OOTS #282 - The Discussion Thread

[The Giant]

So, I finished the script and found it was way, WAY too long for one strip. But rather than force two consecutive "closing argument" strips on you, I give you one mammoth double-sized strip.

[Ranorian]

Yay!!!

Hahaha, gotta love Vaarsuvius' response.

[mdsoze]

Great comic, Rich. I really enjoyed this one.

Now I'm wondering if I'm the only person who heard a Law and Order style ::dum dum:: after reading the closing arguments.

On the nit-picking side of things, doesn't the prosecution usually go last, because they have the burden of proof? Or does the defense have the burden of proof in this court? Or did it just work better for storytelling/creative reasons to have the defense go last?

[Marller]

V, you are the man. ;D

[pquekadl]

First page!

Very nice. I especially liked hearing DnD alignment argued over by lawyers. And V's comment was great.

[Alfryd]

So, I finished the script and found it was way, WAY too long for one strip. But rather than force two consecutive "closing argument" strips on you, I give you one mammoth double-sized strip.
Eeexcellent.
"Lawful can be wrong foe all the right reasons, and chaotic can be right for all the wrong reasons." I like. V is amusificating.

[El Jaspero, the Pirate King]

Celia's argument is an absolute treasure; it should be added to the "alignment" section of every WoTC product from here on out. Bravo!

[fwiffo]

LOL... I think Celia has been reading this forum.

[captheather]

Love it! Now I see why the Giant has been avoiding us for a while. All our arguments about alignment were actually spoilers, but he couldn't say they were spoilers without posting a spoiler himself.

And V's comment at the end made me snort. Good thing I wasn't drinking any milk.

[Jibar]

Great, the new strip is up
1. Amazing arguments.
2. fetching blue jacket, Celia,
3. You've just addressed the concerns so many people have with the alignment system of DnD. Well done Giant.
4. I bet you Vs player would be a collage lecturer or something like that.

[enigma]

Are you sure you weren't a lawyer in a previous life? Those two arguments are great.
Too brief indeed.

Enigma

[Shlik]

AAAAAAAH! You better have the next comic be the verdict... Mr Burlew, you have been teasing us for weeks now!

I can't wait to find out the final verdict. I knew I shouldn't have checked the update today.



Very good comic though. I have really enjoyed this story arc and this is a nice climax.

[Ravenlord]

I loved V's comment in the end. ;D

[Sarathi]

Nice conclusion! Im glad for the double closing arguement, the trail was getting a little long winded. Though I really not sure how the court will rule, given the militant jury.

[Nighthawk4]

Very nicely argued on both sides. I love the way that Celia thinks that Elan could not possibly understand what he was doing - so it is entirely coincidental that he did the right thing.

Then, to follow all that summing up from both sides with V's comment is brilliant. :D

[Jevanyn]

Woot! I have that warm, snuggly, Law-and-Order feeling. :)

Elan: Dun dun DUNNNNN
V: No, no, it's "DUNT DUNT!"
Elan: Oh, sorry.

[slowly_insane]

Wow, thank you Rich! Loved Roy's pointing at Elan and saying "no singing." while he's looking at Celia.

~Celestia

[Norri_Windwalker]

really cool! good job!

[Leo_Forestclaw]

Rich, that was great!

The examination of alignments pretty much summed up what the boards have been rambling about for pages and pages on the board. Nicely done.

Again, I wanted to comment on how good your layouts are. Simple things like line thickness on the character's clothing to body posture and guestures. It makes this series a joy to read!

Also: "no singing!" LOL!!

edit: spelling errors.

[Antina]

Wooo - big fellas ;)
Expecially loved the part about "proving gods will by Mikos still having her godgiven powers"
V = just great!
Nicely done, Giant! Thanx! :)

Antina ;D

[saraswati]

Great comic, Rich. I really enjoyed this one.


On the nit-picking side of things, doesn't the prosecution usually go last, because they have the burden of proof? Or does the defense have the burden of proof in this court? Or did it just work better for storytelling/creative reasons to have the defense go last?

I would assume that, just like the rules of D & D, the Giant can change some legal rules to serve to storyline or make it funny. In the US, the prosecution goes last. But in some instances the prosecution actually goes first, then the defense, then the prosecution again. In the UK, cases used to be summed up by the judge instead of allowing closing arguments. There's a lot of variation.

Very cool strip, IMHO. The whole Miko story has made us all think about alignment and "absolute good" or "absolute evil". It's great to see some of the Giant's ideas gone into in depth.

[fwiffo]

Oooh... And he even addressed the issue with Miko. Let's see what Mr Jones said:

"...wouldn't they [gods] have revoked the divine powers granted to the arresting officer? We can easily interpret their will by observing that they have not yet seen fit to do so."

Yet... Hmmm... What does Mr Jones know that we don't know??! :)

[Albion]

Ooh ooh, a lot to read. Not that I'm complaining! I smirked plenty of times in this one. ;) The most at the end, not surprisingly - which is always nice.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

Finally! The Word on alignments! ;D

[King_Troll]

Wow! I could almost hear Denny Crane in the background saying "It's just that simple." Of course Denny would be all over Celia...

[metawidget]

Very nicely argued on both sides. I love the way that Celia thinks that Elan could not possibly understand what he was doing - so it is entirely coincidental that he did the right thing.

It reminds me a little of the JusticeWorld episode of Red Dwarf, when Kryten sums up the defense of Rimmer... I really enjoyed it.

The intertwining of the rules beyond the (ruins of the) fourth wall and the rules on the characters' side is really fun, too. I'm looking forward to the exciting conclusions of many things now...

[Melnor]

Hahahahaha,
Ah Giant, you rock my world!
That was so hilarious, and it made sense!
You studied law in school, didn't you, eh EH? ;)

[Karellen]

I'm unconvinced as to the validity of Celia's arguments for the functionability of the Alignment system, but as a legal argument, it's certainly fair, and definitely superior to Mr. Jones' obtuse "Gods didn't say a damn thing, and that means they must be guilty". Right.

[Duskrider_Moogle]

That was amazing on so many levels...the closing arguments thing takes me back to good ole high school mock trial. And "Prove that the alignment system still works" was amazing both as an argument for the alignment system and as a play on a real social issue ("prove the system still works").

And V's "far too brief for my own taste"...pure awesome.

[zibeck]

Awesome strip. Great speech on Allignment by Celia. A Monty Python reference. And a zinger by Vaarsuvius!

[xrestassuredx]

Awesome comic! Who knew Celia had it in her (even if her argument was a bit "brief") ...

And no, in the American legal system at least, the defense always goes last, not because they have the burden of proof, but because they have the benefit of the doubt, "innocent until proven guilty" and all that. Our system favors the accused, usually with good reason, although things can become ridiculously skewed at times.

(edit: typos)

[Landon_Fox]

Celia's Lawful Good is one I would have no problem following. Thank you for a most interesting exposition on alignment, Mr. Giant.

Tell me, was this in any part a responce to all of the alignment debates on the boards?

However...


The gods have wisdom and understanding beyond what you or I can possibly grasp, and if they didn't want the Sapphire Guard to bring these perpetrators to justice, wouldn't they have revoked the divine powers granted to the arresting officer?


Miko is so boned.

I bet you 100-1 that Shojo decides that whether Miko still has powers will determine the verdict, and Belkar gets her to do an impeachable offense in the next comic...

[Lightman]

One of the most amazing courtroom dramas I've ever read. Ha!

"Too brief..."

[TheLastOfTheFallen]

OH MY GOD!!!

I was eating when I read Vs comment. Readin caused me to snort, which meant what I was eating entered my nasal passage.

I was eating buffalo chicken. :'(

The agony!!!

Great comic, though. Celia's argument belongs in an offical WOTC book, to show how alignment should work. Next time an alignment debate pops up on the WOTC boards, I am so whipping out the closeing arguments from Sapphire Guard V The Order of the Stick. ;D

[Sundog]

I am going to print this comic and use it on certain GM's I know - perhaps as an example, perhaps as a suppository...

[The Giant]

Tell me, was this in any part a responce to all of the alignment debates on the boards?

No, it's a response to every debate on alignment that has ever existed since D&D began. I don't actually read most of what's posted here anymore. :P

[Sylvius]

When Mr. Jones made his claim about Miko not having lost her powers, I really expected a Belkar-driven climax to the strip.

I actually take issue with Celia's legal argument. She's completely discounted the harm (non-Good) that could be done by weakeneing the prescriptive force of laws in general.

If I'm the being of pure Law and Good, I take her argument as a good reason why the law should be changed regarding other gates, but I need to punish the OotS now because they broke a law as it was written at the time they broke it. By letting them go free, I'm sending a message that the laws don't always apply as they're written, thus weakening their prescriptive force. This makes them less effective deterrents of bad acts, and leads to more harm than punishing the OotS for their ultimately Good act.

Ex post facto law weakens deterrence.

[thatwolfguy]

i see generations of future gamers referring back to this strip as the defining moment in the solution to the alignment debate.

but yeah...too short - LOL

great job giant - thanks again

[Jibar]

No, it's a response to every debate on alignment that has ever existed since D&D began. I don't actually read most of what's posted here anymore. :P

No surprised really.
A lot of the comments on these threads seem to eba rguments to me.

[Quixote]

Wow. In that universe, the 'will of the Gods' argument can TOTALLY be exploited! Shouldn't Jones have been struck down by a bolt of lightning? Shouldn't Celia have been struck down, if he wasn't? And as they weren't, does this mean they're both right??

[Liquid]

First reaction: OMFG!
Second reaction: Thanks, Giant for a greatly profound and thought-invoking strip.
Third reaction: I blame Cerebus. :)

[Swashbuckler]

No, it's a response to every debate on alignment that has ever existed since D&D began. I don't actually read most of what's posted here anymore. :P


... and I certainly cannot blame you for that, sir.

OUTSTANDING COMIC!

My new standard response is forever going to be, "Meh. I find your argument far too brief for my taste." ;D

Priceless!!

[n11]

I would agree. OOTS should be found guilty, but the sentence should reflect the good outcome. "I hereby sentence you to community service... please get Belkar out of the Azure City!!! (which would greatly service the community)" :D

[Adeptus]

Brilliant punchline Rich! :D

[Eutheos]

Just joining in the congratulations for the strip :) And also for not reading the boards any more; I certainly support the decision not to have to worry about other people's spoilers.

[Winged One]

GO CELIA!

An absolutely brilliant arguement on alignment. It should, indeed, become official WotC material. After they give you money for using it, of course. :)

[celticdeltic]

Great comic wonder what the verdict will be?

[Istielthia]

I love how, once again (whether intentional or not) Rich has given a definitive answer (in this universe at least) to all the angsty arguments going on on this board. Fantastic work, sir.

Were I of the OoSTiverse, I would gladly have Celia on retainer.

[Lostdruid]

Thank you all for coming, but this is where the free OOTS comic comes to an end. To see the verdict please sent $19.95 to...


Sorry, the bastardly side of me just had to write it.
;D

[GeeVee]

The thought of Vaarsuvius' argument scares me. :o

[tmacdevitt]

Long time lurker, 1st time poster.

I really like today's comic a lot. It was just what I needed to read today.

[WNxArrakis]

Were I of the OoSTiverse, I would gladly have Celia on retainer.

I'd have her on speed dial :P

And there's the definitive answer we all know and love. LKawful characters dont have to be ten-foot-pole sitters.

Arrakis

[Ilaun_Undil]

I have to agree with V though. Celia's arguement was a little brief, and could be missing a vital part that could win the case for them. Let's just hope that Lord Shojo didn't fall asleep.

[alanajoli]

LOL... I think Celia has been reading this forum.

That was entirely my first thought.

Then I did a happy dance. Go Celia.

-Alana

[Froggy_the_Great]

Dunno, beings of pure justice and pure law don't tend to give credence to justifiable exceptions. Given the Prosecutions declaration of transgression versus Celia's appeal to the soul, the OoTS are soooo boned...

[theKOT]

Good strip. I hope friday's concludes something, or else it is going to be a loooooooooooong weekend...

Thank you all for coming, but this is where the free OOTS comic comes to an end. To see the verdict please sent $19.95 to...


Sorry, the bastardly side of me just had to write it.
;D

Sad thing is, I might actually pay it! As long as that was like a 6 month subscription.

[xyzchyx]

Interesting closing arguments, by both sides.

The prosecution's argument fails, however, on a simple point.

If one is to admit to the premise that the god would destroy the gate if it were right that it should be destroyed, the gods would not require a mortal-made self-destruct button to be in place. If Durokan was following the gods' wishes by placing that self-destruct button there, then the existence of that button and the fact that a mortal would use it if the gate was threatened wre also part of that plan. Indeed, one could very easily argue that Elan was unwittingly fulfilling Durokan's intentions.

One cannot blame Elan or the OOTS for this unless one also simultaneously faults Durokan's choices with regards to the construction of the gate as well. Given Shojo's response to V's query in the 2nd row of panels in #278 (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=278) seems to make it clear that Durokan is not considered by the court to be at fault for doing so, acquittal seems imminent.

(Of course... it's never going to be that easy)

[Curunir]

Let's just hope that Lord Shojo didn't fall asleep.

´When I read it, i was wondering, if the last picture would be sleeping Shojo. But it may have happened.

[watermammal]

Not only was it a brilliant comic with good arguments on both sides, regardless of where you come down on the arguemtnt, but in addition, really gives some insight into how people can play allignments in game play. I have always hated the fact that my LG characters could be forced to do something evil because it was the law. Granted, part of that was the DM just exerting control over the storyline, but still.

Bravi, bravi, bravissimi.

[alanajoli]

From a friend & fellow oots reader not on the forums:

Today's oots should be called "A short (middling) tutorial in how to role play an alignment."

-Alana

[Kanashimi]

Beautiful. Absolutely beautiful.

Not only have the arguments of the two lawyers succinctly summed up decades of arguments over good v evil and law v chaos, their arguments and the entire trial itself has been brilliantly mirrored by the LG v CE battle raging between Miko and Belkar.

Which side is right?

While everyone on this board seems to agree that OOTS should go free (if nothing else than to keep the great story line going) there is great debate as to how people would like to see the Miko/Belkar thing end.

Will they end with the same alignment side winning, or will they display the dichotomy inherent in the entire alignment argument?

I, personally, can't wait to find out.

Great Job, Giant

[Kish]

Dunno, beings of pure justice and pure law don't tend to give credence to justifiable exceptions. Given the Prosecutions declaration of transgression versus Celia's appeal to the soul, the OoTS are soooo boned...
A being of pure law wouldn't, but a being of pure law would be, by definition, Lawful Neutral, not Lawful Good. A being of pure justice must. There can be no justice when rules are absolute.

[NovaNightmare]

Gota Love the long suspense!!!!!

V's statment rocks!! ha! ha!

[Eriol]

First of all, nice closing arguments. Interesting to see them in their entirety. I do have two points to mention though:

One, did anybody else think that Celia's closing argument was far too general? MOST of the argument tended to be debating alignment itself, with a seeming minority of it directly mentioning THIS case. So while a great dissertation on alignment rules, a relatively poor defense, as it doesn't MENTION the specific case enough. Personally I still put it in the "good" category, but while Jones spends virtually the entire time talking about the crime itself, Celia spends most of her time talking about alignment in general. Most of it needed to be said to justify the Order's actions, but again, relatively little on the actions themselves. IMO it should have focused more on the dire consequences of letting the gate continue to exist, rather than the idea that the law was flawed. Both ARE mentioned, but in wrong proportions IMO.

Secondly, on the "who went last" argument, I believe it does vary according to legal system (perhaps state-by-state in the US), but in formalized debate (competitions I mean, internationally), the DEFENDING party ALWAYS goes last. With debates, there isn't the presumption of innocence per se, but since the burdon IS on the one "prosecuting", the refutation of such necessarily must be last, or else it is easy to bring up arguments which can go unrefuted, thus sandbagging any defense with last minute "gems" of evidence.

So IMO Rich got it right with Celia going last, though I think she could have made a much stronger argument by focusing more on the facts of the case than she did, rather than focusing most of her arguments on the nature of alignment in general.

[brummeren]

I agree with V.

And Celia is adressing what has been the debate on this forum for months now. A little nudge from the Giant?

[Vampire_Boy]

Meh. I suppose there had to be some closing arguments, yes, but I rather hoped they wouldn't be lengthy rantings about the alignment system.

Oh well, there is always the Friday's comic. :)

[FlawedParadigm]

Retainer? Speed dial? Hell with all that, I say.

In fact, I say...Celia...will you marry me? (I'm not certain, but this may be the first time a character in this strip has been proposed to. Heh.)

She's become quite the impressive character for someone I doubt any of us thought we would see again in the strip, and grown far past stealing office supplies and fooling around with her boyfriend, "leafy wanker" that he was.

I should point out the lawyers' argument must be relying entirely on the religious nature of the city the trial is in, since most open-minded people would be inclined to ask; why, if the Gods and their collective will were so important to the verdict of the trial, were they not being communicated with via magic...or showing up themselves, which they are perfectly capable of doing?

Arguing the "will of God" may have worked hundreds of years ago in the real world, because all of the Gods that humanity has believed in have failed to show any particular interest or manifestations of their existence for a little over 2,000 years (the last supposed divine manifestation in any religion I'm aware of is Jesus Christ). But in a world where the Gods are perfectly capable of popping in for tea any time they like? Seems like a pretty flimsy argument for prosecuting someone.

(EDIT: Bleeding shift key.)

[Vampire_Boy]

And Celia is adressing what has been the debate on this forum for months now. A little nudge from the Giant?

Actually, that was my first thought. I caught myself thinking, 'gee, now that's pretty blatant Voice of The Author'. :)

[whmice]

Although this comic is supposed to be funny and simple, the past serious strips were good, they were right, they had something in them. i hope it is more than just a plotline for the next joke.
funny yet meaningfull, i like that idea. it reminds me of terry prattchet.
excellent work Rich

[Swashbuckler]

If you all go back and read a page or two back, Rich specifically states that today's strip had nothing to do with any forum discussions.

End of discussion. ;D

[Oznstuff]

Yay!!!

Hahaha, gotta love Vaarsuvius' response.

I agree completely, but I advise against checking for updates during class hours. Students tend to get nervous if you start chorteling for no discernable reason... ;)

[theKOT]

Beautiful. Absolutely beautiful.

Not only have the arguments of the two lawyers succinctly summed up decades of arguments over good v evil and law v chaos, their arguments and the entire trial itself has been brilliantly mirrored by the LG v CE battle raging between Miko and Belkar.

Which side is right?

While everyone on this board seems to agree that OOTS should go free (if nothing else than to keep the great story line going) there is great debate as to how people would like to see the Miko/Belkar thing end.

Will they end with the same alignment side winning, or will they display the dichotomy inherent in the entire alignment argument?

I, personally, can't wait to find out.

Great Job, Giant

Your analyzation is somewhat flawed. The court case is NOT CE vs LG. It is NG or CG at worst. If Belkars side had been argued in court, it would have been "I felt like destroying the gate, so I did! In your face!" The truth of the matter is that Belkar/Miko is independent, and although it may have some bearing on the trial, I don't see the trial having much bearing on IT. Oh, and.....
[refuting spoiler]
I don't know WHY a previous poster thought Lord Shojo would rebuke Miko's paladinhood. She was simply following orders and doing what she THOUGHT was good. If Celia's argument wins then Miko won't fall because she was "striving to be LG", and if Jones' argument wins, she will have been doing the right thing.

Retainer? Speed dial? Hell with all that, I say.

In fact, I say...Celia...will you marry me? (I'm not certain, but this may be the first time a character in this strip has been proposed to. Heh.)

Nope. EvilE proposed to Miko a while ago, but she's been to busy chasing Belkar to answer...
As for the rest of your post, I think you should take a gander at the rules. Or maybe a goose. either way, really....

[Nerd-o-rama]

Hooray for Celia! Hooray for common sense applied to D&D morality!

I still doubt it'll fly in a Court presided over by a senile Paladin and a Lawful Wrathful celestial, though.

[Krytha]

This is what happens when Law and Order is on 3 times a week...

Hoo-ray for Oots!

[Nasrudith]

Love V's comment, too brief. If V gave it then the summoners would fall asleep and accidentaly unsummon the spirt.

[Starbuck_II]

R

Arguing the "will of God" may have worked hundreds of years ago in the real world, because all of the Gods that humanity has believed in have failed to show any particular interest or manifestations of their existence for a little over 2,000 years (the last supposed divine manifestation in any religion I'm aware of is Jesus Christ). But in a world where the Gods are perfectly capable of popping in for tea any time they like? Seems like a pretty flimsy argument for prosecuting someone.

(EDIT: Bleeding shift key.)

You probablt shouldn't post stuff about real world religion here The Voice of Mod: You should follow your own advice then and not actually post stuff about real world religion. Scrubbed.

Back on topic:
But this was a great comic: I loved the alignment/law debate between Celia and the prosecuters

I hope they win or get a lesser charge.

[LennonsDad]

Nice speeches, I can see how it ran long on you, Giant.

One thing I'd like to just point out, and I don't think this qualifies as spoiler, is a part of Jones' speech:

"The gods have wisdom and understanding beyond what you or I can possibly grasp, and if they didn't want the Sapphire Guard to bring these perpertrators to justice, wouldn't they have revoked the divine power granted to the arresting officer?"

:o

EDIT: Sorry, wasn't the only one who pointed this out. And I, too, was thinking "Denny Crane!" more than "Dunt dunt!"

[Kanashimi]

Your analyzation is somewhat flawed. The court case is NOT CE vs LG. It is NG or CG at worst. If Belkars side had been argued in court, it would have been "I felt like destroying the gate, so I did! In your face!" The truth of the matter is that Belkar/Miko is independent, and although it may have some bearing on the trial, I don't see the trial having much bearing on IT.....


Maybe mirrored is simply the wrong analysis word, as it implies perfect reflection. Perhaps complemented is a better word. And I believe the prosecution IS arguing over law v chaos, with the defense arguing that what they did was good, and preventing evil (thus good v. evil)

Thus we have all four extremes of alignment battling it out physically or cereberally in two different and complementary storylines.

and it is one heck of a great story.

[Eriol]

"The gods have wisdom and understanding beyond what you or I can possibly grasp, and if they didn't want the Sapphire Guard to bring these perpertrators to justice, wouldn't they have revoked the divine power granted to the arresting officer?"
I'd take the "Durkon Perspective" on that one: what if the Gods knew that new protectors of the gates were needed, since they saw Xykon's threat, and so needed the Order to get taken before the Sapphire Guard so that they could learn the story, and WHY they had to stop Xykon once they thought him destroyed.

Roy's oath would keep him after Xykon of course, but still, it's kinda plausable from the Gods' perspective.

[xyzchyx]

I'd take the "Durkon Perspective" on that one: what if the Gods knew that new protectors of the gates were needed, since they saw Xykon's threat, and so needed the Order to get taken before the Sapphire Guard so that they could learn the story, and WHY they had to stop Xykon once they thought him destroyed.

Roy's oath would keep him after Xykon of course, but still, it's kinda plausable from the Gods' perspective.
Woah. That's, like... deep.

[Darius Midnite]

Really good job you've done there Rich..

Me like the long text and the funny punch-line to finish it of with..

Very good! :D

[Melnor]

I have to agree with V though. Celia's arguement was a little brief, and could be missing a vital part that could win the case for them. Let's just hope that Lord Shojo didn't fall asleep.

Actually, I had assumed that the final panel in the comic would show Shojo asleep, but once again, the Giant has overstepped me in sheer brilliance!

[FreeloadingSausage]

LOL... I think Celia has been reading this forum.


I think the Giant has been reading this forum.

I know, surprise, surprise.

I want Celia to join the party!

C'mon Mr. The Giant, pleeeaasseee?

[killingwithasmile]

" we live in a world of black and white morality."

ha great stuff cant wait for the verdict or the cross to some other story and then the verdict.

[PhoeKun]

Good strip. The arguments are well laid out, and this reminds me of my absolute favorite part of D&D: when 2 NPCs debate with each other, leaving the DM to argue with himself.

Priceless.

[Duskrider_Moogle]

Oh, also, I don't think Jones' argument works for one reason: as Shojo said, divine intervention on this magnitude might undo the trap (ie, reality). So the gods sent their agents, which is what they do, ya know.

[coyote6]

That was absolutely terrific, Rich.


Let's just hope that Lord Shojo didn't fall asleep.

I don't think it would matter to the verdict; isn't the celestial the judge?

[Edmund]

Hahahahaha... ha. I don't get it.

Great argument, though.

[Sylian]

This comic was interesting, though I felt it was more of a board discussion about alignments.
But, since it might be critical for the story, it's useful.
V was funny!

I don't know what'll happend after this. Who will win?
Will there be a cut to Miko vs Belkar?

The worst thinkt that could happend (aside from very bad things, like not getting anymore strips) is perhaps a cut screen to the Linear Guild. They're interesting, but now atleast I want to see the trial or Miko vs Belkar.

Oh, and go Miko! She has much more potentional to grow into an really interesting character, Belkar's just there for jokes mostly, and he's really Evil.

Not neutral, not good, Evil!
Would kill puppies for fun, probably.

[theKOT]

Not neutral, not good, Evil!
Would kill puppies for fun, probably.
Then eat them. Don't forget the eating part!

[DeathQuaker]

I've been trying to stay away from posting to message boards (I've been letting myself get too distracted by them) but I _had_ to log on after reading this.

This was beautiful. *wipes tear from eye* Rich, you are a very, very good writer. Even if you are preaching to the audience a little more obviously than some, but it's well placed, well timed, and well worth it.

And V's comment at the end was priceless (I also liked "Testify, testify, testify, testify on your own behalf.")

I look forward to the resolution to this storyline, coming along so nicely, and on to saving the world! (Or rotting in jail, whichever comes first ;) )

[morbiczer]

To be honest, I'm glad that the trial is now over.

With the exception of the crayon saga I think this court strips were subpar (for my taste at least).

[Sylian]

Then eat them. Don't forget the eating part!
Eat them infront of their mother. After he has eaten them, he throws the bones at the mother, laughing as the bone connect with the mothers skull.
The dog run away. Belkar sits down and sighs.
The fun for him is over.

Hmm... Would he do that? I don't think he's smart enought, and has the patiens to eat a puppy alive.
To much work holding it still.

[SteveMB]

A being of pure law wouldn't, but a being of pure law would be, by definition, Lawful Neutral, not Lawful Good. A being of pure justice must. There can be no justice when rules are absolute.
Reminds me of this passage:

"What is your definition of justice?"
"Justice, Elijah, is that which exists when all the laws are enforced."
Fastolfe nodded. "A good definition, Mr. Baley, for a robot.... A human being can recognize the fact that, on the basis of an abstract moral code, some laws may be bad ones and their enforcement unjust. What do you say, R. Daneel?"
"An unjust law," said R. Daneel evenly, "is a contradiction in terms."
-- Isaac Asimov (The Caves Of Steel)

[Bitterbadger]

Ooo, The Caves of Steel, it's been quite a while since I read that one.

Nice comic, Giant.

[Ayago22]

Celia is my hero, this is exactly how I feel about alignments!

Yay for the Giant!

[Marller]

Spoiler was here.

If the Giant had the same idea as me, the miko hater will get what they want but they will still be disappointed.

[CarpeAmentum]

Does it count as still having your powers if you are dead?


also, cool new sig
|
\/

[BURNhollywoodBURN]

Are you sure you weren't a lawyer in a previous life? Those two arguments are great.
Too brief indeed.

Enigma

Acctually, a "lawer" in real life wouldn't get whatever anyone said. What Cielia said translated into common would be "If Elan had not destroyed xykon's castle we would let his plan be carried out(Though noone knows Redcloak is still alive).

[Jabby]

Wow this hits so close to home. I feel like i am reading arguments about using nuclear weapons in world war 2. Giant you are a story-teller for the ages! I am glad i could support you in buying some books. Great work!

[Tawkis]

Epically brilliant ^^

[cyberchihuahua]

Something in the closing arguments gave me this thought.

The rifts were not created by the gods, and presumanly they were not imediatly aware of them.

The gates were not created by the gods, nor were they crafted under a divine mandate.

If this is true, and I may have missed something along the way, how is it the the gods have jurisdiction on this matter at all? That could blow the whole case for the prosecution right there.

[BURNhollywoodBURN]

Something in the closing arguments gave me this thought.

The rifts were not created by the gods, and presumanly they were not imediatly aware of them.

The gates were not created by the gods, nor were they crafted under a divine mandate.

If this is true, and I may have missed something along the way, how is it the the gods have jurisdiction on this matter at all? That could blow the whole case for the prosecution right there.



that is a good point, and who is to say that teh ORder of the Stick was not sinply unknowingly playing out the plan of the gods...

[rebellioussong]

damn i just posted under my brothers name insted...stupid not signing out... anyway the above comments belong to me

[The_Shrike]

God, who is she ^^

awesome comic, but how can they tie in balkar?

[Odd_Thomas]

Am i the only one who skipped the 50 word last words? "V" is cool.

[The_Ducky_Ninja]

When I become a lawyer and I have a case about rightness vs. lawness, I'm gonna use the "Celia Argument". Good stuff.

I was gonna say something else witty, but the sheer awesomeness of this comic knocked it out of my brain. I look forward to seeing a comic completely unrelated to the trial on friday (similar to what The Giant did to us when the Miko v Belkar storyline started to get really heated).

[Caledonian]

Law is about actions and not intentions. Good is about intentions and not actions.

The question becomes: are the deities primarily Lawful and secondarily Good, or Good and secondarily Lawful?

[Skojar]

Something in the closing arguments gave me this thought.

The rifts were not created by the gods, and presumanly they were not imediatly aware of them.

The gates were not created by the gods, nor were they crafted under a divine mandate.

If this is true, and I may have missed something along the way, how is it the the gods have jurisdiction on this matter at all? That could blow the whole case for the prosecution right there.

The real clincher in my mind is that the original party of heroes agreed not to interfere with each other's gates and defenses (#277), so if nothing else I feel that the juristdiction of the Sapphire Guard is in question. By imposing their judgement on the OoTS, they are breaking the original agreement made by Soon...not very LG. Of course, Celia's approach is good too.

[WeaponMasterLDO]

Of course a lawful good government shoudn't adhere to meaningless laws, it doesn't even have free speech!

[Devils_Advocate]

A Monty Python reference.
Oh? I missed that one.


I actually take issue with Celia's legal argument. She's completely discounted the harm (non-Good) that could be done by weakeneing the prescriptive force of laws in general.
Ah, but potential criminals can only be deterred by laws they actually know about. The prohibition against destroying the gates is a secret law, as it must be for the gates themselves to remain a secret. A law cannot be weakened as a deterrent if it never served as a deterrent in the first place. So that argument does not apply in this case, as allowing all sorts of exceptions to secret laws doesn't weaken the general prescriptive force of laws at all, since only non-secret laws have such force.


Not only was it a brilliant comic with good arguments on both sides, regardless of where you come down on the arguemtnt, but in addition, really gives some insight into how people can play allignments in game play. I have always hated the fact that my LG characters could be forced to do something evil because it was the law. Granted, part of that was the DM just exerting control over the storyline, but still.
Forced by whom? It is not an alignment violation for a Lawful Good character to refuse to do something because it is evil. Indeed, I should think that a Lawful Good character who did not have "commit no clearly evil acts" as one of the most important rules of his code of ethics would be the exception rather than the rule. It may not be enumerated in some official list, but that's because it's taken for granted! A Lawful Good character follow/uses the law because (s)he believes doing so to be in service of good. Such a character would naturally see evil done in the name of law as opposed to the law's fundamental purpose. From this perspective, a law that commands evil is either illegitimate or flawed, and it is proper to oppose or attempt to change such a law. ... You know, I'm kinda repeating a lot of what Celia said here, actually.

Of course, that's just one sort of Lawful Good. One could call it the "paladinic" variety. The paladin class is sort of designed for a character interested in being/doing Good in a Lawful way, as (slightly) opposed to following/promoting Law in a Good way. A paladin is forbidden from committing a single Evil act or associating with Evil people and can detect Evil and smite Evil (but can commit a single Chaotic act and associate with Chaotic people and doesn't normally detect or smite Chaos). Roy is a good example of the former, generally more heroic type of Lawful Good, and, umm... Miko is a good example of the latter. Yup, Roy is more in keeping with the spirit of paladinhood, while Miko mostly just follows the letter. And of course following the letter rather than the spirit of her class is in keeping with the way she's generally more concerned with the letter of the law than its spirit. She's the less heroic variety of Lawful Good, despite the fact that she may do a lot of heroic things. It makes her a rather ironic sort of paladin.

In short, Lawful Good can mean "Lawful, but Good", but it can also mean "Good, but Lawful". Although I suppose that the ideal Lawful Good character would see no conflict between Law and Good. Following the right sort of law is essential for that, of course.


Unless it did something to make him angry, I really don't see Belkar wanting to kill a wussy little puppy. That would be entirely too easy. And he certainly wouldn't just eat it, not without properly preparing it first! Eating a piece of raw deal animal would send Belkar straight into culinary shock!

[Jack Squat]

I feel a quote coming on ;D

"A jury consists of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer."
Robert Frost

[McBish]

Best line intodays comic " the defense will try to obfuscate the simplicity of this awnser..." Just because of the word obfuscate, which I now know is indeed a word.

Second goes to Roy's "... If somebody wasn't whispering 'testify, testify, testify on your own behalf'..."

Great strip.

[Gralamin]

V's comment has just made him my favorite character forever, I say meh all the time!

[warmachine]

When someone says he's right because the divine haven't tried to stop him, he's a fanatic and you keep him away from anything important, children or the gullible. However, in a world where the gods do exist and actually communicate, claiming their silence as evidence is not completely lunatic. But they don't communicate that much, so silence is too unreliable to mean anything.

Clerics can obtain divine judgements via the Commune spell. This spell would be cast for a trial of this importance. The Sapphire Guard claim a divine mandate yet don't obtain divine decisions. Either they consult with extra-planar beings but don't care about divine opinion or they cannot obtain divine opinion after all, even via the extra-planar beings. In the former case, they're hypocrites and so is the jury. In the latter, they're fanatics. Either way, it's a kangaroo court.

[The_Weirdo]

A being of pure law wouldn't, but a being of pure law would be, by definition, Lawful Neutral, not Lawful Good. A being of pure justice must. There can be no justice when rules are absolute.

Quoted for truth.

Summum jus, summa injuria.

[Electric_Monkey]

The gods didn't intervene to prevent Elan's destruction of the gate, even though Durkon provided a convenient conduit for divine warnings. I move for a case of negligent damage against Thor.

[Devils_Advocate]

Something in the closing arguments gave me this thought.

The rifts were not created by the gods, and presumanly they were not imediatly aware of them.

The gates were not created by the gods, nor were they crafted under a divine mandate.

If this is true, and I may have missed something along the way, how is it the the gods have jurisdiction on this matter at all? That could blow the whole case for the prosecution right there.
First of all, why would you assume that the gods only have jurisdiction over what they create? It's not like political power is limited in that way in the mortal world. ("Your honor, I have conclusive evidence that the department of wildlife never even created the endangered species my client is alleged to have killed. I therefore move for immediate dismissal.")

Secondly, the gods created the world, its mortal inhabitants, and (unintentionally, through their bickering and thread-pulling) the Snarl. So even assuming that they only have any business regulating their creations, handing down laws that prevent mortals from releasing the Snarl to destroy the world qualifies on three counts (as it deals with mortals, the world, and the Snarl).

As a practical matter, being a ruler just means that other people follow your commands. In this case, all that's really relevant is whether (and how) the gods' worshippers (Shojo, the being of pure Law and Good) follow their orders. And it's not like the gods that the Sapphire Guard serves are in charge of that organization because they siezed power and forced its members to follow their orders. They rule because a bunch of Lawful Good people willingly decided to follow them and enforce their will. I'd like to hear of a less questionable source of worldly authority.

[Gralamin]

The gods didn't intervene to prevent Elan's destruction of the gate, even though Durkon provided a convenient conduit for divine warnings. I move for a case of negligent damage against Thor.

you dare accuse thor of being negligent? oh. (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=201) I see what you mean.

Edit: dang silent letters.

[redmind0]

Celia's argument is an absolute treasure; it should be added to the "alignment" section of every WoTC product from here on out. Bravo!

I agree with El Jaspero. I also think the argument was too short.

Celia is hawt.

[humanpylon]

Reminds me of this passage:

"What is your definition of justice?"
"Justice, Elijah, is that which exists when all the laws are enforced."
Fastolfe nodded. "A good definition, Mr. Baley, for a robot.... A human being can recognize the fact that, on the basis of an abstract moral code, some laws may be bad ones and their enforcement unjust. What do you say, R. Daneel?"
"An unjust law," said R. Daneel evenly, "is a contradiction in terms."
-- Isaac Asimov (The Caves Of Steel)

With all apologies to the Giant, Isaac Asimov: Best author ever.

[AtomicKitKat]

*snicker*

Only V would find a closing statement taking up half the entire strip too brief. ;D

[koran_the_archmage]

Great comic, Rich. I really enjoyed this one.

On the nit-picking side of things, doesn't the prosecution usually go last, because they have the burden of proof?

BECAUSE the prosecution has the burden of proof, they go first, then goes the defendant, knowing from what he must defent himself...

Hey! First post (quite a clichê for a lawyer)

see ye

[Bilbo27]

elan's singing + celia's defense + V's awesome statement+ another Priceless strip GIANT WTG!!!

[Marlene]

:) wow. good strip. it should totaly be included in any further publications of D20 gaming manuals (with appropriate compensation to you of course! $$)

[Zeekar]

Retainer? Speed dial? Hell with all that, I say.

In fact, I say...Celia...will you marry me? (I'm not certain, but this may be the first time a character in this strip has been proposed to. Heh.)

Sorry, but you've been beaten to the punch - at least by the guy who has a proposal to Miko in his signature on every post. :)

[mdsoze]

BECAUSE the prosecution has the burden of proof, they go first, then goes the defendant, knowing from what he must defent himself...

Hey! First post (quite a clichê for a lawyer)

see ye


I thought that was in the case opening statements. But I figured that in closing statements, the side with the burden of proof would get the last word. Probably from my experience in policy debate, where the affirmative side gets the first and last word. I am glad to be educated.

[mec]

I've got a problem with Mr. Jones's argument.

Jones cites a factual claim: that Miko has not lost her powers. However he has not presented any good evidence to establish that fact. He didn't obtain Miko's testimony directly. And Miko is easily available to the court, so evidence from other people such as Hinjo ("yeah she had powers when we left her at the halfling's cell") would not be -- how do lawyers say it? -- not the best available evidence. It would be hearsay.

Perhaps a real lawyer could extract the idea out of that and make it presentable? It looks awkward when I write it.

[Namfoodle2]

When he talks about Miko's powers, I think he's mostly referring to the fact that she was able to use her powers to defeat the entire party and drag them to the court.

He's unaware that Miko and Belkar are currently fighting it out. He's also unaware of all the posts wondering about Belkar forcing Miko to do something evil and loose her powers.

The outcome of the battle remains to be seen, but I'm rooting for Belkar. He's way cooler than Miko. And the fact that he lifted that healing potion is a huge tactical advantage. Miko will be in for shock when she can't find it.

I don't think he would eat a puppy, either. Puppies don't have a high enough CR for Belkar.

[Grunjon]

http://www.wackyb.co.nz/yh/Yahoo_v700426_Smileys/yh700426_77.gif I bow with respect to The Giant! A great read, well-written! Totally awesome...I'm not worthy!!!!

[redmind0]

Celia is hawt.

Yes, I do realize that her whole upper torso could fit in her mouth.

[spite48]

BECAUSE the prosecution has the burden of proof, they go first, then goes the defendant, knowing from what he must defent himself...

Hey! First post (quite a clichê for a lawyer)

see ye


The rest of us were preparing a factum on the subject.

I agree with my learned friend's analysis, however, I regret the paucity of large words with which he expressed it.

We've got a reputation for inscrutability to uphold.

[infiniteviking]

Yay for mammoth strips! *cue lumbering mastadons in the distance*

*snickering* Elan just can't do anything that doesn't annoy Roy, can he? Which makes Roy's endorsement of Elan's blunder all the more powerful.

I love how Jones talks about not overdramatizing things with talk of heroes and quests, and then exhorts the court to follow the unspoken will of heaven. And then Celia's argument that there's nothing wrong with a chequered universe.... no talk about 'shades of gray', just the simple statement that an action's moral value depends on its context. 'And if he hadn't, we might all be speaking goblin now'. Go, Celia!

Vaarsuvius's closing words made me LAUGH OUT LOUD. 'Meh. I found her argument far too brief for my taste.' This, coming from the undisputed master of obfustication -- and just the fact that V's vocabulary includes 'Meh'..! Priceless.

[Lianae]

I love V!

[Josh_Kablack]

And here I thought Rich's ponderously verbose strip was merely spoofing the numerous pointlessly long and inevitably inconclusive alignment arguments found on any D&D related message board with its length.

[Max_Overload]

I have to say that Celia's closing argument was a brilliant review of the alignment system in D&D.

It will certainly be required reading for the alignment miscreants in my games.

[Amotis]

*plays law and order air guitar*

[mec]

When he talks about Miko's powers, I think he's mostly referring to the fact that she was able to use her powers to defeat the entire party and drag them to the court.

What fact? Courts generally require evidence and witnesses to establish a fact, unless the other side agrees to stipulate the fact.

I'm not disputing that Miko has her powes. (And yay Miko!) I'm pointing out that Jones hasn't produced any good evidence to the court that Miko has her powers.

[JessmanCA]

Yuck. I have to say this is the first OOTS I couldn't bring myself to read all of.

..Just one person's opinion.

[dragon95046]

The prosecution may well have presented evidence proving that Miko did/does still have access to her powers. We saw only snippets of the actual trial, with only partial sentences from a handful of witnesses, and who knows how many witnesses may have gone through off panel while Miko and Belkar sparred. I would hazard a guess that we saw/heard/read less than 1% of what would have been happening in that trial (and thankfully so).

In short, I don't think we, as readers, have enough information to really debate the merits of this case, nor the validity of the closing arguments...

...though that has never stopped anyone before. ;D

Aa an aside, I think the Law/Chaos alignment axis could be more accurately labeled Order/Chaos.

[The Glitter Ninja]

Wow, what a terrific strip. It's an allegory! It's commentary on RPGs! It's all that and more. Wonderful writing, Rich, very moving and to the point.

I'm extremely impressed with this strip and ep #282 is one of the reasons I've been a fan of OOTS for so long. You done good, Rich. Thank you.

(Oh, look, people are complaining that there were "too many words". To them I say, go read a picture book so you don't sprain your fragile widdle brains. Obviously this strip is too much for you. Feh.)

[Kamakazee_Gnome]

I am SO showing this to my DM who'll have a paladin lose their powers for walking on the grass!

Oh and as for V's comment: Best. Punchline. Ever.

[Sc00by]

lots of words make thog sc00by's head hurt.

Yay! for overly verbose comics! but rocket skates are still better...

[IRSWalker]

"...we might all be speaking Goblin..."

Very, very, very good! I can only assume that Mr Burlew has spent some time in the delightful company of the British tabloid press.

I loved the way that in the comic world, the characters understood the alignment system, and how it affected them, which kind of breaks the 3.5th wall (tm). I wonder if there are stick-universe philosphers who study this sort of thing?

Perhaps a stick-Descartes, postulating "I think I'm lawful and good, therefore I am Lawful Good"

[The Giant]

And here I thought Rich's ponderously verbose strip was merely spoofing the numerous pointlessly long and inevitably inconclusive alignment arguments found on any D&D related message board with its length.

Who said it wasn't? ;)

[Charity]

Nice one Rich, having recently participated in just such a meaningless and inconclusive debate, I salute you for your perfect mimicry of the routinely overly verbose style of those whom find this sort of debate irresistible.
;)

[Delgarde]

Good strip. The arguments are well laid out, and this reminds me of my absolute favorite part of D&D: when 2 NPCs debate with each other, leaving the DM to argue with himself.

Even more so if you have someone good at putting on accents, using a different one for each character.

[Single Shot Zombie]

<Comes back home from school, washes up, turns on computer and goes to GiantITP.com to read Rich's latesr comic.>

<Reads the extremely verbose closing arguments.>

<Sees Vaarsuvius' comment.>

<Drops dead of excessive laughter. ;D>

That. Was. Classic. It's just as good as that battle scene in "On The Origin Of PCs" - and that's saying something.

(For those of you who haven't read that book by Rich, go find out yourself; I shan't spoil it for you. :P)

[Freelance Henchman]

Celia: blah blah blah alignments blah blah blah gods blah blah blah right and wrong blah blah blah universe blah blah blah [2 hours later] blah blah blah ... not guilty. Thank you.

V: Meh. Too short.

ROFL fantastic!

[The_Weirdo]

Folks, I don't think it's about V being a mage, it's about him being an ELF. Think about it, elves live far longer than humans. They have the time and use it too (as proven in some sourcebooks in which elves have potions and stuff that takes about 10 years to make). See my point?

[Alfryd]

A Monty Python reference.
Curse you, acolyte! Your Chapman Lore doth exceed mine own! Reveal unto me the lost reference.


One, did anybody else think that Celia's closing argument was far too general?
Little bit. She's new at this. Jones' argument was too narrow.

"An unjust law," said R. Daneel evenly, "is a contradiction in terms."

And of course following the letter rather than the spirit of her class is in keeping with the way [Miko's] generally more concerned with the letter of the law than its spirit.
Ah, love Asimov. See Robotic Good in the Miko FRC.

Law is about actions and not intentions...
Which is why we never distinguish between manslaughter, murder, attempted murder and acts of self-defence... Oops! Silly me. Carry on.

...the original party of heroes agreed not to interfere with each other's gates and defenses...
On the grounds of personal disagreements irrelevant to the central issue.

Clerics can obtain divine judgements via the Commune spell.
It's possible the Gods are unclear on the issue themselves.

I'd like to hear of a less questionable source of worldly authority [than the Gods.]
It is conceivable that the Gods could be malevolent bastards intent on torturing their creation (and certain members appear to be,) in which case virtually any other authority would be less questionable.


Yuck. I have to say this is the first OOTS I couldn't bring myself to read all of.
Sweet, blessed Ritalin.


And here I thought Rich's ponderously verbose strip was merely spoofing the numerous pointlessly long and inevitably inconclusive alignment arguments found on any D&D related message board with its length.

Who said it wasn't?
Um... given it didn't appear to be primarily humorous, perhaps it was implied? I may be missing something here.

I don't actually read most of what's posted here anymore.
I'm surprised it's even possible to read the majority of everything posted here.

[Mute]

Curse you, acolyte! Your Chapman Lore doth exceed mine own! Reveal unto me the lost reference.


I think he refers to Roy's "and no singing!".

[Vengeful_Hand]

Yup, that's Michael Palin, in Holy Grail. I'm surprised Roy hasn't used that before now actually. Elan does seem a little like the kid Herbert in MP and the HG. 8)

[Lady_Orc]

Folks, I don't think it's about V being a mage, it's about him being an ELF. Think about it, elves live far longer than humans. They have the time and use it too (as proven in some sourcebooks in which elves have potions and stuff that takes about 10 years to make). See my point?

Good point, and it reminds me of Tolkien's ents. Can't you just imagine V in a debate that takes a decade just to say 'good morning'? Plus, although the ents weren't genderly ambiguous as such, they had lost the entwives, poor things.

[Eldhrin]

I love it! V's comment at the end fixes it up perfectly. I'm sure, however, that Elan's bard song for Roy (or should that be bard whispering) was entirely unnecessary.

I am loving how the Miko/Belkar fight is parallelling what's being discussed in the courtroom to some extent. I didn't realise it until this strip, but it suddenly became quite clear. I wonder what the great planar being of justice and truth will think of all this.

Especially since it probably knows about Miko and Belkar. And Celia doesn't.

[slb]

Yup, that's Michael Palin, in Holy Grail. I'm surprised Roy hasn't used that before now actually. Elan does seem a little like the kid Herbert in MP and the HG. 8)

Right ! http://www.mwscomp.com/movies/grail/grail-14.htm


I'm surprised Roy hasn't used that before now actually. Elan does seem a little like the kid Herbert in MP and the HG. 8)

They sure do share the same Int score, but I doubt the Giant was quoting the Monty Python ... "no singing" seems to be an obvious command that Roy would have told to Elan (Although I thank Zibeck to have reminded us all this awesome fun the Holy Grail was)

[Gefangnis]

As an aspiring constitutional lawyer, these recent comics have left me with a very warm, fuzzy feeling.

As always, thanks for the great strip!

[Supagoof]

Sublime, simply sublime.

Perhaps, if Celia hadn't come along, then V could have handled the defense, and gotten the judge to throw the "OMG this defense is taking far too long to get to the point, I'm bored, case dismissed" statement into the trial.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm taking this comic and am going to go slap our DM in the face. ;)

[cruciare]

Great comic Giant!

As always, thanks for the amusing read, now I just gotta wait until friday to see the epic comclusion!

[IRSWalker]

Hey, it's only taken me 14 comics, but I just noticed Celia's suit! Love the Ally McBeal look!

[chully]

I've finally been incited to join the forum, so I'll give this latest comic at least that much credit.

To be perfectly honest, I've dropped from checking on the comic every publishing day, to perhaps once a week at best. What happened to the witty slandering of d20 gamers and manipulation of the rules?

That, was funny. What isn't very funny is the entire subplot revolving around Miko. It's bordering on asinine, yes, but that isn't enough to make it funny. At some point I wondered if I were the only one, but alas, every gamer that I personally know (okay, a grand total of about twelve people) agrees with me. Some went from avid fans to "I don't read the webcomic anymore".

What I'm wondering is where all of these "bravo" comments are coming from? Is everyone in my office and social circle simply wrong?

Although the Miko and Belkar strips are amusing, I have to say these are disappointing as well. I would have expected that little letch to at least have hinted at improper conduct whilst Miko lay unconscious, perhaps Belkar calling into question whether or not she could even remain a paladin after their little tryst, however involuntary on Miko's part. But I digress.

Opinion: More of the "Sssssh! We're random encounters! Hide!!" and much less of this legal banter. It's getting old.

[humanpylon]

Well excuse us Philistines for enjoying plot and character development along with the funny one liners.

[Freelance Henchman]

More of the "Sssssh! We're random encounters! Hide!!" and much less of this legal banter. It's getting old.

I think it improves the strip to have an actual story going on, rather than making jokes about the D&D-rules over and over. I thought the earlier strips had more laugh-out-loud moments, but *that* gets tiring too. The current story "exposition", which also has frequently very funny jokes strewn in, provides a change of pace after 200 more or less one-off joke strips. I liked the crayon-drawing history of the world very much; it was wonderful fantasy storytelling *and* had the occasional joke.

OOTS is, I think, not only a 3-panels-one-joke comic like Dilbert (also good, but very different) etc. but actually manages to tell a rather long and well thought-out story *as well*. And that's what I like about it very much.

[The_Weirdo]

I find it amazing how can someone not have liked Belkar's "true psychopath" moment. And the "needs pepper" remark. And the Wang. And the "far too short for my taste". And the "kitty-judge". And the "When in doubt, set something on fire" remark...

Oh, yeah, you're right, the comic isn't funny at all anymore. (Being sarcastic here)

[theKOT]

More of the "Sssssh! We're random encounters! Hide!!" and much less of this legal banter. It's getting old.
I blame cerebus. Seriously, this was covered in comic 242. OOTS is take it or leave it. You can't steer the direction of the strip by posting in the forums. I LOVE the new direction, and even though I have never played D&D or anything similar, I can enjoy these strips. Read 242. A strip can't maintain a plot and make every comic be centered around little quips. Once characters are developed, their personalities are the center of jokes and the strip or book reaches a new level of depth.

[Alfryd]

To be perfectly honest, I've dropped from checking on the comic every publishing day, to perhaps once a week at best. What happened to the witty slandering of d20 gamers and manipulation of the rules?
There is only one reliable method of settling this. We must summon a Being of Pure Objective Criticism from the lower planes, or myself, to render judgement. He, or I, will read every OotS in succession from No. 1 in the archives, plus the books, and rate their hilarity factor by page on a scale of 1 to 10, where South Park is 3.5 and Terry Pratchett is 7.3. We will then plot the graph across time with allowance for standard deviation to determine whether or not the strip has gotten funnier and you are an Scrubbed.

As it so happens, here's one I made earlier:

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?&range=2y&size=medium&compare_site s=&y=r&url=www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript#top

[Freeman333]

Aaaaaaand that settles that. I would have mentioned the Cerebus strip, but it's been done, so I'd say we've pretty much covered the issue.

Anyway, I was particularly interested in the alignment discussion the Giant posted in today's strip. I've always been fascinated by the disconnect between the, as Celia says, "black and white" moral universe of Dungeons and Dragons and our own "gray" universe. As stated in the PHB, alignment and morality don't work in D&D like they do in our world; they don't depend upon a person's subjective interpretation of the moral value of certain actions or beliefs, but rather upon an objective value that can be ascertained and evaluated by any number of individuals and yet yield the same result. A person doesn't arbitrarily assign his or her beliefs as "good" and all opposing beliefs as "evil", as in our world; rather, there is an objective scale of "good vs. evil", not to mention "law vs. chaos", upon which an individual falls.

Though it's rarely considered by the game's players, this has some fairly serious implications for the people who live in such a world. I mean, one of the major defining features of humankind is the fact that we are capable of making overarching moral judgements based upon subjective observations. Without that ability, our history and natures would be vastly different from what they are. But in D&D, that's exactly the situation we're faced with: not only humans, but any number of other rational, sapient races, possessing the ability to think abstractly but WITHOUT either the need or the ability (the first giving, presumably, rise to the latter) to judge morality on a subjective level, since "morality" is already an inarguable aspect of a person's being, and it can be "viewed" by any spellcaster capable of observing auras.

Combine this with the fact that in D&D you have gods that are corporally manifest, and whose existence is never really in any sort of objective doubt, and you've got a race of "humans" with a totally different set of relations between the concrete and the abstract than the creatures we typically define as human (namely, us)--and yet, like I say, this aspect of the game world is almost never (so far as I've been able to tell) explored by the players.

So. Yeah. Good strip, Giant. If we're going to posit a universe with absolutely non-abstract ("black and white") conditions for morality, I think it's incumbent upon us (as bored people with too much time on their hands) to explore the necessary moralistic ramifications of such. Go to it, class. At least 1000 words, double spaced, 12 point font, due on Sunday. Extra credit for giving me ice cream.

[Marller]

What I'm wondering is where all of these "bravo" comments are coming from? Is everyone in my office and social circle simply wrong?
Nobody is wrong. The comic evolved. People start to dislike it, other people start to like it. The target audience shifted a little bit, so to speak.

Happened for me with the Anita Blake books, too. The first 9 books i liked but the newer books are more or less doorstoppers, in my opinion.

[Friv]

What I'm wondering is where all of these "bravo" comments are coming from? Is everyone in my office and social circle simply wrong?

Yes?

I dunno, everyone I talk to loves the strip, and I like it as much or more with the plot. Maybe you're just not looking for the same thing in a comic.

[Kish]

Although the Miko and Belkar strips are amusing, I have to say these are disappointing as well. I would have expected that little letch to at least have hinted at improper conduct whilst Miko lay unconscious, perhaps Belkar calling into question whether or not she could even remain a paladin after their little tryst, however involuntary on Miko's part.
Um...yeah.

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who would consider implied rape not only not at all funny on any level, but to cross a particular line in Belkar's portrayal. If that's what you're looking for here, I'm glad to say I think you'll never stop being disappointed.

[NephandiMan]

I realize I'm a little late in this thread to be doing Law and Order riffs, but I thought this up just now and had to share it:

"In the criminal justice system, unraveling the fabric of reality is considered especially heinous. In Sapphire City, the bumbling fools who perpetrate this vicious felony are part of a ragtag party known as the Order of the Stick. These are their stories." DUNT DUNT!

It's best if you read it in the deep voice used for the L&O:SVU opening sequence.

[mec]

The prosecution may well have presented evidence proving that Miko did/does still have access to her powers. We saw only snippets of the actual trial, with only partial sentences from a handful of witnesses, and who knows how many witnesses may have gone through off panel while Miko and Belkar sparred. I would hazard a guess that we saw/heard/read less than 1% of what would have been happening in that trial (and thankfully so).

Oh, sure. Jones maybe did call Hinjo to testify about Miko. But that's hearsay -- it's inferior to calling Miko directly. Since Miko works for Shojo and is in the castle, it would be reasonable for Jones to examine her directly. I think it's damaging to his case that his closing statement relies on evidence that he never showed, or only showed by hearsay.


As an aside, I think the Law/Chaos alignment axis could be more accurately labeled Order/Chaos.

Me too.

[Namfoodle2]

I think that Jones is saying that the mere presense of the OOTS is proof that Miko has some sort of Divine Right because it is known she brought them. His argument would be better if she demonstrated lay on hands at just that moment, but he doesn't care, he's just trying railroad things along, and it may backfire on him.

[Sylvius]

Ah, but potential criminals can only be deterred by laws they actually know about. The prohibition against destroying the gates is a secret law, as it must be for the gates themselves to remain a secret. A law cannot be weakened as a deterrent if it never served as a deterrent in the first place. So that argument does not apply in this case, as allowing all sorts of exceptions to secret laws doesn't weaken the general prescriptive force of laws at all, since only non-secret laws have such force.

Okay, that completely destroys my argument...

But, it raises a bigger problem. How can anyone ever be held responsible for breaking a law of which they could not have been aware? The whole assertion that ignorance of the law is no excuse relies on the assumption that there was some available alternative to ignorance.

With secret laws, every single thing you do in a day could potentially be a violation of some secret law of which you could not possibly be aware. Doesn't Good require an element of fairness?

[Namfoodle2]

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who would consider implied rape not only not at all funny on any level, but to cross a particular line in Belkar's portrayal.

Thankfully, Rich made his Wisdom save against thinking anything along those lines would be funny (assuming it ever crossed his mind, which is doubtful, anyway).

A failed wisdom save can be a terrible burden to bear.

Over 20 years ago, I failed my save and decided that it would be a good idea to fling a spoonfull of chocolate pudding at the DM (in his parents' house). Even after 20 years, my friends still give me a hard time about it. ::)

[Grey Watcher]

I would have expected that little letch to at least have hinted at improper conduct whilst Miko lay unconscious...

Well, granted, Order of the Stick goes beyond a G-rating, but that's pretty heavy territory, and it would be awfully difficult to go back to making light-hearted jokes about ANYTHING (rules trivia or whatever) after something like that. It's a very dark turn, and something that is almost impossible to make humorous (and even if you did, 90-some-odd% of your audience would be so shocked, they'd leave).

Besides, Belkar is pretty consistently focused on causing harm to others. There's only twice he's ever expressed a lustful side: he had a passing interest in Samantha, and he hit on Roy, and even the latter was just an attempt to mess with Roy's mind. It think it's pretty obvious that this whole running fight with Miko is just a game to Belkar. That's part of the joke of the strip, that Belkar gives up an obvious chance to either escape or coup de grace Miko because it's more fun to be chased around and to frustrate her than to actually kill her.

[Caledonian]

Good and evil are all about intent. Belkar's sparing Miko's life is actually an evil and chaotic act precisely because of his reasons for doing so - another person doing the same thing might be good and lawful.

[Starbuck_II]

There is only one reliable method of settling this. We must summon a Being of Pure Objective Criticism from the lower planes, or myself, to render judgement. He, or I, will read every OotS in succession from No. 1 in the archives, plus the books, and rate their hilarity factor by page on a scale of 1 to 10, where South Park is 3.5 and Terry Pratchett is 7.3. We will then plot the graph across time with allowance for standard deviation to determine whether or not the strip has gotten funnier and you are an imbicele.

Thou shalt not blasphemy against the holy South Park: I mean it has Pandas, Jesus, and God! 8)



But, it raises a bigger problem. How can anyone ever be held responsible for breaking a law of which they could not have been aware? The whole assertion that ignorance of the law is no excuse relies on the assumption that there was some available alternative to ignorance.

With secret laws, every single thing you do in a day could potentially be a violation of some secret law of which you could not possibly be aware. Doesn't Good require an element of fairness?

Hmm, good point.
Does good require fairness? Depends on the creature.

There aer unfair good creatures as well as fair evil creatures (LE maybe). In FF4, you meet one: the Flame Elemental heals you before he fight due to fairness.

[The Giant]

I've finally been incited to join the forum, so I'll give this latest comic at least that much credit.

To be perfectly honest, I've dropped from checking on the comic every publishing day, to perhaps once a week at best. What happened to the witty slandering of d20 gamers and manipulation of the rules?

That, was funny. What isn't very funny is the entire subplot revolving around Miko. It's bordering on asinine, yes, but that isn't enough to make it funny. At some point I wondered if I were the only one, but alas, every gamer that I personally know (okay, a grand total of about twelve people) agrees with me. Some went from avid fans to "I don't read the webcomic anymore".

What I'm wondering is where all of these "bravo" comments are coming from? Is everyone in my office and social circle simply wrong?

Although the Miko and Belkar strips are amusing, I have to say these are disappointing as well. I would have expected that little letch to at least have hinted at improper conduct whilst Miko lay unconscious, perhaps Belkar calling into question whether or not she could even remain a paladin after their little tryst, however involuntary on Miko's part. But I digress.

Opinion: More of the "Sssssh! We're random encounters! Hide!!" and much less of this legal banter. It's getting old.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion. You are also entitled to stop reading the comic whenever it suits you.

Suffice to say, were it not for plot and character development, I would have run out of straight "d20-slandering" jokes about 100 strips ago; I would have lost interest and quit the strip. Where you and your friends have stopped enjoying the strip, there is no shortage of people who haven't—or who enjoy it more. So, I bid you adieu and welcome those willing to take the ride into the uncharted Land of Plot.

EDIT: Oh, and if a main character molesting an unconscious paladin is your idea of funny or appropriate, then as others have said, I'm just as glad to not be filling your need for such. Rape and sexual abuse are not subjects I expect OOTS to cover, ever.

[saraswati]

EDIT: Oh, and if a main character molesting an unconscious paladin is your idea of funny or appropriate, then as others have said, I'm just as glad to not be filling your need for such. Rape and sexual abuse are not subjects I expect OOTS to cover, ever.

Whew! That's kind of a relief. Thanks Giant! I don't mind the occasional dark slapstick(kidneys anyone?), but I'm glad we aren't going to pulling out the Book of Vile Deeds for reference either. (or whatever that one was called, I'm sure I don't know. Cough cough, ahem.)

Alfryd, your reference chart of OOTS funny factor strip by strip is nothing short of scary. Dedicated, impressive, but scary. What is really bizarre is that I would completely reverse your numbers comparisons and rate Prachett as a 3.5 and South park as a 7.2, and yet my own chart would look about the same. I think OOTS is getting funnier too.

As far as I am concerned, we are basically getting a two for one deal on the funny by having plot as well as one-liners.

But what do I know? I regularly laugh at jokes about contract law.

[SirEdward]

Decent closing arguments, though Celia could have done a little better, especially considering the jury.

As for Belkar not doing anything to Miko, I am disappointed that he didn't do some petty form of humiliating or distracting her, such as placing the lead sheet in her own inventory or drawing a silly mustache on her face. As for some of the more perverse ideas that I've seen thrown around, I am glad they will not show up.

[chully]

There is a significant difference between Belkar hinting that something improper might have occured to further unsettle the paladin, and the act of molestation.

It is mildly disconcerting that more than one person could make that leap based upon my previous post, but more disturbing is the apparent lack of tolerance for any form of criticism from the community. Speaks volumes, I'll step out of the sandbox now.

Cheers.

[The Giant]

but more disturbing is the apparent lack of tolerance for any form of criticism from the community. Speaks volumes, I'll step out of the sandbox now.

Yeah, it's quite odd that a community that exists primarily due to the shared love of something would actually ENJOY that thing, and wouldn't immediately change their mind due to a few paragraphs written by a stranger. ::)

Sorry, if you are free to express a negative opinion here, then fans are free to express positive ones. Since your criticism wasn't deleted or edited by the moderators, I don't see how that forms a "lack of tolerance". The only volumes it speaks to me is that you are in the minority on this message board in not liking the strip any more.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Am I the only one to have found the arguments rather weak and uninspired? Celia's was functional, if unoriginal, but if any court were to take Jones' "Lawful Good! Lawful Good! Convict! Lawful Good!" argument seriously, it wouldn't be because they were Lawful Good but because they were stupid. A good court drama has both sides present valid - or at least seductive - points, but this didn't hit the mark in my eyes. I'll be especially disappointed if it turns out that Jones' argument is a set-up for the Order's exoneration by way of Miko falling.


Actually, I had assumed that the final panel in the comic would show Shojo asleep,

Actually I think that would have been funnier, so I tip my cup to you. The "testify chant" was funny, though.

[Caledonian]

EDIT: Oh, and if a main character molesting an unconscious paladin is your idea of funny or appropriate, then as others have said, I'm just as glad to not be filling your need for such. Rape and sexual abuse are not subjects I expect OOTS to cover, ever. Wow. I guess the Stick is a +5 Trollbane weapon after all.

[theKOT]

There is a significant difference between Belkar hinting that something improper might have occured to further unsettle the paladin, and the act of molestation.

It is mildly disconcerting that more than one person could make that leap based upon my previous post, but more disturbing is the apparent lack of tolerance for any form of criticism from the community. Speaks volumes, I'll step out of the sandbox now.

Cheers.

Sigh. You said
...to at least have hinted at improper conduct, which implied that that was not as far as he actually would go. Also, even hinting at it would have been pretty bad. Don't claim "It was your mind that thought of it!" The implication is there.

Although some people in this community think that you should not ever criticize, most, myself included realize a posters right to state their opinion. I myself have before commented that I disliked a strip for this or that reason, but your post had a demanding tone before you EDITED IN that "opinion" tag.

Most people simply enjoy a comic that actually HAS a plot, no matter how funny the plotless ones might be. The comic is, in my opinion, just as funny, but now has jokes that don't take an entire comic to develop. Sometimes (Do you think lord shojo is a robot?) an entire strip is dedicated to humor, but more often the plot is moved while the OOTS' personalities are used for the jokes, instead of the rules. It has to do with it being a story, and not just a bunch of gags. People complained about that robot strip because they said it didn't move the plot enough, so it really just depends on what you like. I'm not telling you to get my opinion or leave. I'm just trying to debate.
edit:

The only volumes it speaks to me is that you are in the minority on this message board in not liking the strip any more.
Awww, we make the Giant happy(at least that is what I inferred from this post). I'm glad. I had, until about a week ago, been worried that the lack of :) s and the increasing frequency of :P s lately meant that the Giant was, well, getting a bit bitter. However, I am very happy to admit that I was wrong. Yay!

[Landon_Fox]

At the risk of sounding like the latest model from Rabid Fanboys Inc, I'm going to have to agree with the author. I've read a number of comics that poked fun at RPG's or other stuff. The ones that didn't bother creating a decent plot became pretty hollow and boring once they ran out of jokes. By making a plot, the Giant has laid the foundation for a long term and entertaining comic.

And considering he will want long-term webtraffic to help grow his independant efforts, it makes good business sense for him to do so as well.

[Gralamin]

Giant is handleing the small pop not liking the strip quite well, unlike the guy who made the late squidi.net.

back on topic, the type of preverse things people have thought of are not Belkar's style. as giant said the strip will not have that type of thing in it, and I would add that Belkar does things in his character, he isn't the type to do that. yes you can be evil without being THAT preverse.

[theKOT]

Giant is handleing the small pop not liking the strip quite well, unlike the guy who made the late squidi.net.

back on topic, the type of preverse things people have thought of are not Belkar's style. as giant said the strip will not have that type of thing in it, and I would add that Belkar does things in his character, he isn't the type to do that. yes you can be evil without being THAT preverse.

Nope! Belkar's not evil until he is that perverted and eats that puppy!

So that's what happened to squidi? I only recently saw the archives, so I wondered why it cut off.

[Grey Watcher]

Personally, I think the ongoing plot allows more opportunity for jokes. I mean, could you have done "I wouldn't touch your skinny, uptight ass with a standard-issue 10-ft. pole, you overbearing, self-righteous bitch" without the weeks and weeks of previous strips of Miko being exactly that?

[aaronbourque]

Rape and sexual abuse are not subjects I expect OOTS to cover, ever.
Unless you're skewering Fatal: D20!

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque; which doesn't exist, as far as I know, thank God.

[Solara]

Am I the only one to have found the arguments rather weak and uninspired? Celia's was functional, if unoriginal, but if any court were to take Jones' "Lawful Good! Lawful Good! Convict! Lawful Good!" argument seriously, it wouldn't be because they were Lawful Good but because they were stupid.

Actually, I thought Jones was being pretty clever, taking into account the being that was overseeing the trial and adapting his closing argument to appeal to it. Celia might have the better argument from most people's point of view, but keep in mind that most people aren't Lord Shojo or a BPLG...

[Devils_Advocate]

See Robotic Good in the Miko FRC.
Oh, I have. And I don't think her motives for doing Good make her any less of a hero than if she behaved the same way for "better" reasons; I just think that she's not as good at being Good, if you will, as she would be if her heart were in it. (Not that I have proof that it isn't. It's just my opinion of her based on what I've seen so far.) I think a lack of innate kindness on her part actually makes her a rather tragic figure. She's still quite heroic, but she doesn't really enjoy it. And since she's dedicated her life to being a holy warrior, that means she rarely enjoys anything. Poor, grumpy Miko...


It is conceivable that the Gods could be malevolent bastards intent on torturing their creation (and certain members appear to be,) in which case virtually any other authority would be less questionable.
I'm afraid you completely misread what I wrote. I wasn't refering to the authority the gods give the Sapphire Guard (by granting them divine spells and class abilities to help them carry out their missions), I was talking about the authority that the Sapphire Guard gives the gods (by enforcing their will on the mortal plane).

If there's a large organization of Lawful Good people who all willingly chose to serve you, that's a pretty strong indication that you're a just ruler. Why would they serve you if you weren't? (Yes, one can construct hypothetical scenarios in which a bunch of paladins are duped into doing apparently good but actually evil things. But on the whole, I think that the approval of Good people probably more strongly correlates with being trustworthy than anything else likely to gain one worldly power. That was my point.)


Okay, that completely destroys my argument...

But, it raises a bigger problem. How can anyone ever be held responsible for breaking a law of which they could not have been aware? The whole assertion that ignorance of the law is no excuse relies on the assumption that there was some available alternative to ignorance.

With secret laws, every single thing you do in a day could potentially be a violation of some secret law of which you could not possibly be aware. Doesn't Good require an element of fairness?
Well, yeah. One could make a very strong argument that trying the Order is unjust because they couldn't possibly have known that they weren't supposed to destroy the gate.

... were it not for the warning on the castle self-destruct rune saying, "Do Not Touch Ever. (No, not even then.)" :P

[Atlas]

Oh, and if a main character molesting an unconscious paladin is your idea of funny or appropriate, then as others have said, I'm just as glad to not be filling your need for such. Rape and sexual abuse are not subjects I expect OOTS to cover, ever.

Then do you not consider a joke about a "teenage schoolgirl bound and gagged" and "hentai bookstores" not to be a joke about rape and sexual abuse? http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=258 Or were you perhaps in too much of a hurry to throw a stone at a critic to remeber that joke? You write a great comic and I, personally, like the direction it tends, but you seem to have been overly upset by someone saying they don't like it.

[ElfLad]

But in that case, none of the acts actually took place. Having a main character actually getting raped and losing her paladin powers as a result of something she wasn't responsible for is extremely sadistic.

[theKOT]

Then do you not consider a joke about a "teenage schoolgirl bound and gagged" and "hentai bookstores" not to be a joke about rape and sexual abuse? http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=258 Or were you perhaps in too much of a hurry to throw a stone at a critic to remeber that joke? You write a great comic and I, personally, like the direction it tends, but you seem to have been overly upset by someone saying they don't like it.
Before I say anything, Let me just remark that the Giant was not responding negatively because the guy was a critic, but because he was acting demanding and making untrue claims.

However, you bring up a good point and I hope that Giant will give some explaination. Still, the implied reference there and a direct reference in #281 would have been on a different level.

[PhoeKun]

Then do you not consider a joke about a "teenage schoolgirl bound and gagged" and "hentai bookstores" not to be a joke about rape and sexual abuse? http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=258 Or were you perhaps in too much of a hurry to throw a stone at a critic to remeber that joke? You write a great comic and I, personally, like the direction it tends, but you seem to have been overly upset by someone saying they don't like it.

The joke in that strip wasn't an implication of rape, but rather that there was a place anywhere in the city where you could take a bound and gagged girl (in this case for hostage purposes) and not have anyone bat an eyelid.

Me, I've got no problems if people complain. I do have a problem if the complaint demands something of me, or anyone else beyond the poster himself. I don't think the Giant does, either, but I don't speak for him.

People are here because they have something to say. Given that they are saying it in front of thousands of people who enjoy nothing more than endlessly debating seemingly pointless topics, they shouldn't be surprised when their words find critics.

[Marller]

Nope! Belkar's not evil until he is that perverted and eats that puppy!

So that's what happened to squidi? I only recently saw the archives, so I wondered why it cut off.
As far as i gathered from the adieu-note, he had some dispute with some other website (about copyright, i think) which tired him out and made him hate the internet. Something like that.

EDIT: I know it's pretty fuzzy but he was only hinting at the reasons.

[carabaldo]

A person doesn't arbitrarily assign his or her beliefs as "good" and all opposing beliefs as "evil", as in our world; rather, there is an objective scale of "good vs. evil", not to mention "law vs. chaos", upon which an individual falls.

Though it's rarely considered by the game's players, this has some fairly serious implications for the people who live in such a world. [...]
since "morality" is already an inarguable aspect of a person's being, and it can be "viewed" by any spellcaster capable of observing auras.



I remember the Chaotic/Lawful language in the original D&D (the red basic set)! :)
My players (hey, we were 12 yo) used to "speak lawful" to someone they questioned whether he was good or bad, and decided that according to the fact that he answered or not.
lol

[Alfryd]

Extra credit for giving me ice cream.
I too, wish for ice cream.

But, it raises a bigger problem. How can anyone ever be held responsible for breaking a law of which they could not have been aware?
They can't. As far as I can tell, the intention is either to attach a cost to repeat offences (however unlikely that sounds) or assume that anyone able to destroy the gates probably knew the secret to begin with.

Thou shalt not blasphemy against the holy South Park: I mean it has Pandas, Jesus, and God!

...I would completely reverse your numbers comparisons and rate Prachett as a 3.5 and South park as a 7.2...
That's crazy talk. And I'll take Super Demolition Christ any day of the week.

...but more disturbing is the apparent lack of tolerance for any form of criticism from the community.
Little bit. The place has it's up-sides. While I sometimes feel the moderation policies verge on the draconian, it's surprisingly often possible to actually conduct a civil, constructive discussion here.

And considering he will want long-term webtraffic to help grow his independant efforts, it makes good business sense for him to do so as well.
True dat.

I think a lack of innate kindness on her part actually makes her a rather tragic figure... Poor, grumpy Miko...
True dat.

If there's a large organization of Lawful Good people who all willingly chose to serve you, that's a pretty strong indication that you're a just ruler... That was my point.
Ah, I see. True dat.

[xrestassuredx]

Good and evil are all about intent. Belkar's sparing Miko's life is actually an evil and chaotic act precisely because of his reasons for doing so - another person doing the same thing might be good and lawful.
First, the intent of the action will not change the fact that it was a Lawful act, no matter how you imply it. Second, you're making assumptions about Belkar's reasons for leaving her alive in the first place -- am I the only person who thinks he has no "grand Miko death scheme" or any evil intent other than to have some fun at the expense of Miss stick-up-the-butt?


Giant is handleing the small pop not liking the strip quite well, unlike the guy who made the late squidi.net.
Aw, RIP squidi. I had flashbacks to AMD with Belkar's dummy in 270 (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=270). *snif*

[Lady_Orc]

But in that case, none of the acts actually took place. Having a main character actually getting raped and losing her paladin powers as a result of something she wasn't responsible for is extremely sadistic.

Eh? I must have missed something here, where was it claimed that a rape would make a paladin lose her powers? While it is sadly true that humans sometimes blame a rape victim rather than the rapist, I don't think any LG DND gods do.

[Freelance Henchman]

There is a significant difference between Belkar hinting that something improper might have occured to further unsettle the paladin, and the act of molestation.


Still, if you think even hinting at *rape* is funny you need your head examined.


It is mildly disconcerting that more than one person could make that leap based upon my previous post, but more disturbing is the apparent lack of tolerance for any form of criticism from the community. Speaks volumes, I'll step out of the sandbox now.


"Lack of tolerance"? You made some (very snotty IMO) remarks about how basically OOTS sucks now because it doesn't meet your standards for what is funny. Others disagreed, and now your leaving in a huff. Seems like your "tolerance for criticism" isn't very high.

[evileeyore]

Still, if you think even hinting at *rape* is funny you need your head examined.
Actually that could have been amusing in a black comedy sort of way. I can chuckle at the histironics Miko would possibly gone through at just the mere idea of impropriety.

But this is not the vehicle for such humor.

[The Giant]

The hentai joke didn't ever imply that the schoolgirl in question would be molested. And further, those were the villains of the strip anyway; even they wouldn't actually DO any such thing, they're just hiding near those who MIGHT or might not. In contrast, I've established that Pompey is attracted to Julia, but there was no implication that he would take advantage of her bound status to act on his attraction. To have Belkar, a main character, do something questionable like that is equally out-of-bounds for me.

[Sneak]

All I have to say is that if there's something you don't like, just don't read the strip.

EDIT: I didn't see any implication of rape, anyway.

[Atlas]

The hentai joke didn't ever imply that the schoolgirl in question would be molested. And further, those were the villains of the strip anyway; even they wouldn't actually DO any such thing, they're just hiding near those who MIGHT or might not. In contrast, I've established that Pompey is attracted to Julia, but there was no implication that he would take advantage of her bound status to act on his attraction. To have Belkar, a main character, do something questionable like that is equally out-of-bounds for me.

True, it was not at all hinted that Julia would be sexually molested, but it was still a joke about the rape and sexual abuse commonly found in hentai. I merely thought that your statement that you would never cover those topics disingenuous in light of that joke. Perhaps you are drawing a distinction between jokes made that directly involve the characters and jokes made on general topics. It's a bit too fine of a line for me to perceive, but it's your comic, neh?

[Kish]

Eh? I must have missed something here, where was it claimed that a rape would make a paladin lose her powers?

I would have expected that little letch to at least have hinted at improper conduct whilst Miko lay unconscious, perhaps Belkar calling into question whether or not she could even remain a paladin after their little tryst, however involuntary on Miko's part.

[aaronbourque]

Then do you not consider a joke about a "teenage schoolgirl bound and gagged" and "hentai bookstores" not to be a joke about rape and sexual abuse?
Just because someone is tied up doesn't mean that person is abused.

Or raped.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque

[Coffee_Dragon]

Actually, I thought Jones was being pretty clever, taking into account the being that was overseeing the trial and adapting his closing argument to appeal to it.

It's possible Jones know more about the BPLG than we do, but it seems strange that an experienced lawyer would rely on an appeal to conceit to such an extent.


Celia might have the better argument from most people's point of view,

I definitely think so. It would have been interesting if Jones could have made such a good argument as to actually sway a lot of readers to his side. Since he does little but echo people's favourite reasons to hate paladins, it's not exactly going to make anyone challenge their perspective.

[theKOT]

The hentai joke didn't ever imply that the schoolgirl in question would be molested. And further, those were the villains of the strip anyway; even they wouldn't actually DO any such thing, they're just hiding near those who MIGHT or might not. In contrast, I've established that Pompey is attracted to Julia, but there was no implication that he would take advantage of her bound status to act on his attraction. To have Belkar, a main character, do something questionable like that is equally out-of-bounds for me.

Ahh, thank you. I had never heard the word hentai before I read this comic, so I wasn't sure what that implied after I looked it up on Dictionary.com . Now I understand.

[brummeren]

Be glad that you didn't google it first, like i did :P That is not work-safe, at all.

[Vampire_Boy]

Eh? I must have missed something here, where was it claimed that a rape would make a paladin lose her powers? While it is sadly true that humans sometimes blame a rape victim rather than the rapist, I don't think any LG DND gods do.

That would be quite pathetic if the gods viewed it like that - I immediately thought of a scenario where for example Aribeth from NWN would be on the end of sexual molestation and then Tyr would make her fall, saying, "well, you asked for it wearing that revealing body armor".

Ugh. No, I can't believe that could ever happen.

[xrestassuredx]

Well, to play devil's advocate, we have seen it's not beyond Belkar to make a few innuendos (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=244) to make another character uncomfortable. All the same, something like that here doesn't fit Belkar or the situation at all and would definitely lessen the effect of showing what Belkar is trying to do -- not to mention that any hint of "bumping uglies (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=212)" is going to go right over Miss Holier-than-Thou's head anyway.

[Grey Watcher]

The way I look at it, I don't think Rich could get away with even hinting at rape. I mean, look at all the ruckus that has been created just because someone suggested the implication of rape. If that's enough to create this much of a stir, I think actually doing it might just kill the comic.

[Alfryd]

Oh, for heaven's sake. The Hentai reference was several layers of context removed from what it's been suggested Belkar might get up to. Or is Rich not allowed to even hint at the possible existence of evil actions in his fantasy universe?

[geek_2049]

I kinda thought Belkar and Miko might hook up. The opposites attract thing. Then they could have twins and split up. They would each get custody of one and they would match their parent;s respective alignment, one would be CE the other LG. Then the twins could form there own adventuring parties when they got older and reunite in a dungeon. The CE twin would use his LG twin to accomplish his evil plans then defeat him and put him in a position which would surely be his death , but the LG guy would find a way to overcome the impossible odds and eventually confront and defeat the CE twin. History tends to repeat repeat itself.

Should the above scenario not happen, then perhaps Miko will lose her status as Paladin or have the stick-up-her-butt removed.

I liked the trial stuff. The first time I played with the group I am now in I played an NPC judge while they were the defendants and the DM was the prosecution. I ordered the kobold be neutered, but he bluffed his way out saying he already was.