Bring back Draketooth

[SlashDash]

I am NOT saying this is a plot hole
There are plenty of reasons why this wouldn't work and the characters might not even think of this at this point.



But regardless, during the pyramid investigation, Durkon couldn't bring back any of the Draketooth clan to life. They said because Durkon is Lawful Good, the Draketooth clan would assume he's a paladin and ignore him.

But... What about Hilga? She's clearly not "lawful good" and most likely the Draktooth will return if she called.
Haley kept saying that Gerard was like her father and we know the thieves are pretty close to clerics of Loki in general.


It's possible not enough of the bodies is left after the explosion, or after Tarquin was done with the place (maybe the Snarl too) so it's surely not a plot hole or anything. Plus Hilga isn't likely to agree to go anywhere near Tarquin and her face was on the posters there.

But I find it funny just to think "what if" someone would have suggested that Hilga would do a small sidestep to bring back someone who knows a lot more about the gates.

[Dr.Zero]

I am NOT saying this is a plot hole
There are plenty of reasons why this wouldn't work and the characters might not even think of this at this point.


If they know that their whole family has been slaughtered, and from what we have seen of the afterlife, they probably know it, I highly doubt that they will accept a resurrection from a random chaotic neutral (some would argue evil, but they are clearly wrong) cleric, who might want them alive to inquire them about the gates and seize them.

They, like Ian, trusted only family, and the whole family is gone, so they trust no one else anymore on the mortal plane. And if a call to be resurrected comes, they are sure it comes from someone who is not of the family, therefore untrustworthy, alignment notwithstanding.

[Grey Watcher]

It seems like it'd be really weird for Hilgya to agree to go trekking all the way to the Western Continent on what is essentially a wild guess. She literally bailed in the middle of a fight to save the world from destruction, so I highly doubt she'd be willing to go try to resurrect some people she doesn't even know for... why would they be doing this again? At this point, the only reason to try to resurrect the Draketooths is out of charity, since they likely have little to no relevant information or insight. And charity ain't exactly high on Hilgya's to-do list.

Furthermore, given that (as Haley observes) the Draketooth clan/cult was worried about both Paladins and bad guys being after the Gate, an Evil-aligned Cleric might end up being similarly distrusted and refused.

And if Girard's attitudes towards the gods was something that became part of the clan's general philosophy, they might refuse aid from divine magic just on principle, regardless of the caster.

And that's before we even get to the whole practical problem of the fact that anything short of True Resurrection (a 9th level spell, which I don't think Hilgya can cast yet) requires at least a body part, which in turn means you have to search a wide swath of featureless desert for something as small as a human body (if not even smaller), with no guarantee that there even is anything intact enough to find. And if any of the anti-divination spells are still up and running, that means searching the old-fashioned way.

And, on top of all that, Tarquin might be aware of her association with Nale, which means we don't know if he'd have her arrested if she were spotted wandering around in or near the territory of any of the three Empires.

TL;DR: it seems highly unlikely that this would even be attempted, much less work.

[Emanick]

Aside from all of the above, The Snarl is loose around Girard’s Gate. It’s probably not safe to search for body parts, and without body parts, Hilgya can’t resurrect any of Girard’s descendants.

[Aidan]

If they know that their whole family has been slaughtered, and from what we have seen of the afterlife, they probably know it, I highly doubt that they will accept a resurrection from a random chaotic neutral (some would argue evil, but they are clearly wrong) cleric, who might want them alive to inquire them about the gates and seize them.

They, like Ian, trusted only family, and the whole family is gone, so they trust no one else anymore on the mortal plane. And if a call to be resurrected comes, they are sure it comes from someone who is not of the family, therefore untrustworthy, alignment notwithstanding.

Unless every single member of the clan ended up in the same afterlife, which may not be guaranteed (we don't know that every single member was Chaotic Neutral) a chaotic neutral cleric may have a chance to resurrect one of them. They only are told the alignment of the cleric, not their identity.

The point is moot anyways because Higlya is Chaotic Evil, as Rich explicitly stated in the commentary for War and XP.

[Dr.Zero]

Unless every single member of the clan ended up in the same afterlife, which may not be guaranteed (we don't know that every single member was Chaotic Neutral) a chaotic neutral cleric may have a chance to resurrect one of them. They only are told the alignment of the cleric, not their identity.


Yeah, acceptable point.



The point is moot anyways because Higlya is Chaotic Evil, as Rich explicitly stated in the commentary for War and XP.

In that case, he was clearly wrong too, obviously.

[Aidan]

Back to the original question, I would also like to point out that like Soon's gate, the gate in the pyramid was remarkably hidden, making direct observations of it kind of hard. I doubt that any of the Draketooth clan would know much more about the gates as opposed to the Sapphire Guard.

Hardly enough to justify flying back to the desert to search for some bits of the Draketooths to resurrect.

The only member of the Draketooth clan that would know enough to make a trip to resurrect them worth it is Girard Draketooth, who the Order concluded died of old age, meaning no resurrection for him.

[factotum]

And that's before we even get to the whole practical problem of the fact that anything short of True Resurrection (a 9th level spell, which I don't think Hilgya can cast yet) requires at least a body part, which in turn means you have to search a wide swath of featureless desert for something as small as a human body (if not even smaller), with no guarantee that there even is anything intact enough to find.

Especially since the desert critters will no doubt have done a pretty good job of finding and eating any odd bits of body parts left lying around after the explosion.

[Jannoire]

The point is moot anyways because Higlya is Chaotic Evil, as Rich explicitly stated in the commentary for War and XP.

He did what? Why were there so many arguments then?
I need to check my library again...

To the bat-library, Bard-Boy!

[Dire_Flumph]

He did what? Why were there so many arguments then?
I need to check my library again...

To the bat-library, Bard-Boy!

Yeah, no, doing a quick Ctrl-F of my Ookadook pdf finds only the below

"The first time around, Durkon’s opposite had been Hilgya, who, while evil, was not particularly opposed to Durkon himself. It was their genders (and patron gods) that made them opposites, as well as a certain difference of opinion over one’s obligation to duty."

While I would interpret that as Hilgya is Chaotic Evil, I wouldn't say it states it explicitly.

[Peelee]

Yeah, no, doing a quick Ctrl-F of my Ookadook pdf finds only the below

"The first time around, Durkon’s opposite had been Hilgya, who, while evil, was not particularly opposed to Durkon himself. It was their genders (and patron gods) that made them opposites, as well as a certain difference of opinion over one’s obligation to duty."

While I would interpret that as Hilgya is Chaotic Evil, I wouldn't say it states it explicitly.

It does explicitly say Hilgya is Evil. Just doesn't explicitly say Chaotic.

[Schroeswald]

It does explicitly say Hilgya is Evil. Just doesn't explicitly say Chaotic.
That means that she’s Lawful Evil!

[Aidan]

Yeah, no, doing a quick Ctrl-F of my Ookadook pdf finds only the below

"The first time around, Durkon’s opposite had been Hilgya, who, while evil, was not particularly opposed to Durkon himself. It was their genders (and patron gods) that made them opposites, as well as a certain difference of opinion over one’s obligation to duty."

While I would interpret that as Hilgya is Chaotic Evil, I wouldn't say it states it explicitly.

Fair point, he only states there that she is definitely evil.

However given no one that I know of has been arguing that she is not chaotic, my point stands.

[Ron Miel]

To the bat-library, Bard-Boy!

Shouldn't that be the ninja-library?

[CriticalFailure]

If there is word of author that Hilgya is CE and Girard is CN, it tells us that in this universe the line between neutral and evil lies somewhere between "massive scale kidnapping operation" and "attempting to kill or bankrupt those who get in your way." Though honestly I still find it surprising that the massive scale kidnapping thing isn't classified as "evil, but for a good cause."

[Schroeswald]

If there is word of author that Hilgya is CE and Girard is CN, it tells us that in this universe the line between neutral and evil lies somewhere between "massive scale kidnapping operation" and "attempting to kill or bankrupt those who get in your way." Though honestly I still find it surprising that the massive scale kidnapping thing isn't classified as "evil, but for a good cause."
Both of those acts are Evil, but the massive scale kidnapping operation isn’t the only thing he did, Girard spent most of his life working to save the world, while Hilgya spends her life trying to win against all the losers who lose, that’s what separates them alignment-wise, not just their worst actions.

[Grey Watcher]

If there is word of author that Hilgya is CE and Girard is CN, it tells us that in this universe the line between neutral and evil lies somewhere between "massive scale kidnapping operation" and "attempting to kill or bankrupt those who get in your way." Though honestly I still find it surprising that the massive scale kidnapping thing isn't classified as "evil, but for a good cause."

Do we know for a firm fact that Girard is Chaotic Neutral and not Chaotic Evil? I mean, I always did have the impression he was CN, but now that you mention it, I don't know if it's ever firmly stated. As for adventuring alongside Soon and him remaining a Paladin in good standing, maybe he was CN at the time, but went to a very dark, ends-justify-the-means kind of place after the Scibblers broke up.


Both of those acts are Evil, but the massive scale kidnapping operation isn’t the only thing he did, Girard spent most of his life working to save the world, while Hilgya spends her life trying to win against all the losers who lose, that’s what separates them alignment-wise, not just their worst actions.

Yeah, but "evil, but for a good cause" is also Redcloak's whole shtick and he's still officially an Evil aligned character.

Although, does running off with the baby count as kidnapping? It gets into a murky area where it's arguably a custody dispute, since the Whoever Draketooth is just as much a parent to the child as the outsider. I don't know. In the case of male Draketooths, getting someone to have a baby for you on false pretenses is a pretty scummy thing to do, so that's definitely a black mark on the whole group, I think.

As for running off with the parents money, as Orrin did to Penelope, maybe that's standard procedure or maybe it's a special "rob from the rich" type deal they pull when they happen to have targeted a wealthy person. We just don't know, since we have no details on any of these seductions outside of Penelope's.

And that's before we get into a discussion of how deliberately he built up the cult of personality around himself. Maybe the latter half of his life consisted of him trying (unsuccessfully) to avoid being made into such a figure. Or maybe he went for maximum hypocrisy and actively cultivated it. We just don't know as of right now.

I think what, for me, pushes Hilgya into definitively Evil (aside form Rich's say so) is that she seems to go out of her way to hurt people. She tried to kill her husband repeatedly and only settled for running away when that failed. And she could've made plenty of money for herself by fixing the races, but she went the extra mile to absolutely ruin her family. And maybe they deserve some measure of revenge for forcing her into a marriage in the first place, but it still feels a tad excessive to tank the entire family when her beef is really with a handful of the clan's elders. (And let's not forget that bankrupting them was her second choice; she would rather have just burned them all alive in their homes, but only refrained due to her pregnancy.)

The Draketooths might have been similar in terms of being needlessly cruel to their marks. Or not. Or maybe the basics of the con are cruel enough on their own. Maybe there's a reason their alignment (collectively or any given individual) is never specified farther than "Chaotic non-Good." With so few details, it's hard to pin them down on something as cut-and-dried as an alignment chart.

D&D alignment gets really weird and arbitrary when you try to figure out which bad behaviors are Evil and which ones are Chaotic.

(As an aside, I always assumed that Draketooth women just disappeared as soon as they were sure they were pregnant, so the father might never have even known the child existed.)

[CriticalFailure]

I mean parental kidnapping is a thing. I don’t think not telling someone you got pregnant and running away to raise the baby alone is evil since they don’t know so it doesn’t really affect them, but parental kidnapping a child away from a parent who has known it seem pretty evil to me.

It’s not like I think it’s a problem with the story or anything because in the end alignment decisions are subjective because people have different opinions on morality. It just seems to me that doing evil things like mass scale kidnapping should be classified as evil but for a good cause, since kidnapping isn’t actually necessary to save the world and it’s the result of Girard’s paranoia. If kidnapping were literally the only way to save the world I’d consider it a good but unfortunate act, like choosing the lesser evil in the trolley problem or something.

I guess unlike Redcloak, Girard’s ultimate good cause was a very concrete reality rather than an unlikely and far off end goal, and his evil was relatively minor in comparison. But to me they did seem to fall in the same general “the ends justify the evil means category.”

I also always assumed he went from CN to CE after the Scribblers split up and he was more isolated and could stew in paranoia and didn’t have checks on his behavior in the form of good aligned allies.

[hamishspence]

It does explicitly say Hilgya is Evil. Just doesn't explicitly say Chaotic.

Being able to cast the Chaos Hammer spell, however, does -

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/cleric.htm



Deity, Domains, and Domain Spells
A cleric’s deity influences his alignment, what magic he can perform, his values, and how others see him. A cleric chooses two domains from among those belonging to his deity. A cleric can select an alignment domain (Chaos, Evil, Good, or Law) only if his alignment matches that domain.


Do we know for a firm fact that Girard is Chaotic Neutral and not Chaotic Evil?



What Alignment was Girard Draketooth? To me, he seems textbook Chaotic Neutral.
Yep.

I think it's reasonable to presume, (given how the interview was long after we saw Girard's dead body) that Girard was always that alignment, at least from when he joined the Order of the Scribble, to when he died.

[Grey Watcher]

I mean parental kidnapping is a thing. I don’t think not telling someone you got pregnant and running away to raise the baby alone is evil since they don’t know so it doesn’t really affect them, but parental kidnapping a child away from a parent who has known it seem pretty evil to me.

It’s not like I think it’s a problem with the story or anything because in the end alignment decisions are subjective because people have different opinions on morality. It just seems to me that doing evil things like mass scale kidnapping should be classified as evil but for a good cause, since kidnapping isn’t actually necessary to save the world and it’s the result of Girard’s paranoia. If kidnapping were literally the only way to save the world I’d consider it a good but unfortunate act, like choosing the lesser evil in the trolley problem or something.

I guess unlike Redcloak, Girard’s ultimate good cause was a very concrete reality rather than an unlikely and far off end goal, and his evil was relatively minor in comparison. But to me they did seem to fall in the same general “the ends justify the evil means category.”

I also always assumed he went from CN to CE after the Scribblers split up and he was more isolated and could stew in paranoia and didn’t have checks on his behavior in the form of good aligned allies.

I guess the point I was aiming for is that parental kidnapping isn't necessarily clear cut. In the case of the Draketooths, it's obviously wrong from our detached perspective, but might not seem so clear to people raised in a paranoid cult. (Thinking of the intake deva's line about doing the best one can within one's abilities, including the ability to judge what is best.) Lots of parental kidnapping cases boil down to the parent without legal custody believing (rightly or wrongly) that the kid is better off with them than the other parent. So once you start factoring in intent (which counts in the OOTS comology, per Roy's intake, but is not the sole consideration, per Miko's fall) and the child's well-being (both actual and as perceived by each parent), plugging it into the Big Board becomes a whole lot murkier.

On top of all of that, there are lots of things that hurt people that aren't automatically evil. Stealing isn't. But stealing something does injure the owner in some emotional or psychological way. Maybe they deserve it. Maybe they're rich enough that the injury is negligible. But it still points to "injury != Evil" as an assumption this system takes. This is one of those situations where what's evil in real life and what's Evil in D&D metaphysics might not be the same thing.

Or not. The point is, I really can't make up my mind where this falls, even as I recognize that, by a more real-world standard it's thoughtless, hurtful, and cruel.

I think there's a reason even the newer editions of game itself have started to de-emphasize alignment.

[CriticalFailure]

I actually think the alignment system is better than people give it credit for. It doesn’t force people to make their characters 2d alignment stereotypes, they can just come up a character and then place them where they think they belong on the alignment chart after. I think it get blamed for a lot of bad GMing/lazy characterization that is just that, bad GMing/lazy characterization.

[Resileaf]

Would there even be a Draketooth left to resurrect after the pyramid exploded?

[Mike Havran]

If there is word of author that Hilgya is CE and Girard is CN, it tells us that in this universe the line between neutral and evil lies somewhere between "massive scale kidnapping operation" and "attempting to kill or bankrupt those who get in your way." Though honestly I still find it surprising that the massive scale kidnapping thing isn't classified as "evil, but for a good cause."There is no evidence Girard started the kidnapping habit; it may have easily been a novelty introduced by his successor as the patriarch/matriarch of the clan.

[factotum]

Would there even be a Draketooth left to resurrect after the pyramid exploded?

Resurrection doesn't require a complete body--provided you can find one, a small piece of hair or bone would be sufficient. As said above, though, while there might well be bits and pieces of them lying around after the pyramid exploded, finding them in the desert before the scavengers do would not be easy.

[Resileaf]

Resurrection doesn't require a complete body--provided you can find one, a small piece of hair or bone would be sufficient. As said above, though, while there might well be bits and pieces of them lying around after the pyramid exploded, finding them in the desert before the scavengers do would not be easy.

Considering the violence of the explosion, most pieces have most likely been vaporised and what is left has been scattered for miles around or buried under the sand. Sand that is currently under an angry snarl portal.

[Riftwolf]

From Durkon's message from his resurrecting Deva, he didn't just know the alignment of the cleric casting Resurrection, but that they were a Cleric of Loki. Any Draketooth would be suspicious of a Northern God's cleric trying to bring one back, as it might be a ploy from an outside force.
While hypotheticals are interesting, it's not a plot hole that the Order haven't done this. If anything, it raises plot holes if it happened.

[Jannoire]

Maybe that piece of information is only that important because it's Loki and Thor?

[Aidan]

Maybe that piece of information is only that important because it's Loki and Thor?

Considering Minrah got a drink upgrade on account of being killed by a cleric of Loki, it's a fair chance. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1136.html)

[Precure]

There is no evidence Girard started the kidnapping habit; it may have easily been a novelty introduced by his successor as the patriarch/matriarch of the clan.

Didn't he died few years ago?

[Riftwolf]

Didn't he died few years ago?

Durkon observes in 849 he's been dead twenty years or more. It's possible he handed effective control of the clan over to his heir before he died, and that heir instigated the child abduction program, but that's a weak hypothesis.

[Schroeswald]

Durkon observes in 849 he's been dead twenty years or more. It's possible he handed effective control of the clan over to his heir before he died, and that heir instigated the child abduction program, but that's a weak hypothesis.

Actually 846 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0846.html). But I'm confused by your second sentence, more than twenty years, that leaves 5+ years between the earliest baby stealing we know of and his death, plenty of time for this scheme to be instituted (I'm not saying that Girard didn't start it, I'm just saying that whoever the heir was instituting it isn't a weak hypothesis).

[Riftwolf]

OK weak hypothesis was a wrong choice of words. Looking at evidence (the family tree in the pyramid), the children may have been a more recent invention (as Girards extended family realised if they wanted to prevent inbreeding, they couldn't rely on persuading outsiders into their cult to raise the next generation.) as the number of children accelerates on the lower lines. However, it could still be a Girard invention; just because the first documented case was likely after his death, we shouldnt assume it was the first or last (it has something to do with tank numbers?). If the reason for claiming the child abduction began after Girards death is to somehow vindicate Girard of wrongdoing, that's the weak part for me.

[factotum]

OK weak hypothesis was a wrong choice of words. Looking at evidence (the family tree in the pyramid), the children may have been a more recent invention

V says in #843 that "The Draketooth Clan spent 60 years propagating itself by mating with random outsiders and then disappearing with the child". So, *he* certainly believes they've been doing this since before Girard died.

[Mike Havran]

OK weak hypothesis was a wrong choice of words. Looking at evidence (the family tree in the pyramid), the children may have been a more recent invention (as Girards extended family realised if they wanted to prevent inbreeding, they couldn't rely on persuading outsiders into their cult to raise the next generation.) as the number of children accelerates on the lower lines. However, it could still be a Girard invention; just because the first documented case was likely after his death, we shouldnt assume it was the first or last (it has something to do with tank numbers?). If the reason for claiming the child abduction began after Girards death is to somehow vindicate Girard of wrongdoing, that's the weak part for me.My original point contested the poster who fit the child abduction & robbery scheme with Girard's confirmed Chaotic Neutral alignment (IMO, it doesn't fit very well). In dubio pro reo, I say.

In fact, the only thing that points towards Girard is V's statement and we have no idea if it's based on anything tangible (I kinda doubt the abduction strategy was inscribed somewhere on the murals). The flashback panels with the murders did happen, but in is quite uncertain whether those people were victims of child abduction scheme, or merely lovers or distant family of the Draketooths.

It is also possible the only abductor was Orrin and he was a maverick in this. it explains why Penelope hasn't met anyone else who had been wronged by a Draketooth despite searching for her child for years, and why Tarquin and his buddies haven't moved against what they would inevitably perceive as a well-orgainzed competitive group of villains.

[factotum]

It is also possible the only abductor was Orrin and he was a maverick in this. it explains why Penelope hasn't met anyone else who had been wronged by a Draketooth despite searching for her child for years, and why Tarquin and his buddies haven't moved against what they would inevitably perceive as a well-orgainzed competitive group of villains.

Possible, but not supported by any evidence in the comic--there were quite a few children dead in the pyramid, were they all Orrin's? Also, I think you're overestimating just how big the Draketooth clan are. At a rough estimate, given how many of them there were and how many children we saw in the pyramid, they were doing child abductions maybe once a year--twice a year at most. And they have millions of humans spread across the entire Western Continent to choose from when picking their targets. It could be decades between them visiting the same town or city for a second time, so Penelope not finding anyone else who'd had the same experience doesn't really mean anything.

Also, where does "a well-organised competitive group of villains" come from? Even if Tarquin et al. had noticed an unusually large number of abducted children--which seems unlikely in the extreme, given the numbers--why would they assume this is an organised gang of villains and move against them, when the only evidence they would have is that the kidnapper has red hair? How would they even know where to look for said villains? You'll note from strip #821 that Nale was only able to narrow down the location to Windy Canyon after months of divinations, with more information available to him about the Draketooths than Tarquin ever had.

[The Aboleth]

Possible, but not supported by any evidence in the comic--there were quite a few children dead in the pyramid, were they all Orrin's? Also, I think you're overestimating just how big the Draketooth clan are. At a rough estimate, given how many of them there were and how many children we saw in the pyramid, they were doing child abductions maybe once a year--twice a year at most. And they have millions of humans spread across the entire Western Continent to choose from when picking their targets. It could be decades between them visiting the same town or city for a second time, so Penelope not finding anyone else who'd had the same experience doesn't really mean anything.

Also, where does "a well-organised competitive group of villains" come from? Even if Tarquin et al. had noticed an unusually large number of abducted children--which seems unlikely in the extreme, given the numbers--why would they assume this is an organised gang of villains and move against them, when the only evidence they would have is that the kidnapper has red hair? How would they even know where to look for said villains? You'll note from strip #821 that Nale was only able to narrow down the location to Windy Canyon after months of divinations, with more information available to him about the Draketooths than Tarquin ever had.


I think it's also important to note that the Western Continent is an extremely volatile environment politically, with new empires regularly rising and falling. It's possible, and I would hypothesize quite likely, that many of the abducted children were written off as war casualties--either because it was assumed they and/or the Draketooth parent "died," or because a few abductees would barely register in an environment that regularly sees violence and instability.

[DaOldeWolf]

I kind of wonder how cooperative a member of such a paranoid family would be even if they could be revived. Would they believe what happened while they were dead? Would they believe the people who revived them to be part of the good side?

[factotum]

I kind of wonder how cooperative a member of such a paranoid family would be even if they could be revived. Would they believe what happened while they were dead? Would they believe the people who revived them to be part of the good side?

The person being resurrected knows the alignment of the person resurrecting them, but that would make them *less* likely to trust them in this case, because they'd just assume the Lawful Good person doing the resurrection was associated with Soon and his paladins.

[Aquillion]

Worth pointing out that Durkon and Hilgya both have Plane Shift, which means they could shift to their afterlife and talk to them personally before going for a resurrection.

[Peelee]

Worth pointing out that Durkon and Hilgya both have Plane Shift, which means they could shift to their afterlife and talk to them personally before going for a resurrection.

In much the same way that I have a car, so I could drive to California and talk to Arnold Schwarzenegger.

It being possible and it being feasible are two very different things.:smalltongue:

[factotum]

Worth pointing out that Durkon and Hilgya both have Plane Shift, which means they could shift to their afterlife and talk to them personally before going for a resurrection.

Even assuming that happens--and as Peelee points out, it's not quite as simple as you're making out here--why would the dead Draketooth clan have any more reason to trust Durkon and Hilgya if they spoke to them directly? These are guys who were convinced that a *paladin* (of all people) would break their oath, they're not going to believe anything anyone tells them.

[Quizatzhaderac]

Draketooth may have died of old age, which means nothing can bring him back.

The comic didn't show what happened to the body, but presumably the order removed it from the casket when they hid in it (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0900.html). Three and a half people is a lot for a one person casket already. The explosion may have disintegrated or fractured the bones, but it definitely would have scattered them.

Locating a piece of the body would require having specifically Durkon (the only living caster to have seen Girard's corpse) cast locate object. Assuming any piece survived the explosion, the snarl, and the sweaters.

[MReav]

I am NOT saying this is a plot hole
There are plenty of reasons why this wouldn't work and the characters might not even think of this at this point.



But regardless, during the pyramid investigation, Durkon couldn't bring back any of the Draketooth clan to life. They said because Durkon is Lawful Good, the Draketooth clan would assume he's a paladin and ignore him.

But... What about Hilga? She's clearly not "lawful good" and most likely the Draktooth will return if she called.
Haley kept saying that Gerard was like her father and we know the thieves are pretty close to clerics of Loki in general.


It's possible not enough of the bodies is left after the explosion, or after Tarquin was done with the place (maybe the Snarl too) so it's surely not a plot hole or anything. Plus Hilga isn't likely to agree to go anywhere near Tarquin and her face was on the posters there.

But I find it funny just to think "what if" someone would have suggested that Hilga would do a small sidestep to bring back someone who knows a lot more about the gates.


I would say the problems with this idea are threefold:

1. Why would they trust Hilgya? Just because they don't trust paladins doesn't mean they would automatically trust people on the opposite side. They might view paladins as jack-booted authoritarians who try to run roughshod over your rights for the greater good, but they would likely view clerics of Loki as selfish, backstabbing exploiters who will ditch you to a horrible fate the moment it becomes convenient to them.

2. The explosion probably scattered their remains far and wide what wasn't vaporized. It was difficult enough to find a pyramid in a random desert, now imagine bits and pieces that scavengers would be happy to eat.

3. There's a Snarl in the vicinity. Hanging around the area where the god-killing abomination is is going to end badly. And they can scout the area via divinations, so even if they don't know now, they can easily enough.

[Quizatzhaderac]

they're not going to believe anything anyone tells them.Durkon: Hello, I'm here today...
Draketooth: I don't believe you!
Durkon: I haven't said anything yet!
Draketooth: You might be a projection and not really here. Or maybe there's some time delay thing and you were here yesterday, and I'm only seeing/hearing you now. Also, "hello" is derived from "halouen" which detonates shouting, whereas you actually greeted me in a moderate tone...