OOTS #1213 - The Discussion Thread

[The Giant]

New comic is up.

[Shale]

"Big faces are getting big maces!" is an absolutely delightful battle cry.

[Fyraltari]

Amazing.

I totes thought Oona was slipping on ice in panel two, though.

Also has Greyview always spoken like that? I thought he made complete sentences.

[hroþila]

So Greyview is not actually too cool for emotions, even if said emotions are just things like "mild puzzlement".

[locksmith of lo]

i predict that there will much more discussion of the alignment of Oona on this thread. :smallbiggrin:

[Doug Lampert]

"Big faces are getting big maces!" is an absolutely delightful battle cry.

Ditto. I do think it's time for our Heroes to get out of dodge.

[Crusher]

My love for Greyview (has always been the case) and Oona (more recently) grows every day.

[wolph42]

I didnt expect oona to last so long, hope she'll make it.

[Crusher]

I didnt expect oona to last so long, hope she'll make it.

I wonder if Minrah and Oona are basically opposites, or at least counter-parts.

[understatement]

Ouch, that looked like it hurt.

OK, now it's time to haul ass.

[Fyraltari]

i predict that there will much more discussion of the alignment of Oona on this thread. :smallbiggrin:

I have the urge to add "Oona is not having compelling reason to not be killing them, and little bald man in red cape did say please. Good manners are being rewarded!" to the quote page of Tvtropes' Affably evil page.

[dancrilis]

I like Oona and Greyview - hope we keep having them for a good bit of the book.

And Durkon finally figures out which part of the negotiation they are at - figured he would get there eventually.

[Ionathus]

i predict that there will much more discussion of the alignment of Oona on this thread. :smallbiggrin:

Ooh, ooh, pick me! I'll start!

I'll admit I didn't expect Oona to jump into the fight here, but the way she did isn't surprising. I also love how she holds Redcloak's feet to the fire on "you didn't answer my question", which I interpret as "so they don't need killing?"

Continuing to lump her and Greyview into the Evil end of the alignment pool, but more of a self-interested, survival-minded Evil than Evil for any big cause (like Redcloak, Tarquin, or even Xykon -- even if that cause is just "rule the world")


I wonder if Minrah and Oona are basically opposites, or at least counter-parts.

This exact thought has been mentioned on the forums recently! Can't remember where.

Honestly, I think it's more just a matter of Rich wanting new people for Team Evil and The Order to bounce their personalities off -- and deciding to go with women in an effort to balance the male/female character ratio.


I have the urge to add "Oona is not having compelling reason to not be killing them, and little bald man in red cape did say please. Good manners are being rewarded!" to the quote page of Tvtropes' Affably evil page.

I can't think of a better quote to exemplify it! Oona is a new favorite character for me :smallbiggrin:

[Pterocards]

Oona and Greyview both continue to be loveable villains.
Poor Minrah though, that looked incredibly painful!

I hope Durkon and Minrah’s resolve to stay here talking is also Shrinky-Dinking!

Also the effect with Greyview’s eyes glowing and him growling was really cool, really shows he’s not to be trifled with after so much screen time of him being puppy ;)

Also! Interesting that she’s using two morningstars now, when before she planned to use a morningstar and knife against the paladuo in 1035.

[blackshadow111]

I adore how pure and uncomplicated Oona's thinking is.

Unrelated, what exactly are the good guys doing in Panel 4 anyway? It looks like they're breaking Kraagor's statue, but... why?

[Reboot]

I hope Durkon and Minrah’s resolve to stay here talking is also Shrinky-Dinking!

I think that already happened, judging from what D said.

[BaronOfHell]

Love Oona. :-)

[Going Hereward]

Oona and Minrah... two minor characters thay have rather grown on me.

Also hilarious that the latest additions to each team are probably the most even-headed, in different ways.

Good one, Giant.

[Fyraltari]

This exact thought has been mentioned on the forums recently! Can't remember where.

Honestly, I think it's more just a matter of Rich wanting new people for Team Evil and The Order to bounce their personalities off -- and deciding to go with women in an effort to balance the male/female character ratio.
The similarities go beyond the both of them being new and females, though. They both have an optimistic relaxed outlook to the world around them, both are principaly mêlée fighters and both have motor mouths.




I can't think of a better quote to exemplify it!
Done.

[dancrilis]

I adore how pure and uncomplicated Oona's thinking is.

Unrelated, what exactly are the good guys doing in Panel 4 anyway? It looks like they're breaking Kraagor's statue, but... why?

Because he keeps trying to hit Durkon which is taking him out of the fight as he doesn't have a weapon (and might not have a great concentration to cast spells defensively).

[wRAR]

I adore how pure and uncomplicated Oona's thinking is.

Unrelated, what exactly are the good guys doing in Panel 4 anyway? It looks like they're breaking Kraagor's statue, but... why?

It was animated by RC 2 strips ago.

[Fyraltari]

Also the effect with Greyview’s eyes glowing and him growling was really cool, really shows he’s not to be trifled with after so much screen time of him being puppy ;)
The added shadows around the eyes are a great touch.

[Cygnia]

Rich, please be making a plush Greyview <3

[Mr. Demiurge]

I'm a bit shocked this fight has gone on so long. I pretty much expected Durkon and Minrah to have a plan in place so they could make a break for it the second it was clear negotiations weren't going to pan out, given the risk of Xykon overhearing the battle and teleporting in to see what's happening.

[Tvtyrant]

When you get power attacked in the face.

[Kruploy]

Oona is pretty cool.
Team Evil needed some female representation.
Too bad Tsukiko bit the bullet and Revenant Miko never came to pass.
Revenant Miko would have been an awesome antagonist.

[Souhiro]

Impresive!!!

There was the fact that I only could hope a crushing defeat (and painful death would be nice) for Team Evil. Xykon was irredeemable, but Redcloak was no slouch either: The most glorious and complete fanatical in a webcomic I've ever seen!

And yes, I think his fanatism is greater even than Miko's.


Yet... Oona looks just cool. She's an antagonist, but also a relatable character. She reminds me ALL the good character traits in Thog, and none of the fails.
(That, and the fact that dual-wielding maces is cool)

[RatElemental]

Interesting that "fake people" make Minrah mad. Did she have a run in with a golem in the past?

[Fyraltari]

Interesting that "fake people" make Minrah mad. Did she have a run in with a golem in the past?

I can't tell if you're making a joke or not.

[TerrickTerran]

Ahh Oona, I think the wolf is smarter than you. You swing a nice mean mace though.

[RatElemental]

I can't tell if you're making a joke or not.

Upon rereading it, it does seem she's talking about Redcloak with that line. She was smashing the animated statue at the time, though, hence my confusion.

[dps]

Grewview got the best punch line in a while, IMO.

[ForgetsHisUID]

Ahh Oona, I think the wolf is smarter than you. You swing a nice mean mace though.

It wouldn't be the first time the "My familiar is smarter than I am" trope has been used.

Heck, it wouldn't be the first time that trope has come up IN THIS COMIC.

[Cicciograna]

Is Oona jumping in panel 3, is she making some kind of maneuver? I don't really understand the dynamics of her movement.

[Vinyadan]

The power of shrinking fonts, I'm going to need a magnification glass to read this, and a visit by the ophthalmologist later.

[Fyraltari]

Is Oona jumping in panel 3, is she making some kind of maneuver? I don't really understand the dynamics of her movement.

She's jumping on top of the roof, grabbing the rain drain in her left hand.

[Metastachydium]

Ooh, ooh, pick me! I'll start!

I'll admit I didn't expect Oona to jump into the fight here, but the way she did isn't surprising. I also love how she holds Redcloak's feet to the fire on "you didn't answer my question", which I interpret as "so they don't need killing?"

The question was „who is this that is needing the killing”, though, which Redcloak actually did not answer. He only told her why they need killing.

[ti'esar]

Uh, what's up with the small text? Particularly for lines like "Owww! My foot!" that neither take up a lot of space nor fit with the normal spoken-quietly associations of small text.

[understatement]

I wonder who's getting here first: Xykon or the Order.

(I feel like I said this last strip, but whatever).

[Rinion]

The power of shrinking fonts, I'm going to need a magnification glass to read this, and a visit by the ophthalmologist later.

I also struggled to read this after the first three panels (but enjoyed it when I did). I don't know if my screen has the wrong resolution for the comic or...?

[Fyraltari]

I wonder who's getting here first: Xykon or the Order.

(I feel like I said this last strip, but whatever).

Trigak, of course.

More seriously, don't forget our mystrious invisible people.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

Nod, get hit in face.


Trigak, of course.

More seriously, don't forget our mystrious invisible people.

Or the person who appeared in one comic but is getting an important role in the last book.

[Metastachydium]

Trigak, of course.

More seriously, don't forget our mystrious invisible people.

Or Tiamat's lizards. It will happen, eventually.

[The Giant]

The power of shrinking fonts, I'm going to need a magnification glass to read this, and a visit by the ophthalmologist later.

This is actually an error and will be fixed in a few minutes.

EDIT: Should be fixed now, you might need refresh the page to see it.

[Kareeah_Indaga]

This strip has not changed my mind about wanting Oona to be the next High Priest. :smallbiggrin:

[Fyraltari]

Or the person who appeared in one comic but is getting an important role in the last book.

You mean Horney (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1036.html) Mc (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1204.html)Hornface (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1205.html)?

[KorvinStarmast]

Oona and Minrah... two minor characters thay have rather grown on me. But Minrah's shrinking! :smalleek:

This is actually an error and will be fixed in a few minutes. Thank you, and thanks for this fun strip.

Things that tickled my fancy:
A. Oona jumping up to the roof to run up and hit large sized creature in the face. Nice Ranger move!
B. Durkon's "the-gettin'-out-alive-part" observation.
C. Greyview's chomp! (I love Minrah, but that's a fine bit of Greyview-in-action there!)
D. Big Faces are getting Big Maces. Oona 's refreshing conversational style strikes again.
E. "little bald man in red cape did say please" got a grin out of me. Good manners are being rewarded!
F. "Indignities of life diminish us all ... usually not so literal" Aah, just what we all wanted: more Greyview. :smallsmile:
G. Redcloak's dig about his patience shrinking with Oona and Greyview. Nice one!

Note about Oona and Greyview alignment that someone raised up there:

I've got them as pretty much neutral. Regardless of teams, this is their village and someone is in a battle with a guest. (Granted, the guest started the fight ...) Reasonable to defend one's own village and to apply the standard "you are under my protection while under my roof" idea ...

[Iain]

Ouch - the violence can be a lot more unsettling in the new art style. And probably with the increased size of Minrah's face.

It was easier for it to feel cartoony with the simpler art, on this page it hurts to see it!

Not that that's necessarily a bad thing - it's just different.

[Metastachydium]

BReasonable to defend one's own village and to apply the standard "you are under my protection while under my foof" idea ...

Under my FOOF? Are we talking explosives again?

[dancrilis]

This is actually an error and will be fixed in a few minutes.

Just to check while you are here - I find Redcloak eyebrows a bit difficult to read at times with the eyepatch, which is fine as he often conveys attitude through mouth appearance and an eyepatch making him a bit harder to read might be deliberate (as an eyepatch could do that).

Just wondering if this is intentional?

[KorvinStarmast]

Under my FOOF? Are we talking explosives again? Thanks, fixed via edit. :smallwink:

[Fyraltari]

Under my FOOF? Are we talking explosives again?
Well, Redcloak already tried implosives...

[understatement]

Well, Redcloak already tried implosives...

Are you saying he's not going to conjure Sodium elementals? :smallconfused:

[Fyraltari]

Are you saying he's not going to conjure Sodium elementals? :smallconfused:

I'm not not saying the opposite of the contrary to that. Or am I?
Yes, this post exists solely to annoy Greywolf.

[KorvinStarmast]

Half the panels are extraneous. You could black out panels 1, 4, 6 and the entire last row and the same amount of information would be conveyed. But it would be less fun. :smallcool:

[Metastachydium]

I'm not not saying the opposite of the contrary to that. Or am I?


(Is that or of yours inclusive or exclusive?)

[Fyraltari]

Half the panels are extraneous. You could black out panels 1, 4, 7 and the entire last row and the same amount of information would be conveyed.But it would be less fun. :smallcool:
Also that's not true. Panel 2 would have an answer without a question, we wouldn't know that Minrah felt she should pull her punches and that Durkon thinks they should leave now, Oona's jumping on the roof is very hard to decipher without panel 7 and without the last row we'd lose Maxrah turning into Minrah again, as well as Oona and Greview stepping back toward the house. And the punchline.

(Is that or of yours inclusive or exclusive?)
Yes, it isn't.

[RatElemental]

But it would be less fun. :smallcool:

Not to mention factually untrue.

Panel 1: Redcloak asks Oona for help. Oona asks why; sets up next panel where her question is not answered.

Panel 4: Minrah hits the statue, and says her spell is about to wear off. Minrah and Durkon also agree that negotiations are over.

Panel 7: More of a beat panel, so more of a pacing thing than actual information being conveyed.

Panel 9: Oona is on the ground again.

Panel 10: Minrah's spell expires.

Panel 11: Punchline.

[King of Nowhere]

i like oona and greyview. both have a very hard life in an hostile place, but oona is super cheerful. makes a nice contrast to greyview. and none of them have any big plan, which contrasts redcloak nicely

[137beth]

I love the interplay between Oona, Redcloak, and Minrah.

[RMS Oceanic]

Got treat.

[JSSheridan]

Thanks Giant!

[Qwerty Shrdlu]

Judging by the "crack" in panel four, we're about to see what's inside Kraagor's statue. Kraagor?

[Kantaki]

Oona's great again.
Evil, but still great.
She and Greyview are the best part of Team Evil.

[oonker]

Judging by the "crack" in panel four, we're about to see what's inside Kraagor's statue. Kraagor?

I've noticed we don't see Kraagor after this. I'm guessing this will be importante...

[GrayDeath]

That was another excellent post, though I do wonder how Oona is a Shaman(ish being) with so little Wis in addition to Int (given that she should ahve noticed the signs of a spell vanishing etc).

Still, laughed hard, well done!

[Man on Fire]

I lowkey ship Oona and Redcloak.

[Worldsong]

Good manners are being rewarded!

Despite his jab I think Redcloak appreciates having someone like Oona around. Every sane man needs a cloudcuckoolander.

[understatement]

I know opinions on Redcloak have...fluctuated...but I'm still so looking forward to a goblin team-up battle. Don't think the comic has had one since Redcloak and Jirix in the Azure City throne room.

[KorvinStarmast]

D&D 3.5ish combat question as it applies to the tag team on Minrah.

a. Greyview chomps and also seems to grab Minrah. (Panel's 6 and 7)
b. Title of strip is Grab and Smash.

Question: Did Oona's double mace attack get a benefit to hit, and/or to damage, due to Greyview having (apparently) grappled Minrah?

Also, thanks to @QwertyShrdlu for pointing out the red line crack on the statue. I'd not have noticed that but for your mentioning it. :smallsmile:

[dancrilis]

Good manners are being rewarded!

Despite his jab I think Redcloak appreciates having someone like Oona around. Every sane man needs a cloudcuckoolander.

I read it very differently - I think he is frowning at her in panel 1 and 3.
I think he wants people to respect his authority and she doesn't, which leads me to wonder how they were recruited in the first place - and I have to wonder the hand that Xykon played in it.


D&D 3.5ish combat question as it applies to the tag team on Minrah.

a. Greyview chomps and also seems to grab Minrah. (Panel's 6 and 7)
b. Title of strip is Grab and Smash.

Question: Did Oona's double mace attack get a benefit to hit, and/or to damage, due to Greyview having (apparently) grappled Minrah?

Also, thanks to @QwertyShrdlu for pointing out the red line crack on the statue. I'd not have noticed that but for your mentioning it. :smallsmile:

I think that was just Greyview tripping her (Worgs are good at that) and Oona hitting her before she hit the ground as a visual item.

As for the red line - I believe those are the statue's glasses.

[danielxcutter]

Redcloak seems annoyed that Oona is not being what he perceives as serious, which may partly originate from wanting to get this over quickly and partly because he’s been humoring Xykon for way too long and he’s fed up with that sort of behavior in general.

[KorvinStarmast]

@danielxcutter

Redcloak seems annoyed that Oona is not being what he perceives as serious, which may partly originate from wanting to get this over quickly and partly because he’s been humoring Xykon for way too long and he’s fed up with that sort of behavior in general.
Oona established early on that she marches to the beat of her own drum. (Strips 1037-1039).

As I read it, Xykon's in his own category of annoying for Redcloak for a host of reasons.

-------------------

Aside: I just had a call back to a TV movie from - gah, is it that long?- over 40 years ago (Breaking Away) about bike riders and the University of Indiana, and the local folks referred to as "Cutters" which comes from working in stone quarries.

Did you used to cut stone? I read 'xcutter' as "ex Cutter" as in "someone who once cut stones". I know, it's a reach, but that's what happens now and again, something goes "ding" in my head and I ask oddball questions.

[Worldsong]

I read it very differently - I think he is frowning at her in panel 1 and 3.
I think he wants people to respect his authority and she doesn't, which leads me to wonder how they were recruited in the first place - and I have to wonder the hand that Xykon played in it.


Redcloak seems annoyed that Oona is not being what he perceives as serious, which may partly originate from wanting to get this over quickly and partly because he’s been humoring Xykon for way too long and he’s fed up with that sort of behavior in general.

Oh he's definitely annoyed, but... in a good way?

What I'm thinking is that compared to the rest of Team Evil she's like a godsent for Redcloak. He hates Xykon with every ounce of his being and MitD is, so far as Redcloak knows, a dim-witted child.

Oona is quirky, but also smart, friendly, helpful and a goblinoid. Basically I imagine that even with people he can get along with Redcloak is a bit of a grump.

[Quizatzhaderac]

i predict that there will much more discussion of the alignment of Oona on this thread. :smallbiggrin:I used to think she was vertically aligned, but after panel three I'm not so sure.

[understatement]

Oh he's definitely annoyed, but... in a good way?

What I'm thinking is that compared to the rest of Team Evil she's like a godsent for Redcloak. He hates Xykon with every ounce of his being and MitD is, so far as Redcloak knows, a dim-witted child.

Oona is quirky, but also smart, friendly, helpful and a goblinoid. Basically I imagine that even with people he can get along with Redcloak is a bit of a grump.

She even gives him head rubs!

[Jason]

I've got Oona pegged at Neutral Evil now, though she's a polite and cheery Neutral Evil. I think that if you admit that you have serious questions about who you are being asked to kill and why, but you go ahead anyway because an ally (who avoided directly answering your question) asked nicely and you can't think of a reason not to kill people you don't know anything about, then your outlook is essentially evil.

[Windscion]

I've got Oona pegged at Neutral Evil now, though she's a polite and cheery Neutral Evil. I think that if you admit that you have serious questions about who you are being asked to kill and why, but you go ahead anyway because an ally (who avoided directly answering your question) asked nicely and you can't think of a reason not to kill people you don't know anything about, then your outlook is essentially evil.

These aren't random strangers. They are dwarves (racial enemies who pushed them into this barren and cold region) who invaded their territory. Also, RC is an ally of sorts. Why not help?

[KorvinStarmast]

Oona is quirky, but also smart, friendly, helpful and a goblinoid. Basically I imagine that even with people he can get along with Redcloak is a bit of a grump. Kinda like me some days, particularly when the coffee is a surprise pot of decaf at work. :smallfurious:

I've got Oona pegged at Neutral Evil now, though she's a polite and cheery Neutral Evil. I think that if you admit that you have serious questions about who you are being asked to kill and why, but you go ahead anyway because an ally (who avoided directly answering your question) asked nicely and you can't think of a reason not to kill people you don't know anything about, then your outlook is essentially evil. I am afraid of starting an alignment furball here - please let's not - but within the context of D&Disms simply killing is not inherently evil. That's why I am down for neutral, and also because these are intruders to her village.

[Jason]

These aren't random strangers. They are dwarves (racial enemies who pushed them into this barren and cold region) who invaded their territory. Also, RC is an ally of sorts. Why not help?
That argues that Oona is partially motivated by racism, which would also be essentially an evil outlook.

[Fyraltari]

These aren't random strangers. They are dwarves (racial enemies who pushed them into this barren and cold region) who invaded their territory. Also, RC is an ally of sorts. Why not help?
Invaded my hairy butt, Durkon came to negotiate and Redcloak broke the truce.

[KorvinStarmast]

That argues that Oona is partially motivated by racism Facepalm. OK, I'm outta this conversation.

[dancrilis]

Invaded my hairy butt, Durkon came to negotiate and Redcloak broke the truce.

Technically you are still invading whether you come to negotiate or not - for instance you get home from work and a stranger is in your house seeking to negotiate with you about something, they have still invaded - you might listen to them but that doesn't change the base line reality that they should have called ahead and meet you in a neutral location if you were willing to speak to them, not showed up in your territory without invitation.

[hroþila]

Technically you are still invading whether you come to negotiate or not - for instance you get home from work and a stranger is in your house seeking to negotiate with you about something, they have still invaded - you might listen to them but that doesn't change the base line reality that they should have called ahead and meet you in a neutral location if you were willing to speak to them, not showed up in your territory without invitation.
Home invasion and trespassing are not the same thing. At most, Durkon and Minrah were trespassing - but do note they weren't actually in anyone's home.

[Fyraltari]

Technically you are still invading whether you come to negotiate or not - for instance you get home from work and a stranger is in your house seeking to negotiate with you about something, they have still invaded - you might listen to them but that doesn't change the base line reality that they should have called ahead and meet you in a neutral location if you were willing to speak to them, not showed up in your territory without invitation.

They're not even in the village proper.

[Worldsong]

They're not even in the village proper.

Get off my property!

[dancrilis]

Home invasion and trespassing are not the same thing.
It was an example - if the person is in your garden or your forest or whatever they are still invading your territory.


They're not even in the village proper.
I suspect that they Bugbear's regard the whole of monster hollow and the village and a fair bit around as their territory.

[Jason]

Well, the "good" action when confronted with a racial enemy in your territory would be to find out who they are and why they are in your territory, and only use force if they won't leave when you don't accept their reasons or if they are actively hostile.
The "neutral" action would be to forcibly escort them out and use lethal force only if they resist, and you may or may not give them a chance to explain their presence afterwards.
The "evil" action is to try to just kill them because they are your racial enemies, without giving them a chance to explain their presence or caring much if they have trespassed.

Oona gets a little wiggle room because it's not clear what she saw. If she came back and saw a fight already going on between her ally and racial enemies then she might even be classed as "good" for attacking immediately to defend her ally, but we know she didn't intervene immediately. If she saw Red Cloak talking with an unarmed Durkon peacefully and then attacking him, then she is at best "neutral" and probably "evil" in attacking with intent to kill without further explanation.

Edit: Note also that Oona was present when Durkon first showed up. She may have left and come back, or she may have stayed and seen the whole debate, though she may not have understood it (does she speak Common?).

[ShurikVch]

"Big faces are getting big maces!"
It sounds... painful...
https://www.picclickimg.com/d/l400/pict/362554347979_/Self-Defense-Magnum-Pepper-Gel-w-Pistol-Grip-Handle.jpghttps://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/314PFmD-fCL.jpg

[Fyraltari]

It was an example - if the person is in your garden or your forest or whatever they are still invading your territory.
In a colloquila sense, maybe. But someone showing up unarmed, making their presence known immediately and asking to parley is very much not an invasion.

[Particle_Man]

I think that was just Greyview tripping her (Worgs are good at that) and Oona hitting her before she hit the ground as a visual item.


Considering Minrah was "Maxrah sized" and that Dwarf stability makes her harder to trip, that was impressive of Greyview to pull that one off!

I think that Oona is technically using Morningstars, but the "maces/faces" rhyme was just too good not to use. And Oona has some kind of ability that lets her do two attacks as a standard action or part of a jump or charge, it seems.

[Quizatzhaderac]

Technically you are still invading whether you come to negotiate or not - for instance you get home from work and a stranger is in your house seeking to negotiate with you about something, they have still invaded - you might listen to them but that doesn't change the base line reality that they should have called ahead and meet you in a neutral location if you were willing to speak to them, not showed up in your territory without invitation.All semantics aside, is there literally anything else Durkon could have done about his approach and making clear his intention of peaceful negotiation?

[Jason]

All semantics aside, is there literally anything else Durkon could have done about his approach and making clear his intention of peaceful negotiation?
Red Cloak showed that he accepted Durkon's intent as peaceful. If Oona was there the whole time then she saw it was Red Cloak who broke the truce.

[dancrilis]

All semantics aside, is there literally anything else Durkon could have done about his approach and making clear his intention of peaceful negotiation?

He could have ignored Roy and send a sending to guage if Redcloak had any interest in parley - in honestly he likely handled everything fairly well (with that exception*) but without him having a clue who Redcloak was and what Redcloak was about, and without Redcloak having a chance to get his thoughts together for proper negotiation.

*but the exception is major, had they spoken a bit via sending (likely over the course of many of them spread over some time) first Durkon might have had a much better hand to play and could have perhaps followed up with Thor about matters first, and Redcloak could have avoided being put on the spot and having a make a split decision between the random dwarf he just met and his lifelong plan. Might not have worked out anyway but that is negotiation for you.

More on topic - I think Oona was willing to attack the dwarves for exactly the reason she said - she had no reason not to and some reason to help Redcloak.

[Jacky720]

In a colloquila sense, maybe. But someone showing up unarmed, making their presence known immediately and asking to parley is very much not an invasion.
More like showing up to your front door and asking to talk. In fact, Durkon specifically avoided inviting himself in in the extended metaphor, so even that isn't an issue.

Still would be nice to call ahead, but not an invasion.

[hroþila]

More like showing up to your front door and asking to talk. In fact, Durkon specifically avoided inviting himself in in the extended metaphor, so even that isn't an issue
Well, he used to be a vampire host. Maybe it rubbed off.

[gatemansgc]

Amazing.

I totes thought Oona was slipping on ice in panel two, though.

inorite? really looked like a slip!

[Cirin]

A thought. . .Oona is only nominally a part of Team Evil, and she's noticing Redcloak getting real evasive on pointed questions. She's a high-level Bugbear Druid, so she's nominally with them. . .but she's definitely not exactly a True Believer in The Plan.

Perhaps that's what will get things to flip.

If Oona is a Bugbear, which is considered a Goblinoid and I think she mentioned she's a least nominally a follower of The Dark One (but not fanatical about it), and she's a Druid (which I presume is by Greyview being her animal companion, and apparently being Awakened), then if she could cast 9th level spells. . .would those come from Purple Quiddity and thus be suitable for sealing the gate?

Seems like she might be the easier point for getting a suitable caster to help seal the gate.

[understatement]

Well, the "good" action when confronted with a racial enemy in your territory would be to find out who they are and why they are in your territory, and only use force if they won't leave when you don't accept their reasons or if they are actively hostile.
The "neutral" action would be to forcibly escort them out and use lethal force only if they resist, and you may or may not give them a chance to explain their presence afterwards.
The "evil" action is to try to just kill them because they are your racial enemies, without giving them a chance to explain their presence or caring much if they have trespassed.

Oona gets a little wiggle room because it's not clear what she saw. If she came back and saw a fight already going on between her ally and racial enemies then she might even be classed as "good" for attacking immediately to defend her ally, but we know she didn't intervene immediately. If she saw Red Cloak talking with an unarmed Durkon peacefully and then attacking him, then she is at best "neutral" and probably "evil" in attacking with intent to kill without further explanation.

Edit: Note also that Oona was present when Durkon first showed up. She may have left and come back, or she may have stayed and seen the whole debate, though she may not have understood it (does she speak Common?).

I mostly agree that Oona is evil, or at best neutral-with-strong-evil-tendencies, but the bugbear in 1204 was actually a different one altogether. They have different masks.


A thought. . .Oona is only nominally a part of Team Evil, and she's noticing Redcloak getting real evasive on pointed questions. She's a high-level Bugbear Druid, so she's nominally with them. . .but she's definitely not exactly a True Believer in The Plan.

Perhaps that's what will get things to flip.

If Oona is a Bugbear, which is considered a Goblinoid and I think she mentioned she's a least nominally a follower of The Dark One (but not fanatical about it), and she's a Druid (which I presume is by Greyview being her animal companion, and apparently being Awakened), then if she could cast 9th level spells. . .would those come from Purple Quiddity and thus be suitable for sealing the gate?

Seems like she might be the easier point for getting a suitable caster to help seal the gate.

Judging by the fact that her first instinct is melee and not summon animal whatever, she is most likely not a druid.

[Jason]

I mostly agree that Oona is evil, or at best neutral-with-strong-evil-tendencies, but the bugbear in 1204 was actually a different one altogether. They have different masks.
Ah, looks like I failed my Spot check. So that bugbear probably ran off and told Oona that RC was talking with a dwarf, and they may have already been fighting by the time she showed up.
I had thought she was a ranger, not a druid.

[Draconi Redfir]

We've only known Oona for maybe ten pages, but if anything happens to her, i will disintegrate everyone on this forum and then myself.

[Windscion]

That argues that Oona is partially motivated by racism, which would also be essentially an evil outlook.

Don't be difficult. The bugbears are stated to have lost a war for territory with the dwarves. That's what "no dwarves here to chase us away" implies. It may not have been a war with big battles, but it still gives the bugbears a real reason to look askance at strange dwarves who show up unexpectedly. Calling that racism is simply incorrect.
Also: you realize that rangers have class features that act as weaponized speciesism? And that this requires an evil alignment only when targeting your own species?

[Sebastian]

A thought. . .Oona is only nominally a part of Team Evil, and she's noticing Redcloak getting real evasive on pointed questions. She's a high-level Bugbear Druid, so she's nominally with them. . .but she's definitely not exactly a True Believer in The Plan.

Perhaps that's what will get things to flip.

If Oona is a Bugbear, which is considered a Goblinoid and I think she mentioned she's a least nominally a follower of The Dark One (but not fanatical about it), and she's a Druid (which I presume is by Greyview being her animal companion, and apparently being Awakened), then if she could cast 9th level spells. . .would those come from Purple Quiddity and thus be suitable for sealing the gate?

Seems like she might be the easier point for getting a suitable caster to help seal the gate.

Greyview is not awakened


Worg click to see monster
[...]
Abilities: Str 17, Dex 15, Con 15, Int 6, Wis 14, Cha 10

[...]
A typical worg has gray or black fur, grows to 5 feet long and stands 3 feet tall at the shoulder. It weighs 300 pounds.

More intelligent than their smaller cousins, worgs speak their own language. Some can also speak Common and Goblin.
Combat
[...]
Trip (Ex)

A worg that hits with a bite attack can attempt to trip the opponent (+3 check modifier) as a free action without making a touch attack or provoking an attack of opportunity. If the attempt fails, the opponent cannot react to trip the worg.

[Worldsong]

Judging by the fact that her first instinct is melee and not summon animal whatever, she is most likely not a druid.

I vaguely remember a suggestion of Oona being a Beastmaster of some sort. Although whether the suggestion was Beastmaster as a class (which apparently is a thing) or Beastmaster as a prestige class (which apparently is also a thing) with her first class being Ranger I can't recall.

Either way I can't imagine her being a druid because she's given no indication of having much with magic. Also druids usually don't resort to dual wielding spiked maces.

[Fyraltari]

inorite? really looked like a slip!
"Inorite"?

Well, he used to be a vampire host. Maybe it rubbed off.
Nice one!

[dancrilis]

"Inorite"?


I believe they meant 'I know right' in that they were agreeing with you about it looking like a slip.

[pendell]

Love the comic so far. In the continued debate over Oona's alignment, in my view she has picked up some evil points because she's willing to kill people she has no reason to NOT kill. This implies a disregard for intelligent life that goes beyond what could be explained by climactic conditions. So in my personal alignment-o-meter I'm putting her in "lawful" "neutral" (asks why rather than immediately obeying redcloak) "evil" (disregard for life). Though still not as deep as RC.

ETA: And the fact she doesn't flinch when protection from good is cast on her confirms her alignment is either neutral or evil, although I don't think this was in dispute. Nonetheless, I am changing my stance from "possibly neutral" to "probably evil, and less-probably "neutral" ) .

And Grayview continues to delight. I hope we see more of them in side adventures.

Actually , that implies a what-if version of the story, in which the OOTS fails and the world is destroyed; the way it is destroyed is that Grayview writes a novel, and the crushing existential despair causes the collective suicide of all the intelligent peoples of the planet, after they read it :smallamused:

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Riarra]

Love how Oona's animal trainer background is bleeding through there with "Good manners are being rewarded!"

[Jason]

Don't be difficult. The bugbears are stated to have lost a war for territory with the dwarves. That's what "no dwarves here to chase us away" implies. It may not have been a war with big battles, but it still gives the bugbears a real reason to look askance at strange dwarves who show up unexpectedly. Calling that racism is simply incorrect.If she attacks them simply because they are dwarves then yes, that is racism. If she attacks them because they are in her territory and actively fighting an ally then it's not necessarily racism, though it could still be a factor.

Also: you realize that rangers have class features that act as weaponized speciesism? And that this requires an evil alignment only when targeting your own species?
They have a class feature that allows them to more effectively fight particular types of opponents. It's entirely possible for a ranger to have no animosity at all towards the creatures they've been trained to fight.
I can't find the "you must be evil to chose your own race as a favored enemy" rule in the ranger description in the 3.5 PHB at the moment, though I have heard that rule cited before.

[Vinyadan]

This is actually an error and will be fixed in a few minutes.

EDIT: Should be fixed now, you might need refresh the page to see it.
It's fixed! Thanks!

[dancrilis]

I can't find the "you must be evil to chose your own race as a favored enemy" rule in the ranger description in the 3.5 PHB at the moment, though I have heard that rule cited before.

Check the 3.0 PHB instead and you will likely have more luck.

[Ariko]

"Inorite"?

Nice one!

"I know, right?". Its also frequently shortened to "right?" these days. The colloquial meaning might not translate well into french, its kind of a way of saying you agree with the sentiment.

[Jason]

Check the 3.0 PHB instead and you will likely have more luck.
You are correct. It was in the 3.0 PHB Favored Enemy rule in the ranger class description but is not in 3.5. So the designers recognized that having a favored enemy doesn't mean you hate that creature type.

[CriticalFailure]

> good manners are being rewarded

it’s so nice Redcloak has someone to teach him manners

[Ruck]

I'm a bit shocked this fight has gone on so long. I pretty much expected Durkon and Minrah to have a plan in place so they could make a break for it the second it was clear negotiations weren't going to pan out, given the risk of Xykon overhearing the battle and teleporting in to see what's happening.

They still might; it's hard to say how long this has taken. If their plan was "reactivate Wind Walk as soon as Redcloak becomes hostile," it probably still hasn't been five rounds yet.

[CriticalFailure]

Oh he's definitely annoyed, but... in a good way?

What I'm thinking is that compared to the rest of Team Evil she's like a godsent for Redcloak. He hates Xykon with every ounce of his being and MitD is, so far as Redcloak knows, a dim-witted child.

Oona is quirky, but also smart, friendly, helpful and a goblinoid. Basically I imagine that even with people he can get along with Redcloak is a bit of a grump.

IIRC Redcloak tends to tease people he gets along with. based on SOD banter seems to be his way of showing affection, he and his brother constantly tease each other. Not sure what this says about him and his weird emotional issues, but yeah.

[rbetieh]

When Oona says "True, true" is she agreeing with both Greyview and Redcloak or just Redcloak?

[Yirggzmb]

Not sure what this says about him and his weird emotional issues, but yeah.

Eh, probably not much on its own anyway. I know plenty of people who use affectionate teasing as their way of marking the people they like, oftentimes people who can give it right back.

Whether it says anything when you intersect it with the rest of his life, eh ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ perhaps

[Jason]

When Oona says "True, true" is she agreeing with both Greyview and Redcloak or just Redcloak?It could be both. One "true" for Greyview and one for Red Cloak.

[Jacky720]

People were trying to track spell expenditure as of last comic, right? There's a cure-something in panel 4.

[ratfox]

Oona sounds like she would be a great mother. Maybe she is?

[Rogar Demonblud]

I can't believe that five rounds hasn't passed yet for the dwarves to be misting out.

[Ghosty]

Well, he used to be a vampire host. Maybe it rubbed off. Clap, clap. I love it.


inorite? really looked like a slip! Having owned Labradors in the past, I thought he'd just bowled her over on the way to something he wanted. At least, I've looked like Oona did in that panel. "Damn it, Dog! My knees don't bend that way!"

Greyview's about a 180 from a Lab's disposition though.

I had no idea that was supposed to be her jumping onto a roof to do an Arya Stark (TM) Flying Smash! Attack into Minrah. All pretty badass looking. Even though Durkon and Minrah needed to be gone about three rounds ago.

Edit: I dunno if there's been Word of Giant on Oona's alignment, but she strikes me as TN more than anything else. TN in a D&D scape, where life's a bit cheaper; not TN in our world.

[Jacky720]

I can't believe that five rounds hasn't passed yet for the dwarves to be misting out.
I don't think you can defend yourself during the transformation, which is bad. You also can't transform while defending yourself, and they've been pretty busy in the defending themselves department.

[Quizatzhaderac]

Are there called shot rules in 3.5e? I don't think so, but if so Minrah may be hamstrung and blinded according to the rules I just made up.

[CriticalFailure]

Eh, probably not much on its own anyway. I know plenty of people who use affectionate teasing as their way of marking the people they like, oftentimes people who can give it right back.

Whether it says anything when you intersect it with the rest of his life, eh ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ perhaps

Yeah I agree, alone it doesn’t say anything and affectionate teasing is quite common in my experience.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I don't think you can defend yourself during the transformation, which is bad. You also can't transform while defending yourself, and they've been pretty busy in the defending themselves department.

Nope. The rules just say it takes five rounds to switch between solid and vapor forms.

[WanderingMist]

Are you saying he's not going to conjure Sodium elementals? :smallconfused:
This would be a very poor area to do that in.


Judging by the "crack" in panel four, we're about to see what's inside Kraagor's statue. Kraagor?
You know, I've been wondering. Haley said they searched every inch of that valley before trying doors. But who would think to check the memorial itself as a possible location? Though that would render MitD's extra marks pointless...perhaps it just shows which door to choose, which might possibly reveal MitD's betrayal to Team Evil.


IIRC Redcloak tends to tease people he gets along with. based on SOD banter seems to be his way of showing affection, he and his brother constantly tease each other. Not sure what this says about him and his weird emotional issues, but yeah.
That was a long time ago. Redcloak's only grown more and more bitter over the years.

[Anitar]

Are there called shot rules in 3.5e? I don't think so, but if so Minrah may be hamstrung and blinded according to the rules I just made up.

Judging by panel 8, only one of her eyes got a sharp object slammed into it. Her left eye should be just fine, inasfar as a person who just took two maces to the face can be "just fine".

EDIT: And for that matter, Redcloak himself has proven that OotS does in fact work on "if you get stabbed in the eye, you lose the use of that eye" rules already.

[dancrilis]

They still might; it's hard to say how long this has taken. If their plan was "reactivate Wind Walk as soon as Redcloak becomes hostile," it probably still hasn't been five rounds yet.

If it have only been five rounds then either:
1. Thor's might is not righteous might.
or
2. Minrah didn't cast it.


I can't believe that five rounds hasn't passed yet for the dwarves to be misting out.

1210: Minrah shows up with a AOO (requires very careful timing to pull off) - 0 rounds.
1211: Redcloak - Harm, Animate Objects - 2 rounds.
1212: Redcloak - Summon Monster, Unholy Blight, Heal - 3 rounds.
1213: Redcloak - Protection from Good - 1 Round.

So yes at least 6 rounds have occured between her appearing and the current scenario, but if she got that AOO she might not be able to re-enter mist form, I still think it is likely she is dying here (and might be brought back later).

[mjasghar]

Oona sounds like she would be a great mother. Maybe she is?

I disagree
Look at Greyview she has essentially crushed his spirit
She would be the worst mother

[Draconi Redfir]

I disagree
Look at Greyview she has essentially crushed his spirit
She would be the worst mother

that could easily be a case of nature rather then nurture. Maybe Greyview is just a pessimist by nature.

[dancrilis]

I disagree
Look at Greyview she has essentially crushed his spirit
She would be the worst mother

Greyview is one of the most optimistic characters in the comic, he knows that the world is a bleak and terrible place but if you follow the rules correctly you can have a good life in it. He is somewhat similiar to Lien in that way.

[understatement]

Now I'm wondering...is this the strategy when they do dungeon crawling? Redcloak buffs Oona, Greyview attempts to Trip whatever, Oona sails in with 2 maces, Redcloak cleans it up?

You gotta admit, Team Evil synergy is really smooth when they put their minds to it. I think Oona/Greyview and Redcloak make a pretty good fighting team.

[Snails]

I anticipate Durkon and Minrah being on the verge of capture/death, and then a sudden rescue by Roy.

This "bad plan we planned for" just stopped making sense. Once hostilities commence, the two of them alone are not going to prevail. Trading blows with the statue is ludicrous. If you are not going to kill Redcloak like you mean it, just run away.

[Ghosty]

...This "bad plan we planned for" just stopped making sense. Once hostilities commence, the two of them alone are not going to prevail. Trading blows with the statue is ludicrous. If you are not going to kill Redcloak like you mean it, just run away.

Can we +1 posts? Because I really want to plus one this.

Dead on, IMHO. Refuge or WoR or some other 'WeLeaveNow!' spell needed to happen about 2 rounds ago. Hopefully, Xykon is still screwing around in his Astral Fortress or the like...

[Jacky720]

Nope. The rules just say it takes five rounds to switch between solid and vapor forms.
Even so, I would definitely houserule "being 80% gaseous" as "unable to make normal melee attacks".

[CriticalFailure]

That was a long time ago. Redcloak's only grown more and more bitter over the years.

That doesn’t mean he can’t tease Oona, though? He’s been pretty negative fir a while but he seems to get along with her fairly well despite it.

[danielxcutter]

@danielxcutter

Oona established early on that she marches to the beat of her own drum. (Strips 1037-1039).

As I read it, Xykon's in his own category of annoying for Redcloak for a host of reasons.

Well yes, but I can see Redcloak being more annoyed now by such behavior than he might have been before ever meeting Xykon.


Aside: I just had a call back to a TV movie from - gah, is it that long?- over 40 years ago (Breaking Away) about bike riders and the University of Indiana, and the local folks referred to as "Cutters" which comes from working in stone quarries.

Did you used to cut stone? I read 'xcutter' as "ex Cutter" as in "someone who once cut stones". I know, it's a reach, but that's what happens now and again, something goes "ding" in my head and I ask oddball questions.

Nope, absolutely nothing to do with that. Just thought it sounded cool in middle school and haven’t dropped the handle since.

[Anitar]

Now I'm wondering...is this the strategy when they do dungeon crawling? Redcloak buffs Oona, Greyview attempts to Trip whatever, Oona sails in with 2 maces, Redcloak cleans it up?

I would say "Of course not. They also have Xykon and the MitD to account for."
But those two, uh... really don't seem like the sort to do "strategy" in the first place.

[danielxcutter]

I would say "Of course not. They also have Xykon and the MitD to account for."
But those two, uh... really don't seem like the sort to do "strategy" in the first place.

I don’t think they particularly need strategy in the first place. And unless Xykon doesn’t know the correct way to deal with an enemy and has a reason to deal with it somewhat seriously, he tries to solve it the simplest way available, which isn’t that much of a problem because he’s an epic Sorcerer anyways.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I sure do hope the dwarves make it out of this one quickly. Especially before any other reinforcements arrive.

[Hatu]

I anticipate Durkon and Minrah being on the verge of capture/death, and then a sudden rescue by Roy.

This "bad plan we planned for" just stopped making sense. Once hostilities commence, the two of them alone are not going to prevail. Trading blows with the statue is ludicrous. If you are not going to kill Redcloak like you mean it, just run away.

Agreed.

Unfortunately, Durkon seems to have convinced himself that the degree to which he needs his gambit to succeed must be proportional to its likelihood of success.

I understand why he's desperate and I give him full marks for actually listening not just to Redcloak's demands but to the reasons for those demands. But at the end of the day, Durkon STILL doesn't realize just how bad the 'deal' he offered Redlcoak was; it was a deal he admits he does not have the authority to enforce and might not do what Redcloak wants even if it were approved.

It's no surprise Redlcoak turned that down (even ignoring that Durkon had completely neglected to mention the crucial flaw with the Dark One's plan to gamble on the destruction of the world). Frankly, it also shouldn't have been a surprise that Redcloak would be eager to get in the first attack once the parley ended either; Haley and Belkar spent enough time with the Resistance they could have called that. If Durkon didn't know, it means he must have spent even less time researching Redcloak than I thought.

Which is just beyond frustrating to me. Durkon is supposed to have high Wisdom and low Charisma. If negotiations had broken down because he saw what needed to be done but inadvertently offended/threatened Redcloak in the process, that would be great. But we basically got the opposite of that.

[understatement]

Agreed.

Unfortunately, Durkon seems to have convinced himself that the degree to which he needs his gambit to succeed must be proportional to its likelihood of success.

I understand why he's desperate and I give him full marks for actually listening not just to Redcloak's demands but to the reasons for those demands. But at the end of the day, Durkon STILL doesn't realize just how bad the 'deal' he offered Redlcoak was; it was a deal he admits he does not have the authority to enforce and might not do what Redcloak wants even if it were approved.

It's no surprise Redlcoak turned that down (even ignoring that Durkon had completely neglected to mention the crucial flaw with the Dark One's plan to gamble on the destruction of the world). Frankly, it also shouldn't have been a surprise that Redcloak would be eager to get in the first attack once the parley ended either; Haley and Belkar spent enough time with the Resistance they could have called that. If Durkon didn't know, it means he must have spent even less time researching Redcloak than I thought.

Which is just beyond frustrating to me. Durkon is supposed to have high Wisdom and low Charisma. If negotiations had broken down because he saw what needed to be done but inadvertently offended/threatened Redcloak in the process, that would be great. But we basically got the opposite of that.

This is kind of unfair to Durkon. How was he supposed to know how committed Redcloak was to the Plan?

[CriticalFailure]

I don’t know, Durkon was definitely overly optimistic that Redcloak would see someone offering to work with him as worth it, despite not being able to offer guarantees or anything.

[KorvinStarmast]

Nope, absolutely nothing to do with that. Just thought it sounded cool in middle school and haven’t dropped the handle since. Thanks, I realize that it was a bit of a reach. :smallsmile:

[Particle_Man]

I guess we can assume that Oona lacks ranks in spellcraft?

[understatement]

I don’t know, Durkon was definitely overly optimistic that Redcloak would see someone offering to work with him as worth it, despite not being able to offer guarantees or anything.

Redcloak doesn't try to kill him because it was a bad offer; he does so because it was too good of one.

Although I'm not sure what Durkon was thinking either when he moved talks to mortal level.

[bravelove]

Wow Oona is cool

[Wimblesaurus]

Redcloak doesn't try to kill him because it was a bad offer; he does so because it was too good of one.

Although I'm not sure what Durkon was thinking either when he moved talks to mortal level.

The characters know they're in a comic, so I think Durkon was trying to move the plot along so the readers don't have to sit through ten more strips of the order scouting the outpost.

[Hatu]

This is kind of unfair to Durkon. How was he supposed to know how committed Redcloak was to the Plan?

I don't think he really needed to, at least not at first.

He already knew that Redcloak was trying to seize indirect control of the Snarl via the Gates; that's what Thor told him. He seems to have realized that Redcloak's goal was more than just a direct attack, because in 1206 he says Redcloack wants to "threaten" the gods, not "attack" them. Everyone involved realizes there's only one gate left and it's destruction would doom the world. And he himself already realized that destruction of the world would mean the Dark One would participate in the creation on a new one (until Thor revealed the snag in that).

Given all that, it's hard to see why Durkon would assume the risk of getting the world destroyed had never occurred to Redcloak and the Dark One. Yet he never really addressed that. Not in his opening pitch, and definitely not once it was clear Redcloak was willing to roll the dice if it came down to it.

Now this comic has more or less ignored the fundamental issue that the deaths of characters in a world where their souls are definitively given an afterlife is not automatically a bad thing when their souls are on the line. So the fact that Durkon also has to ignore that problem is par for the course (even though you'd think the lawfulest of lawful good dwarves would be the one to notice it).

Still, the most fundamental aspect of negotiation is to point out that half a loaf is better than no loaf at all. And Durkon botched that because a) as he admits, he can at best offer an IOU for the quarter-loaf Redcloak already stole and b) the downside if Redcloak turns down Durkon's offer is the exact same circumstance Redcloak already has!

Seriously, Durkon's deal has absolutely no downside if it's rejected. He offered no reason to think the OotS would be able to stop Redcloak from securing the last Gate - certainly not without destroying it, which was already a known risk. He asserted that the gods would blow up the world before Redcloak's plan could succeed, but he offered no new details on that. And he decided not to mention the risk that the Dark One wouldn't survive to a new world.

All Durkon did was inform Redcloak that the Dark One's nature might be an additional bargaining chip, but that all it could buy was a better lease on what they already had. So, in essence, he revealed that Redcloak might as well play out his current hand because if things go badly wrong, at worst it's what they already expected and at best the Dark One will now have a different option to pursue instead.

Even if we had never read SoD, why would we expect Redcloak to take the deal?

[Rogar Demonblud]

Even so, I would definitely houserule "being 80% gaseous" as "unable to make normal melee attacks".

You are never X% something. You are a solid until you are a gas, and vice versa.

[F.Harr]

O.K., so the Not Destroy the World side has had to take a minor set back. Not a problem, not a problem. It does rather make we wonder if Xyon and Roy are going to show up at any moment.

[Ace of Rogues]

I'd say Durkon's tactic was an attempt to highlight how much Redcloak's people stood to lose when the gods nuked the world or the Snarl got loose and that this was Redcloak's chance to get some leverage besides force of arms, which Redcloak himself basically admitted wouldn't do much long-term good. Not the worst strategy, but yeah between Redcloak's raging Sunk Cost Fallacy, general fanaticism, and the lack of any concrete proof for Durkon's claims, it was a long shot. That said, the first two of those factors were traits Durkon had no way of knowing about ahead of time, and the last was unavoidable so he just had to make the best of it. Going in to make the offer definitely wasn't the best move at this point, but if nothing else Durkon now knows he made a sincere offer to settle things peaceably and Redcloak rejected it, which clears up most of the moral ambiguity of forcing the issue at sword-point down the line.

[understatement]

I don't think he really needed to, at least not at first.

He already knew that Redcloak was trying to seize indirect control of the Snarl via the Gates; that's what Thor told him. He seems to have realized that Redcloak's goal was more than just a direct attack, because in 1206 he says Redcloack wants to "threaten" the gods, not "attack" them. Everyone involved realizes there's only one gate left and it's destruction would doom the world. And he himself already realized that destruction of the world would mean the Dark One would participate in the creation on a new one (until Thor revealed the snag in that).

Kind of, maybe.


Given all that, it's hard to see why Durkon would assume the risk of getting the world destroyed had never occurred to Redcloak and the Dark One. Yet he never really addressed that. Not in his opening pitch, and definitely not once it was clear Redcloak was willing to roll the dice if it came down to it.

He assumed that, above all else, that a person (specifically, an Evil one) has some degree of self-preservation. Redcloak is not that person.


Now this comic has more or less ignored the fundamental issue that the deaths of characters in a world where their souls are definitively given an afterlife is not automatically a bad thing when their souls are on the line. So the fact that Durkon also has to ignore that problem is par for the course (even though you'd think the lawfulest of lawful good dwarves would be the one to notice it).

Most people prefer a chance of living over dying. Durkon would certainly prefer living with his own son over both of them dying.


Still, the most fundamental aspect of negotiation is to point out that half a loaf is better than no loaf at all. And Durkon botched that because a) as he admits, he can at best offer an IOU for the quarter-loaf Redcloak already stole and b) the downside if Redcloak turns down Durkon's offer is the exact same circumstance Redcloak already has!

Hmm, that's sorta true. I feel like Durkon should have mentioned the bennies the Dark One gets if he's given a spot at the table, but then again Thor didn't really mention it either.


Seriously, Durkon's deal has absolutely no downside if it's rejected. He offered no reason to think the OotS would be able to stop Redcloak from securing the last Gate - certainly not without destroying it, which was already a known risk. He asserted that the gods would blow up the world before Redcloak's plan could succeed, but he offered no new details on that. And he decided not to mention the risk that the Dark One wouldn't survive to a new world.

All Durkon did was inform Redcloak that the Dark One's nature might be an additional bargaining chip, but that all it could buy was a better lease on what they already had. So, in essence, he revealed that Redcloak might as well play out his current hand because if things go badly wrong, at worst it's what they already expected and at best the Dark One will now have a different option to pursue instead.

Even if we had never read SoD, why would we expect Redcloak to take the deal?

What (I think) was most damning wasn't that Redcloak turned down the offer -- after all, it does get vague on promises, and Durkon didn't mention a lot of information -- it was that he decided to murder the negotiator afterward. The message is crystal-clear to Durkon and to any gods that might be watching: Redcloak says no to any attempt at peace, and killing the messenger is as strong of a message as any that he'll do the same in future attempts.

If the deal truly had been terrible, Redcloak would have still argued for it, like they did from 1206-1208. He knows that Durkon, even with his charisma in the toilet, absolutely means the best of intentions. He knows at least that the negotiations are worth haggling over. He could've told Durkon to "screw off, and I'll give you six rounds before I turn you into sauce." Nope. Straight-up murder.

[Anitar]

Now this comic has more or less ignored the fundamental issue that the deaths of characters in a world where their souls are definitively given an afterlife is not automatically a bad thing when their souls are on the line.

The comic may have ignored it, but the author hasn't. Being in any of the afterlives is significantly less than ideal; even Celestia ends with each of its resident souls reduced to a thoughtless mote of Law and Good with no personality or identity to speak of. Apparently this is already the case in (some?) canon D&D settings; and Rich chose to keep it specifically so that dying is still a bad outcome, for the sake of the story.

...Someone else can find the quote for that, I'm sure.


He could've told Durkon to "screw off, and I'll give you six rounds before I turn you into sauce."

I like this threat. I kind of want to ask permission to use/quote it elsewhere, but I don't actually have anything worth using it for.

[CriticalFailure]

Redcloak doesn't try to kill him because it was a bad offer; he does so because it was too good of one.

Although I'm not sure what Durkon was thinking either when he moved talks to mortal level.

I don’t think his offer was really too great to turn down. He basically offered trying to convince the Azurites not to take their home back, but right now they aren’t in ina position to do so anyways, so this is basically nothing. He says they will work together, but admits that he doesn’t have any way to actually get either humans or gods to agree to any concessions. So unless you trust Durkon and Thor, the offer is basically meaningless. Durkon is a generally trusting person from a Lawful Good society. Redcloak is much more jaded and not inclined to put a bunch of trust in a stranger, not to mention a barely known enemy. Redcloak has had a generally ****ty life, most of which has been spent working for a manipulative, easily bored sociopath. He’s not trusting in general, it completely makes sense for his character to keep working on the plan rather than putting his faith in an enemy and the cooperation and good will of player races and the gods, even without his need to make sure the plan was “worth it.”

[hamishspence]

Apparently this is already the case in (some?) canon D&D settings; and Rich chose to keep it specifically so that dying is still a bad outcome, for the sake of the story.

...Someone else can find the quote for that, I'm sure.



This is the thread:

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?434019-After-vs-Life

And these are the quotes:



You're saying the afterlife shouldn't have flaws, and therefore Roy should be OK with everyone dying. I'm saying that I require Roy to be not OK with everyone dying in order to continue the story, and therefore the afterlife must have flaws (and here they are). Since the goal here is for me to continue to tell the story I have imagined, my position wins.

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.
There's other quotes by The Giant in there, but these two are the ones that cover it.

[Worldsong]

IIRC Redcloak tends to tease people he gets along with. based on SOD banter seems to be his way of showing affection, he and his brother constantly tease each other. Not sure what this says about him and his weird emotional issues, but yeah.

Even better. A grump who makes snarky comments about the people he actually likes.


I don’t think his offer was really too great to turn down. He basically offered trying to convince the Azurites not to take their home back, but right now they aren’t in ina position to do so anyways, so this is basically nothing. He says they will work together, but admits that he doesn’t have any way to actually get either humans or gods to agree to any concessions. So unless you trust Durkon and Thor, the offer is basically meaningless. Durkon is a generally trusting person from a Lawful Good society. Redcloak is much more jaded and not inclined to put a bunch of trust in a stranger, not to mention a barely known enemy. Redcloak has had a generally ****ty life, most of which has been spent working for a manipulative, easily bored sociopath. He’s not trusting in general, it completely makes sense for his character to keep working on the plan rather than putting his faith in an enemy and the cooperation and good will of player races and the gods, even without his need to make sure the plan was “worth it.”

I'm somewhat confused anyone would consider "We might be able to convince those guys whose lands you've conquered to not come back" an offer that is too good to be true. Especially when the demands of the person you're negotiating with involve some kind of cosmic recognition of the plight of his people.

[Linkcat]

I don't know if this has been brought up before, but I find the 4th and 5th panels of strip 672 very amusing considering the current situation.

[Anitar]

I don't know if this has been brought up before, but I find the 4th and 5th panels of strip 672 very amusing considering the current situation.

It's been brought up that he's probably using Malack's custom Mass Death Ward (now that Malack can no longer dispel it at will due to being a pile of dust), rather than any version he created on his own.

[Mic_128]

This would be a very poor area to do that in.


You know, I've been wondering. Haley said they searched every inch of that valley before trying doors. But who would think to check the memorial itself as a possible location?

Literally everyone. "Here's hundreds of doors that the gate could be behind. Also here's this conspicuous statue." Everyone would check it first before starting to go through weeks of death traps.

[Harbajar]

Just finished yet another re-read from comic 1 and glad I did.
I also agree to the plushie idea of Greyview.
Hope they have diamonds.
Fully expecting the rest of the Order to arrive and Xykon to pop out.

[Worldsong]

You know, I've been wondering. Haley said they searched every inch of that valley before trying doors. But who would think to check the memorial itself as a possible location? Though that would render MitD's extra marks pointless...perhaps it just shows which door to choose, which might possibly reveal MitD's betrayal to Team Evil.

Given that the statue kind of stands out, lots of people on these boards have already suggested it, and Haley has pointed out that Xykon and Redcloak (mostly Redcloak) were the ones to use the shell game con the first time around... The odds are pretty high.

The odds are even higher when you remember that at the time that the statue was created the bugbear village didn't exist yet (unless the Order of the Scribble had some very strange connections). So from the perspective of the people who both erected the statue and set out to protect the rifts the statue would stand there in the middle of nowhere, practically serving as a landmark in front of Kraagor's Tomb.

For someone to not check out the statue they'd have to convince themselves that the statue is too obvious a place to hide the Gate, and be so sure of themselves that they wouldn't even bother to check because it would be beath them. Which might work if you're protecting the Gate against a specific villain who is known for delusions of grandeur, but the Order of the Scribble didn't design their defences with a specific villain in mind: their goal was to keep the Gates safe for as long as possible, both against the Snarl and anyone who might want to use the Gates/rifts.

Here's how I think the conversation would go down if one of the Scribblers had suggested using the statue to hide the gate:
1: "Hey, why don't we use Kraagor's statue to hide the Gate?"
2: "...Why?"
1: "It's out there in the open. Nobody would ever believe we'd be so careless."
2: "That's a good idea-"
1: "Thank you."
2: "Right up until someone decides they'd rather be safe than sorry."
1: "Well, I mean-"
2: "Anyone who comes all the way out here probably can afford to spend some time demolishing a statue."
1: "But what if-"
2: "A single fireball could blow it up and then the Gate is revealed."
1: "Couldn't we-"
2: "And if we made the statue out of materials that could resist attempts at removing it we might as well use 200-foot-tall flaming letters to declare we're hiding something there."
3: "...Let's just use the tomb of horrors instead."
1: "Fine. But what if someone manages to fight their way past all the monsters?"
2: "Come on, they'd have to be, like, an epic sorcerer lich with an entourage of high level minions."
1: "It could happen!"
2: "Odds are still better than that every single villain who thinks it's worth coming all the way out here can't be bothered to destroy a single statue."

[dancrilis]

In fairness while I find the idea that the statue was hidding the entrance to the true dungeon highly unlikely (to say the least) - I am not sure what odds I would give it, and one in a thousand that the Order of the Scribble did that combined with a one in a thousand that Team Evil didn't check immediately might be accurate ....

[danielxcutter]

Roy says he doesn’t want the world to end before everyone has their fill of life or something I think? It makes sense; if you’re going have a decent afterlife that’s good, but there’s nothing wrong with living a decent actual life before that isn’t it?

[mjasghar]

Roy says he doesn’t want the world to end before everyone has their fill of life or something I think? It makes sense; if you’re going have a decent afterlife that’s good, but there’s nothing wrong with living a decent actual life before that isn’t it?
That’s an issue with any apocalypse - unless you have some mass infertility plague which itself isn’t exactly fair on those effected.
Reminds of me the novel Childhood’s End

[danielxcutter]

That’s an issue with any apocalypse - unless you have some mass infertility plague which itself isn’t exactly fair on those effected.
Reminds of me the novel Childhood’s End

So... are we in agreement then? I’m not 100% sure as to the point you’re making.

[Hatu]

Kind of, maybe.
He assumed that, above all else, that a person (specifically, an Evil one) has some degree of self-preservation. Redcloak is not that person.

A bizarre expectation from someone selflessly devoted to his own deity, wouldn't you agree?




What (I think) was most damning wasn't that Redcloak turned down the offer -- after all, it does get vague on promises, and Durkon didn't mention a lot of information -- it was that he decided to murder the negotiator afterward. The message is crystal-clear to Durkon and to any gods that might be watching: Redcloak says no to any attempt at peace, and killing the messenger is as strong of a message as any that he'll do the same in future attempts.

If the deal truly had been terrible, Redcloak would have still argued for it, like they did from 1206-1208. He knows that Durkon, even with his charisma in the toilet, absolutely means the best of intentions. He knows at least that the negotiations are worth haggling over. He could've told Durkon to "screw off, and I'll give you six rounds before I turn you into sauce." Nope. Straight-up murder.
But that is absolutely the correct response to Durkon, assuming you ignore morality and just go with just cold logic.

First, because Durkon had made it clear that he had literally nothing to offer Redcloak, the negotiation was already over. That means Redcloak is back to trying to maximize the chances his original scheme works. As he says, killing Durkon is a great benefit to his odds, and surprise makes killing Durkon that much more likely. It's ruthless, sure, but that's what evil is all about.

Second, because Durkon's parley never set any actual conditions for what happened if the two failed to reach an accord. Again, Durkon was so blinded by the need for this scheme to work that he didn't really think out what would happen if it didn't. Durkon might have expected safe passage back to his party if Reedcloak turned down the offer, but Redcloak was under no obligation to honor that. After all the legal loopholes in the last book, that's something Durkon should have seen coming.

But third and most important, Durkon's own argument illustrated why Redcloak would suffer no consequences for this 'treachery.' Normally the downside to this sort of thing is that future opponents won't risk negotiating with you.

While it was played for laughs in the comic, Redcloak points out that Durkon's very presence is an indication that the Dark One's plan to force the gods to the negotiating table is actually working. That means that how they feel about Redcloak is irrelevant, the conditions on the ground alone are what matter.

And, as I said before, Durkon also revealed that the Dark One's nature was uniquely valuable to the gods for some reason. This again underlines that even if Redcloak burns bridges now and the plan winds up failing, the Dark One will still have something of value to offer and the gods will not want to just kill him in retaliation.

So in the end, I don't think Redcloak's sudden attack has anything to do with his pent up issues. I think it was a logical and highly predictable outcome of the situation Durkon set up. Which is why I feel I must give him so much flak over it.

[KorvinStarmast]

You are never X% something. You are a solid until you are a gas, and vice versa. Sublimation?

The characters know they're in a comic, so I think Durkon was trying to move the plot along so the readers don't have to sit through ten more strips of the order scouting the outpost. Fair point.

Redcloak has had a generally ****ty life, most of which has been spent working for a manipulative, easily bored sociopath. Hmm, I expect that a variety of people can identify what that situation. :smallcool:

I also agree to the plushie idea of Greyview. I think I'd get one.

[pendell]

Redcloak doesn't try to kill him because it was a bad offer; he does so because it was too good of one.

Although I'm not sure what Durkon was thinking either when he moved talks to mortal level.

Please explain your reasoning for the offer being "too good to be true".

Because when I read the negotiation, here is what I saw (from Redcloak's point of view):

:durkon: : "We want ye to give up all ye have worked so hard to obtain in exchange for vague promises from the same human kingdoms who have proven themselves both treacherous and genocidal in the past. Promises which they have not empowered me to make."

I wouldn't have taken that deal either. I wouldn't have tried to kill Durkon during Parley -- Peter Jackson nothwithstanding, that's an evil act -- but I would have told him to come back when he had something tangible to offer.

Humans are a pretty mixed bag. Redcloak could deal honorably enough with Hinjo, but there's no guarantee that would be binding on Hinjo's successor. If Hinjo were to concede the city he is supposed to be ruling, it's quite likely he would be deposed as the ruler by the rest of the nobles, who would view the action as dishonorable.

And of course the Tarquins, Nales, and Xykons of the world don't need any excuse to be treacherous or to take over countries that don't belong to them.

Redcloak is right: Goblins are going to have to fight for their place in the sun and, if they DO agree to negotiations, they have to be backed by effective guarantees, not mere promises.

After all, from his perspective in sod

The last time the Dark One tried honest negotiation he was assassinated during parley. The humans/elves/dwarves will speak softly until they can safely kill the dark one, at which point status quo ante will resume


Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Jason]

So in the end, I don't think Redcloak's sudden attack has anything to do with his pent up issues. I think it was a logical and highly predictable outcome of the situation Durkon set up. Which is why I feel I must give him so much flak over it.
You think Red Cloak's pent up issues had nothing to do with how he responded to Durkon's offer?
I think you've laid out some fairly logical rationalizations for why Red Cloak would act as he did, but I think that his "pent up issues" are the real reasons he chose to act as he did. Because choosing to support his obsession with being right and then rationalizing it after the fact is what RC has always done.

[Jacky720]

Ceding title to Azure City is worthless to Redcloak
I know there are other issues with Durkon's offer, but consider this:
:redcloak: Do you think for one second that I'm not fully aware of what the Azurites will do to us to get their land back, the moment they have the strength to try? (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1209.html)
So yeah, that is one of the things Redcloak wants.

[Worldsong]

You think Red Cloak's pent up issues had nothing to do with how he responded to Durkon's offer?
I think you've laid out some fairly logical rationalizations for why Red Cloak would act as he did, but I think that his "pent up issues" are the real reasons he chose to act as he did. Because choosing to support his obsession with being right and then rationalizing it after the fact is what RC has always done.

Out of curiosity, how could one disprove to you the idea that Redcloak's decision was based on his pent up issues rather than it being the rational response to Durkon's half-assed proposal?

This is an honest question. If an emotional response and a logical response result in the same action, how can you tell whether it was emotion or logic that influenced someone's decision?

We could point at Redcloak's issues and claim that it's his emotions controlling his behaviour right now, but we could also point at his overall behaviour, of someone who prefers strategy and orderly planning, to say it's logic which dictated that he should try to get rid of Durkon as quickly as possible.

[Ghosty]

In fairness while I find the idea that the statue was hidding the entrance to the true dungeon highly unlikely (to say the least) - I am not sure what odds I would give it, and one in a thousand that the Order of the Scribble did that combined with a one in a thousand that Team Evil didn't check immediately might be accurate ....

So you're saying, a chance like that succeeds...9 times out of 10?

Damn, I miss the guy.

I still think the Gate isn't behind any of the doors at all, but instead behind a panel of stone in that valley, somewhere, that looks like every other piece of valley wall. I would have had though, each of the doors lead to a separate chunk of Plot Coupon, like a scepter broken into 100 pieces, with each fight giving you one piece of the total key. The 'scepter' may be completely worthless, may have powers after each X percentage of it's been put together. Give the challengers to the Gate some false idea of how far they're progressing.

Obviously this story isn't working that way, but hiding the Gate somewhere other than behind a door fits in with how I'd think a Rogue thinks, while still having the Mother of All Dungeon Crawls to honor Kraggor.

[CriticalFailure]

Out of curiosity, how could one disprove to you the idea that Redcloak's decision was based on his pent up issues rather than it being the rational response to Durkon's half-assed proposal?

This is an honest question. If an emotional response and a logical response result in the same action, how can you tell whether it was emotion or logic that influenced someone's decision?

We could point at Redcloak's issues and claim that it's his emotions controlling his behaviour right now, but we could also point at his overall behaviour, of someone who prefers strategy and orderly planning, to say it's logic which dictated that he should try to get rid of Durkon as quickly as possible.

I tend to agree that Redcloak’s decision is largely logically motivated. However, it seems clear that his emotional motivations are at least somewhat on his mind based on what he says to Durkon as he attacks him. Also, he looks pretty conflicted in panel 20 of 1209.

[understatement]

First:


I like this threat. I kind of want to ask permission to use/quote it elsewhere, but I don't actually have anything worth using it for.

I probably cribbed it off from all those death threats they make on movies or something, but yeah! Go ahead.

Since the following are pretty much all the same vein of thought:


I don’t think his offer was really too great to turn down. He basically offered trying to convince the Azurites not to take their home back, but right now they aren’t in ina position to do so anyways, so this is basically nothing. He says they will work together, but admits that he doesn’t have any way to actually get either humans or gods to agree to any concessions. So unless you trust Durkon and Thor, the offer is basically meaningless. Durkon is a generally trusting person from a Lawful Good society. Redcloak is much more jaded and not inclined to put a bunch of trust in a stranger, not to mention a barely known enemy. Redcloak has had a generally ****ty life, most of which has been spent working for a manipulative, easily bored sociopath. He’s not trusting in general, it completely makes sense for his character to keep working on the plan rather than putting his faith in an enemy and the cooperation and good will of player races and the gods, even without his need to make sure the plan was “worth it.”



I'm somewhat confused anyone would consider "We might be able to convince those guys whose lands you've conquered to not come back" an offer that is too good to be true. Especially when the demands of the person you're negotiating with involve some kind of cosmic recognition of the plight of his people.

OK, so, when I said the "offer too good instead of bad" I was actually angling for some rhetoric flair, which fell miserably on its face.

I am working off the assumption that Redcloak hates the Plan, because he sacrificed so much for it, and that he hates Xykon, so he would like to "cease cooperation" with the murdeous skeleton at a certain point. You're right in that Durkon's negotiations were maybe too vague, or not exactly enforceable. But by killing him, instantly, without warning, Redcloak is essentially saying "don't ever send me negotiations again."


A bizarre expectation from someone selflessly devoted to his own deity, wouldn't you agree?

More of that Durkon is bewildered why Redcloak would go such a long way to conquer a city and then come up to the North Pole, but then decide to pull the plug anyway.


But that is absolutely the correct response to Durkon, assuming you ignore morality and just go with just cold logic.

First, because Durkon had made it clear that he had literally nothing to offer Redcloak, the negotiation was already over. That means Redcloak is back to trying to maximize the chances his original scheme works. As he says, killing Durkon is a great benefit to his odds, and surprise makes killing Durkon that much more likely. It's ruthless, sure, but that's what evil is all about.

Second, because Durkon's parley never set any actual conditions for what happened if the two failed to reach an accord. Again, Durkon was so blinded by the need for this scheme to work that he didn't really think out what would happen if it didn't. Durkon might have expected safe passage back to his party if Reedcloak turned down the offer, but Redcloak was under no obligation to honor that. After all the legal loopholes in the last book, that's something Durkon should have seen coming.

But third and most important, Durkon's own argument illustrated why Redcloak would suffer no consequences for this 'treachery.' Normally the downside to this sort of thing is that future opponents won't risk negotiating with you.

While it was played for laughs in the comic, Redcloak points out that Durkon's very presence is an indication that the Dark One's plan to force the gods to the negotiating table is actually working. That means that how they feel about Redcloak is irrelevant, the conditions on the ground alone are what matter.

And, as I said before, Durkon also revealed that the Dark One's nature was uniquely valuable to the gods for some reason. This again underlines that even if Redcloak burns bridges now and the plan winds up failing, the Dark One will still have something of value to offer and the gods will not want to just kill him in retaliation.

So in the end, I don't think Redcloak's sudden attack has anything to do with his pent up issues. I think it was a logical and highly predictable outcome of the situation Durkon set up. Which is why I feel I must give him so much flak over it.

The point is, by killing Durkon (well, almost) Redcloak is also cutting off any future negotiations with him, ever. It's pretty much him saying "my Plan or the highway." If Durkon (and Minrah) had died here, it's quite possible the gods would've decided to blow the world there and then.

I'm mostly basing my judgement off the panel where Redcloak closes his eye. That is as clear of a sign of regret/self-loathing as it can get, which is not something he'd feel if the negotiations were terminally terrible.


<respectful snip>
I wouldn't have taken that deal either. I wouldn't have tried to kill Durkon during Parley -- Peter Jackson nothwithstanding, that's an evil act -- but I would have told him to come back when he had something tangible to offer.


It's not him turning down the offer that shows all his pent-up emotional issues, it's him killing the messenger after.

[Worldsong]

I tend to agree that Redcloak’s decision is largely logically motivated. However, it seems clear that his emotional motivations are at least somewhat on his mind based on what he says to Durkon as he attacks him. Also, he looks pretty conflicted in panel 20 of 1209.

His emotions definitely play a part, but that doesn't mean that the course of action he takes isn't based on what rationally speaking makes sense to him. Saying that all the logical reasons are mere rationalizations sounds... dismissive. The implication is made that the only way you can prove yourself to be logical is if your actions go in direct disagreement with your desires, which would paradoxically mean your actions are no longer logical because you're prioritizing proving yourself to be logical over choosing whatever course of action actually makes sense.

EDIT:

OK, so, when I said the "offer too good instead of bad" I was actually angling for some rhetoric flair, which fell miserably on its face.

I am working off the assumption that Redcloak hates the Plan, because he sacrificed so much for it, and that he hates Xykon, so he would like to "cease cooperation" with the murdeous skeleton at a certain point. You're right in that Durkon's negotiations were maybe too vague, or not exactly enforceable. But by killing him, instantly, without warning, Redcloak is essentially saying "don't ever send me negotiations again."

The point is, by killing Durkon (well, almost) Redcloak is also cutting off any future negotiations with him, ever. It's pretty much him saying "my Plan or the highway." If Durkon (and Minrah) had died here, it's quite possible the gods would've decided to blow the world there and then.

I'm mostly basing my judgement off the panel where Redcloak closes his eye. That is as clear of a sign of regret/self-loathing as it can get, which is not something he'd feel if the negotiations were terminally terrible.

It's not him turning down the offer that shows all his pent-up emotional issues, it's him killing the messenger after.

I'm not sure Redcloak outright hates the Plan. He's doing his best to convince himself that the Plan is the only way to achieve what he wants, but if he were completely honest I'd imagine he'd say that it stopped being about the Plan a long time ago.

That aside, I think part of the disagreement here is caused by a different perspective on the concept of death in a DnD-like setting. Senseless killing is still Evil without a shadow of a doubt but using death as a way to deal with your problems is a lot easier to justify than it would be in our world (otherwise the entire Adventurer profession wouldn't really work).

Also keep in mind that Redcloak's killing of Durkon is heavily influened by the fact that if Durkon is allowed to walk away from these negotiations alive he's all but certain to try and interfere with the Plan again. Redcloak's actions are motivated by more than just the negotiations. It's entirely possible that if Durkon actually was some random cleric with no prior history of interference that Redcloak would just have told him to bugger off.

On top of that Redcloak isn't negotiating with Durkon. He's negotiating with the gods. Durkon is just their servant, at least from Redcloak's perspective. Killing Durkon isn't the same as saying 'I will never accept negotiations'. It's more telling the gods that 1) they need to come up with a better offer, and 2) their messenger was a known enemy of Redcloak's, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that the goblin would resort to dusting him afterwards.

Redcloak is certainly playing hardball but he's not shutting down negotations forever, he's treating Durkon as just one of the gods' potential messengers.

EDIT2: If you think about it killing Durkon serves an additional purpose: checking the sincerity of the gods. Durkon comes with a story about saving the world from the Snarl forever, a once in a lifetime opportunity even for the infinite lifetimes of the gods. If one dead mortal already causes the gods to give up on negotiating that's a strong indicator that Durkon was spouting nonsense.

Redcloak approaches life from the perspective that sacrifices are worth it as long as the objective is achieved. He doesn't have much reason to believe the gods would think differently.

[happycrow]

I have the urge to add "Oona is not having compelling reason to not be killing them, and little bald man in red cape did say please. Good manners are being rewarded!" to the quote page of Tvtropes' Affably evil page.

I had precisely the same thought. Oona is not a nice person, but she does have a specific charm to her.

[Jason]

Out of curiosity, how could one disprove to you the idea that Redcloak's decision was based on his pent up issues rather than it being the rational response to Durkon's half-assed proposal?

This is an honest question. If an emotional response and a logical response result in the same action, how can you tell whether it was emotion or logic that influenced someone's decision?

We could point at Redcloak's issues and claim that it's his emotions controlling his behaviour right now, but we could also point at his overall behaviour, of someone who prefers strategy and orderly planning, to say it's logic which dictated that he should try to get rid of Durkon as quickly as possible.
I can't think of anything that is likely to convince me otherwise, given Red Cloak's history. If villains acted completely logically and made wise choices without their own flaws affecting them then they wouldn't be villains. I think we will reach the point in the comic where Red Cloak himself finally is forced to face that he has not been acting rationally, but out of emotion and completely selfish motivations - in short, that he was wrong. We're not at that point yet, so he can continue to rationalize for the moment.

It did make logical sense for Red Cloak to attack Durkon once Red Cloak had decided to reject Durkon's offer. It is the choice to reject the offer that was irrational. Consider that Durkon's offer was the first and only offer RC has ever received to open peaceful negotiations with leaders of the other races.

The question wasn't whether Durkon could actually deliver everything RC wants, it was whether RC was willing to take an opportunity to communicate his grievances and work with the other races towards a mutual solution. His answer was a very firm "no".

[danielxcutter]

I had precisely the same thought. Oona is not a nice person, but she does have a specific charm to her.

It’s why everyone liked Thog, except a bit smarter.

[understatement]

I'd like to point out that nothing about Durkon's offer requires him dropping the Plan and kicking it away...just putting it "on hold," at the very least.

[Doug Lampert]

I'd like to point out that nothing about Durkon's offer requires him dropping the Plan and kicking it away...just putting it "on hold," at the very least.

Xykon has decided that the plan takes priority over the needs of the goblins (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0662.html).

RC can't just put the plan on hold for the good of goblinkind. Not unless he's willing to do something about X, which runs squarely into his sunken costs.

[Oxenstierna]

“So now, for certain gameplay mechanics your complex, interesting characters will have to be assigned an alignment. It’s clearly a simplification, so…”

Players: “Yay! Structure.” “Structure make roleplay easy.”

“Okay, that’s not really what is intended…”

Players: “Every action taken and sentence spoken will be alignment compliant!”

“You really shouldn’t feel constrained…”

Player1: “My character will be a goblin!”
Players: “Ooooh, evil!”
Player1: “Who wants to save the children.”
Players: “Yay, good!”
Player1: “And will break any rule…”
Players: “Ooooh, chaotic!”
Player1: “To establish a better society!”
Players: “Yay, lawful!”
Player1: “And loves spicy salsa!”
Players: “Ooooh, chaotic!”
Player2: “My paladin smites the salsa! You will all eat plain chips under my leadership.”
Player3: ”My predictably secretly evil thief will predictably secretly betray the party!”

“Okay, that’s not typically fun for everyone else. Besides, in history, many evil people build up a loyal base of friends and followers. They’re not evil to everyone.”

Player3: “By buying decaf!”

*sigh* “It’s nighttime and the party are camping in the wilderness. The dying embers from the fire cast a faint glow in the clearing. Whoever takes first shift on night watch, sip that decaf if you want, and make a roll to stay awake…”

[Drake Halfmoon]

So either the dwarves get captured or the rest of the Order arrives to save the day...

OR

The Monster In The Darkness somehow helps them escape.

[dancrilis]

So either the dwarves get captured or the rest of the Order arrives to save the day...

OR

The Monster In The Darkness somehow helps them escape.

Team Evil are not trying to capture them.

There is the option that one of them dies and the other escapes (possible with the body).

[understatement]

Xykon has decided that the plan takes priority over the needs of the goblins (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0662.html).

RC can't just put the plan on hold for the good of goblinkind. Not unless he's willing to do something about X, which runs squarely into his sunken costs.

Oh right, yeah. Xykon wasn't even mentioned in the negotiations at all.

Back to the original point made by Hatu, then Durkon truly couldn't have known the 'right' thing to say at all.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I'm not sure there actually is a right thing to say. The real negotiations are on a deific level, given the scale of the issues involved. And The Dark One probably won't believe much of anything the other gods say until his own ego-wall is shattered.

[Gallowglass]

Out of curiosity, how could one disprove to you the idea that Redcloak's decision was based on his pent up issues rather than it being the rational response to Durkon's half-assed proposal?


Well, for me, you'd have to go back and rewrite the history of the comic to portray Redcloak as something other than someone who *thinks* he makes rational logical decisions when he is actually making irrational decisions based on his pent up issues.

His entire history and behavior for the past 1200+ strips have shown him consistently to be the one, not the other.

Not that I don't believe that he's building up to a moment of self-realization as his emotional apex of his story.

Although there does seem to be a rather large contingent of readers who seem to bend over backwards to find ways to believe the sky is orange when its blue, to the point of dismissing the author's word when he steps in to say "no, it's really blue"

[Hatu]

Oh right, yeah. Xykon wasn't even mentioned in the negotiations at all.

Back to the original point made by Hatu, then Durkon truly couldn't have known the 'right' thing to say at all.
I would put it slightly differently.

With so many unknowns and so much distrust already between him and Redcloak, the odds that this parley would end in a signed deal were always near zero. So the real goal should have been about building bridges and getting Redcloak to start thinking about the situation in a new way. That way the NEXT parley might actually have a shot.

(That, incidentally, is why I think Durkon was right to defy Roy and start negotiating as soon as possible.)

Durkon did about as good a job building bridges as he could have. But he did too little to reframe the topic for Redcloak. And it seems to have never occurred to him that if this meeting ended without a deal Redcloak would have a very strong encentive to kill Durkon before he could rejoin the OotS.

In short, I think Durkon assumed that he could make this parley succeed if he tried hard enough, and thus had no real plans for what to do if Redcloak turned him down (even regretfully).

I find that frustrating from a character who should be wiser than that.

-H

[understatement]

I'm not sure there actually is a right thing to say. The real negotiations are on a deific level, given the scale of the issues involved. And The Dark One probably won't believe much of anything the other gods say until his own ego-wall is shattered.

Which sorta makes me wonder 2 things: why Redcloak accepted the negotiations in the first place, if he was already so dead-set on the Plan, and what Durkon expected Redcloak to do at the very table.

[pendell]

Team Evil are not trying to capture them.

There is the option that one of them dies and the other escapes (possible with the body).

The quote that rings in my ears from "Goblet of Fire" is : "Kill the Spare!" :smallamused:

If I had to guess , the "spare" who will be killed is Minrah. She existed to give the Order a cleric back when Durkon was vamped, and now that Durkon is back, we need to find some way to remove her from the party. If it makes the stakes seem more real by killing off a character in the process, that's a bonus from a storytelling perspective.

I also don't think that , if we're to lose one of the characters, that it will be the one we just devoted an entire book , and six years of real time , to fleshing out. It would seem very anticlimactic to deadify him so quickly right after bringing him back with so much fanfare.

I suppose it's possible they will both escape alive , and I won't feel sorry if they do. I want to see more Minrah! But I can't believe the clerics can take such an awful risk and not pay SOME consequence. A few damage marks which will be easily healed when they rest and regain their spells just doesn't seem like enough of a consequence.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[dancrilis]

I suppose it's possible they will both escape alive , and I won't feel sorry if they do. I want to see more Minrah! But I can't believe the clerics can take such an awful risk and not pay SOME consequence. A few damage marks which will be easily healed when they rest and regain their spells just doesn't seem like enough of a consequence.


I was thinking a few pages ago that Minrah could die, Durkon could escape with her remains - this could act as a bit of character development for Durkon (similiar to how Roy considering his own death as a nuisance but Durkon's death nearly broke him - a whole burden of command thing), Minrah could then be brought back (after following up with Thor) and so stay in the story as someone new for The Giant to have around.

[Jason]

Well, for me, you'd have to go back and rewrite the history of the comic to portray Redcloak as something other than someone who *thinks* he makes rational logical decisions when he is actually making irrational decisions based on his pent up issues.

His entire history and behavior for the past 1200+ strips have shown him consistently to be the one, not the other.

Not that I don't believe that he's building up to a moment of self-realization as his emotional apex of his story.
Amen.
Only I would add that Red Cloak is aware on some level that this (rationalizing his irrational decisions) is what he is doing, much though he tries to hide it from himself, which is one reason why it makes him very angry when someone accuses him of being irrational. It's also why he has a moment of regret/self-hatred right before he tries to Implode Durkon.

[Worldsong]

I can't think of anything that is likely to convince me otherwise, given Red Cloak's history. If villains acted completely logically and made wise choices without their own flaws affecting them then they wouldn't be villains. I think we will reach the point in the comic where Red Cloak himself finally is forced to face that he has not been acting rationally, but out of emotion and completely selfish motivations - in short, that he was wrong. We're not at that point yet, so he can continue to rationalize for the moment.

It did make logical sense for Red Cloak to attack Durkon once Red Cloak had decided to reject Durkon's offer. It is the choice to reject the offer that was irrational. Consider that Durkon's offer was the first and only offer RC has ever received to open peaceful negotiations with leaders of the other races.

The question wasn't whether Durkon could actually deliver everything RC wants, it was whether RC was willing to take an opportunity to communicate his grievances and work with the other races towards a mutual solution. His answer was a very firm "no".

This sounds a lot like 'if people were rational and logical they wouldn't be villains'. Never really got on board with that idea.

Also, the offer was half-assed. Accepting it purely because it's the first time someone has made him an offer would, from my perspective, have been the more emotional response since you'd be basing your decision off of the fact someone is finally making you an offer, instead of judging whether it's a good offer you can work with.

And Redcloak isn't in a situation where he can settle into extended debates with the hope that maybe he gets something good out of it and voice his grievances with the opposition. The Plan is currently in motion, he can't stop it because Xykon is present. Either Durkon can present him an offer which is workable as-is or Redcloak has to reject it because the circumstances don't allow for him to work this through at a steady pace.


I'd like to point out that nothing about Durkon's offer requires him dropping the Plan and kicking it away...just putting it "on hold," at the very least.


Xykon has decided that the plan takes priority over the needs of the goblins (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0662.html).

RC can't just put the plan on hold for the good of goblinkind. Not unless he's willing to do something about X, which runs squarely into his sunken costs.


Oh right, yeah. Xykon wasn't even mentioned in the negotiations at all.

Back to the original point made by Hatu, then Durkon truly couldn't have known the 'right' thing to say at all.

Yeah, Xykon is kind of the ultimate block here. For one thing getting rid of him is much easier said than done, even if Redcloak did side with the Order. And Redcloak isn't going to agree to getting rid of Xykon until he already knows for a fact that he can get what he wants without Xykon, because Xykon is fundamental for his fallback plan if negotiations don't work out.


Well, for me, you'd have to go back and rewrite the history of the comic to portray Redcloak as something other than someone who *thinks* he makes rational logical decisions when he is actually making irrational decisions based on his pent up issues.

His entire history and behavior for the past 1200+ strips have shown him consistently to be the one, not the other.

Not that I don't believe that he's building up to a moment of self-realization as his emotional apex of his story.

Although there does seem to be a rather large contingent of readers who seem to bend over backwards to find ways to believe the sky is orange when its blue, to the point of dismissing the author's word when he steps in to say "no, it's really blue"

I'm pretty sure The Giant has never stated that every decision Redcloak makes is irrational and based on emotion.

Yes Redcloak has a boatload of emotional baggage and yes said baggage does often force his hand. That doesn't mean he can't also make decisions where even an outsider has to admit that, given the circumstances, those decisions make sense.

If giving Redcloak more personality and depth than a pancake counts as bending over backwards, then I guess I'm forming a backwards loop. Which I'm fine with because with those conditions backwards looping seems like the reasonable thing to do.

[Jason]

Yeah, Xykon is kind of the ultimate block here. For one thing getting rid of him is much easier said than done, even if Redcloak did side with the Order. And Redcloak isn't going to agree to getting rid of Xykon until he already knows for a fact that he can get what he wants without Xykon, because Xykon is fundamental for his fallback plan if negotiations don't work out.Sooner or later Red Cloak is going to have to deal with Xykon. If he is in fact rational and logical about it then he must have a plan for doing so. Accepting an offer to work with the other races from Durkon merely requires him to move up his timetable for destroying the lich. Oh, and abandon the Plan that has been a lifelong obsession for him.


I'm pretty sure The Giant has never stated that every decision Redcloak makes is irrational and based on emotion.Of course not every decision Red Cloak has made is irrational, just the most important ones.

[Jasdoif]

With so many unknowns and so much distrust already between him and Redcloak, the odds that this parley would end in a signed deal were always near zero. So the real goal should have been about building bridges and getting Redcloak to start thinking about the situation in a new way. That way the NEXT parley might actually have a shot.Seems to me like learning some of those unknowns, to hopefully identify what the heck Redcloak might (and might not) see as a bridge, would be more immediately helpful...and hey, Durkon made some headway there.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'm not sure there actually is a right thing to say. The real negotiations are on a deific level, given the scale of the issues involved. And The Dark One probably won't believe much of anything the other gods say until his own ego-wall is shattered. This.

Which sorta makes me wonder 2 things: why Redcloak accepted the negotiations in the first place, if he was already so dead-set on the Plan, and what Durkon expected Redcloak to do at the very table. Durkon's "it can't hurt to try" and "Thor wants me to" juxtaposed with Redcloak's "Yeah, I figured the gods would eventually send someone, but I was expecting someone taller."
But here's the catch as I see it: Durkon cannot honestly be said to be representing the gods. He can only (at best) represent Thor, who'd still have to sell any deal to the rest of them. Durkon had an uphill battle from word one.

She existed to give the Order a cleric back when Durkon was vamped, and now that Durkon is back , we need to find some way to remove her from the party. If it makes the stake It appears to me that she also exists to act as a foil for Belkar's character growth.

[Worldsong]

Sooner or later Red Cloak is going to have to deal with Xykon. If he is in fact rational and logical about it then he must have a plan for doing so. Accepting an offer to work with the other races from Durkon merely requires him to move up his timetable for destroying the lich. Oh, and abandon the Plan that has been a lifelong obsession for him.

Of course not every decision Red Cloak has made is irrational, just the most important ones.

Redcloak does have to deal with Xykon at some point, but I'd call it presumptuous to say that teaming up with Durkon under the current circumstances would have been the smartest way to go about it. Especially since accepting Durkon's offer wouldn't give him what he's aiming for, even if he did abandon the Plan and focus purely on giving goblinoids a better life.

Just to make it clear, so far as I'm concerned Durkon's offer was bad. It wasn't even well thought out, his entire spiel came down to relying on goodwill and the suggestion that the Azurites aren't going to try and take back the city they don't have the resources or manpower to take back anyway. His offer might have worked if the two factions were on reasonable terms. Redcloak refusing the offer is fair game because he needs something more solid than merely an opportunity to talk with the PC races. The same way that the good guys don't trust Redcloak he has no reason to trust the good guys.

And it's not even like all the PC races or established nations are good guys.

[Jason]

Redcloak does have to deal with Xykon at some point, but I'd call it presumptuous to say that teaming up with Durkon under the current circumstances would have been the smartest way to go about it. Especially since accepting Durkon's offer wouldn't give him what he's aiming for, even if he did abandon the Plan and focus purely on giving goblinoids a better life.If he has been rational and logical about it, then Red Cloak's plan for dealing with Xykon must involve only Red Cloak, and must be ready to execute as soon as they find the gate and complete the ritual. Since searching for the gate has been Team Evil's occupation since they left Gobbotopia, it must be already primed and ready to go as soon as Red Cloak decides to carry it out.
That's all assuming that Red Cloak is acting rationally.


Just to make it clear, so far as I'm concerned Durkon's offer was bad.Yeah, I get that. You're right, it wasn't a great offer. But first offers in any negotiation are seldom great. What Durkon was really offering was a chance to be heard and negotiate with the leaders of the people who could give security to Gobbotopia, with his support as a high-level priest of Thor. His offer was really just to start negotiations. Red Cloak decided not to even try to have an honest negotiation with the leaders of the other races.

[Worldsong]

If he has been rational and logical about it, then Red Cloak's plan for dealing with Xykon must involve only Red Cloak, and must be ready to execute as soon as they find the gate and complete the ritual. Since searching for the gate has been Team Evil's occupation since they left Gobbotopia, it must be already primed and ready to go as soon as Red Cloak decides to carry it out.
That's all assuming that Red Cloak is acting rationally.

I believe The Giant has stated at some point that the ritual would take a while, and Redcloak might have based his plan around having that time. The point is that there's many potential variables and I don't think Redcloak has a kill switch for the moment he decides he doesn't need to put up with Xykon anymore. Of course the most rational course of action would be to abandon The Plan and run away from Xykon as quickly as possible, but just because Redcloak is irrational about his dedication to the Plan doesn't mean he can't make rational decisions within the confines of the Plan.

Also it's entirely possible that Redcloak's plan for dealing with Xykon is completing the ritual and making an attempt at killing Xykon once the ritual is complete... but with him having no complaints if Xykon kills him instead. The goal of the Plan is to complete the ritual and give the Dark One control over the Gate: destroying Xykon is not actually one of his primary objectives.


Yeah, I get that. You're right, it wasn't a great offer. But first offers in any negotiation are seldom great. What Durkon was really offering was a chance to be heard and negotiate with the leaders of the people who could give security to Gobbotopia, with his support as a high-level priest of Thor. His offer was really just to start negotiations. Red Cloak decided not to even try to have an honest negotiation with the leaders of the other races.

Under normal circumstances I would agree, but the circumstances aren't normal. Redcloak doesn't have the time for extended negotiations, and we can't assume that Xykon can just be brushed aside the moment he's no longer needed. Epic sorcerer lich is serious business.

Also it's an exaggeration to say that Durkon could arrange serious negotiations with the leaders of the other races. Durkon is acting in the service of Thor (and Loki kind of) and he's friends with Hinjo. That's it. That's all he has. That falls far short from what Redcloak needs. Yes they could maybe build up to the rest but that falls in the category of goodwill, trust and vague hopes from a single dwarf, whereas Redcloak needs something more concrete before he can say that it's a fair alternative to the Plan.

[Jason]

Also it's entirely possible that Redcloak's plan for dealing with Xykon is completing the ritual and making an attempt at killing Xykon once the ritual is complete... but with him having no complaints if Xykon kills him instead. The goal of the Plan is to complete the ritual and give the Dark One control over the Gate: destroying Xykon is not actually one of his primary objectives.
I agree that it may be "this might work, but if it doesn't then I will have still succeeded at the Plan even if Xykon kills me."
But destroying Xykon after the Plan is achieved is one of Red Cloak's primary objectives.

[CriticalFailure]

Rational reasoning and emotional motivation aren’t mutually exclusive. He can be fairly rational and still be influenced by emotion. In fact, I would argue that a lot of his story actually deals with how fuzzy the line between rationality and rationalization can be and how hard it can be to detect the subtle influence of emotion. imo just declaring Redcloak to be irrational and driven by emotion is missing the point.

[KorvinStarmast]

I believe The Giant has stated at some point that the ritual would take a while, and Redcloak might have based his plan around having that time. Either a week or a couple of weeks, but I don't remember where he pointed that out. I think it was in comic after Azure City was conquered.

[dancrilis]

Either a week or a couple of weeks, but I don't remember where he pointed that out. I think it was in comic after Azure City was conquered.

Before actually, panel 7 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0416.html).

Edit: Which I suppose brings to mind a question I had a while ago, would it have been better for all concerned if Azure City had merely ceded the thrown room to Redcloak and Xykon, the ritual would be completed a while ago and depending on what it actually does a lot more people would still be alive.

[Anitar]

So, I've seen a lot of people looking for/theorizing about some kind of twisty twist regarding the search to find Kraagor's Gate. But all of those people have been concerned with where the gate is actually located, and right now I just thought of a different kind of twist.

By some method or another, the characters eventually find the gate. Only the gate. Nothing else. The rift is gone; the gate isn't binding anything anymore. That'd throw a "there's a planet inside the rifts"-sized wrench into everyone's intentions; and just like said planet, the surprise could be justified by the gods' inability to look through the gates and into the Snarl's jail-plane.

Just a thought. Plausible? I don't know. Interesting? Definitely.

[understatement]

I believe The Giant has stated at some point that the ritual would take a while, and Redcloak might have based his plan around having that time. The point is that there's many potential variables and I don't think Redcloak has a kill switch for the moment he decides he doesn't need to put up with Xykon anymore. Of course the most rational course of action would be to abandon The Plan and run away from Xykon as quickly as possible, but just because Redcloak is irrational about his dedication to the Plan doesn't mean he can't make rational decisions within the confines of the Plan.

Also it's entirely possible that Redcloak's plan for dealing with Xykon is completing the ritual and making an attempt at killing Xykon once the ritual is complete... but with him having no complaints if Xykon kills him instead. The goal of the Plan is to complete the ritual and give the Dark One control over the Gate: destroying Xykon is not actually one of his primary objectives.



Under normal circumstances I would agree, but the circumstances aren't normal. Redcloak doesn't have the time for extended negotiations, and we can't assume that Xykon can just be brushed aside the moment he's no longer needed. Epic sorcerer lich is serious business.

Also it's an exaggeration to say that Durkon could arrange serious negotiations with the leaders of the other races. Durkon is acting in the service of Thor (and Loki kind of) and he's friends with Hinjo. That's it. That's all he has. That falls far short from what Redcloak needs. Yes they could maybe build up to the rest but that falls in the category of goodwill, trust and vague hopes from a single dwarf, whereas Redcloak needs something more concrete before he can say that it's a fair alternative to the Plan.

Hmm. I think you've mentioned before that you hadn't read SOD, so for spoilers:


Redcloak tells his brother that their god will take care of Xykon when the time comes.


Durkon's not asking for an answer of "Yes" or "No" (and even if he was, he doesn't really have the clericpower to enforce it, so RC's not in peril or under duress). He's asking that Redcloak have this route of negotiations to haggle over, as a clear alternative to the plan. In essence (and what Jason said), saying yes to more negotiations.


Rational reasoning and emotional motivation aren’t mutually exclusive. He can be fairly rational and still be influenced by emotion. In fact, I would argue that a lot of his story actually deals with how fuzzy the line between rationality and rationalization can be and how hard it can be to detect the subtle influence of emotion. imo just declaring Redcloak to be irrational and driven by emotion is missing the point.

Seems about right, yeah. If I had to simplify it I'd say Redcloak's making rational decisions (in his mind) over something that wasn't a logical situation in the first place.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Which sorta makes me wonder 2 things: why Redcloak accepted the negotiations in the first place, if he was already so dead-set on the Plan, and what Durkon expected Redcloak to do at the very table.

Redcloak is Lawful. He follows the rules. And the Rules of Drama say there's always an attempt at negotiation before the final battle. Elan would be proud.

What did Durkon expect? Honestly, it pretty much looks like he just expected Redcloak to roll over at the first alternate option to The Plan. Showing again how bad his CHA is, because he doesn't get how people work at all.

[Jacky720]

Just to make it clear, so far as I'm concerned Durkon's offer was bad. It wasn't even well thought out, his entire spiel came down to relying on goodwill and the suggestion that the Azurites aren't going to try and take back the city they don't have the resources or manpower to take back anyway.
Let me repeat:

I know there are other issues with Durkon's offer, but consider this:
:redcloak: Do you think for one second that I'm not fully aware of what the Azurites will do to us to get their land back, the moment they have the strength to try? (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1209.html)
So yeah, that is one of the things Redcloak wants.
As said before: Gobbotopia is crusade bait. If the Azurites cede the title, it stops being crusade bait. That is a concession that Redcloak wants.

Not being able to guarantee that concession is an issue, but by far not the largest one.

[Rogar Demonblud]

No, the Azurites ceding the city wouldn't make it Not Crusade Bait. It would just reduce the number of attacking parties by one. At this point, I'm pretty sure the other nations on the Southern Continent are busy absorbing chunks the hobgoblins haven't gotten to, and eventually someone is going to want that port.

[Jasdoif]

So, I've seen a lot of people looking for/theorizing about some kind of twisty twist regarding the search to find Kraagor's Gate. But all of those people have been concerned with where the gate is actually located, and right now I just thought of a different kind of twist.

By some method or another, the characters eventually find the gate. Only the gate. Nothing else. The rift is gone; the gate isn't binding anything anymore. That'd throw a "there's a planet inside the rifts"-sized wrench into everyone's intentions; and just like said planet, the surprise could be justified by the gods' inability to look through the gates and into the Snarl's jail-plane.

Just a thought. Plausible? I don't know. Interesting? Definitely.Discarding everything interesting is not, itself, interesting. You'd need to build something sufficiently interesting/clever on top of the details of such a foundational change, in order to get a net positive there.

[CriticalFailure]

Redcloak doesn’t consider his own survival a priority. He’d like to be able to get rid of Xykon, but if they get the ritual off and then Xykon kills him, he considers it a win.

[Quizatzhaderac]

Regarding people saying that Durkon's offer isn't good/ Durkon can't actually offer stuff: Rich is taking huge shortcuts to fit something that could in reality require millions of words into a stick figure comic.

If Redcloak agreed with Durkons offer, what he'd really mean is "I agree to this deal, pending approvals of the Dark One, the majority of each of the three other pantheons, their heads, Hinjo, the majority of Azurite nobility, all nations bordering Gobtopia, and the elves.

Since we (presumably) don't want to see 200 strips of Durkon talking to Thor, talking to Odin, talking to Marduk, arguing the case to the pantheon, and godsmoot, gods talking to clerics, clerics talking to congregations; we just have to imagine that Durkon is actually empowered to speak for the rest of the world.

I don't think even Homestuck would be willing to go that far.

I still think the Gate isn't behind any of the doors at all, but instead behind a panel of stone in that valley, somewhere, that looks like every other piece of valley wall. My guess is behind a panel in a wall in the dungeon, that looks like every other wall. That way somebody with lots of lower level minions can't exhaustively search it (Also, I'd imagine the bugbears have a pretty good idea of the area around the dungeon, having been hunting and gathering there for years), but still being possible for one strong party to miss.

[Worldsong]

I agree that it may be "this might work, but if it doesn't then I will have still succeeded at the Plan even if Xykon kills me."
But destroying Xykon after the Plan is achieved is one of Red Cloak's primary objectives.


Redcloak doesn’t consider his own survival a priority. He’d like to be able to get rid of Xykon, but if they get the ritual off and then Xykon kills him, he considers it a win.

Backing Critical's statement here. Xykon dead? Awesome. Redcloak dead? Doesn't matter, still won.


Hmm. I think you've mentioned before that you hadn't read SOD, so for spoilers:


Redcloak tells his brother that their god will take care of Xykon when the time comes.


Durkon's not asking for an answer of "Yes" or "No" (and even if he was, he doesn't really have the clericpower to enforce it, so RC's not in peril or under duress). He's asking that Redcloak have this route of negotiations to haggle over, as a clear alternative to the plan. In essence (and what Jason said), saying yes to more negotiations.

I just read all the spoilers. Heh.

As stated before (I believe) I concede that under normal circumstances Redcloak would have reason to accept the offer of continued negotiations, but he can't really afford that kind of thing right now. Xykon being a big obstacle, but also the fact that he'd want the Plan as backup in case the negotiations don't work out and the longer he delays the more chance the other side sabotages the Plan in a terminal manner.

That he wants to keep the Plan available is irrational in itself but within the mindset of the Plan being important it's rational to not want to give the opposition the time/opportunity to wreck it.


Rational reasoning and emotional motivation aren’t mutually exclusive. He can be fairly rational and still be influenced by emotion. In fact, I would argue that a lot of his story actually deals with how fuzzy the line between rationality and rationalization can be and how hard it can be to detect the subtle influence of emotion. imo just declaring Redcloak to be irrational and driven by emotion is missing the point.


Seems about right, yeah. If I had to simplify it I'd say Redcloak's making rational decisions (in his mind) over something that wasn't a logical situation in the first place.

As usual, I need other people to phrase things I can't put into words myself. Redcloaks overall goal of the Plan is irrational as hell but he can make rational decisions in pursuit of that goal.


Let me repeat:

As said before: Gobbotopia is crusade bait. If the Azurites cede the title, it stops being crusade bait. That is a concession that Redcloak wants.

Not being able to guarantee that concession is an issue, but by far not the largest one.

Redcloak's demands are more expansive than just wanting the Azurites to leave Gobbotopia alone. Also Durkon at best tells him that he stands a good chance of convincing Hinjo, the leader of the Azurites, to acknowledge Gobbotopia. As someone else has already pointed out, even if that succeeds that doesn't mean Gobbotopia is safe.

Just because the other side is willing to give you one thing you want doesn't mean you should throw everything else aside.


Regarding people saying that Durkon's offer isn't good/ Durkon can't actually offer stuff: Rich is taking huge shortcuts to fit something that could in reality require millions of words into a stick figure comic.

If Redcloak agreed with Durkons offer, what he'd really mean is "I agree to this deal, pending approvals of the Dark One, the majority of each of the three other pantheons, their heads, Hinjo, the majority of Azurite nobility, all nations bordering Gobtopia, and the elves.

Since we (presumably) don't want to see 200 strips of Durkon talking to Thor, talking to Odin, talking to Marduk, arguing the case to the pantheon, and godsmoot, gods talking to clerics, clerics talking to congregations; we just have to imagine that Durkon is actually empowered to speak for the rest of the world.

I don't think even Homestuck would be willing to go that far.

If Rich wanted to tell us that Durkon is effectively speaking for the rest of the world he could have put it a little bit more bluntly. Durkon himself doesn't even believe he's speaking for the rest of the world: even if you were correct OOC-wise Durkon's behaviour wouldn't convey that to Redcloak, so Redcloak's decision would still make sense based on the assumption that Durkon has little to no executive power.

[pendell]

No, the Azurites ceding the city wouldn't make it Not Crusade Bait. It would just reduce the number of attacking parties by one. At this point, I'm pretty sure the other nations on the Southern Continent are busy absorbing chunks the hobgoblins haven't gotten to, and eventually someone is going to want that port.

Also, signing a peace treaty with the Azurites doesn't protect them from the Empire of Blood or similar countries. There are plenty of conquerors who need no justification to launch a war of aggression.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[dancrilis]

There are plenty of conquerors who need no justification to launch a war of aggression.

Which would be equality.

Redcloak's problem is he wants equality and to be protected - were nobody else is protected so that would not be equality, so what he wants cannot be delivered because it is internally inconsistent.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Also, signing a peace treaty with the Azurites doesn't protect them from the Empire of Blood or similar countries. There are plenty of conquerors who need no justification to launch a war of aggression.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

I'm pretty sure the EoB lacks the resources for a transoceanic invasion. The Realm of the Dragon, however...

[Worldsong]

Which would be equality.

Redcloak's problem is he wants equality and to be protected - were nobody else is protected so that would not be equality, so what he wants cannot be delivered because it is internally inconsistent.

I wouldn't be surprised if Redcloak was willing to deal with something like the Empire of Blood making trouble for Gobbotopia. What seems to really rankle him is that, in addition to expansionistic empires, Gobbotopia would be in danger of attacks by otherwise peaceful nations who are motivated by the belief that the goblinoid nation must be destroyed because goblinoids are bad.

[Sebastian]

Redcloak does have to deal with Xykon at some point, but I'd call it presumptuous to say that teaming up with Durkon under the current circumstances would have been the smartest way to go about it. Especially since accepting Durkon's offer wouldn't give him what he's aiming for, even if he did abandon the Plan and focus purely on giving goblinoids a better life.

Just to make it clear, so far as I'm concerned Durkon's offer was bad. It wasn't even well thought out, his entire spiel came down to relying on goodwill and the suggestion that the Azurites aren't going to try and take back the city they don't have the resources or manpower to take back anyway. His offer might have worked if the two factions were on reasonable terms. Redcloak refusing the offer is fair game because he needs something more solid than merely an opportunity to talk with the PC races. The same way that the good guys don't trust Redcloak he has no reason to trust the good guys.

And it's not even like all the PC races or established nations are good guys.

Look, at the end it doesn't matter. I mean, yes, Durkon's offer was too little and poorly put out and everything you said, but even if all the gods of the three pantheons did appear and pinkie-promised to give Redcloak anything he wanted, he would have refused it, probably persuading himself that it was a trick, or that it was not enough, or some other rationalization.

Because if he get what he want without the Plan then everything he did, everything that happened to him, would have been for nothing.

[Jasdoif]

I'm pretty sure the EoB lacks the resources for a transoceanic invasion.You don't think Tarquin has the resources for corpse-ships (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0300.html)?

[RatElemental]

You don't think Tarquin has the resources for corpse-ships (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0300.html)?

Depending on how far her wormholes can go, I think Tarquin would just have to call in Laurin again.

[Jasdoif]

I'm pretty sure the EoB lacks the resources for a transoceanic invasion.You don't think Tarquin has the resources for corpse-ships (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0300.html)?Depending on how far her wormholes can go, I think Tarquin would just have to call in Laurin again.Fairly sure Laurin's a resource for the Empire of Sweat, not the Empire of Blood; though.

[dancrilis]

I'm pretty sure the EoB lacks the resources for a transoceanic invasion. The Realm of the Dragon, however...

He has the resources for eight squadrons of hippogriffs (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0814.html) - which seems to be more then Azure city had and they had ships for a transoceanic withdrawal, if he thought it was worth it he might try - but he still has to rest of the western continent to absorb (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0763.html).

[Rogar Demonblud]

Eh, tomato, tomato. Really, nobody on the Western Continent has resources to spare. If they did, they'd either conquer the neighbors or try and conquer the Elven Kingdom.

[Schroeswald]

Fairly sure Laurin's a resource for the Empire of Sweat, not the Empire of Blood; though.

I mean they'll probably swap nations soon enough, with Malack dead there's a decent chance Tarquin gets paired with Laurin next time.

[Jasdoif]

I'm pretty sure the EoB lacks the resources for a transoceanic invasion.You don't think Tarquin has the resources for corpse-ships (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0300.html)?Depending on how far her wormholes can go, I think Tarquin would just have to call in Laurin again.Fairly sure Laurin's a resource for the Empire of Sweat, not the Empire of Blood; though.I mean they'll probably swap nations soon enough, with Malack dead there's a decent chance Tarquin gets paired with Laurin next time."The EoB has the resources for a transoceanic invasion, assuming the EoB has the resources for a transoceanic invasion" is pretty boring.

[bunsen_h]

It appears to me that she also exists to act as a foil for Belkar's character growth.


The quote that rings in my ears from "Goblet of Fire" is : "Kill the Spare!" :smallamused:

If I had to guess , the "spare" who will be killed is Minrah. She existed to give the Order a cleric back when Durkon was vamped, and now that Durkon is back, we need to find some way to remove her from the party. If it makes the stakes seem more real by killing off a character in the process, that's a bonus from a storytelling perspective.

Rich has stated that he wanted to bring another female character into the party to balance things out a bit better.

I don't believe that he's going to bring in another female character, then kill her to make things more "real". "Fridging" female characters is bad storytelling.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Also, the new character was added to help show the difference between the old characters in Book 1 and in Book 7. Minrah can't do that if she's dead.

[Worldsong]

Rich has stated that he wanted to bring another female character into the party to balance things out a bit better.

I don't believe that he's going to bring in another female character, then kill her to make things more "real". "Fridging" female characters is bad storytelling.

Agreed. If Rich brought in Minrah just to kill her as motivation for Durkon or whatever I'd lose a lot of respect for him.

Durkon already knows what is at stake. He's painfully aware of the cost of failure. The fact that his first attempt at persuading Redcloak failed so miserably should already be enough for him to realize that he needs to step up his game.

[Snails]

Even if we had never read SoD, why would we expect Redcloak to take the deal?

We, the Readers, would not.

Durkon's key mistake is assuming the genuine best interests of the goblins of Goblotopia would be a strong enough motivational factor to keep Redcloak willing to talk, until talking was clearly useless. His mistake is imagining that concessions to Goblotopia would at least keep Redcloak onboard for more talking. And while he surely understood that the case he laid out was less than perfectly and was missing a few key facets, Durkon could not imagine how Redcloak was already quite comfortable with the idea of throwing away so many goblin lives for a theoretical benefit to the abstract future of goblinkind. That is Durkon being Durkon.

Ultimately, Redcloak was only going to hesitate if he understood the Plan as likely to turn out lose-lose for goblinkind, rather than brilliantly win-win like he has been telling himself for years. But that would require him to believe some pretty fantastical information from a dwarf cleric he hardly knows. Even if he believes Durkon is not purposefully lying, it is not likely that he would accept that Thor can be trusted, especially when it is information that TDO is (too) conveniently incapable of confirming or denying.

The point of this scene is not how clever and persuasive Durkon is -- he played his hand better than I expected. The point of this scene is to give Redcloak one last chance to be tested: Are you willing to fight for a whole nation of living breathing goblins? Or are all those goblin lives just pawns for your high stakes gamble, a gamble you cannot honestly say you fully understand?

[Fyraltari]

I'd like to point out that nothing about Durkon's offer requires him dropping the Plan and kicking it away...just putting it "on hold," at the very least.
Yes it does. Once the Rifts are sealed the Snarl can’t get out until new Rifts form in thousands if not millions of years and Redcloak’s Ritua is pointless. A sealed Rift is not a threat to anyone.

Oh right, yeah. Xykon wasn't even mentioned in the negotiations at all.

Back to the original point made by Hatu, then Durkon truly couldn't have known the 'right' thing to say at all.
There are no right thing he could have done. Redcloak is not in this because he made a lucid assessment of the situation and calculated the odds of the goblins coming on top. He is in this because of a bundle of trauma, guilt and rationalization. Durkon just doesn’t have the emotional connection with Redcloak to nudge him off his course. He will see it through until he reach is goal or is forced to abandon it.

Which sorta makes me wonder 2 things: why Redcloak accepted the negotiations in the first place, if he was already so dead-set on the Plan, and what Durkon expected Redcloak to do at the very table.
Because he thought Durkon was there to negotiate a surrender from the gods. He thought the Plan had succeeded. And then the dwarf talk to him about doing something different.

The quote that rings in my ears from "Goblet of Fire" is : "Kill the Spare!" :smallamused:

If I had to guess , the "spare" who will be killed is Minrah. She existed to give the Order a cleric back when Durkon was vamped, and now that Durkon is back
Pretty sure the order didn’t need a Cleric back when Durkon was camped in addition to Hilgya who raised him she’s there because being a newcomer brings a change in dynamic to the party. Someone who isn’t familiar with their oddities, someone who only knows the new and improved Belkar, someone to give recaps to.

we need to find some way to remove her from the party.
If the Giant needed her out of the party he could have let her die in Firmament or simply not have her join the crew when they left.



I suppose it's possible they will both escape alive , and I won't feel sorry if they do. I want to see more Minrah! But I can't believe the clerics can take such an awful risk and not pay SOME consequence. A few damage marks which will be easily healed when they rest and regain their spells just doesn't seem like enough of a consequence.
How about the fact that Team Evil knows the Order is here now. Isn’t that consequence enough?

[Worldsong]

How about the fact that Team Evil knows the Order is here now. Isn’t that consequence enough?

Given how vehemently Pilgrim argued that death is the only reasonable end for Redcloak's story I'm starting to suspect that for some people death is the only consequence that counts.

[Hatu]

Seems to me like learning some of those unknowns, to hopefully identify what the heck Redcloak might (and might not) see as a bridge, would be more immediately helpful...and hey, Durkon made some headway there.

I believe that's exactly what I said: Durkon was good at building bridges, bad at the rest. (Particularly planning for failure at first.)


Look, at the end it doesn't matter. I mean, yes, Durkon's offer was too little and poorly put out and everything you said, but even if all the gods of the three pantheons did appear and pinkie-promised to give Redcloak anything he wanted, he would have refused it, probably persuading himself that it was a trick, or that it was not enough, or some other rationalization.

Because if he get what he want without the Plan then everything he did, everything that happened to him, would have been for nothing.

That's the heart of the issue, but I don't think it's a slam dunk that Redcloak would automatically turn such an offer down if it somehow happened. To me, it would come down to two things.

1) What does Redcloak think the Plan is for? We know he's never spoken to the Dark One. We know from Word of God that the Dark One sees control of the Gate as more of a deterent than a weapon; the very fact Redcloak listened to the parley suggests Redcloak understands that as well. But at the end of the day, does the Dark One want the Snarl as an ace in the hole to ensure negotiations tilt in his favor, or is intended as the very means to those negotiations (and could thus be traded away freely when the time came)?

If Redcloak thinks the Snarl is an ace, even honest negotiations wouldn't be enough to dissuade him; the offer would have to be so good there would be nothing left to negotiate for, otherwise he's running the risk of short-selling the Dark One. But if Redcloak thinks the point of the Plan is to get a bargaining chip, he might be willing to give up the Plan in exchange for everything he could think to ask for. Not that it would be easy to do so, because...

2) Is Redcloak only getting this offer from the gods because his plan is on the cusp of success? This, to me, is the key. If Redcloak thinks all his actions ultimately led to the deal, I think he could end the Plan and sell himself on a job well done. But if he can't convince himself of that, either because he thinks the Dark One would settle for nothing less than the power of the Snarl or because the gods insist that this could have been done at any time and has nothing to do with the chaos Redcloak has caused, then I think Redcloak would almost certainly reject their offer and stick to the Plan for the reasons everyone has long ago pointed out.

Interestingly, even though Durkon doesn't really know Redcloak's background, he almost wound up confirming the significance of Redcloak's efforts by accident. Sadly, he couldn't recognize the opportunity, so he backtracked and the moment was played mostly for comedy. But it would not surprise me if that ends up getting revisited at a later date.

-H

[understatement]

Yes it does. Once the Rifts are sealed the Snarl can’t get out until new Rifts form in thousands if not millions of years and Redcloak’s Ritua is pointless. A sealed Rift is not a threat to anyone.

? The Plan involves handing over Snarl power to the Dark One, which has nothing to do with the rifts on the Material Plane. Redcloak's Plan was still in use even when the other rifts had been sealed.


There are no right thing he could have done. Redcloak is not in this because he made a lucid assessment of the situation and calculated the odds of the goblins coming on top. He is in this because of a bundle of trauma, guilt and rationalization. Durkon just doesn’t have the emotional connection with Redcloak to nudge him off his course. He will see it through until he reach is goal or is forced to abandon it.

Yeah.


Because he thought Durkon was there to negotiate a surrender from the gods. He thought the Plan had succeeded. And then the dwarf talk to him about doing something different.

"The Plan succeeded?" How's that?

[Worldsong]

? The Plan involves handing over Snarl power to the Dark One, which has nothing to do with the rifts on the Material Plane. Redcloak's Plan was still in use even when the other rifts had been sealed.

The Dark One can't exactly get to the Snarl if the rifts to the Snarl's prison are sealed.


"The Plan succeeded?" How's that?

He figured that the reason Durkon came to talk to him was because the gods were willing to listen to his demands in exchange for him not using the ritual that would grant the Dark One the ability to unleash the Snarl on them.

From the beginning the Plan has been to use the Snarl to strongarm the gods into giving goblinoids better lives. As Hatu pointed out, if Redcloak considers the Snarl the means rather than the objective having the gods themselves show up to negotiate would mean that the Plan is working.

[Fyraltari]

? The Plan involves handing over Snarl power to the Dark One, which has nothing to do with the rifts on the Material Plane. Redcloak's Plan was still in use even when the other rifts had been sealed.
What? No! The plan is to give the Dark One the ability to move a Rift to any Palne of his chosing so that he can threatne the gods with unleashing the beast on their turf.



"The Plan succeeded?" How's that?

The Plan is to scare the gods into compliance. The discussion began with redcloak reveling in the belief that the Gods were afraid of his actions.

[understatement]

What? No! The plan is to give the Dark One the ability to move a Rift to any Palne of his chosing so that he can threatne the gods with unleashing the beast on their turf.

Crap, OK, I just rechecked SOD - you're right; it's about shifting the rift itself. (which begs the questionn - does sealing one rift mean sealing all the others, or would Redcloak have to do Thor's ritual four times?)

(I imagined you were enacting Wahlberg from The Happening, FYI).


The Plan is to scare the gods into compliance. The discussion began with redcloak reveling in the belief that the Gods were afraid of his actions.




He figured that the reason Durkon came to talk to him was because the gods were willing to listen to his demands in exchange for him not using the ritual that would grant the Dark One the ability to unleash the Snarl on them.

From the beginning the Plan has been to use the Snarl to strongarm the gods into giving goblinoids better lives. As Hatu pointed out, if Redcloak considers the Snarl the means rather than the objective having the gods themselves show up to negotiate would mean that the Plan is working.

Right, right. 1207 completely slipped from my mind.

[Quizatzhaderac]

Also, signing a peace treaty with the Azurites doesn't protect them from the Empire of Blood or similar countries. There are plenty of conquerors who need no justification to launch a war of aggression. Then why do the empires of blood, sweat, and tears need to keep making up justifications?

People like Tarquin are exactly who Redcloak fears; people who abuse the causes of plight of the Azurites or the safety of the remaining southern demi-humans to clothe their naked desire for conquest.

The conqueror doesn't need to convince everyone of their lies, just cause enough doubt to cause good people to hesitate to stop them.

Or even just the idea that the conqueror believes what they say helps. "oh, we only want to conquer Azure city because it's held by those evil goblins, we would never attack other humans".

There's also a small but important minority of people like Gin-jun and Miko who care very much about law and very little about general humanoid life.


I mean they'll probably swap nations soon enough, with Malack dead there's a decent chance Tarquin gets paired with Laurin next time.I'd say they should do five nations next, as the three they have are conspicuously large already.

Given how vehemently Pilgrim argued that death is the only reasonable end for Redcloak's story I'm starting to suspect that for some people death is the only consequence that counts.Good thing Rich has been stingy with the resurrections and rewards in the hereafter, otherwise there would be no major consequences!

[Fyraltari]

Crap, OK, I just rechecked SOD - you're right; it's about shifting the rift itself. (which begs the questionn - does sealing one rift mean sealing all the others, or would Redcloak have to do Thor's ritual four times?)
Five. That wasn't clarified, but I would guess all of them at once. Gods be gods.


(I imagined you were enacting Wahlberg from The Happening, FYI).

Oh my goooooooooood (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyophYBP_w4).

[Jasdoif]

With so many unknowns and so much distrust already between him and Redcloak, the odds that this parley would end in a signed deal were always near zero. So the real goal should have been about building bridges and getting Redcloak to start thinking about the situation in a new way. That way the NEXT parley might actually have a shot.Seems to me like learning some of those unknowns, to hopefully identify what the heck Redcloak might (and might not) see as a bridge, would be more immediately helpful...and hey, Durkon made some headway there.I believe that's exactly what I said: Durkon was good at building bridges, bad at the rest. (Particularly planning for failure at first.)Huh....The whole post read to me like you were expecting Durkon to do a better job of "building bridges", before knowing what he could build that would serve as a bridge; the knowledge of which seems like the most realistic thing Durkon could expect to take away here.

Of course, using a negotiation as a fact-finding mission is questionable at best; but if Thor hasn't answered communes before (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1148.html), I can't really fault Durkon for not going through the motions of pre-meeting divinations. To say nothing of Durkon's assessment of his own diplomatic abilities being more accurate than Thor's (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1143.html), though I could see how beings capable of manipulating reality might have difficulty recognizing wishful thinking.

[heroeric]

Redcloak is right: Goblins are going to have to fight for their place in the sun and, if they DO agree to negotiations, they have to be backed by effective guarantees, not mere promises.

After all, from his perspective in sod

The last time the Dark One tried honest negotiation he was assassinated during parley. The humans/elves/dwarves will speak softly until they can safely kill the dark one, at which point status quo ante will resume


Respectfully,

Brian P.

So I've seen previously some people claim that the Dark One has learned from his previous mistakes and that the reason why he created the plan but is that really true. I haven't actually read SOD so most of my information comes from what I hear other people say so I might be misunderstanding what actually happened but it sounds like one interpretation is that Dark One tried to get better treatment for goblins by creating a large army and trying to get the other races to listen to him through threats of force. And the other races might have assassinated him partly because the didn't like being threatened or couldn't trust him and expected that the goblin army would just dissolve without him.

This doesn't sound that different with his current situation with the other gods. He doesn't wish to negotiate if he doesn't have guarantees that they will listen to him(the goblin army/ the snarl).
And the other side not wishing to negotiate because of these threats or not trusting him and believe that they have a solution that makes his threats moot(assassinating the dark one/Destroying the world).

[Khaldun]

I’m curious to see how Redcloak interacts with Oona afterward. She may be fairly happy-go-lucky, but he’s literally talking about ending the world. She’s probably going to want answers.

Then what does Redcloak do?

I remember what the Giant said about Tarquin, where it’s what you do when the stakes are high that determines what truly matters to you (paraphrased).

Right now, it’s not COMPLETELY irrational to act as Redcloak has (it’s not the best idea, but it’s understandable given the information he has), but I think that some day soon, Redcloak’s going to have that fork in the road where he has to choose: the goblins he claims to be fighting for, or being able to tell himself he didn’t do anything wrong.

Then we will see what truly matters to him.

That day isn’t today though.

[Paula]

What happened to Durkon's original hammer? He said it was a family heirloom. I'd hate to think he lost it. Also, was it passed from his mother or his father?

[Fyraltari]

What happened to Durkon's original hammer?

Malack and Durkon* left it back at the pyramid.

[weckar]

Don't be difficult. The bugbears are stated to have lost a war for territory with the dwarves. That's what "no dwarves here to chase us away" implies. It may not have been a war with big battles, but it still gives the bugbears a real reason to look askance at strange dwarves who show up unexpectedly. Calling that racism is simply incorrect.
Also: you realize that rangers have class features that act as weaponized speciesism? And that this requires an evil alignment only when targeting your own species? Depends strongly on the edition, that.

[snowblizz]

So I've seen previously some people claim that the Dark One has learned from his previous mistakes and that the reason why he created the plan but is that really true. I haven't actually read SOD so most of my information comes from what I hear other people say so I might be misunderstanding what actually happened but it sounds like one interpretation is that Dark One tried to get better treatment for goblins by creating a large army and trying to get the other races to listen to him through threats of force. And the other races might have assassinated him partly because the didn't like being threatened or couldn't trust him and expected that the goblin army would just dissolve without him.

This doesn't sound that different with his current situation with the other gods. He doesn't wish to negotiate if he doesn't have guarantees that they will listen to him(the goblin army/ the snarl).
And the other side not wishing to negotiate because of these threats or not trusting him and believe that they have a solution that makes his threats moot(assassinating the dark one/Destroying the world).


The Dark One when mortal amassed a goblin army that slaughtered it's way through human lands and then wanted to negotiate from a position of strength.

[danielxcutter]

The Dark One when mortal amassed a goblin army that slaughtered it's way through human lands and then wanted to negotiate from a position of strength.

Well yeah, because their lives sucked and they wanted a better lot in life. Even if the gods didn't explicitly make the goblinoids as XP fodder for their clerics, it's hard to argue that they weren't in a position where the PC races could kill them at their leisure and often did.

Also, do you mean he should have bargained from a position of weakness? They wouldn't have bothered with assassination, they would just have crushed him outright I imagine.

I don't disagree that conquest and war is a bad thing, sure. But he was trying to better the lives of goblinkind and they assassinated him under the pretense of a peace talk.

[understatement]

The Dark One when mortal amassed a goblin army that slaughtered it's way through human lands and then wanted to negotiate from a position of strength.


Actually, the text explicitly calls out that the Dark One didn't have his army attack the humans (and presumably other demihumans). The slaughter started after he was assassinated at peace talks.

[Sebastian]

I believe that's exactly what I said: Durkon was good at building bridges, bad at the rest. (Particularly planning for failure at first.)



That's the heart of the issue, but I don't think it's a slam dunk that Redcloak would automatically turn such an offer down if it somehow happened. To me, it would come down to two things.

1) What does Redcloak think the Plan is for? We know he's never spoken to the Dark One. We know from Word of God that the Dark One sees control of the Gate as more of a deterent than a weapon; the very fact Redcloak listened to the parley suggests Redcloak understands that as well.

But at the end of the day, does the Dark One want the Snarl as an ace in the hole to ensure negotiations tilt in his favor, or is intended as the very means to those negotiations (and could thus be traded away freely when the time came)?

If Redcloak thinks the Snarl is an ace, even honest negotiations wouldn't be enough to dissuade him; the offer would have to be so good there would be nothing left to negotiate for, otherwise he's running the risk of short-selling the Dark One. But if Redcloak thinks the point of the Plan is to get a bargaining chip, he might be willing to give up the Plan in exchange for everything he could think to ask for. Not that it would be easy to do so, because...

2) Is Redcloak only getting this offer from the gods because his plan is on the cusp of success? This, to me, is the key. If Redcloak thinks all his actions ultimately led to the deal, I think he could end the Plan and sell himself on a job well done. But if he can't convince himself of that, either because he thinks the Dark One would settle for nothing less than the power of the Snarl or because the gods insist that this could have been done at any time and has nothing to do with the chaos Redcloak has caused, then I think Redcloak would almost certainly reject their offer and stick to the Plan for the reasons everyone has long ago pointed out.

Interestingly, even though Durkon doesn't really know Redcloak's background, he almost wound up confirming the significance of Redcloak's efforts by accident. Sadly, he couldn't recognize the opportunity, so he backtracked and the moment was played mostly for comedy. But it would not surprise me if that ends up getting revisited at a later date.

-H



I think Redcloak accepted the discussion because he is not completely irrational. He is not willing to accept any deal but he must rationalize it to itself first. To say, even just to himself "see. I am being reasonable. I have accepted a parley" and the reason he break parley and tried to kill Durkon is because the deal started to sound almost as if it could be acceptable (with some work), so he had to end it, and immediately started to work on how to rationalize his own decision. "How many goblins did you kill personally?"

edit:

But Redcloak is irrational. Durkon just said to him that the gods need TDO to fix the snarl problem once and for all. That would give his god a bargaining power even greater that what the Plan would give him. and Redcloack obviously believed him, because he is saying that even if the gods destroy the world they will need TDO to make the new one, so his god will still win.

Redcloak essentially is saying that the Plan is become useless, but he still want to go on with it.

[KorvinStarmast]

Hmm, what spell was Durkon casting on himself in panel 4?

Something to heal after Redcloak's attack on him, or a prep to "get the heck outta here" of some kind?