Why Redcloak is my favourite character. [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Metastachydium

2020-08-05, 10:43 AM

No, Redcloak is evil because he chooses to do evil things, like enslaving people or attempting to murder Durkon. And you can't argue that his life experiences left him with no other choice, because
his brother, who had the same life experiences as Redcloak, didn't make the same choices as he did.

That comparison is a little bit unfair. Especially using ”choices” in the plural. You know, people keep forgetting that 1. hiring Xykon (their first misguided move) was Right-Eye's decision (and a decision Redcloak initially opposed);
2. turning him into a lich (their second, even more misguided move) was Redcloak's idea, but Right-Eye ultimately gave it his express consent;
3.a. arguably, Right-Eye quitting to found that village of his would not have gone so smoothly were it not for Redcloak covering his escape;
3.b. Right-Eye was never quite in the same position as Redcloak: he did not serve as a cleric, let alone the Bearer for many years when he suggested on Lair Island that Redcloak should just toss the Mantle to the first goblin cleric in the castle, and unlike Redcloak who would have had to make a very quick decision there (with Right-Eye urging him and with Xykon in the next room), Right-Eye has been pondering the whole business with his defection for some time;
4. when Xykon disappeared, Redcloak eventually decided he'll quit as well and join his brother;
5. Xykon catching up with them was no fault of his own;
6. and at that point they both made the same choice: follow Xykon and save their lives.
The only (ethically speaking) wrong call Redcloak made (NB: Right-Eye never had a chance of succeeding) was siding with Xykon instead of his brother, and all he would have achieved by not doing so would have been dying an honourable death and leaving the Plan in potentially less-than-capable hands.

King of Nowhere

2020-08-05, 10:43 AM

i, for once, am extremely happy that redcloak got this offer from durkon.
so far, all his life, redcloak never had an honest choice he could take. he's right in that regard. if he hadn't conquered azure city, nobody would have negotiated with him. if he hadn't worked with xykon, he'd be dead already. even the business with his brother was not much of a clean choice, it would have required giving up on goblins everywhere else, on his responsibility as leader of all goblinkind. all his life, redcloak was forced to pick evil because he never had a workable good option.

but this time, redcloak was given a good deal. he had a clear choice between good and evil, with good being a real possibility and not a crazy optimistic chance.
and he made his choice. A bad choice.
redcloak is a tragic character. he could have been a genuinely good person if he had a different life. but in the end he made his choice. and i think he deserved at least that much: a clean, clear choice.

Also there's very much a difference between having a tragic past and (twisted) character development and being "human".

being "human" does not mean being a good person. it's generally meant as having a complex, multifaceted personality.

No, Redcloak is evil because he chooses to do evil things, like enslaving people or attempting to murder Durkon. And you can't argue that his life experiences left him with no other choice
the interplay between environment and choice is more complex than that.
sure, we can pick any single evildoer and see that it was his choices leading him to his path, that he always had chances for redemption. we definitely can't say that people are doomed to evil and have no choice in the matter.
at the same time, if we pick 1000 people who grew up in a bad environment, and 1000 people who grew up in a good environment, we'll get many more evil people from the first batch. and while for all of them we can highlight the choices they made, we certainly cannot disregard the impact of life experiences in steering one's choices in certain directions.

Fyraltari

2020-08-05, 10:47 AM

See this is much more in line of what I’ve come to expect from you.

Also there's very much a difference between having a tragic past and (twisted) character development and being "human". Redcloak treats his people better than, say, Tarquin, but that doesn't mean he is a good person.
Redcloak is a human character but not a humane one.

No, Redcloak is evil because he chooses to do evil things, like enslaving people or attempting to murder Durkon. And you can't argue that his life experiences left him with no other choice, because
his brother, who had the same life experiences as Redcloak, didn't make the same choices as he did.
These are hardly incompatible. Had Redcloak grown up with his loving family he wouldn’t have become Evil. The evil that people do is always their choice but it is also always a consequence to their life story. In this manner, Redcloak is much more human a character than Xykon whose evilness we are supposed to believe was inborn.

Also it’s a detail but Right-Eye did not have the same life experience abs Redcloak. As both the eldest brother and the high priest Redcloak was the leader, meaning that the pressure to carry out the plan and to make the right decisions was on him while Right-Eye had the (relative) luxury of passing responsibility to Redcloak. But also, and that’s a key point, Right-Eye’s metabolism wasn’y tampered by the Mantle and so he matured and aged. His decision to leave was in part due to the fact that unlike his brother he only ever had one lifetime.

Lord Torath

2020-08-05, 10:51 AM

Hey, Luna, I found something for you: Enjoy! (https://www.deviantart.com/museamused/art/RedCloak-279231866)

understatement

2020-08-05, 10:55 AM

These are hardly incompatible. Had Redcloak grown up with his loving family he wouldn’t have become Evil. The evil that people do is always their choice but it is also always a consequence to their life story. In this manner, Redcloak is much more human a character than Xykon whose evilness we are supposed to believe was inborn.

I don't think Xykon was evil from birth -- more like he got power at an early age, and chose to inflict as much pain and suffering as possible.

Also it’s a detail but Right-Eye did not have the same life experience abs Redcloak. As both the eldest brother and the high priest Redcloak was the leader, meaning that the pressure to carry out the plan and to make the right decisions was on him while Right-Eye had the (relative) luxury of passing responsibility to Redcloak. But also, and that’s a key point, Right-Eye’s metabolism wasn’y tampered by the Mantle and so he matured and aged. His decision to leave was in part due to the fact that unlike his brother he only ever had one lifetime.

Maybe someone should take the mantle off of Redcloak.

137beth

2020-08-05, 12:25 PM

And that person is me! Yes! I've decided that Jake is never coming back and so there is no better evil cleric (I've got a thing for them) than the Green Goblin!

But what if Redcloak becomes a vampire? Would the Vampire Redcloak be better than the goblin Redcloak?

More seriously, I do think Redcloak is one of my favorite characters in the comic, as someone I love to read about. I don't think he's a good person, but he is a good character.

EDIT:
Also, I thought Redcloak's real name was Carlton (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?294277-Something-Fun)? Are you telling us the vision you had seven years ago was not completely accurate?!?:smalltongue:

Jason

2020-08-05, 12:44 PM

A person's history can explain their character, but it can never excuse their character. Redcloak is the villain he is ultimately because of his own bad choices. The terrible things that happened to him can make his choices seem more plausible and reasonable, but they were still bad choices. And Redcloak's most noticeable flaw is a refusal to admit that he made bad decisions.

Jason

2020-08-05, 02:20 PM

InvisibleBison

2020-08-05, 03:36 PM

brian 333

2020-08-05, 04:53 PM

While societal pressures often require them to limit their self-expression, evil people come from good backgrounds as often as from bad. Just watch a few episodes of Springer to see the horror show suburban life can be. There's still a lot we don't know about nature versus nurture, but evil cannot be explained by childhood poverty and oppression.

The Pilgrim

2020-08-05, 05:09 PM

There seems to be an assumption throughout these forums that Redcloak's story about the gods creating the goblin races as xp fodder for their clerics and giving them all the low-resource areas to prevent them from overcoming the other races is true.
That story is certainly what Redcloak believes, and is (with perhaps some edits for his audience) what The Dark One told him in his information download, but is it true?

The only parts of the story that Thor confirmed directly were that The Dark One arose without the help of other deities, that his followers killed a lot of Thor's followers, and that Thor himself at first wanted to destroy him. Thor doesn't say anything about the gods having created goblinoids as xp fodder in the first place or having given them a raw deal as far as lands went.

Is there other evidence in the comic that the goblins have been given a raw deal? The hobgoblins had their own thriving city when Redcloak became their supreme leader, didn't they?

The bugbears seem to believe the Dark One only cares about goblins and hobgoblins too, not improving the lot of all goblinoids.

At this point, does it really matters if the Gods created the goblins as XP fodder or not?

I mean, the Gods created the Dwarves as bargaining chips, yet the dwarves have prospered. The Gods probably created a lot more races intended as XP fodder, yet those races prospered. The Dark One, according to his own narrative, was betrayed by the humans, not by the Gods. Redcloak himself wasn't originally wronged by the Gods, but by mortal people.

Yes, the Goblins were perhaps given a worse starting package than other races. That doesn't means there is a Celestial Boot over their heads preventing them from prospering, as many goblinoid communities, like the Hobgoblins, were able to develope to the point of managing to take over better lands from the supposedly "privileged" races.

Conradine

2020-08-05, 05:16 PM

There's still a lot we don't know about nature versus nurture, but evil cannot be explained by childhood poverty and oppression.

Poverty and oppression are a thing.

Genocide, the deliberate and systematic destruction of a group of people, is on a whole different level.

What Redcloak went through is almost inconcivable from a modern perspective.

Jason

2020-08-05, 05:28 PM

At this point, does it really matters if the Gods created the goblins as XP fodder or not?
Yes, that's part of the point, isn't it? Redcloak acts as if goblins will forever be victims until the gods and other races begin treating them as equals, but as Durkon points out "I guess I'm na really clear on how yer na already equal. Ye goblins got yer own territory, yer own rules an' clerics. An' yer own army tha ye killed a bunch o' people wit. Ye've even got yer own god all ta yerself. Us dwarves've gotta share gods wit ev'ryone else."
Redcloak's response is basically "okay, so in those terms we're equal, but we had to work for what we have while you were handed it," which is obviously false. The other races might have had better resources in their lands than the goblinoids to begin with, but the gods didn't build their cities for them.

Luna_Mayflower

2020-08-05, 06:05 PM

Look at all these people, using words. It brings a tear to my eye.

But what if Redcloak becomes a vampire? Would the Vampire Redcloak be better than the goblin Redcloak?
EDIT:
Also, I thought Redcloak's real name was Carlton (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?294277-Something-Fun)? Are you telling us the vision you had seven years ago was not completely accurate?!?:smalltongue:

Okay, see, here is someone who gets me. Yes, vampire Redcloak would obviously be better. Yes, his real name is Carlton. Everyone knows Redcloak is just a pseudonym, but it is also the only name is his know by. At least to those who don't study my prophecies.

Why Spain?

I think my grandmother suggested it. In the dream.

Okay hold up a sec

My dreams have been proven to provide "end time prophetic insights". No time to hold.

Hey, Luna, I found something for you: Enjoy! (https://www.deviantart.com/museamused/art/RedCloak-279231866)

:smallredface::smallredface::smallredface: :smallredface::smallredface::smallredface::smallre dface: :smallredface::smallredface: :smallredface::smallredface::smallredface::smallre dface::smallredface::smallredface::smallredface: :smallredface::smallredface:

He's not topless, but it'll do. Do you think his powerful turn undead (but not quite) means he has high Charisma? Perhaps not bad Strength too? I just really want him to have a six pack.

Jake the Snake had a six pack. He showed it to Nale. Now he's gone. :smallfrown:

understatement

2020-08-05, 06:08 PM

Yes, that's part of the point, isn't it? Redcloak acts as if goblins will forever be victims until the gods and other races begin treating them as equals, but as Durkon points out "I guess I'm na really clear on how yer na already equal. Ye goblins got yer own territory, yer own rules an' clerics. An' yer own army tha ye killed a bunch o' people wit. Ye've even got yer own god all ta yerself. Us dwarves've gotta share gods wit ev'ryone else."
Redcloak's response is basically "okay, so in those terms we're equal, but we had to work for what we have while you were handed it," which is obviously false. The other races might have had better resources in their lands than the goblinoids to begin with, but the gods didn't build their cities for them.

I said some stuff about this back in 1208, and I'll just shift it over here:

What really cheesed Redcloak off was not the resource inequality; it was the racial stigma. It's the fact that other races can kill goblinoids on sight for no reason without any form of meaningful repercussion, divine or not.

Redcloak, for all his very severe issues, did not pull out some "perceived stigma" from empty air. He has a valid example of it:

the Sapphire Guard massacring his village and having no punishment whatsoever.

Yes, some may have Fallen -- but as the Giant equates it, it's the equivalent of a city cop shooting your family dead and then having to turn in their badge. If an adventurer killed Eric, Sara, and Julia personally in front of Roy, and as punishment had to pay all his gold to the town hall, you honestly cannot expect Roy to swallow that and sit on his hands.

Nothing divine intervened or punished the Sapphire Guard, and so Redcloak believes the gods themselves have something against the goblins. This fact, coupled with the Giant's confirmation that the goblins worshipped no one before the TDO, lends some credibility to the XP story. It certainly does not mean all goblins are helpless victims (that's also a form of racism) nor does it mean the Dark One is telling the whole, complete truth, but Redcloak's claim can't be dismissed as groundless.

Luna_Mayflower

2020-08-05, 06:25 PM

I said some stuff about this back in 1208, and I'll just shift it over here:

What really cheesed Redcloak off was not the resource inequality; it was the racial stigma. It's the fact that other races can kill goblinoids on sight for no reason without any form of meaningful repercussion, divine or not.

Redcloak, for all his very severe issues, did not pull out some "perceived stigma" from empty air. He has a valid example of it:

the Sapphire Guard massacring his village and having no punishment whatsoever.

Yes, some may have Fallen -- but as the Giant equates it, it's the equivalent of a city cop shooting your family dead and then having to turn in their badge. If an adventurer killed Eric, Sara, and Julia personally in front of Roy, and as punishment had to pay all his gold to the town hall, you honestly cannot expect Roy to swallow that and sit on his hands.

Nothing divine intervened or punished the Sapphire Guard, and so Redcloak believes the gods themselves have something against the goblins. This fact, coupled with the Giant's confirmation that the goblins worshipped no one before the TDO, lends some credibility to the XP story. It certainly does not mean all goblins are helpless victims (that's also a form of racism) nor does it mean the Dark One is telling the whole, complete truth, but Redcloak's claim can't be dismissed as groundless.

At least someone watched the black-and-white picture show. You have clear intelligence. Be proud.

I wonder what Redcloak would think about the anime show Goblin Slayer.

Conradine

2020-08-05, 08:09 PM

There's one thing that no one ( including Redcloak himself! ) don't seem to take seriously enough.
All those goblins and hobgoblins who died and were sacrificed in order to further the Plan are not erased from existence.

They are with the Dark One, enjoying an eternal reward of glory and honor. Something between Valhalla and Heaven.

So, it's really "sacrifices" those we are talking about, if they still exist as conscious individuals and are enjoying an eternal bliss?

InvisibleBison

2020-08-05, 08:36 PM

Luna_Mayflower

2020-08-06, 04:54 AM

Given that every single character we've seen who's died and come back to life has been delighted to do so, I think it's safe to say that despite the appeals of the afterlife, being alive is better.

I'd argue that they all had unfinished business.

Look at the blonde haired dwarf girl who's name isn't important enough for me to remember. She was happy to live in Valhalla until she decided she wasn't done yet. She didn't immediately beg Durkon to revive her.

The Pilgrim

2020-08-06, 05:28 AM

I think my grandmother suggested it. In the dream.

But we discontinued the tradition of beating our mothers centuries ago. We replaced it with bullfighting.

Yes, that's part of the point, isn't it? Redcloak acts as if goblins will forever be victims until the gods and other races begin treating them as equals, but as Durkon points out "I guess I'm na really clear on how yer na already equal. Ye goblins got yer own territory, yer own rules an' clerics. An' yer own army tha ye killed a bunch o' people wit. Ye've even got yer own god all ta yerself. Us dwarves've gotta share gods wit ev'ryone else."
Redcloak's response is basically "okay, so in those terms we're equal, but we had to work for what we have while you were handed it," which is obviously false. The other races might have had better resources in their lands than the goblinoids to begin with, but the gods didn't build their cities for them.

Yeah that's the thing. Redcloak keeps playing the victim card, but he stopped being the victim and started being the offender long ago.

But, frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if someone made the argument that it's fair for the hobgoblins to keep the azurites as slaves, because the humans have to compensate for centuries of goblin opression. Redcloak approves that way of thinking.

Metastachydium

2020-08-06, 06:11 AM

I'd argue that they all had unfinished business.

Look at the blonde haired dwarf girl who's name isn't important enough for me to remember. She was happy to live in Valhalla until she decided she wasn't done yet. She didn't immediately beg Durkon to revive her.

I'd argue that the author thinks otherwise:
(https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?434019-After-vs-Life/page2&p=19684300#post19684300)

Folks, this is exactly how the afterlife has always worked in D&D; I've maybe tweaked some specifics, but the gist is the same. Souls go to the afterlife and eventually dissolve into the substance of the Outer Plane to which they are remanded, end of story. You don't have to like it or think it's fair, but it's how it works—because like my story, D&D needs the afterlife to not be Awesome Happy Fun Times Forever or else there's no logical underpinning for why the heroes should want to save the world from destruction.
[Emphasis mine.]

Jason

2020-08-06, 09:10 AM

Nothing divine intervened or punished the Sapphire Guard, and so Redcloak believes the gods themselves have something against the goblins. This fact, coupled with the Giant's confirmation that the goblins worshipped no one before the TDO, lends some credibility to the XP story. It certainly does not mean all goblins are helpless victims (that's also a form of racism) nor does it mean the Dark One is telling the whole, complete truth, but Redcloak's claim can't be dismissed as groundless.
I wouldn't say it's groundless, but I still don't think it's completely true either.

The Sapphire Guard being insufficiently punished simply means that the Southern gods may have had something against those particular goblins. It does not show that all the gods have it in for all goblins.

On the flip side, has Redcloak, or any other goblin, for that matter, ever been punished by The Dark One, for killing humans or other races just because they weren't green? If not, then I say again "I don't see how you're na' already equal."

Jason

2020-08-06, 09:16 AM

I'd argue that the author thinks otherwise:
With respect to the Giant, there is a reason to try to save the world even if the afterlife is "Awesome Happy Fun Times Forever":
The world is where new souls come from. Without new souls, the gods themselves cease to exist and the afterlife the new souls power eventually goes away.

Metastachydium

2020-08-06, 09:27 AM

With respect to the Giant, there is a reason to try to save the world even if the afterlife is "Awesome Happy Fun Times Forever":
The world is where new souls come from. Without new souls, the gods themselves cease to exist and the afterlife the new souls power eventually goes away.

Hm. Save the world to save the afterlife to have happy fun forever. That's not a bad line of thought, you know (even if it does not apply to the Stivkverse).

Peelee

2020-08-06, 09:43 AM

With respect to the Giant, there is a reason to try to save the world even if the afterlife is "Awesome Happy Fun Times Forever":
The world is where new souls come from. Without new souls, the gods themselves cease to exist and the afterlife the new souls power eventually goes away.

That's a good reason for the gods to want the people to save the world, but doesn't really mean anything to the people themselves.

Jason

2020-08-06, 10:10 AM

That's a good reason for the gods to want the people to save the world, but doesn't really mean anything to the people themselves.

Sure it does. All of your ancestors and all the people you know and loved who have died are there. Saving the world is saving everyone who ever lived on the world too.

Peelee

2020-08-06, 10:15 AM

Sure it does. All of your ancestors and all the people you know and loved who have died are there. Saving the world is saving everyone who ever lived on the world too.

Eh, the gods can make a new world. Afterlife keeps chugging along, ancestors are good, nothing to worry about.

Jason

2020-08-06, 10:19 AM

Eh, the gods can make a new world. Afterlife keeps chugging along, ancestors are good, nothing to worry about.

Except that the people living on the new world will not be the direct descendants of everyone who lived on the old world before it was destroyed, so there is motivation for the people in the afterlife (at least anyone who cares about their descendants) to want the still living to save the world as well.

Peelee

2020-08-06, 10:26 AM

Except that the people living on the new world will not be the direct descendants of everyone who lived on the old world before it was destroyed, so there is motivation for the people in the afterlife (at least anyone who cares about their descendants) to want the still living to save the world as well.

Those descendents will get to spend eternity in the afterlife if the world is destroyed. Not really a problem.

understatement

2020-08-06, 11:08 AM

I wouldn't say it's groundless, but I still don't think it's completely true either.

The Sapphire Guard being insufficiently punished simply means that the Southern gods may have had something against those particular goblins. It does not show that all the gods have it in for all goblins.

Having a minimum of one-third of the divine forces that created the world set against you is one-third more than any gods are supposed to have against a specific race.

Also, from Redcloak's point of view. He doesn't know which of the 12 gods are evil and which are not; all he knows is that the paladins collectively worship them, and they didn't get punished for their actions -- nor did they ever seek out Redcloak and offered him reparations.

On the flip side, has Redcloak, or any other goblin, for that matter, ever been punished by The Dark One, for killing humans or other races just because they weren't green? If not, then I say again "I don't see how you're na' already equal."

For the same reason Nergal doesn't punish Malack for mass enslavement, or why Loki doesn't punish Hilgya for setting Durkon ablaze. The Dark One is evil. The 12 Gods, and other pantheons collectively, are not.

(As my usual addendum, I obligingly add that no, Redcloak is absolutely no way justified in conquering Azure City, and he'll receive his punishment, whether divine or mortal, in due time.)

I wonder what Redcloak would think about the anime show Goblin Slayer.

I remembered seeing the versus matchup somewhere...long story short, Redcloak implodes him. The show's synopsis doesn't seem at all appealing, so I never watched it.

WindStruck

2020-08-06, 11:57 AM

Last night, between dreams of beating my mother and going to Spain...

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZBCgFzWnH2I/hqdefault.jpg

Jason

2020-08-06, 12:36 PM

Those descendents will get to spend eternity in the afterlife if the world is destroyed. Not really a problem.But there won't be any more of them if the world is destroyed.

Luna_Mayflower

2020-08-06, 12:38 PM

I'd argue that the author thinks otherwise:
(https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?434019-After-vs-Life/page2&p=19684300#post19684300)

[Emphasis mine.]

The Giant's description of even the Good afterlives is one of the most horrifying things I've ever read. Everyone there has dementia and their lives never change. I can't agree that his idea of D&D's afterlife is like that, but obviously it is in OOTS.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZBCgFzWnH2I/hqdefault.jpg

Yes, I got into a quite vivid altercation with her in a car. I do hope it's not a portent, but knowing my dreams...

Jason

2020-08-06, 12:45 PM

Having a minimum of one-third of the divine forces that created the world set against you is one-third more than any gods are supposed to have against a specific race.Well, again, the Sapphire Guard is one group in one particular part of the world, and they were massacring one specific group of goblins - the group that happened to contain the current high priest of the Dark One who even then had a plan to threaten the other gods with destruction through the use of the gates the Sapphire Guard was founded to protect in the first place.

It does not show that the Southern gods are "against all goblins". All it really shows is that, in this one particular instance the Southern gods were unwilling to punish their nominal servants.

Redcloak is upset that a goblin could be killed without any repercussion if he enters a human city, just because he "has fangs and is green". But what will happen to a human if he enters a goblin village or hobgoblin city?
Again "I dinna' see how ye aren't already equal."

Peelee

2020-08-06, 12:48 PM

But there won't be any more of them if the world is destroyed.

....and? The ones there were are in the afterlife for eternity. So now descendants are in the afterlife for eternity, ancestors are in the afterlife for eternity, the world is destroyed, a new world is made, their people and ancestors and descendants are in the afterlife for eternity, their world is destroyed, and on and on. Everything is copacetic.

We've seen the Stickworld afterlife. They by and large do not keep tabs on how many great-great-great whatever grandkids they have. They pretty much spend their time in the afterlife, keeping their concerns to the afterlife. There are few exceptions, but those are just that - exceptions.

Squire Doodad

2020-08-06, 12:51 PM

....and? The ones there were are in the afterlife for eternity. So now descendants are in the afterlife for eternity, ancestors are in the afterlife for eternity, the world is destroyed, a new world is made, their people and ancestors and descendants are in the afterlife for eternity, their world is destroyed, and on and on. Everything is copacetic.

We've seen the Stickworld afterlife. They by and large do not keep tabs on how many great-great-great whatever grandkids they have. They pretty much spend their time in the afterlife, keeping their concerns to the afterlife. There are few exceptions, but those are just that - exceptions.

I should point out that the afterlife appears to technically not be an eternal one. However, souls last for a very long time, and you could probably go and check up on all of your ancestors up until Charlemagne, so the difference is not a meaningful one.

Peelee

2020-08-06, 12:59 PM

I should point out that the afterlife appears to technically not be an eternal one. However, souls last for a very long time, and you could probably go and check up on all of your ancestors up until Charlemagne, so the difference is not a meaningful one.

Oh, it is most certainly not an eternal one. Which is part of the point I'm making/arguing against:

I'd argue that the author thinks otherwise:
(https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?434019-After-vs-Life/page2&p=19684300#post19684300)

Folks, this is exactly how the afterlife has always worked in D&D; I've maybe tweaked some specifics, but the gist is the same. Souls go to the afterlife and eventually dissolve into the substance of the Outer Plane to which they are remanded, end of story. You don't have to like it or think it's fair, but it's how it works—because like my story, D&D needs the afterlife to not be Awesome Happy Fun Times Forever or else there's no logical underpinning for why the heroes should want to save the world from destruction.
[Emphasis mine.]

With respect to the Giant, there is a reason to try to save the world even if the afterlife is "Awesome Happy Fun Times Forever":
The world is where new souls come from. Without new souls, the gods themselves cease to exist and the afterlife the new souls power eventually goes away.

Though I would argue the difference is mot meaningless, and that one cannot check up on ancestors after a time because they would have moved on further up the mountain (metaphorical mountain for those not in Celestia).

understatement

2020-08-06, 02:07 PM

Well, again, the Sapphire Guard is one group in one particular part of the world, and they were massacring one specific group of goblins - the group that happened to contain the current high priest of the Dark One who even then had a plan to threaten the other gods with destruction through the use of the gates the Sapphire Guard was founded to protect in the first place.

I never got this reasoning -- that Redcloak's massacred village was the fault of the Bearer. The fall of Azure City is solely due to Redcloak and his army, not the Sapphire Guard; by that same strand of logic Redcloak's village lies squarely on the paladins, not the Bearer's presence.

It does not show that the Southern gods are "against all goblins". All it really shows is that, in this one particular instance the Southern gods were unwilling to punish their nominal servants.

War&XP mentions that the Sapphire Guard has had a long history of sending out crusades against goblin settlements, even since Soon's time. Why were these gods unwilling to punish their servants? These aren't normal citizens, they're the Lawful Good of lawful goods and their divine servants.

Redcloak is upset that a goblin could be killed without any repercussion if he enters a human city, just because he "has fangs and is green". But what will happen to a human if he enters a goblin village or hobgoblin city?
Again "I dinna' see how ye aren't already equal."

You know if the words "goblin" and "human" were replaced with real-life races then this would be describing a very severe problem that people often use in specific counterarguments?

There is a clear power disparity here. First, goblinoid cities are rare -- in fact, Gobbotopia may be the only one existent in the world. Second -- let's say that a group of goblins breaks into Roy's house, and kills Eric, Julia, and Sara in front of him. Roy, in revenge, hunts down the goblins and kills their village too. Who would punish Roy?

Absolutely no one.

But if a group of humans invaded a village, massacred everyone, and left, and Redcloak in revenge goes to their city and sacks it -- suddenly, the problem of divine punishment comes into play, where it never appeared in Roy's scenario.

In this case, punitive justice is unequal for the goblinoids and the demihumans. There is a lower threshold for killing 'monstrous' races than for killing demihumans. I don't think sorting out the punitive side of justice is what the story will resolve for, but it's a problem that has existed for decades.

Jason

2020-08-06, 02:32 PM

I never got this reasoning -- that Redcloak's massacred village was the fault of the Bearer.Well I didn't say it was the high priest's fault that his village got massacred, but it is a possible explanation for why the paladins were targeting that particular village.

The fact that the paladins weren't targeting just any random goblin village speaks against the idea that the attack was solely out of anti-goblin prejudice. There may well have been anti-goblin prejudice involved, but the high priest might also be a legitimate threat.

There is a clear power disparity here. First, goblinoid cities are rare -- in fact, Gobbotopia may be the only one existent in the world.How do we know that goblinoid cities are in fact rare? Because Redcloak says they are?

The hobgoblins had a prospering city before Gobbotopia was founded on the ruins of Azure City - one that Redcloak had no knowledge of before he became their supreme leader.

But if a group of humans invaded a village, massacred everyone, and left, and Redcloak in revenge goes to their city and sacks it -- suddenly, the problem of divine punishment comes into play, where it never appeared in Roy's scenario.How does divine punishment come into play? The scenario you describe is basically what happened in the main story line, and Redcloak has not received any divine punishment for his actions, either from his own god or from others.
The paladins were not divinely punished for destroying Redcloak's village.
Redcloak was not divinely punished for destroying Azure City.
Equality.

In this case, punitive justice is unequal for the goblinoids and the demihumans. There is a lower threshold for killing 'monstrous' races than for killing demihumans. I don't think sorting out the punitive side of justice is what the story will resolve for, but it's a problem that has existed for decades.I'm not sure I see this lower threshold demonstrated in the comic. In fact, it could be said that Redcloak attacked Azure City to avenge the destruction of his village, destroying and enslaving a large human city in revenge for the destruction of a relatively small goblin village.

A goblin goes into a human city - he gets killed for being green.
A human goes into a goblin city - he gets killed for being not green.
Equality.
No, it's not what should happen in a perfect world, but the end result appears to be roughly equal. Saying "but the human city is much bigger than the goblin city" seems pretty irrelevant to the poor human or goblin who got killed.

Squire Doodad

2020-08-06, 03:15 PM

How do we know that goblinoid cities are in fact rare? Because Redcloak says they are?

The hobgoblins had a prospering city before Gobbotopia was founded on the ruins of Azure City - one that Redcloak had no knowledge of before he became their supreme leader.

So you guys know:

There was the town the goblins in the DoD came from, the massive sprawling hobgoblin cityscape, and a nice little bugbear settlement in Monster Hollow.
Not to mention there's probably a group living by the Oracle's place given Hydra Head Burgers.
All three of them were going along swimmingly and were perfectly functional, which indicates there are probably many more.

They may not be as prosperous as Cliffport, but that's a different matter.

understatement

2020-08-06, 03:55 PM

Well I didn't say it was the high priest's fault that his village got massacred, but it is a possible explanation for why the paladins were targeting that particular village.

The fact that the paladins weren't targeting just any random goblin village speaks against the idea that the attack was solely out of anti-goblin prejudice. There may well have been anti-goblin prejudice involved, but the high priest might also be a legitimate threat.

And the villagers afterward?

How do we know that goblinoid cities are in fact rare? Because Redcloak says they are?

The hobgoblins had a prospering city before Gobbotopia was founded on the ruins of Azure City - one that Redcloak had no knowledge of before he became their supreme leader.

The previous Supreme Leader states that their hobgoblin settlement is "one of the largest goblinoid settlements on the surface." Note that, despite the large military presence, the overall amount of hobgoblins is still low compared to a typical city (the settlement at most had 50000 residents, compared to Azure City's 500,000).

Judging by his statement, large surface goblinoid settlements functioning similarly to a demihuman city-state are rare, compared to other races' city-states and such.

How does divine punishment come into play? The scenario you describe is basically what happened in the main story line, and Redcloak has not received any divine punishment for his actions, either from his own god or from others.
The paladins were not divinely punished for destroying Redcloak's village.
Redcloak was not divinely punished for destroying Azure City.
Equality.

That really isn't the definition of equality.

Look at it this way: from Redcloak (and the Dark One's) POV, paladins came in, massacred his village, and left with no punishment. Not even by their own gods. Why would the Dark One punish Redcloak for sacking the city? It got rid of the paladins, it solidified his god's power, and both are Evil parallel actions and intents.

You might as well ask why Nerghal doesn't punish Malack, or Loki Hilgya, for killing innocents.

Why are gods supposed to punish other gods' followers? There was a whole book over gods not interfering with other gods' clerics.

I'm not sure I see this lower threshold demonstrated in the comic. In fact, it could be said that Redcloak attacked Azure City to avenge the destruction of his village, destroying and enslaving a large human city in revenge for the destruction of a relatively small goblin village.

A goblin goes into a human city - he gets killed for being green.
A human goes into a goblin city - he gets killed for being not green.
Equality.
No, it's not what should happen in a perfect world, but the end result appears to be roughly equal. Saying "but the human city is much bigger than the goblin city" seems pretty irrelevant to the poor human or goblin who got killed.

When I say the "human city is larger than the goblin city," it means that the human city can quickly muster enough resources to permanently ensure that the goblin settlement is not a threat again.

There is much less dissuading a human attacking a goblin village then a goblin attacking a human village. That's what I mean by "lower threshold."

Jason

2020-08-06, 04:14 PM

And the villagers afterward?That probably would have been anti-goblin prejudice, yes. But it may also have been intended to prevent the appointment of a new high priest in the area. Which obviously failed in this case.

The previous Supreme Leader states that their hobgoblin settlement is "one of the largest goblinoid settlements on the surface." Note that, despite the large military presence, the overall amount of hobgoblins is still low compared to a typical city (the settlement at most had 50000 residents, compared to Azure City's 500,000).

Judging by his statement, large surface goblinoid settlements functioning similarly to a demihuman city-state are rare, compared to other races' city-states and such.

"On the surface" would seem to be the most important part of his statement. If there are hundreds of vast undergound goblinoid metropolises in the world then it's not really true that goblinoid cities are rare.

As a side note, obviously I need to get Good Deeds Unpunished. Pity I waited until all the physical copies were sold out.

That really isn't the definition of equality.Equal outcomes for equivalent actions is not equality?

Look at it this way: from Redcloak (and the Dark One's) POV, paladins came in, massacred his village, and left with no punishment. Not even by their own gods.Which may indicate that the high priest of the Dark One was considered a legitimate threat that justified the massacre, at least in the judgement of the Southern gods. It is not incontrovertible evidence that the Southern gods always condone slaughtering goblins for no reason whatever.

When I say the "human city is larger than the goblin city," it means that the human city can quickly muster enough resources to permanently ensure that the goblin settlement is not a threat again.

There is much less dissuading a human attacking a goblin village then a goblin attacking a human village. That's what I mean by "lower threshold."That assumes that the idea that human cities are always larger than goblin cities is correct. Again, do we know that for sure?

understatement

2020-08-06, 06:12 PM

That probably would have been anti-goblin prejudice, yes. But it may also have been intended to prevent the appointment of a new high priest in the area. Which obviously failed in this case.

Probably?

If the villagers were humans, the paladins wouldn't have done the purge they did.

Here's the thing: at the time of the slaughter, the SG did not know about the cloak's powers, and believed the ritual power came from the goblin themself. Thus, they killed the goblin -- and by some leap of logic, decided it was perfectly okay to kill every other villager present, even if they didn't know about the Mantle (and they didn't). How is that not a war crime?

"On the surface" would seem to be the most important part of his statement. If there are hundreds of vast undergound goblinoid metropolises in the world then it's not really true that goblinoid cities are rare.

As a side note, obviously I need to get Good Deeds Unpunished. Pity I waited until all the physical copies were sold out.

Why would there be a hundred vast goblinoid metropolises underground? If the goblins were fine with being underground (again, that needs proof) why would they push onto the surface?

Equal outcomes for equivalent actions is not equality?

That's not the deal here. The context matters a lot, y'know.

Which may indicate that the high priest of the Dark One was considered a legitimate threat that justified the massacre, at least in the judgement of the Southern gods. It is not incontrovertible evidence that the Southern gods always condone slaughtering goblins for no reason whatever.

With this one specific event, which shows the Southern gods condone the village massacre, you're saying that there's no proof they always do, while I'm saying it's proof that they absolutely do, because there is no way this was the SG's first time in wiping out a village (see line about previous crusades), and yet they keep their badges and go home without any repercussions.

It's not that the 12 gods hate the goblins, it's just that they don't care. That's not better at all.

That assumes that the idea that human cities are always larger than goblin cities is correct. Again, do we know that for sure?

Since there hasn't been any goblin cities seen at all, I'd assume so. Even the largest settlement is still called that: a settlement.

A city gives legal authority, official trading systems, and more importantly, groups can't waltz up to it and attack a bunch of the residents and then expect to get away with it.

137beth

2020-08-06, 06:17 PM

My dreams have been proven to provide "end time prophetic insights". No time to hold.

May I put this quote in my extended sig, oh great prophetess?

Jason

2020-08-06, 07:16 PM

Probably?
Here's the thing: at the time of the slaughter, the SG did not know about the cloak's powers, and believed the ritual power came from the goblin themself. Thus, they killed the goblin -- and by some leap of logic, decided it was perfectly okay to kill every other villager present, even if they didn't know about the Mantle (and they didn't). How is that not a war crime?
I went and had a look at the book again:
The paladins say that they're there because the goblins detect as evil and "Further, one among you threatens the very foundations of creation itself." The high priest acknowledges that they detect as evil and that the paladins came there to kill him specifically, "just as they did my master and her master before." When the paladins spot him they recognize the red cloak and attack him.
It's not clear whether the paladins know that another goblin will take the high priest's place or they're just killing all the goblins because they're evil, but they did know that the goblin high priest was a threat to the foundations of reality.

Why would there be a hundred vast goblinoid metropolises underground? If the goblins were fine with being underground (again, that needs proof) why would they push onto the surface? Well what do you think he meant by the qualifier "on the surface"?
That would seem to me to imply that the hobgoblins do have more and possibly larger settlements underground.

understatement

2020-08-06, 10:14 PM

I went and had a look at the book again:
The paladins say that they're there because the goblins detect as evil and "Further, one among you threatens the very foundations of creation itself." The high priest acknowledges that they detect as evil and that the paladins came there to kill him specifically, "just as they did my master and her master before." When the paladins spot him they recognize the red cloak and attack him.
It's not clear whether the paladins know that another goblin will take the high priest's place or they're just killing all the goblins because they're evil, but they did know that the goblin high priest was a threat to the foundations of reality.

There's a pretty good explanation of the crimson mantle in GDGU. which

shows, yes, members of the Sapphire Guard very much have prejudices against goblinoids, civilians or not.

Also, I do not have the quote (I'll see if I can find it), but the SG did not scan the entire village for Evil. Also, if someone's registered as Evil but is doing absolutely nothing, killing them is at best morally questionable (think Roy's talk with the deva about Belkar).

Well what do you think he meant by the qualifier "on the surface"?
That would seem to me to imply that the hobgoblins do have more and possibly larger settlements underground.

Okay, yeah. :smalltongue:

Luna_Mayflower

2020-08-07, 12:25 PM

May I put this quote in my extended sig, oh great prophetess?

Absolutely.

Lord Torath

2020-08-10, 01:41 PM

Hey, Luna, I found something for you: Enjoy! (https://www.deviantart.com/museamused/art/RedCloak-279231866):smallredface::smallredface::smallredfac e: :smallredface::smallredface::smallredface::smallre dface: :smallredface::smallredface: :smallredface::smallredface::smallredface::smallre dface::smallredface::smallredface::smallredface: :smallredface::smallredface:

He's not topless, but it'll do. Do you think his powerful turn undead (but not quite) means he has high Charisma? Perhaps not bad Strength too? I just really want him to have a six pack.I confess, I'm kind of afraid of the results if I search for "Redcloak Topless" or even "Redcloak Topless Goblin". :smalleek:

Metastachydium

2020-08-11, 04:40 AM

I confess, I'm kind of afraid of the results if I search for "Redcloak Topless" or even "Redcloak Topless Goblin". :smalleek:

It's a thing, you know. Also, it's a lot tamer (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0149.html) than you'd think (spoiler alert: there is no sixpack; sorry, Luna).

Fyraltari

2020-08-11, 07:02 AM

Hey, Luna, I found something for you: Enjoy! (https://www.deviantart.com/museamused/art/RedCloak-279231866)

Redcloak with hair looks weird.

Jason

2020-08-11, 09:41 AM

Durkon really hit a nerve there with the "I haven't killed as many goblins as you have" bit there, didn't he?

137beth

2020-08-11, 09:56 AM

Durkon really hit a nerve there with the "I haven't killed as many goblins as you have" bit there, didn't he?

And certainly fewer hobgoblins.

dude123nice

2020-08-11, 05:01 PM

{scrubbed}

B. Dandelion

2020-08-12, 04:23 PM

So this thread seems like it might be a good place to ask some questions I have been holding in for a while.

Firstly, if Redcloak is still physically a teenager, it follows that he would have the same hormone levels as a typical teenage guy, right? You wouldn't guess it from his behavior (mostly? (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0082.html)) but it stands to reason.

Second, has he had sex ever? It hasn't explicitly been said that he hasn't, but if he has it certainly hasn't been mentioned either, and his career hasn't really lent itself to a lot of opportunities. He was still at the "haven't asked out the girl next door" stage when SoD opened and he's been pretty much "married to the job" since then.

Thirdly, is there a particular reason he needed his own bathroom (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0526.html)? (I'm assuming it was his since there weren't likely many goblin clerics are among the hobgoblin army, much less goblin clerics who rate their own private bathroom.)

Fyraltari

2020-08-12, 04:31 PM

Yo Luna, your inbox is full.

So this thread seems like it might be a good place to ask some questions I have been holding in for a while.

Firstly, if Redcloak is still physically a teenager, it follows that he would have the same hormone levels as a typical teenage guy, right? You wouldn't guess it from his behavior (mostly? (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0082.html)) but it stands to reason.
Makes sense.

Second, has he had sex ever? It hasn't explicitly been said that he hasn't, but if he has it certainly hasn't been mentioned either, and his career hasn't really lent itself to a lot of opportunities. He was still at the "haven't asked out the girl next door" stage when SoD opened and he's been pretty much "married to the job" since then.[quote]
I really don’t see why this would matter but if I had to guess I’d say no. He’s too focused on his mission and emotionally stunted to seek intimacy.

[quote]Thirdly, is there a particular reason he needed his own bathroom (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0526.html)? (I'm assuming it was his since there weren't likely many goblin clerics are among the hobgoblin army, much less goblin clerics who rate their own private bathroom.)

Big boss man get big boss room to show other apes who is big boss.

As the regime’s #2 I would assume he got his own apartments as a matter of course, with bathroom included.

understatement

2020-08-12, 04:40 PM

these questions three

Okay, I had to crack up -- these questions are very different from what usually is associated with Redcloak.

First: He's mentally 55 and physically ~18. I don't know how that works out.

Second: he's married to the job (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1206.html) (I can't believe RC and Durkon were chatting so friendly just four strips ago). The Cloak's powers include longetivity, immunity to disease, and the special abilities Bestow Celibacy, which has no saving throw.

Third: I always assumed that was Jirix's bathroom, but maybe there's an exciting cleric spell that can help people hit the hay.

ETA: In more seriousness, though, anyone he can be close with would pretty much end up as a #1 target for Xykon.

Jason

2020-08-12, 04:42 PM

Firstly, if Redcloak is still physically a teenager, it follows that he would have the same hormone levels as a typical teenage guy, right? You wouldn't guess it from his behavior (mostly? (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0082.html)) but it stands to reason.I would say he has the same level of hormones he had when he was a teenage goblin, which might be different from the "typical" teenage goblin or human. That assumes that the red cloak doesn't alter that along with its arresting of the aging process in him.

Second, has he had sex ever? It hasn't explicitly been said that he hasn't, but if he has it certainly hasn't been mentioned either, and his career hasn't really lent itself to a lot of opportunities. He was still at the "haven't asked out the girl next door" stage when SoD opened and he's been pretty much "married to the job" since then.It's probably none of our business, but my general impression would be no. He hasn't seemed to show much interest in the subject, even when the goblin/hobgoblin supreme leader and High Priest of the Dark One is obviously someone any number of young ambitious female goblins might consider cozying up to. One wonders whether Redcloak ever saw the girl goblin his brother tried to set him up with in Start of Darkness again.

Thirdly, is there a particular reason he needed his own bathroom (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0526.html)? (I'm assuming it was his since there weren't likely many goblin clerics are among the hobgoblin army, much less goblin clerics who rate their own private bathroom.)Perks of being the supreme leader, I would imagine, not any special reason.

B. Dandelion

2020-08-13, 03:29 AM

I really don’t see why this would matter but if I had to guess I’d say no. He’s too focused on his mission and emotionally stunted to seek intimacy.

I don't know if it specifically matters but I don't know that it specifically doesn't either. The general impression I have within the comic is that sex is an important part of life in general and does factor in to most people's lives to at least some extent. We have some idea of most of the major character's sexual history. 5/6ths of the title characters have had sex at least once during the run of the comic, and the 6th was married. Xykon has no sex drive as a lich, but was sexually active as a younger man. Nale and Sabine have sex constantly. Tarquin is a dirty old man who has sex with women who may or may not be consenting. Lien has a boyfriend and explicitly isn't a virgin. The characters who aren't established as sexually active usually have some comment on it or are too young/immature. MitD is a literal child. Thog is childish and thinks girls have cooties. O-Chul's sex life has never been discussed, but he does have a line about having no interest in such matters as marriage, which has led some to conclude he is asexual. Hinjo's not been shown with a sexual partner but says in a bonus strip he does plan to marry later. Miko is not established as having had sex and this gets thrown in her face as a taunt about being sexually frustrated. (Maaaaybe not the high point of the comic although I still get a chuckle out of "Treasure Type O" in abstract.)

Somehow it feels especially prurient to focus on Redcloak's sex life or lack thereof (hence my hesitation to broach the topic outside of this thread), but when I think about it I don't entirely know why that is. Why should he be the exception to the general rule about sex in the comic, why does it feel more taboo to talk about him in particular? Or make a risque joke about him that the comic has specifically made about other (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0582.html) characters (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1045.html) before? He was a young man when his life got derailed, and he may have missed out on what is for most people an important threshold of adulthood. He is shown as having attraction to goblin women. If he is still a virgin so late in his life, he undoubtedly has feelings about it. The comic has progressed in certain ways and may no longer be prone to crack wise about how so-and-so needs to get laid, but I wouldn't necessarily take it for granted that the issue on the whole is something that doesn't warrant thinking about. Going by the track record, the question of "has Redcloak ever had sex" has more than likely been considered by the author.

Would it detract from his character if it were implied that he has some degree of repressed sexual frustration, as most people would in his position? That being a person with sexual needs and no outlet is something that adds to the general misery of his life, that he tries not to think about? Or that he might have some insecurity about himself that he's never forged that kind of connection with anyone?

Big boss man get big boss room to show other apes who is big boss.

As the regime’s #2 I would assume he got his own apartments as a matter of course, with bathroom included.

That was what I had assumed myself, right up until I starting writing my first post in this thread. I had just been planning to ask my first two questions and then suddenly my brain went in a direction I had not expected, and I couldn't resist adding a third. But I have thought about the private bathroom from time to time just because I have thought "that time Haley led a strike force raid on Redcloak's bathroom" would be a really funny thing to make a call back to later on if/when Haley and Redcloak ever talk face to face. It seemed like it would be slightly embarrassing for her to have to explain, but now it's potentially even more awkward for all parties concerned. So I want it to happen even more.

Okay, I had to crack up -- these questions are very different from what usually is associated with Redcloak.

First: He's mentally 55 and physically ~18. I don't know how that works out.

Second: he's married to the job (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1206.html) (I can't believe RC and Durkon were chatting so friendly just four strips ago). The Cloak's powers include longetivity, immunity to disease, and the special abilities Bestow Celibacy, which has no saving throw.

Third: I always assumed that was Jirix's bathroom, but maybe there's an exciting cleric spell that can help people hit the hay.

Glad at least one person got a laugh. I hoped more people would, but it is indeed unusual to talk about him in any kind of sexual context and it might be more off-putting than anything.

ETA: In more seriousness, though, anyone he can be close with would pretty much end up as a #1 target for Xykon.

Yeah that's probably a factor.

I would say he has the same level of hormones he had when he was a teenage goblin, which might be different from the "typical" teenage goblin or human. That assumes that the red cloak doesn't alter that along with its arresting of the aging process in him.

If the Mantle further messes with or suppresses his sexual chemistry that is pretty awful and messed up, IMO.

It's probably none of our business, but my general impression would be no. He hasn't seemed to show much interest in the subject, even when the goblin/hobgoblin supreme leader and High Priest of the Dark One is obviously someone any number of young ambitious female goblins might consider cozying up to. One wonders whether Redcloak ever saw the girl goblin his brother tried to set him up with in Start of Darkness again.

It's no less our business than the sex lives of everybody else we already know about. He doesn't appear to be asexual, just celibate. If goblin women have tried to seduce him it's never been mentioned, but he could have other reasons besides a lack of sexual interest to rebuff any such proposition, e.g. fear of making them a target to Xykon or a sense that he would be inappropriately taking advantage of someone he's in a position of authority over.

I'm hoping for her sake that Kayannara split town after Redcloak turned her down, since that would have saved her from being conscripted into Xykon's army like the rest of the village. Otherwise she's dead along with everybody else. In the first case he hasn't seen her since, in the second he might have though I can't think she'd be especially warm toward him after he both rejected her and indirectly led to her enslavement.

Fyraltari

2020-08-13, 04:39 AM

I don't know if it specifically matters but I don't know that it specifically doesn't either. The general impression I have within the comic is that sex is an important part of life in general and does factor in to most people's lives to at least some extent. We have some idea of most of the major character's sexual history. 5/6ths of the title characters have had sex at least once during the run of the comic, and the 6th was married. Xykon has no sex drive as a lich, but was sexually active as a younger man. Nale and Sabine have sex constantly. Tarquin is a dirty old man who has sex with women who may or may not be consenting. Lien has a boyfriend and explicitly isn't a virgin. The characters who aren't established as sexually active usually have some comment on it or are too young/immature. MitD is a literal child. Thog is childish and thinks girls have cooties. O-Chul's sex life has never been discussed, but he does have a line about having no interest in such matters as marriage, which has led some to conclude he is asexual. Hinjo's not been shown with a sexual partner but says in a bonus strip he does plan to marry later. Miko is not established as having had sex and this gets thrown in her face as a taunt about being sexually frustrated. (Maaaaybe not the high point of the comic although I still get a chuckle out of "Treasure Type O" in abstract.)

Somehow it feels especially prurient to focus on Redcloak's sex life or lack thereof (hence my hesitation to broach the topic outside of this thread), but when I think about it I don't entirely know why that is. Why should he be the exception to the general rule about sex in the comic, why does it feel more taboo to talk about him in particular? Or make a risque joke about him that the comic has specifically made about other (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0582.html) characters (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1045.html) before? He was a young man when his life got derailed, and he may have missed out on what is for most people an important threshold of adulthood. He is shown as having attraction to goblin women. If he is still a virgin so late in his life, he undoubtedly has feelings about it. The comic has progressed in certain ways and may no longer be prone to crack wise about how so-and-so needs to get laid, but I wouldn't necessarily take it for granted that the issue on the whole is something that doesn't warrant thinking about. Going by the track record, the question of "has Redcloak ever had sex" has more than likely been considered by the author.
I’d say that’s precisely because the comic doesn’t talk about it. It feels more indiscrete in his case because in his case it’s not already a topic.
His attraction to women has been showcased twice but in both case, in my opinion, the sexual aspect was at best secondary. The first time was showing him to be a normal teenager with teenager problems to contrast what he was robbed of/could have been with what he became. And the second was more about the possibility of him stepping of that path to regain said normalcy.

That was what I had assumed myself, right up until I starting writing my first post in this thread. I had just been planning to ask my first two questions and then suddenly my brain went in a direction I had not expected, and I couldn't resist adding a third. But I have thought about the private bathroom from time to time just because I have thought "that time Haley led a strike force raid on Redcloak's bathroom" would be a really funny thing to make a call back to later on if/when Haley and Redcloak ever talk face to face. It seemed like it would be slightly embarrassing for her to have to explain, but now it's potentially even more awkward for all parties concerned. So I want it to happen even more.
I don’t see why it’s weird for a man living alone to have his own bathroom. I mean he has no roommate not partner so who would he share it with?

Jirix? MitD?

understatement

2020-08-13, 12:53 PM

I don’t see why it’s weird for a man living alone to have his own bathroom. I mean he has no roommate not partner so who would he share it with?

Jirix? MitD?

Food for the MiTD thread? (in the most literal sense possible).

***

@B. Dandelion: the Mantle most likely did; it seems to be a magical effect that slows aging down to the point where the Bearer is functionally immortal. If RC had put it on at a different, older age, things might've turned out differently.

B. Dandelion

2020-08-13, 10:15 PM

I don't really think there's anything "weird" about a private bathroom that needs to be "explained". Y'all are taking my question literally when I just put it there as a joke with some sex-related questions in order to create innuendo about it. The intent was to provoke people into crying for brain bleach, but I got dry answers and earnest confusion instead.

I’d say that’s precisely because the comic doesn’t talk about it. It feels more indiscrete in his case because in his case it’s not already a topic.

His attraction to women has been showcased twice but in both case, in my opinion, the sexual aspect was at best secondary. The first time was showing him to be a normal teenager with teenager problems to contrast what he was robbed of/could have been with what he became. And the second was more about the possibility of him stepping of that path to regain said normalcy.

I don't know, it seems more like most characters are regarded as fair game to speculate about because of the openly adult nature of the setting. Like I remember people on the forum being not shy at all to start making sexual speculation about Laurin and the nature of her "favor", and she wasn't made a sexual topic by the comic first.

He was robbed of a normal life, part of which would have included sex. It is a normal teenage problem to be shy and to not want to rush, the way his mother did when she started talking about grandkids the second she learned of his crush. Kayannara is more overtly sexual, takes the initiative, and wants an adult date with alcohol. Sex isn't THE point, but it is not an overlooked aspect of normalcy.

Anyway, we were talking about why this could be relevant, well. Here's one for you: Sabine is still a part of this story. The IFCC want to promote conflict between Team Evil and the Order of the Stick. They want the world destroyed, so they definitely don't want Redcloak to change sides and heal the rifts. What exactly happens if Sabine and Redcloak cross paths, you think he'd give her the treatment Roy did, when Sabine couldn't offer Roy anything he didn't get elsewhere?

understatement

2020-08-13, 11:06 PM

I don't really think there's anything "weird" about a private bathroom that needs to be "explained". Y'all are taking my question literally when I just put it there as a joke with some sex-related questions in order to create innuendo about it. The intent was to provoke people into crying for brain bleach, but I got dry answers and earnest confusion instead.

Oh, yeah. Right.

I don't know, it seems more like most characters are regarded as fair game to speculate about because of the openly adult nature of the setting. Like I remember people on the forum being not shy at all to start making sexual speculation about Laurin and the nature of her "favor", and she wasn't made a sexual topic by the comic first.

He was robbed of a normal life, part of which would have included sex. It is a normal teenage problem to be shy and to not want to rush, the way his mother did when she started talking about grandkids the second she learned of his crush. Kayannara is more overtly sexual, takes the initiative, and wants an adult date with alcohol. Sex isn't THE point, but it is not an overlooked aspect of normalcy.

It might be 'cause Laurin was human, and at the time (based on forum trawls) there was this mild trend where new female characters were usually immediately suspected of being another's love interest, for whatever reason.

Anyway, we were talking about why this could be relevant, well. Here's one for you: Sabine is still a part of this story. The IFCC want to promote conflict between Team Evil and the Order of the Stick. They want the world destroyed, so they definitely don't want Redcloak to change sides and heal the rifts. What exactly happens if Sabine and Redcloak cross paths, you think he'd give her the treatment Roy did, when Sabine couldn't offer Roy anything he didn't get elsewhere?

Wouldn't Sabine shapeshift into someone Redcloak recognizes instead (such as a family member) to psychologically mess him up even more? But as for your question, Redcloak would probably just kill her. To him, the Plan is just too close to succeeding, and adding an extra character variable would complicate everything.

137beth

2020-08-14, 02:36 PM

He was still at the "haven't asked out the girl next door" stage when SoD opened and he's been pretty much "married to the job" since then.

I don't think the statement by one of Redcloak's younger siblings that

The girl
who lives in the
next hut. He has a
crush on her.
Is particularly strong evidence that Redcloak actually had a crush on that girl, or anyone else. It's extremely common for kids and adolescents to tease each other about alleged crushes that have no basis in fact. If Redcloak had given us some indication that he was romantically included towards that girl, then it would be another story, but just having a younger sibling tease him about it doesn't mean very much except that they are siblings who tease each other.

hamishspence

2020-08-14, 03:19 PM

I don't think the statement by one of Redcloak's younger siblings that

Is particularly strong evidence that Redcloak actually had a crush on that girl, or anyone else. It's extremely common for kids and adolescents to tease each other about alleged crushes that have no basis in fact. If Redcloak had given us some indication that he was romantically included towards that girl, then it would be another story, but just having a younger sibling tease him about it doesn't mean very much except that they are siblings who tease each other.

There's more than just the statement:

Redcloak's mum gets involved, and Redcloak's "I haven't even asked her out yet" seems like a hint that he wanted to, and that the "crush" isn't a complete fabrication.

CriticalFailure

2020-09-01, 02:54 AM

Well I got a laugh from your post.

imo it seems to be implied that sex/relationships are one more aspect of normal human(oid) connection that Redcloak misses out on due to his choices and what has happened to him? With the girl in his village and Kayannara it seems heavily implied that he would rather have a relationship but can’t due to his mission and his evil, petty, manipulative boss. Plus the way his interactions with those two were framed it seems unlikely that he ha had other relationships not shown, since both were suggested to be important information about the degree to which he is isolated and the way he reacts to other options. I mean it wouldn’t make much sense to show the second scenario if he were routinely going on dates between work.

I have wondered vaguely if jokes about this will come up at some point like they have for other characters. I guess with Redcloak it just seems more depressing since it’s directly tied to him being isolated, lonely, and miserable in a general sense? Though the same applied to Miko. I also wondered if it was supposed to be a sensitive topic based on his banter with Right-Eye, they both made fun of each other a lot and were snarky, but Right-Eye never made any comments like suggesting he had ranks in every knowledge skill but carnal or whatever

Fyraltari

2020-09-01, 03:29 AM

at the time (based on forum trawls) there was this mild trend where new female characters were usually immediately suspected of being another's love interest, for whatever reason.

at the time
Oh, my sweet summer child.

understatement

2020-09-01, 08:57 AM

Oh, my sweet summer child.

In my defense I completely forgot about the "would Belkar make a good boyfriend for Minrah or Julia" threads a while back.

CriticalFailure

2020-09-01, 11:59 AM

Clearly Redcloak will end up getting a girlfriend who is a goblin wizard specializing in conjuration. They will bond over a shared affinity for summoning element elementals, thus discovering that they have great chemistry.

The Pilgrim

2020-09-01, 01:17 PM

137beth

2020-09-01, 03:42 PM

Schroeswald

2020-09-01, 05:02 PM

Well, we aren't over the forum assuming every new female character is going to be a love interest. But, in my completely un-rigorous estimate, there does seem to be less assumption that every new female character is Redcloak's niece.

But is that a good thing? Red cloak's niece suggestion is fun, trying to make every female character be defined by a dude they'd sleep with is not fun.

CriticalFailure

2020-09-01, 06:37 PM

Anyway, we were talking about why this could be relevant, well. Here's one for you: Sabine is still a part of this story. The IFCC want to promote conflict between Team Evil and the Order of the Stick. They want the world destroyed, so they definitely don't want Redcloak to change sides and heal the rifts. What exactly happens if Sabine and Redcloak cross paths, you think he'd give her the treatment Roy did, when Sabine couldn't offer Roy anything he didn't get elsewhere?

I think he does the same thing, but is probably more pissed off at her for rubbing in his face what he is missing in life. If he didn’t fail his will save for a goblin woman who apparently made his jaw drop he wouldn’t for a demon.

Peelee

2020-09-01, 08:19 PM

The IFCC.... want the world destroyed

Do they, though?

Keltest

2020-09-01, 08:34 PM

Do they, though?

They seemed pretty direct about it. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1183.html)

137beth

2020-09-01, 09:18 PM

But is that a good thing? Red cloak's niece suggestion is fun, trying to make every female character be defined by a dude they'd sleep with is not fun.

Well, the Redcloak's Niece thing did get kind of old at the peak of its popularity, but I'll admit I greatly prefer it to trying to ship every female character into a romantic relationship.

understatement

2020-09-01, 09:34 PM

Well, the Redcloak's Niece thing did get kind of old at the peak of its popularity, but I'll admit I greatly prefer it to trying to ship every female character into a romantic relationship.

Out of curiosity, can I ask what were the prevailing theories on her character?

Precure

2020-09-02, 11:31 AM

Seeing Luna banned was the most crushing revelation she revealed so far. :smallfrown:

B. Dandelion

2020-09-03, 05:00 AM

Oh, yeah. Right.

This is gonna be my "never live it down" moment, huh.

Wouldn't Sabine shapeshift into someone Redcloak recognizes instead (such as a family member) to psychologically mess him up even more? But as for your question, Redcloak would probably just kill her. To him, the Plan is just too close to succeeding, and adding an extra character variable would complicate everything.

You'd have to explain how she'd know what any of Redcloak's decades-dead family looked like. Not to say it's impossible but it would require abilities or resources she hasn't demonstrated access to thus far.

I don't think he'd kill her out of hand irrespective of what her motives were, or rather what he perceived her motives to be. I could buy it that he just wouldn't trust her under any circumstances, but if she's not trying to push him in a direction other than the one he's inclined toward anyway, it could lessen his suspicion.

Mind, sending Sabine to Redcloak merely for the purposes of keeping him at a task he's kept himself to for decades seems a little weak when she could potentially show up anywhere. I HAD had the thought that it would be interesting for Sabine to cross paths with Redcloak for another reason entirely, namely that he's explicitly been called out as one of the few people in the world capable of casting True Resurrection. But the Giant is on record as hating that spell, wishing it wouldn't exist and preferring to treat it as unavailable, so I think that greatly lessens the odds of any "Sabine wants Redcloak to bring back Nale" kind of plot complication. (Alas.)

There's more than just the statement:

Redcloak's mum gets involved, and Redcloak's "I haven't even asked her out yet" seems like a hint that he wanted to, and that the "crush" isn't a complete fabrication.

He was also alarmed at the discussion going straight to the babymaking aspect, which has a well-known prerequisite. He didn't want to be rushed... and then a few minutes later he was made functionally immortal.

Well I got a laugh from your post.

Ah, sweet validation.

imo it seems to be implied that sex/relationships are one more aspect of normal human(oid) connection that Redcloak misses out on due to his choices and what has happened to him? With the girl in his village and Kayannara it seems heavily implied that he would rather have a relationship but can’t due to his mission and his evil, petty, manipulative boss. Plus the way his interactions with those two were framed it seems unlikely that he ha had other relationships not shown, since both were suggested to be important information about the degree to which he is isolated and the way he reacts to other options. I mean it wouldn’t make much sense to show the second scenario if he were routinely going on dates between work.

I have wondered vaguely if jokes about this will come up at some point like they have for other characters. I guess with Redcloak it just seems more depressing since it’s directly tied to him being isolated, lonely, and miserable in a general sense? Though the same applied to Miko. I also wondered if it was supposed to be a sensitive topic based on his banter with Right-Eye, they both made fun of each other a lot and were snarky, but Right-Eye never made any comments like suggesting he had ranks in every knowledge skill but carnal or whatever

"Ranks in every knowledge skill but carnal" is pretty good. :smallbiggrin:

I think it is a sensitive topic for him. Seems like it'd be hard for it not to be. Especially since his younger brother went out and got a lot more experienced than him. (After getting some extremely explicit advice from Eugene Greenhilt about getting laid -- which was actually directed at both goblin brothers even if Redcloak never heard it.) He reacted with rather melodramatic offense to the notion of a "hunchbacked pity date".

Miko's sexual humiliation did come off as kind of unnecessarily cruel, and while the comic still makes sex jokes on the regular I don't know that it'd re-create that one. It's possible for him to get involved in other jokes without explicitly making that one a punchline, and it's possible to address it in a different way.

I think he does the same thing, but is probably more pissed off at her for rubbing in his face what he is missing in life. If he didn’t fail his will save for a goblin woman who apparently made his jaw drop he wouldn’t for a demon.

He almost did fail his will save against a goblin woman who was explicitly meant to tempt him away from the Plan. Sabine's Charisma is higher than that of even a pretty goblin and I don't think she'd be trying to dissuade him from the Plan at all.

Is he especially wary of demons or succubi? He is evil aligned himself and has summoned fiends against the Resistance. When Xykon and Right-Eye were making sexual comments about the succubus waitress at the evil diner, Redcloak objected to them on the grounds that it wasn't a "locker room" and they were talking about women as objects. If he thought the idea of having sex with a demon woman was dangerous or distasteful purely because of her demonic nature, it didn't come up.

I don't know. I have no idea if Sabine and Redcloak will even get within 20 yards of each other, much less that she'd specifically try to seduce him -- she doesn't try to seduce EVERYBODY she meets and the targets she's chosen thus far have been said to be attractive. But him being automatically offended by any attempt is a bit of an assumption. It would depend on the context. She was kinda presumptuous in her attempts on Roy and Miko so if she were the same way with him then she'd probably go 0-for-3 as a running gag. If she manages a little more tact maybe the results won't be so violent.

They seemed pretty direct about it. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1183.html)

That's what I was thinking of, yeah. If the gods destroying the world would be doing their job for them, then having Redcloak keep at a Plan that makes it more likely that the gods will destroy the world seems like it would also be in their interest. While him changing sides and helping to seal the rifts instead would be an outcome to avoid.

Seeing Luna banned was the most crushing revelation she revealed so far. :smallfrown:

I never even got to talk to her! :smallfrown: I was expecting her to come and chastise me for my EXTREMELY inappropriate remarks about her future boyfriend.

Lord Torath

2020-09-03, 09:50 AM

Clearly Redcloak will end up getting a girlfriend who is a goblin wizard specializing in conjugation. They will bond over a shared affinity for summoning element elementals, thus discovering that they have great chemistry."Conjugation" as in verb tenses? Or "Conjugation" as in "conjugal visits"? Is speciallizing in that anything like going to college for an "MRS degree"?

CriticalFailure

2020-09-03, 10:05 AM

Miko's sexual humiliation did come off as kind of unnecessarily cruel, and while the comic still makes sex jokes on the regular I don't know that it'd re-create that one. It's possible for him to get involved in other jokes without explicitly making that one a punchline, and it's possible to address it in a different way.

Treasure type O was pretty funny but also very personal, I agree the comic seems to be a bit less likely to do that now. However, unnecessarily cruel humiliation basically summarizes Redcloak’s work environment and life in general, so if anyone has it coming their way in the story it’s probably him. Xykon ordering him not to regenerate the eye he could get back with a few minutes and a spell slot is basically constant unnecessarily cruel humiliation anyways, so petty jokes about not getting laid seem minor in comparison.

He almost did fail his will save against a goblin woman who was explicitly meant to tempt him away from the Plan. Sabine's Charisma is higher than that of even a pretty goblin and I don't think she'd be trying to dissuade him from the Plan at all.

I’m not sure exactly what context Sabine would be trying to do this in, but I got the impression that part of the reason that Redcloak was tempted by Kayannara was that she was also smart and shared his interests - she was someone he could connect with on a more personal level rather than just physically. Which given the lonely lifestyle he chose probably has a lot of emotional appeal on top of attractiveness. Whereas I don’t think Sabine would really offer the potential for an emotional connection, and he would likely know she was there to manipulate him. So while her raw CHA is probably higher I think the will saves would be easier since it would be purely based on physical attraction rather than physical attraction + loneliness.

Is he especially wary of demons or succubi? He is evil aligned himself and has summoned fiends against the Resistance. When Xykon and Right-Eye were making sexual comments about the succubus waitress at the evil diner, Redcloak objected to them on the grounds that it wasn't a "locker room" and they were talking about women as objects. If he thought the idea of having sex with a demon woman was dangerous or distasteful purely because of her demonic nature, it didn't come up.

I think it is a sensitive topic for him. Seems like it'd be hard for it not to be. Especially since his younger brother went out and got a lot more experienced than him. (After getting some extremely explicit advice from Eugene Greenhilt about getting laid -- which was actually directed at both goblin brothers even if Redcloak never heard it.) He reacted with rather melodramatic offense to the notion of a "hunchbacked pity date".

I don’t think he’s particularly wary of demons or succubi, in that he is willing to be around them and do business with them. I’m not sure he has any interest in getting to know them more personally or sees himself as having anything in common with them, though. Being evil and pragmatic he views them as good for business, but he probably doesn’t have any illusions that fiends have mortals’ best interests at heart and is likely not particularly trusting towards them. His “evil is not one big happy family” attitude probably would come into play.

I took the conversation in the diner with a Xykon and Right-Eye to indicate that he was generally less comfortable with sexual topics than either of them. I do think that it indicates it’s something he isn’t really comfortable with, and a bit of a sensitive topic. It also seems to suggest he perhaps isn’t comfortable with the idea of casual purely physical relationships and would prefer to be with someone he is more familiar with and respects?

I agree the dramatic reaction to the “pity date” also suggests it is a sensitive topic - it kind of seems like he is trying to convince his brother (and maybe himself) that he’s happy just following the plan and doesn’t want a relationship and isn’t lonely. Like it’s easier to ignore that entire topic and pretend it doesn’t matter to him. I guess it just goes along with the rest of the general denial Redcloak lives in.

"Ranks in every knowledge skill but carnal" is pretty good. :smallbiggrin:

Thanks :)

"Conjugation" as in verb tenses? Or "Conjugation" as in "conjugal visits"? Is speciallizing in that anything like going to college for an "MRS degree"?

oops, that was supposed to be conjuration.