and "her" the next; either comic on its own could be cited as evidence to suggest V is biologically one gender, but is actually coincidental. At worst, it doesn't mean anything and it's literally just used to make the grammar more fluid.

Also, both V and their lover are of ambiguous gender as well as having adopted their kids (I think that was mentioned at one point in the main comic, but I can't recall where, if it should have been spoilered then my apologies), so again there's little reason to make assumptions.

[The Pilgrim]

Got it, understand now, ty. I am now more curious though about the nature of belief systems of "fiends" though, love to know how a "lawful" fiend would differ from chaotic or neutral in terms of actions and... well... laws. Wonder what kind of "laws" fiends have. Being rather new to all this I have to say I'm finding D&D more and more interesting the more I learn.

Devils, that is, LE fiends, are rational and believe in organized evil. They like bureaucratic red tape, little print clauses and catch-22 rules. They prefered way to corrupt mortals is to fool them into making mephistophelic bargains. Among themselves, they struggle for power through intrincate game-of-thrones style plots.

Demons (CE Fiends) on the other hand, are emotional. They corrupt mortals through indulging in their emotions. A succubus/incubus, for example, leads you to peridition through luring you into indulging in your lust. They also like brutal violence and rampaging destruction. Among themselves, their power struggles are through violence, not intrincate plots.

Daemons (NE fiends) don't care about anything but anihilating life and existence. Their approach to evil is nihilistic. War, plague, famine, natural disasters, are just efficient, dissapasionate ways to anihilate life. They are the Ennui of fiendish races.

Well, there is a lot more about it in D&D lore, but that's a basic approach about how the different aligned fiends operate.

[Squire Doodad]

Devils, that is, LE fiends, are rational and believe in organized evil. They like bureaucratic red tape, little print clauses and catch-22 rules. They prefered way to corrupt mortals is to fool them into making mephistophelic bargains. Among themselves, they struggle for power through intrincate game-of-thrones style plots.

Demons (CE Fiends) on the other hand, are emotional. They corrupt mortals through indulging in their emotions. A succubus/incubus, for example, leads you to peridition through luring you into indulging in your lust. They also like brutal violence and rampaging destruction. Among themselves, their power struggles are through violence, not intrincate plots.

Daemons (NE fiends) don't care about anything but anihilating life and existence. Their approach to evil is nihilistic. War, plague, famine, natural disasters, are just efficient, dissapasionate ways to anihilate life. They are the Ennui of fiendish races.

Well, there is a lot more about it in D&D lore, but that's a basic approach about how the different aligned fiends operate.

So they embody the extremes of (corrupt) bureaucracy, hedonism and nihilism?

[Schroeswald]

"Him" was used as shorthand for a person of no specific gender for a long time, but I feel like Rich using male pronouns for V is, at most, toying with the longstanding standard of "V being called a certain gender doesn't mean anything". As in, it's no different than Roy calling V "him" in one comic and "her" the next; either comic on its own could be cited as evidence to suggest V is biologically one gender, but is actually coincidental. At worst, it doesn't mean anything and it's literally just used to make the grammar more fluid.

Also, both V and their lover are of ambiguous gender as well as having adopted their kids (I think that was mentioned at one point in the main comic, but I can't recall where, if it should have been spoilered then my apologies), so again there's little reason to make assumptions.
I would also add that somehow I doubt Rich sees V and Inky as a couple of straight cis people, he did draw a little special panel with them holding hands and Bandana kissing some girl while V cast prismatic spray after all.

[Squire Doodad]

I would also add that somehow I doubt Rich sees V and Inky as a couple of straight cis people, he did draw a little special panel with them holding hands and Bandana kissing some girl while V cast prismatic spray after all.

Aw, that's adorable :D

[The Pilgrim]

So they embody the extremes of (corrupt) bureaucracy, hedonism and nihilism?

Well, Demons are usually portrayed more as brutal violent mutable rampaging monsters fond on destruction torture rape and murder (not neccesary in that order). But, yes.

The important thing when dealing with the Law-Chaos axis is to avoid straight-jackets. Note how Roy has been tried twice in the Comic by LG standards (the Azurite Trial and the Deva Trial in the Afterlife) and both close with a heavy author's tract about understanding D&D alignment, specially the Law-Chaos axis. The most important thing is to remain true to the alignment in your motivations.

For exaple, I mentioned the Incubi/Succubi in my previous post. They are seen by many players as weird demons because they avoid violence and are subtle manipulators, which is generally understood as Devil behaviour.

However, a Devil is trying to fool you, to make you legally binding your soul to him. The succubus just overcharges your senses and turns you into an addict.

A sucessful devil's work ends with the mortal being drawn in chains to Hell, screaming and kicking, asking for a lawyer and a re-trial, while the devil laughts and gloats in his face. The victim of a successful succubus goes willingly, he's just a junkie slave destroyed by his own lust. Most source material of D&D, however, portraits demons playing more with pain rather than pleasure.

Daemons are ofter featured like the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, just doing their job, grim, cold and silent.

[SlashDash]

I still think there's something still open with the Oracle.
The whole "pixie \ kobold" dust thing in #566 is a bit suspicious.

He's lying about his power source, which makes me wonder if he's involved with some yet unseen party.

[Quebbster]

I still think there's something still open with the Oracle.
The whole "pixie \ kobold" dust thing in #566 is a bit suspicious.

He's lying about his power source, which makes me wonder if he's involved with some yet unseen party.
The Oracle has no real need to be honest, so why wouldn't he answer a stupid question in a cheeky way?

[skim172]

My bet is that Tarquin and Co are not resolved in the main plot. From a meta perspective - and that's how Tarkers operates - the only way his ambitions are foiled is if he turns out to be a minor villain after all. That's how Elan can defeat him - by simply rejecting his place in the story.

However, I can see - in some distant future perhaps, following the completion of the main story - the possibility of the Giant writing the resolution of Tarky and the Vector Legion storyline in a side story, a companion book. I think the story hooks have already been laid in the plot, what with Ian Starshine, Geoff, Enor, and Gannji getting recruited for the Avengers by Amun-Zora.

I daresay that Redcloak's niece and other hanging story hooks that don't get resolved might even be thrown in that pot as well.

[Squire Doodad]

The Oracle has no real need to be honest, so why wouldn't he answer a stupid question in a cheeky way?

For all we know, he knew that was the reply he'd get for saying "pixie dust", so said it on purpose to mess with them.

[D.One]

Well, Demons are usually portrayed more as brutal violent mutable rampaging monsters fond on destruction torture rape and murder (not neccesary in that order). But, yes.

The important thing when dealing with the Law-Chaos axis is to avoid straight-jackets. Note how Roy has been tried twice in the Comic by LG standards (the Azurite Trial and the Deva Trial in the Afterlife) and both close with a heavy author's tract about understanding D&D alignment, specially the Law-Chaos axis. The most important thing is to remain true to the alignment in your motivations.

For exaple, I mentioned the Incubi/Succubi in my previous post. They are seen by many players as weird demons because they avoid violence and are subtle manipulators, which is generally understood as Devil behaviour.

However, a Devil is trying to fool you, to make you legally binding your soul to him. The succubus just overcharges your senses and turns you into an addict.

A sucessful devil's work ends with the mortal being drawn in chains to Hell, screaming and kicking, asking for a lawyer and a re-trial, while the devil laughts and gloats in his face. The victim of a successful succubus goes willingly, he's just a junkie slave destroyed by his own lust. Most source material of D&D, however, portraits demons playing more with pain rather than pleasure.

Daemons are ofter featured like the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, just doing their job, grim, cold and silent.

It's woth of notice that Daemons are usually portrayed as beings of Evil for Evil's sake, regardless of method, but also as mercenaries that sell their services to both sides in the Blood War.

[SlashDash]

I honestly don't get it.

I get the notion that the "worst" that could happen to Tarquin is to be taken off screen and all.

But seriously, we saw something coming out of the rift in the desert.

Do people really believe that cliffhanger is going to be left unchecked? We're never going to see or talk about that in the comics ever again?

Sounds completely nuts to me.

[D.One]

I honestly don't get it.

I get the notion that the "worst" that could happen to Tarquin is to be taken off screen and all.

But seriously, we saw something coming out of the rift in the desert.

Do people really believe that cliffhanger is going to be left unchecked? We're never going to see or talk about that in the comics ever again?

Sounds completely nuts to me.

I don't see why those two ideas (tarquin being dealt with offscreen and the rift in the desert appearing again and having plot importance) should be incompatible... The Order might receive news from the desert about the rift there, and go to check on it, expecting some sort of rematch with Tarquin and friends, only to find out he was defeated for good offscreen by the rebelion and that the Vector Legion is behind bars.

[Peelee]

I honestly don't get it.

I get the notion that the "worst" that could happen to Tarquin is to be taken off screen and all.

But seriously, we saw something coming out of the rift in the desert.

Do people really believe that cliffhanger is going to be left unchecked? We're never going to see or talk about that in the comics ever again?

Sounds completely nuts to me.

D. One beat me to it. They weren't anywhere near the rift when Tarquin landed. And he ceded all control and jurisdiction to Laurin. So we could go back there, but that has no bearing on whether we'd see Tarquin.

Also, i don't think we'll go back there until the rifts are re-sealed at comic's end. Same for Azure City rift. Except maybe for Durkon to show Redcloak hoe Gobbotopia is suffering or something.

[hroþila]

I honestly don't get it.

I get the notion that the "worst" that could happen to Tarquin is to be taken off screen and all.

But seriously, we saw something coming out of the rift in the desert.

Do people really believe that cliffhanger is going to be left unchecked? We're never going to see or talk about that in the comics ever again?

Sounds completely nuts to me.
Perhaps we'll return to that rift in particular in some way, I dunno, but my interpretation of that scene with the Snarl is that it was there simply to tell us that yes, the Snarl is real and is very much a threat, at a point where Vaarsuvius (and by extension, the Order and the readers) was wondering whether anything Shojo had told them was true. In that sense, that rift already served its purpose.

[skim172]

I honestly don't get it.

I get the notion that the "worst" that could happen to Tarquin is to be taken off screen and all.

But seriously, we saw something coming out of the rift in the desert.

Do people really believe that cliffhanger is going to be left unchecked? We're never going to see or talk about that in the comics ever again?

Sounds completely nuts to me.

A valid point about the rift, but if they dealt with the Snarl at another rift, presumably the desert rift would be closed, too.

[woweedd]

Perhaps we'll return to that rift in particular in some way, I dunno, but my interpretation of that scene with the Snarl is that it was there simply to tell us that yes, the Snarl is real and is very much a threat, at a point where Vaarsuvius (and by extension, the Order and the readers) was wondering whether anything Shojo had told them was true. In that sense, that rift already served its purpose.
Well, that, and to build suspense by giving us our first non-crayon look at The Snarl in all its awesome (in the literal sense) glory.