Redcloak and the misattribution of blame

[The_Weirdo]

You mean the ones who are all dead?

You wouldn't believe how many dead people I hate and how many institutions I would love to take to task over the actions of said dead people. :smalltongue:

[Fyraltari]

You wouldn't believe how many dead people I hate and how many institutions I would love to take to task over the actions of said dead people. :smalltongue:

Institutions, you mean the Sapphire Guard? That has been disbanded?

[The_Weirdo]

Institutions, you mean the Sapphire Guard? That has been disbanded?

The government, in this case, as the SG was a branch thereof. To be sure, though, I'm fairly certain some spells could be devised to target the paladins that attacked the villages in the afterlife, but my point is to have at least some institution accountable and responsible for reparations. Because of the actions of the SG, these people were enslaved, and none of them could truly say they'd do things differently in Redcloak's place. Someone needs to answer for that - along with Redcloak himself, though it can be argued that he already has, given what happened to his family. And it doesn't need to be "punishment". It can be compensation. And maybe dishonoring the names of the members of the SG that took part in the attacks to the villages. Another suggestion, easily feasible, is making their gravestones, if any, a place for excursions of Azurite schoolchildren - along, of course, with adding a spittoon on top of each, so these people could be paid the respect they deserve.

[Dion]

Someone needs to answer for that

Well, you know what they say!

“The essence of the conception of righteousness, therefore, is to afford an outlet for sadism by cloaking cruelty as justice.”

And Redcloak is righteous.

[The_Weirdo]

Well, you know what they say!

“The essence of the conception of righteousness, therefore, is to afford an outlet for sadism by cloaking cruelty as justice.”

And you are righteous.

I'm not proposing Hinjo gets a hair on his head touched.

I'm advocating reparations and making it clear who's right and who's wrong. Lots of people are supremely understanding with regards to the pain inflicted on other people.

[dancrilis]

The government, in this case, as the SG was a branch thereof.
I am not sure they were - the Sapphire Guard was created by an adventurer who handed leadership of it to a guy whose position as ruler of Azure city was seperate from his position as commander of the Sapphire Guard.

Seperately the government has been effectively destroyed along with the guard.


Someone needs to answer for that - along with Redcloak himself, though it can be argued that he already has, given what happened to his family.
I don't think you can normally get away with saying 'I already answered answered for my poor behaviour' based on events that took place before said behaviour.

[The_Weirdo]

I am not sure they were - the Sapphire Guard was created by an adventurer who handed leadership of it to a guy whose position as ruler of Azure city was seperate from his position as commander of the Sapphire Guard.

Seperately the government has been effectively destroyed along with the guard.

The government will reform and its successors need to deal with the aftermath. If the SG was just a paramilitary group, condemn the ones that raided the village as such and implement the "spitting on their graves" plan.


I don't think you can normally get away with saying 'I already answered answered for my poor behaviour' based on events that took place before said behaviour.

And that can easily be argued, but the point is that all involved in the chain of events that led to the enslaving need to pay. Afterwards, there can be the discussion on whether or not Redcloak already did.

[Dion]

the point is that all involved in the chain of events that led to the enslaving need to pay.

Why? Why do you believe that Rich needs to write a story where someone has a “need to pay?”

Will you enjoy the story more if that happens?

More important, do you imagine that the rest of us will enjoy the story less if it doesn’t happen?

I mean, I kind of dont understand why you think the the story must go that way.

[The_Weirdo]

Why? Why do you believe that Rich needs to write a story where someone has a “need to pay?”

Will you enjoy the story more if that happens?

More important, do you imagine that the rest of us will enjoy the story less if it doesn’t happen?

I mean, I kind of do t understand why you are the the story must go that way.

I'm not discussing narrative or saying that the story should go this or that way; Rich's story is quite good and compelling as it is.

I'm discussing how things should/would go/feel from the point of view of the characters involved. Namely, for this context: how would you feel in the place of one of the Azurites that got enslaved? Would you not want the past dealt with? Would you not curse the very existence of the people that started the mess that directly resulted in your plight?

[Dion]

I'm not discussing narrative or saying that the story should go this or that way;

Oh, sorry. I was here to discuss the comic. Carry on.

[The_Weirdo]

Oh, sorry. I was here to discuss the comic. Carry on.

Discussing how characters within a piece of work would feel/think is an integral part of discussing said piece of work.

[Jason]

Because of the actions of the SG, these people were enslaved, and none of them could truly say they'd do things differently in Redcloak's place.
1) The Sapphire Guard never enslaved anybody. They periodically wiped out goblinoid settlements where their diviners said the Dark One's High Priest was located, but they never enslaved them. It's the hobgoblins who are enslaving people.
2) I'm sure any number of Azurites can honestly say they have no desire to enslave hobgoblins or goblins or even destroy their settlements. Redcloak's response to his trauma was not the only inevitable way to react to that trauma. He deserves the blame for chosing to respond as he did, with violence and oppression. He didn't have to chose revenge - and revenge against a whole city, the vast majority of which had no idea that they had ever wronged any goblins - rather than just the Sapphire Guard.


And maybe dishonoring the names of the members of the SG that took part in the attacks to the villages.
This already happened to some extent in How The Paladin Got His Scar.


Another suggestion, easily feasible, is making their gravestones, if any, a place for excursions of Azurite schoolchildren - along, of course, with adding a spittoon on top of each, so these people could be paid the respect they deserve.They're already dead. They're already undergoing whatever judgement they received from their gods for their actions. The gravestones are also not presently accessible to Azurite school children who are not also slaves of the hobgoblins.

[Dion]

Edit: sorry. This is very silly. Dropping out.

[The_Weirdo]

Redcloak's response to his trauma was not the only inevitable way to react to that trauma.

And yet, it was by no means an unforeseeable response to his trauma, no?

I'm not saying Recloak isn't Evil, I'm not saying his actions aren't despicable, I'm not saying he's not a villain and I'm not saying he should not be punished. I'm saying he's a consequence.


They're already dead. They're already undergoing whatever judgement they received from their gods for their actions. The gravestones are also not presently accessible to Azurite school children who are not also slaves of the hobgoblins.

Sure, I mean, once it's all settled and the presently slaves are freed and so on. As for divine judgment, eh. I would argue that it only qualifies as "enough" if it is seen by the people that got the short end of the stick for their actions.

[Jason]

And yet, it was by no means an unforeseeable response to his trauma, no? "Foreseeable" is not quite the same thing as "everybody in the same position would have acted the same."


I'm not saying Recloak isn't Evil, I'm not saying his actions aren't despicable, I'm not saying he's not a villain and I'm not saying he should not be punished. I'm saying he's a consequence.Saying "he's a consequnce" or "anyone would have done the same" is a way of arguing he is not really responsible for his choices. In other words it is a way of arguing that he is not evil.


Sure, I mean, once it's all settled and the presently slaves are freed and so on. What makes you think that will happen? I think it's much more likely the Snarl has already emerged and devoured the souls of everyone in the city, leaving it a devastated wasteland that no one will return to for centuries, assuming the world is not destroyed in the meantime,

As for divine judgment, eh. I would argue that it only qualifies as "enough" if it is seen by the people that got the short end of the stick for their actions.Not everyone wants to see their enemies in pain in order to receive closure. In fact, the desire to see those who wronged you suffer is often seen as an evil trait - vindictiveness.

[The_Weirdo]

"Foreseeable" is not quite the same thing as "everybody in the same position would have acted the same."

Saying "he's a consequnce" or "anyone would have done the same" is a way of arguing he is not really responsible for his choices. In other words it is a way of arguing that he is not evil.

What makes you think that will happen? I think it's much more likely the Snarl has already emerged and devoured the souls of everyone in the city, leaving it a devastated wasteland that no one will return to for centuries, assuming the world is not destroyed in the meantime,
Not everyone wants to see their enemies in pain in order to receive closure. In fact, the desire to see those who wronged you suffer is often seen as an evil trait - vindictiveness.

To be clear, RC is responsible for his choices. I'm just saying they did not, in fact, materialize out of thin air. There's a very slim chance he'd have invaded AC with an army if his village had been left in peace.

As for the snarl eating Gobbotopia/AC... Doesn't strike me as likely yet, not the least of it because it would be a rather weird way to tie up at least two loose ends: "the slaves got eaten and so did the formerly-oppressed-now-oppressors" seems a bit nihilistic.

[Jason]

To be clear, RC is responsible for his choices. I'm just saying they did not, in fact, materialize out of thin air. There's a very slim chance he'd have invaded AC with an army if his village had been left in peace. The Plan required a gate be taken somewhere, so I wouldn't say it was all that slim a chance. Point taken, however. The Giant does seem to feel that the Azurites are at least partially responsible for Redcloak.


As for the snarl eating Gobbotopia/AC... Doesn't strike me as likely yet, not the least of it because it would be a rather weird way to tie up at least two loose ends: "the slaves got eaten and so did the formerly-oppressed-now-oppressors" seems a bit nihilistic.
I think the news that Gobbotopia and everyone in it was consumed will be useful motivation for Redcloak to finally get over his sunken cost fallacy and decide it's time to turn against Xykon. Or it will be another point to show just how committed (and irredeemable) he can be.

[The_Weirdo]

The Plan required a gate be taken somewhere, so I wouldn't say it was all that slim a chance. Point taken, however. The Giant does seem to feel that the Azurites are at least partially responsible for Redcloak.

The Plan had been on hold for ages until the Paladins had their fun in Redcloak's village.


I think the news that Gobbotopia and everyone in it was consumed will be useful motivation for Redcloak to finally get over his sunken cost fallacy and decide it's time to turn against Xykon. Or it will be another point to show just how committed (and irredeemable) he can be.

The sunk cost fallacy is pretty self-reinforcing. At any rate, if that does happen, I sorta hope Redcloak only dies after pointing out that none of that would have happened if the SG hadn't slaughtered his village. Sure, he can die or otherwise get his comeuppance, but I'd like the parting shot. And, well, it's also true.

[Dion]

I sorta home Redcloak only dies after pointing out that none of that would have happened if the SG hadn't slaughtered his village.

Uggh. That sounds awful. I really hope the comic doesn’t fall into the moral degeneracy of “an eye for an eye makes the whole world see the truth.”

That kind of terrible thinking - its ok for me to hurt you because you hurt me - is the worse evil in the world. Retribution is evil. I don’t want to read a comic that promotes evil.

[The_Weirdo]

Uggh. That sounds awful. I really hope rich doesn’t fall into the moral degeneracy of “an eye for an eye makes the whole world see the truth.”

That kind of terrible thinking - its ok for me to hurt you because you hurt me - is the very worse evil ever created in the world, and I have no interest in reading an apologia for that sickness.

It'd be Redcloak's perspective. I'm not arguing morality here. Neither am I arguing that it's okay. Heck, not even Redcloak might see it as okay by that point. But, well, it's a fact. It doesn't make it okay, but it is true and Redcloak by then would have every reason to be profoundly bitter. In all likelihood, Redcloak wouldn't have invaded AC if his village hadn't been destroyed by the SG, and, whether or not that justifies anything, the fact - and the pain, and the bitterness and all that it entails and created - remains. History needs to be addressed and it would be a complete waste to see the Paladins or the Azurites simply assume that Redcloak, the meanie, came out of nowhere for no reason because he's a meanie.

Things have contexts behind them, and it would be at least remiss of Redcloak not to point them out. Especially if and when he's already lost.

[Ruck]

My opinion, from too many awful examples: When you start talking about how a group of people doesn't deserve to exist because they're evil (with your proof being the perceived actions of a subset), you've gone waaaaay off the rails. The only thing left is for you to abet or ally with those who want to "correct" that. And outsiders may have an increasingly-hard time telling which of you is the evil one.

Since someone else used this phrase, I'd like to reiterate that Rich has made very clear over and over that he does not believe in "usually Evil" as a classification for a race or a justification for mistreating or killing members of that race.

[Dion]

I’m not arguing morality here.

I am arguing morality. I don’t want to read a comic that actively promotes evil behavior like retribution. I hope the comic doesn't end the way you imagine.

[The_Weirdo]

I am arguing morality. I don’t want to read a comic that actively promotes evil behavior like retribution. I hope the comic doesn't end the way you imagine.

Let me repeat: I am not arguing morality. I am not saying that it would mean that AC somehow deserved what it got. I'm saying that there is a direct line of causation between the invasion of Redcloak's village and Redcloak invading Azure City. Furthermore, I am pointing out that, as a villain that was also a victim, Redcloak has zero reason not to bring that up when he loses. Another character can counter it with "an eye for an eye makes the world blind" or whatever, but, again, it would be in-character for Redcloak to say that.

He might not even say (or believe) they deserved it. Just that, well, his actions have context behind them. The comic doesn't need to promote retribution in order to acknowledge the fact that actions such as, well, slaughtering a villaige filled with innocent civilians to include children has at least a higher than zero chance of causing survivors of the slaughter to feel like enacting retribution.

[Dion]

I'm saying that there is a direct line of causation between the invasion of Redcloak's village and Redcloak invading Azure City.

I don’t think we see the universe in the same way, my friend. You seem to see something in the universe that I find myself blind to.

Maybe there is a sequence of direct cause and effect; this is the inevitable result of that, like billiard balls following some physics while they clack together over the slate. But I’ve never seen anything work like that. I have nothing in my experience that has ever worked so simplistically as you describe, and I can’t find a way to see what you see in story that’s on the page.

[The_Weirdo]

I don’t think we see the universe in the same way, my friend. You seem to see something in the universe that I find myself blind to.

Maybe there is a sequence of direct cause and effect; this is the inevitable result of that, like billiard balls following some physics while they clack together over the slate. But I’ve never seen anything work like that. I have nothing in my experience that I had ever worked so simplistically, and I can’t see it in the story that’s been written.

Okay, I'll bite.

When a group of people slaughters a person's village in front of them, to include mother and child relatives, that makes that person angry.

Retaliation - even if disproportionate or unjustified - is often a symptom of anger.

If you take away the first event, you take away Redcloak's anger and, thus, its symptom - the retaliation.

[Fyraltari]

The sunk cost fallacy is pretty self-reinforcing. At any rate, if that does happen, I sorta hope Redcloak only dies after pointing out that none of that would have happened if the SG hadn't slaughtered his village. Sure, he can die or otherwise get his comeuppance, but I'd like the parting shot. And, well, it's also true.

We've already had that. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0422.html) Twice. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0480.html)

The point has been made.

[Good Coyote]

Okay, I'll bite.

When a group of people slaughters a person's village in front of them, to include mother and child relatives, that makes that person angry.

Retaliation - even if disproportionate or unjustified - is often a symptom of anger.

If you take away the first event, you take away Redcloak's anger and, thus, its symptom - the retaliation.

If it's really supposed to be such a direct causation in the narrative, then it seems more likely that one of the survivors in Azure City will dedicate themselves to wiping out goblins in retaliation.

Yes, they could ritualize spitting on the graves of paladins instead. But Redcloak did not respond by ritually spitting on the Red Cloak and the Dark One when he found out that the paladins were motivated by preventing The Plan.

Someone could make The Point by seeing that and telling that person, "No, we're not doing this, the cycle has to stop somewhere."

[The_Weirdo]

If it's really supposed to be such a direct causation in the narrative, then it seems more likely that one of the survivors in Azure City will dedicate themselves to wiping out goblins in retaliation.

Yes, they could ritualize spitting on the graves of paladins instead. But Redcloak did not respond by ritually spitting on the Red Cloak and the Dark One when he found out that the paladins were motivated by preventing The Plan.

Someone could make The Point by seeing that and telling that person, "No, we're not doing this, the cycle has to stop somewhere."

I'm not saying it's an inevitable causation, I'm just saying that, well, it is a causation. Mind that "in the name of the crimson mantle" the goblins were just living their lives in their village in peace, so the ritual spitting comparison is flawed.

And sure, Someone could make The Point. And that's a fine point. It's just Redcloak would be unlikely to be the one making it (not the least of it because he already retaliated) and I, for one, would be hard-pressed to judge him for that.

[Good Coyote]

I'm not saying it's an inevitable causation, I'm just saying that, well, it is a causation. Mind that "in the name of the crimson mantle" the goblins were just living their lives in their village in peace, so the ritual spitting comparison is flawed.

And sure, Someone could make The Point. And that's a fine point. It's just Redcloak would be unlikely to be the one making it (not the least of it because he already retaliated) and I, for one, would be hard-pressed to judge him for that.

The majority of the Azurites were also living their lives in peace. The Sapphire Guard was not even officially attached to their leadership, never mind being in a pseudo-feudal system that they didn't vote for.

I must have misunderstood though. I thought you were saying that you wanted Redcloak to make The Point. (The Point being that there is a cycle and some violence is motivated as a response to other violence.)

[Fyraltari]

I'm not saying it's an inevitable causation, I'm just saying that, well, it is a causation. Mind that "in the name of the crimson mantle" the goblins were just living their lives in their village in peace, so the ritual spitting comparison is flawed.

But the Church of the Dark One had attacked Lirian's Gate and Soon's Gate (SoD p43-44) sometimes before Redcloak's taking up the Crimson Mantle. When Redcloak attacked Azure City, the Azurites were just living their lives in their city in peace too, so that seems pretty symmetrical to me.

[The_Weirdo]

The majority of the Azurites were also living their lives in peace. The Sapphire Guard was not even officially attached to their leadership, never mind being in a pseudo-feudal system that they didn't vote for.

I must have misunderstood though. I thought you were saying that you wanted Redcloak to make The Point. (The Point being that there is a cycle and some violence is motivated as a response to other violence.)

Redcloak's Point would likely be: "If the SG hadn't victimized me, I wouldn't have victimized you." - possibly in his dying breath.

Hinjo might retort by looking at Gobbotopia and saying "Then let the cycle end here. We relinquish the claims to our former home and may you guys live in peace". And that might be his Point.

Frankly I didn't plan much beyond Redcloak making the point that, well, it's to be expected for him to be angry.


But the Church of the Dark One had attacked Lirian's Gate and Soon's Gate sometimes before Redcloak's taking up the Crimson Mantle. When Redcloak attacked Azure City, the Azurites were just living their lives in their city in peace too, so that seems pretty symmetrical to me.

Eh?

[Fyraltari]

Redcloak's Point would likely be: "If the SG hadn't victimized me, I wouldn't have victimized you." - possibly in his dying breath.

Hinjo might retort by looking at Gobbotopia and saying "Then let the cycle end here". And that might be his Point.

Frankly I didn't plan much beyond Redcloak making the point that, well, it's to be expected for him to be angry.



Eh?

The goblins' plans were "thwarted" by the Order of the Scribble (so 60 years ago) and "years later" by the Sapphire Guard. So they had attacked the Gates. Then lived in peace for likely decades. Then the Azurites razed Redcloak's village. And then lived in peace for decades. Then Redcloak razed Azure City. Sounds pretty comparable to me.

[The_Weirdo]

The goblins' plans were "thwarted" by the Order of the Scribble (so 60 years ago) and "years later" by the Sapphire Guard. So they had attacked the Gates. Then lived in peace for likely decades. Then the Azurites razed Redcloak's village. And then lived in peace for decades. Then Redcloak razed Azure City. Sounds pretty comparable to me.

I really thought that the only enemy of the Scribbles was the Snarl, really. No TDO Church involved pre-Xykon. Well, hooray for perspective, I guess. And yeah, does seem pretty symmetrical.

[Good Coyote]

I kinda personally feel that making this a point purely about Redcloak's response and having the human Azurites universally react with a great amount of mercy towards him and wise judgment would reflect pretty badly on Redcloak.

But if we see it as a human driven to retaliate before having someone step in and point out the problem, then it looks less like "well the goblin couldn't help it but humans have a greater natural ability to see the whole picture."

We don't really see a different goblin perspective in the comic, but we have something similar in the supplemental material, with a goblin that Redcloak didn't listen to. So it would be more like "both goblins and humans are the same, and individuals have the choice to listen to reason or give in to their need for revenge."

Obviously Redcloak himself, in character, would not have a point more than "I'm pissed and I got mine." But if that's supposed to be something that we take seriously, and if there's an Azurite reaction of "Oh my twelve gods, he's right." Then that's a bigger narrative point that looks kind of bad, if all of the human reactions are held to a different standard.

It comes across like "Well, being inherently not good, we must be forgiving to the goblin. But humans are inherently better than that, and shame on those who make wrong choices because they had the ability to do otherwise." Both humans and goblins had the ability to make better choices.

[The_Weirdo]

I kinda personally feel that making this a point purely about Redcloak's response and having the human Azurites universally react with a great amount of mercy towards him and wise judgment would reflect pretty badly on Redcloak.

But if we see it as a human driven to retaliate before having someone step in and point out the problem, then it looks less like "well the goblin couldn't help it but humans have a greater natural ability to see the whole picture."

We don't really see a different goblin perspective in the comic, but we have something similar in the supplemental material, with a goblin that Redcloak didn't listen to. So it would be more like "both goblins and humans are the same, and individuals have the choice to listen to reason or give in to their need for revenge."

Obviously Redcloak himself, in character, would not have a point more than "I'm pissed and I got mine." But if that's supposed to be something that we take seriously, and if there's an Azurite reaction of "Oh my twelve gods, he's right." Then that's a bigger narrative point that looks kind of bad, if all of the human reactions are held to a different standard.

Hmm. Yeah, it would be a tough balancing act, to be sure. You make a few good points there.

[Good Coyote]

The goblins' plans were "thwarted" by the Order of the Scribble (so 60 years ago) and "years later" by the Sapphire Guard. So they had attacked the Gates. Then lived in peace for likely decades. Then the Azurites razed Redcloak's village. And then lived in peace for decades. Then Redcloak razed Azure City. Sounds pretty comparable to me.

I think it's also very deliberate that Redcloak didn't know about the Red Mantle until he received it. Most of the Azurites don't know about the Gate and that the Sapphire Guard is charged to protect it. It seems carefully written that way.

[Ruck]

One thing I do this is interesting here is that Redcloak's revenge campaign against Azure City is something of a foreseeable karmic consequence. I don't mean "karmic" in the sense of moral justification; I mean in the sense that "the things you do will eventually come back on you." The Sapphire Guard not only sought to kill the bearer of the Crimson Mantle, but as we saw in Start of Darkness and even How The Paladin Got His Scar, apparently often went around indiscriminately slaughtering goblinoid villages. It is not surprising, then, that a survivor of one of those massacres would eventually seek revenge.

[The_Weirdo]

One thing I do this is interesting here is that Redcloak's revenge campaign against Azure City is something of a foreseeable karmic consequence. I don't mean "karmic" in the sense of moral justification; I mean in the sense that "the things you do will eventually come back on you." The Sapphire Guard not only sought to kill the bearer of the Crimson Mantle, but as we saw in Start of Darkness and even How The Paladin Got His Scar, apparently often went around indiscriminately slaughtering goblinoid villages. It is not surprising, then, that a survivor of one of those massacres would eventually seek revenge.

Seconded. That was my entire point and I am as surprised that you agree with me, Ruck, as you are revulsed by the fact. :smallbiggrin:

[Fyraltari]

I really thought that the only enemy of the Scribbles was the Snarl, really.

The Holey Brotherhood shall not be forgotten! In retrosêct, drilling all the history books they could find may not have been the best way to leave their mark on history.