The flaw in the paladins' (current) plan

[theangelJean]

I'm enjoying the scene of Serini out-logicking the paladins (is that even a word?) The thing is, she's not wrong about what they have done, and she's not wrong about their overall approach. A lot of discussion seems to be about how Serini doesn't have all the necessary information, and how she'll have to be persuaded to work with the Order rather than against them. I haven't seen much examination of the flaws' in the paladins' approach so far, and I wonder if that is where Rich is actually going with this.

Bear with me, here. The number one priority of the Sapphire Guard (and the OOTS in their approach to Girard's Gate) was to prevent any single Gate from falling into Xykon's hands. Serini is merely pointing out that they have been placing this priority higher than the integrity of the Gates themselves - in that they have been ultimately willing to destroy single Gates if it looked like Team Evil was getting close enough to gaining control of them. But there are a number of unexamined assumptions built into this set of priorities, which tie into common story tropes - and while tropes are not bad in themselves, they also might be worth poking holes in, in the case of this story and others.

What's wrong with Team Evil being in control of a gate? Well, the paladins and the OoTS are significantly lacking in knowledge of what that is. We the readers have been told what Redcloak's plan is supposed to be: perform a Ritual, the Dark One gains the ability to move the location of the Gate to a different plane, threaten the other Gods with this ability in order to obtain concessions for goblinkind, and if all else fails the world will be destroyed and they can start again. And That Would Be Bad. We also know that Xykon isn't privy to the part of this plan that occurs after the Ritual. So we don't know exactly what he thinks he will get out of it, other than "power" and "participating in a cool plan where he gets to kill lots of people and gain control of something powerful".

But coming up to now, I'm pretty sure the paladins and the OoTS weren't aware of any of this. And at a crucial point, just as the OoTS has been clued in on part of it, they've lost contact with the paladins.

So what did the Sapphire Guard and the OoTS think would be wrong with Team Evil being in control of a gate? I'd contend that the plan was simply to "Stop Xykon from doing whatever he plans to do, because it's obviously no good and involves the Snarl being released somehow". Shojo's hypothesis is that it might be possible to "harness the power of the Snarl, perhaps releasing it under more controlled circumstances (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0278.html)". I believe that at that point, that was all that the divinations could tell him. This gives them no idea about exactly what Team Evil wanted to do, but it holds over them the threat of the Snarl being released, resulting in not only the destruction of the world, but a threat to the existence of the gods themselves. You can see why this would be the worst of all possible outcomes for the devout Paladins.

It's the nebulousness of planning to "stop the evil plan at all costs" that I'm interested in here, and it comes up in so many stories as a kind of natural progression of the evolution of story logic and Good vs Evil. It goes like this:
- Your heroes are Good, and your Bad Guys are Evil, so you have to defeat the bad guys, right?
- But: Your heroes are Good, so you don't just kill the bad guys because they are declared Evil. No, you need to kill them because they've done Evil Things!
- But killing them won't change the past, will it? What's the point, other than vengeance?
- How about, the villains are actually planning something hugely destructive - we have to stop them now! Now can we go kill them?
- Okay, but how about the third option: we stop them from achieving whatever it is they were planning! We declare that our highest priority, and if the villain gets killed in the process, oh well, we did what we could. And that makes us the Good Ones!
- Hey, how about we focus on thwarting the villain's plan at every step, and ignore the killing business? We're Good, after all! Or maybe we can outsource that bit to the adventurers...
- Maybe we can even convince the villains to come around to our side, by explaining how our way is so much better! Then they'll abandon the plan of their own volition, and we eliminate all the conflict at its source.

What is left out in a lot of these stories is that you don't have to know the villain's motivations to do this. Oh, it might help with predicting the villain's next step in the game of whack-a-mole, or it might help you to come up with better counter-arguments in persuading them to the side of Good, but ultimately what matters is that the Evil Plan exists and that it's bad. That's why you get the Gloating Evil Monologue at the very climax of the story - you have to establish that the plan existed and that it was bad; but right up until the final confrontation, the substance of that plan and the motivation behind it didn't actually matter, you just had to stop it. And once you defeat the villain, or bring them around to the side of Good, and avert the disaster, everyone can live happily ever after, right?

Not in OoTS world. In the Giant's world (as in many other works) villains and Evil characters have lives, personalities and motivations, but they aren't going to magically go away once you thwart their evil plan. And we're in a situation where one of the steps they could take to neutralise Team Evil's plan could endanger the whole world - hence the speculation that maybe the Snarl is magically different and non-threatening somehow, so that the OoTS could destroy the Gate and still have everything turn out alright. We've just tried the "talk the villains around" approach - by outlining how the Good Plan is Good but also the Bad Plan is flawed, and the Good Plan would actually be so much better for everyone, the villains included. (Okay, Durkon is a better listener than that, but he's not a good enough speaker to make a different argument - or maybe he's too Lawful Good.) But they are still considering that if all else fails, "stopping Xykon getting the gate" is still their priority.

But we haven't yet got to the point where they can consider that the "stop the Evil Plan at all costs" approach is itself flawed. And here we come across a character who has a completely different number one priority: protecting the integrity of the Gate. She might yet be convinced that the interests of the Paladins and the OoTS align with hers. But with the way she's poking holes in their ideology, I wonder if the convincing might go the other way around.

Edit: Welp, apparently I've lived up to my signature, and written so much that nobody can follow enough to decide whether there's anything to comment on.

I've clearly been watching too many of those speculation/analysis videos. I'd make this into a video, but that would involve using Rich's art, which is probably no go.

tl;dr: The paladins' "stop Xykon at all costs, no matter what Team Evil's plan actually is" approach is wrong-headed, and Serini is here to point that out. Discuss?

[dps]

Bear with me, here. The number one priority of the Sapphire Guard (and the OOTS in their approach to Girard's Gate) was to prevent any single Gate from falling into Xykon's hands. Serini is merely pointing out that they have been placing this priority higher than the integrity of the Gates themselves - in that they have been ultimately willing to destroy single Gates if it looked like Team Evil was getting close enough to gaining control of them.


That's not exactly true. The Sapphire Guard was willing to destroy the Gate that they were specifically charged with protecting, but weren't involved in the destruction of other 3 Gates:

one was accidentally destroyed by Team Evil in their attempt to seize it;

one was destroyed by Elan being Elan;

and one was deliberately destroyed by Roy (not the Sapphire Guard) to keep Xykon from taking it.

Also, the paladins know full well that the destruction of Gates risks letting the Snarl loose--remember that Shojo had the OotS arrested on the pretext of charging them with "weakening the fabric of reality". I might not have that quote exactly right, but that was the gist of it, anyway.

[Yanisa]

That's not exactly true. The Sapphire Guard was willing to destroy the Gate that they were specifically charged with protecting, but weren't involved in the destruction of other 3 Gates.

And they only seem to take that as an option do that after they learn Dorukan build in a self-destruct methode. Before that knowledge it seemed they never considered it. The holy ghostarmy of paladins sword to oath the protect an existing gate. The moment the gate was destroyed, they lost that important defense.

Both the Order of the Stick and paladins destroy gates only because the smartest guy of the Order of the Scribble seemed to be afraid of something. In D&D terms, an epic wizard is probably one of the smartest people on the world. If he fears a scenario in which a controlled gate is more dangerous then a destroyed gate, there must be a really good reason.

Speculation on my part, but based on Dorukan's and Lirian's relation it seems possible Lirian too decided to build in a self-destruct methode instead of just protecting it.

Also, that paladin flaw is deeply tied to the fact they are servants of their gods. From the perspective of the gods destroying the world is an acceptable alternative to being threatened with the Snarl. I don't think any paladin in comic sees it like this (yet?), but the greater good demands that the greatest good (i.e. good gods) must continue exist over an entire planet.

[Nith]

Is it actually the plan of the paladins to destroy the last gate if that is required to prevent Xykon taking control of it? I don't feel like pulling out comic strips to support it but my impression was that the paladins and the Order was fine with destroying gates before bcause at least one remains, but that it will be different now that there is no other gates left.

[hroþila]

I don't think the Order or the paladins have thought that far ahead. They've been kicking the can down the road so far because they could afford to since there was still a Gate left standing and they're counting on being able to destroy Xykon, but I don't think they've stopped to think about which option would be preferable once they can't delay the decision any longer.

(I personally believe destroying the last Gate would be the worst possible choice with the information we currently have, but our information is incomplete, and wouldn't the destruction of the last Gate be a hugely dramatic and powerful moment in the comic?

[Jason]

Team Evil gaining control of a gate means that the gods destroy the world before the Snarl can be turned on them. So if Team Evil gets a gate everybody dies and the world is destroyed.
On the other hand, if the last gate is destroyed the Snarl gets free and everybody dies and has their souls consumed too. That seems worse than just "everybody dies" unless you personally are looking forward to having a hellish afterlife, and therefore having your soul consumed would be preferable.
Does Sirini understand this?
Edit: Do the Paladins?
Up until there was only one gate left destroying a gate was clearly preferable to letting Team Evil get control of one and the gods immediately destroying the world.

[KorvinStarmast]

I don't think the Order or the paladins have thought that far ahead. + 10.
The OP is overthinking this one, as I see it. The Order has nested objectives:
(1) Stop Xykon: the general goal of the Order
(2) Destroy Xykon, Roy's goal due to the blood oath and Ro not wanting an evil lich to have the kind of leverage that gives him world domination.

The paladins are supporting characters vis a vis the Order.
Roy is the major protagonist, not O-Chul.

[elros]

Everyone has a flawed plan. Everyone not only has limited knowledge of the rifts and the snarl, but they do not even know all of the different groups involved in the struggle. From my count, we have:
1) The gods,
2) The Dark One and Redcloak,
3) Xykon,
4) Monster in the Darkness (more of a free agent than member of a team),
5) Order of the Stick,
6) Paladins of the Sapphire Guard,
7) Inter-Fiend Cooperation Commission,
8) Serini and her companion.

I am probably forgetting others, and you could consider Oona and the Bugbears, but I think they are more like supporting characters than ones with their own agency.

[KorvinStarmast]

Everyone has a flawed plan. Everyone not only has limited knowledge of the rifts and the snarl, but they do not even know all of the different groups involved in the struggle. From my count, we have:
1) The gods,
2) The Dark One and Redcloak,
3) Xykon,
4) Monster in the Darkness (more of a free agent than member of a team),
5) Order of the Stick,
6) Paladins of the Sapphire Guard,
7) Inter-Fiend Cooperation Commission,
8) Serini and her companion.

I am probably forgetting others, and you could consider Oona and the Bugbears, but I think they are more like supporting characters than ones with their own agency. I think that Tarquin may be a side ... or was at one point. But he's off screen. Sabine is all that's left of The Linear Guild. They were a side at one point. (When the cockroaches made that off hand remark). Since she works for the IFCC, her being on the IFCC side is close enough.

[BloodSquirrel]

I don't really see much of a point here. It's not like they're following team evil around saying "Ah ha! They're watering their garden! We must stop them, because this clearly must be part of their plan!"

Sure, they don't know the specifics, and the real plan is worse than they think, but they still know that Xykon and Redcloak are somehow planning on harvesting its power to use as a super-weapon, and that Xykon is an indiscriminate psychopath while Redcloak wants to enslave humanity.

Shojo lays out his reasoning in the very strip you link to, and it's very clear: He has calculated that re-building a destroyed gate is more feasible than stopping Team Evil if they harness the power of the Snarl. And I'm not sure how you can talk about "unexamined assumptions" when there was literally a trial held where lawyers argued on either side of the case of whether destroying the gate was right. And where (at least as far as O-Chul, who destroyed their gate knew) it ended with a celestial telling them "Yes, the Order did the right thing".

[russdm]

It's the nebulousness of planning to "stop the evil plan at all costs" that I'm interested in here, and it comes up in so many stories as a kind of natural progression of the evolution of story logic and Good vs Evil. It goes like this:
- Your heroes are Good, and your Bad Guys are Evil, so you have to defeat the bad guys, right?
- But: Your heroes are Good, so you don't just kill the bad guys because they are declared Evil. No, you need to kill them because they've done Evil Things!
- But killing them won't change the past, will it? What's the point, other than vengeance?


Now you are falling into the "Good is Dumb" bit that causes so many problems. Killing them is about preventing future evil that they may do.

As for the paladins' plans, well, Serini is actually completely wrong. The Gods (or at least some of them) are going to destroy the world as soon as Xykon and Redcloak cast the ritual to give the Dark One control. Boom, everyone dies. If the Gate is destroyed, everyone dies, again. So, whatever Serini may be arguing, there is nothing much here that supports her. The gate should not be destroyed, but if Xykon is going to take control of it, the Gods will end the world. So it is a net loss either way.

There is no outcome beyond destroying Xykon and Redcloak that keeps the world from being destroyed. So, while the Paladins' may have a failed idea, there is no solution that Serini can offer in exchange. She is basically demanding they accept one of the fail conditions as automatic.

Fail 1) Xykon and Redcloak defeat the Order and take control of the Gate. The Gods destroy the world

Fail 2) The gate is destroyed, the snarl destroys the world.

Expect that is not actually true. When the other gates were destroyed, the Snarl did nothing until Tarquin's psionic partner gazed into the Gate and brought the attention of the Snarl, did something happen. So, there might be time between the Gates being destroyed and Gods destroying the World, that the Gates can be re-sealed again.

In fact, destroying the laid on protections might have to happen to put a new "gate" on it.

As for Redcloak, and the Dark One's plans for better Goblin treatment, well, we were told that the Dark One won't travel to the next world. So if things go bad, there will be no improvements for the goblins of any kind, and the Gods may decide to take steps to make the creation of a new Dark One not possible again. They may take that much offense at the whole "Send Gate to Gods' front door" plan. Thus, they make the lot of Goblins even worse in the next world.

The Gods' fear the Snarl more than they fear Xykon and Redcloak, and Serini. Clearly at some point, Serini just decided to forget about how much that fear would be, and how unlikely things are likely to turn out.

Example)

RC succeeds in doing the ritual and Dark One sends the Gate by the Gods' place before the Gods destroy the world.

The Dark One makes his demands. The Gods laugh, then they nuke the world.

Example))

RC succeeds in doing the ritual, and the Gods nuke the world.

Example)))

The heroes destroy the gate, the Gods nuke the world.

Example))))

The heroes destroy the gate, the Snarl shows up, the Gods don't nuke the world because the Snarl does.

Serini is making unrealistic demands, that the paladins won't be able to fulfil. There is no guarantee that the Order of the Stick defeats Xykon.

[hroþila]

You're assuming that the Snarl getting out and unmaking everybody is not an actual risk, which I find super far-fetched. Hel implied the Snarl unmaking everyone is the most frequent outcome of the end of the world, and while she might well have been exaggerating for effect, I don't think it's wise to dismiss the danger. There has been speculation that the other Gates still standing prevented the Snarl from lashing out (although even before the Gates existed the Snarl wasn't constantly lashing out through the rifts). Loki said they can safely demolish the world in a short time, but if it was that simple (if there was no risk) many of the gods would have had little reason to vote Yes.

There's a big difference between a controlled demolition (for example if the gods decide to destroy the world after Xykon and Redcloak capture the last Gate) and the world being made by the Snarl. If the risk of the Snarl unmaking everybody is very, very real, then Serini is completely right.

[russdm]

There's a big difference between a controlled demolition (for example if the gods decide to destroy the world after Xykon and Redcloak capture the last Gate) and the world being made by the Snarl. If the risk of the Snarl unmaking everybody is very, very real, then Serini is completely right.


yes, but what Serini is requesting they do is not right because Thor has already told us the readers when he was telling Durkon that some of hte Gods were already at the point of wanting to unmake the world already to this point in time (#1228). Serini seems, to me, to be wanting to treat events as it being a good outcome of xykon and RC having control of gate when the paladins can destroy it before xykon and RC can do anything.

We don't know that the ritual being cast on the gate to control it and movie it won't wake the Snarl or make the Snarl take action. It may completely turn out that doing so may cause the Snarl to start unmaking the world, by poring through the rifts. That is unreasonable and wrong given in a situation where all possible outcomes short of xykon being destroyed and RC assisting with Gate Sealing, that the world ends as a result from different sources.

The Snarl has been shown to be a threat (as far as is known) and xykon/RC intend to use it, with xykon for power and RC for his god. However, we don't know what the effects would actually be, or if it ends up with the Snarl showing up to say hi in all its terrible glory.

Serini is wanting the gate to be preserved and not destroyed, but only under the case that the Order of the Stick destroys xykon and convinces RC is things feasible for her request to work. Then what about the IFFC/IFCC and their plans? Will V be pulled into their plans for the gate/rift?

We also are relying heavily on the Order of the Stick being able to face off against enemies having nothing to lose with the world on the line, and a group of deities that want to start the unmaking party. Are they going to stick with seeing what the outcome is? Or are they going to jump ahead and getting the first moments when the Order of the Stick is not doing so well? We just don't know.

If there was an answer to that question of firm stance, then agreeing to what Serini proposes/demands works better, but now, it sounds/seems more likely to result in just a lose condition to me. The Order of the Stick gets defeated, and after time spent, Xykon and RC take the gate. assuming it gets that far, and those deities wanting their unmaking party are not busy partying.

There are simply too many variables and possible outcomes that having one set outcome -- Destroying the get right when xykon/RC can claim it, rendering that not possible is foolhardy at best.

Serini has good intentions here about not wanting to blow everything up, that the value of that are sailed quite a time ago with the loss of the 4th out of 5 gates. Now, it is borrowed time, for as long as xykon/rc cannot find the last one. This is quite late along for making the request.

Even more so, Serini doesn't have much to say, especially since she came up with the oath about non-interference and didn't include anything about giving the others a way to monitor how the different gates were doing. At least one or more may have been under observation, but as can be seen clearly in story, only Soon the paladin never bothered about the other gates or contact with the others.

This lack of communication is having major consequences and those consequences are having their effect here. Given the adventure the Scribblers went on to secure the rifts to make the gates, I am appalled that there was no plans made to keep the gates from falling into the wrong hands, when whatever protections each member used failed. Apparently, the protections would be enough, and nothing was needed. But those protections proved to be ultimately ineffective despite some major effort on the Scribblers part. Some things could have never been predicted for, but the one about a group of evil trying to take a gate with that gate's defenses gone was not considered one of those possibilities apparently.

That is not good planning, since it was the most obvious contingency to plan for. one that it seems Soon did plan for. Including for the loss of himself to death as well. The others didn't (Dorukan was a special case with the self-destruct rune, so not counting and not for Serini's gate since we have not seen the full setup for her gate yet)

[Gurgeh]

The Gods (or at least some of them) are going to destroy the world as soon as Xykon and Redcloak cast the ritual to give the Dark One control.
I do not believe this has been established in the comic. Thor is ambiguous about the consequences, far more than the Godsmoot is regarding what would happen if the last gate is destroyed.

[KorvinStarmast]

Now you are falling into the "Good is Dumb" bit that causes so many problems. Killing them is about preventing future evil that they may do. Kind of like shooting a rabid dog ...

Thus, they make the lot of Goblins even worse in the next world. If TDO does not make it, the far simpler solution is that Goblins not even exist in the next world: they'll figure out some other way for XP fodder to arise, like spawn points where undead show up every so often (see World of Warcraft monster respawn / camping as but one example).


The Dark One makes his demands. The Gods laugh, then they nuke the world. Yep.

RC succeeds in doing the ritual, and the Gods nuke the world. Yep.

The heroes destroy the gate, the Gods nuke the world. Yep.

[Jason]

The latest strip shows that Serini doesn't understand that the gods are prepared to destroy the world rather than have the Snarl used against them by the Dark One, and in fact almost already did so.
Unfortunately the paladins don't know this either. Serini needs to meet the Order and Durkon and get the full story.

[littlebum2002]

If TDO does not make it, the far simpler solution is that Goblins not even exist in the next world: they'll figure out some other way for XP fodder to arise, like spawn points where undead show up every so often (see World of Warcraft monster respawn / camping as but one example).


As I've mentioned before, the logical thing for the gods to do is to create more worlds just like this one and create a race just like the goblins on each one in the hopes that, eventually, another Deity will arise similar to TDO but they can learn from their mistakes and embrace this new deity instead of try to kill him and ask for his assistance in helping cage the snarl in exchange for, say, a double share in the next world.

However, that would mean creating millions, if not billions, of sentient creatures and sentencing them to all to a lifetime of oppression in the hopes of using that oppression for their own gain, which seems pretty bad to us but then again, they didn't have problems doing it to the goblins so -shrug-

Also I haven't read the book in a long time, but isn't that kinda the plot of Dune?

[Cazero]

As I've mentioned before, the logical thing for the gods to do is to create more worlds just like this one and create a race just like the goblins on each one in the hopes that, eventually, another Deity will arise similar to TDO but they can learn from their mistakes and embrace this new deity instead of try to kill him and ask for his assistance in helping cage the snarl in exchange for, say, a double share in the next world.
That mostly sounds stupid. If they start mass-producing vengeful gods, one of them will be spiteful enough to Snarl-suicide-bomb them.
Heck, for all we know, TDO might be planning on doing that.

[Jason]

As I've mentioned before, the logical thing for the gods to do is to create more worlds just like this one and create a race just like the goblins on each one in the hopes that, eventually, another Deity will arise similar to TDO but they can learn from their mistakes and embrace this new deity instead of try to kill him and ask for his assistance in helping cage the snarl in exchange for, say, a double share in the next world.

However, that would mean creating millions, if not billions, of sentient creatures and sentencing them to all to a lifetime of oppression in the hopes of using that oppression for their own gain, which seems pretty bad to us but then again, they didn't have problems doing it to the goblins so -shrug-
That would also require the gods to agree that creating new rival dieties or pantheons in the hope that one will agree to work with them in containing the Snarl more permanently is preferable to the current status quo of "get a few centuries of souls out of each world, destroy it before the Snarl gets loose and devours it, start over again" which they've already done billions of times. Thor thinks it would be a good idea, but he is apparently in the minority.


Also I haven't read the book in a long time, but isn't that kinda the plot of Dune?Maybe if you squint a lot. Dune was basically about creating a messiah and what a bad idea it turned out to be for everyone who thought they wanted him.

[TRH]

As I've mentioned before, the logical thing for the gods to do is to create more worlds just like this one and create a race just like the goblins on each one in the hopes that, eventually, another Deity will arise similar to TDO but they can learn from their mistakes and embrace this new deity instead of try to kill him and ask for his assistance in helping cage the snarl in exchange for, say, a double share in the next world.


Tyr, at least, said that he prefers the cycle continuing forever to giving the slightest concessions, so that's a vote for no Dark One successors ever again.

[russdm]

Latest comic is up, and may affect the conversation.

[Paleomancer]

However, that would mean creating millions, if not billions, of sentient creatures and sentencing them to all to a lifetime of oppression in the hopes of using that oppression for their own gain, which seems pretty bad to us but then again, they didn't have problems doing it to the goblins so -shrug-
Given that the gods have no problems with eating the soulstuff of their mortal worshippers*... it's hardly a stretch that they'd do that; they kind of do harvesting of pain and oppression already from their own favored followers, and not even Thor seems able or willing to conceive of a better alternative. Honestly, if you aren't a PC in fantasy (and even then...), life tends to be cruel, brutish, and short; fantasy narratives need both "monsters" and "victims" after all.

*Which is one of the most bizarre narrative choices imaginable. Soul-eating divine abominations DO NOT make for sympathetic characters.

[Jason]

Given that the gods have no problems with eating the soulstuff of their mortal worshippers*... it's hardly a stretch that they'd do that; they kind of do harvesting of pain and oppression already from their own favored followers, and not even Thor seems able or willing to conceive of a better alternative. Honestly, if you aren't a PC in fantasy (and even then...), life tends to be cruel, brutish, and short; fantasy narratives need both "monsters" and "victims" after all.

*Which is one of the most bizarre narrative choices imaginable. Soul-eating divine abominations DO NOT make for sympathetic characters.

What makes you think the gods eat the souls of their worshippers? There's no indication that the process of "powering the outer planes" is at all harmful to a mortal soul.

[Paleomancer]

What makes you think the gods eat the souls of their worshippers? There's no indication that the process of "powering the outer planes" is at all harmful to a mortal soul.

A number of things from the comic itself: Thor explicitly uses a nutrition analogy to describe the deific "diet," which includes mortal souls; Hel's instability is a result of having nothing BUT dwarven souls to subsist on, subsistence literally meaning what one feeds on to barely survive; that the Durkon refers to gods treating their worshippers as "crops," rather than people (like flocks but even more depersonalizing); that the Dark One won't survive the destruction of the world because he doesn't have enough stored soul energy from his worshippers (implying that is a finite quantity that will be consumed in time); that the process of fusing with the plane means that any remnant of "you" as an independent being ceases to exist entirely... I argue that "soul-eating" seems like a very good descriptor of the whole wretched process. It is intentionally unpleasant as well; Mr. Burlew is on record somewhere on the forum that he wants the afterlife to be very imperfect and transient, claiming that forces the characters to have an incentive to save the world.

Really, though, having your memories stripped from you over time and having what is left turned into mere soulstuff to fuel the planes and feed the gods sounds horrifying. Given that "fuel" by definition is used up to power something else, that soulstuff will eventually be consumed and thus cease to exist. No trace of "you" as an individual will remain. Hardly a positive fate by any standard, even if you get coddled beforehand. Nor does it speak well of any god, including Thor, that they are so fine with it.

[Jason]

A number of things from the comic itself: Thor explicitly uses a nutrition analogy to describe the deific "diet," which includes mortal souls;And belief, worship, and dedication, none of which does any injury the soul providing those things.


...that the Dark One won't survive the destruction of the world because he doesn't have enough stored soul energy from his worshippers (implying that is a finite quantity that will be consumed in time);Thor says that the Dark One hasn't been around long enough to amass a store of energy and hasn't had enough worshippers. That could mean he doesn't have enough built up belief, worship, and dedication, since the gods need those three energies as well as just having souls occupy their plane.


...that the process of fusing with the plane means that any remnant of "you" as an independent being ceases to exist entirely... Where in the comic does this fusing with the plane notion appear? I recall seeing it in some of the D&D planar materials, but not in the comic. It's not in any of the latest stuff with Thor's overview of how the universe works and how the gods need mortals, which was what prompted Durkon's "crops" remark. Possibly it appeared way back while Roy was dead?
Edit: Also I see no reason to think the "fusing" process, if that's what really happens to souls from Stickworld, is caused by the gods feeding on them, or that the gods could change what happens to mortal souls on their planes if they wished.
Edit of the Edit: I read through Roy's visit to the celestial realms again and don't see anything in the comic about mortal spirits eventually being absorbed into the plane and losing their individuality. Roy's Archon says the goal of the spirits in Celestia is to climb the mountain and reach enlightenment. Roy's grandfather came back down the levels he had climbed to meet him.