So what are the odds Belkar and Serini are related?

[MartianInvader]

So far, every member of the Order except Belkar has had a storyline involving their immediate family. In 4 out of 5 cases, it was a parent.

And yes, as the murder hobo, Belkar's character has had the least need for family or a backstory in general. But that's become less and less true over the past couple books, as we've seen him genuinely evolve out of his old, one-dimensional self. Maybe he's gotten to the point where he's finally ready for a family arc of his own? And look! Here's an elderly halfling character being conveniently introduced into the storyline - one who enjoys lying and underhanded tactics, even.

What's more, (as of comic #1238) the anti-magic ray is hindering the casters and Roy is downed by poison, meaning Belkar's poised to be a major player in the upcoming scene. Maybe that scene will involve Belkar and/or Serini recognizing each other?

Anyone think I'm on to something? Or am I crazy?

[Peelee]

This has been a theory ever since Serini was introduced as a Halfling.

I put as much stock in it now as I did then. Or, at least, when I first read about it.

[hroþila]

It's not literally impossible, but there's nothing to suggest this is the case. They've known of each other for a while and there's been no indication that they're familiar with each other in any way, plus I'm not sure the chronology fits, considering Belkar's approximate age and Serini's career.

[Psepha]

Does anyone have ANYTHING to support this beyond the fact they're both halflings?

Because otherwise I assume we have to worry that Roy and Elan really ARE brothers, and we need to ask some very serious questions about Haley and Elan's relationship. Plus it's great to know that Tarquin, Ochul, Roy, Hinjo, and Julio are all one big happy family. And I certainly hope that Roy gets to take down his evil grandfather Xykon now that he's become a lich.

[MartianInvader]

Does anyone have ANYTHING to support this beyond the fact they're both halflings?

I... I just filled a whole post with reasons why it fits the story. Only a couple words referred to their race.

I guess the thing is that even though it's been a theory for a long time, the evidence has been getting stronger.

When Serini was introduced, we had only seen Roy's family, now "family arc" is practically a theme of the series. I personally didn't put any thought into it until we saw that Serini was still alive. *Then* we saw that she likes snarky humor and doesn't think much of paladins - cut from the same cloth as someone we know.

Serini and Belkar probably haven't seen each other's faces yet, so a moment like "I didn't realize the Serini of legend was AUNT SERINI!" is totally plausible.

Sure, it's just a theory, but if Haley gets knocked out in the next strip (leaving Belkar the only really capable one left), I'm going to be awfully suspicious.

[TRH]

Your only real argument is that Belkar is supposedly due for a family arc, but I recall the Giant specifically saying he wouldn't give Belkar a backstory for much the same reasons as Xykon. I don't think he's reversing course on that just because Belkar's evolved as a character.

And notice he's grown without interaction with family, because he simply doesn't value that as much as the others (minus V). Not every character needs a family arc, and forcing one on a character who clearly doesn't put stock in family to begin with would feel forced.

[Rrmcklin]

I... I just filled a whole post with reasons why it fits the story. Only a couple words referred to their race.

I guess the thing is that even though it's been a theory for a long time, the evidence has been getting stronger.

When Serini was introduced, we had only seen Roy's family, now "family arc" is practically a theme of the series. I personally didn't put any thought into it until we saw that Serini was still alive. *Then* we saw that she likes snarky humor and doesn't think much of paladins - cut from the same cloth as someone we know.

Serini and Belkar probably haven't seen each other's faces yet, so a moment like "I didn't realize the Serini of legend was AUNT SERINI!" is totally plausible.

Sure, it's just a theory, but if Haley gets knocked out in the next strip (leaving Belkar the only really capable one left), I'm going to be awfully suspicious.

That level of sarcasm might not have been necessary, but I do have to agree with the base sentiment. I'm not seeing why Belkar's character development necessitates family drama for him, let alone in such a frankly awkward, jarring way.

[Precure]

Eh, why not? I wouldn't count out good old Richie to pull something like that. But it would be kinda tragic for Serini, considering Belkar's predetermined death.

[Emanick]

The best argument for this is that the best narrative argument against it is no longer super compelling. Rich's statement that Belkar's story would likely be hurt by receiving a family background because it would make him more tragic than comic (forgive the rough paraphrase) isn't likely as true as it used to be, given Belkar's rapidly approaching death and the degree to which his potential "redemption" arc has progressed.

You could argue, of course, that Rich probably wouldn't have said that if he knew that Belkar would have a redemption arc with family involved eventually, but it wouldn't be the first time he misdirected the reader in the interests of a better story. I doubt he'd outright lie, though, so depending on the wording of his original statement, that might kill this theory.

Either way, I don't think it's very likely, because there's simply no real evidence for it. It would further the plot, sure, but so would lots of other things that would likely come across as far less contrived. Rich typically employs foreshadowing in situations where "authorial contrivance" would otherwise be a plausible reader complaint, and I don't think we've seen any. None of the things mentioned in the OP count as foreshadowing, at least not in my book.

[Ruck]

That level of sarcasm might not have been necessary, but I do have to agree with the base sentiment. I'm not seeing why Belkar's character development necessitates family drama for him, let alone in such frankly awkward, jarring way.

Bolded is important here and it's something that the "Wouldn't it be cool if..." theories often overlook. How would this serve the story and its themes? Does it make a better story to have this scene resolve with "Oh, you're my long-lost relative!" than through the characters' own actions?

(Aside, this is also why I'm skeptical of the "a relative of MitD's will be somewhere in Kraagor's Gate" theory-- I'm not sure what it could achieve in terms of storytelling other than cheapen the MITD's inevitable outward turn toward Good by making his motivation "happening to run into a family member" instead of it happening by applying what he learned from O-Chul and trying his best to follow his own conscience.)

[Rrmcklin]

Bolded is important here and it's something that the "Wouldn't it be cool if..." theories often overlook. How would this serve the story and its themes? Does it make a better story to have this scene resolve with "Oh, you're my long-lost relative!" than through the characters' own actions?

(Aside, this is also why I'm skeptical of the "a relative of MitD's will be somewhere in Kraagor's Gate" theory-- I'm not sure what it could achieve in terms of storytelling other than cheapen the MITD's inevitable outward turn toward Good by making his motivation "happening to run into a family member" instead of it happening by applying what he learned from O-Chul and trying his best to follow his own conscience.)

I agree with all of this. I see it often, people think "X character is related to Y!" inherently makes things better without really thinking about the implications or actual story.

Or, the exact opposite, when a story clearly is setting up such a reveal and people complain that it's "cliche" whether or not it actually fits in with the story's themes and plot apparently not factoring into it. I have one very specific example in mind for that, but it's not OOTS or even DnD related.

[Peelee]

Eh, why not?

Same reason I gripe and moan about Anakin Skywalker building C-3PO; it makes the world significantly smaller.

[brian 333]

Ten quatloos says that Belkar and Serini aren't close enough relations to be killed by the same familicide spell.

[hungrycrow]

C'mon, how many halflings are there in OotS world? The odds that Belkar just happens to be related to another plot important halfling are like a million to one... oh no.

[Emanick]

Ten quatloos says that Belkar and Serini aren't close enough relations to be killed by the same familicide spell.

Not a safe bet. Halfling generations are much shorter than dragon generations, and they've had thousands of years to interbreed with one another. Familicide might wipe out half of all halflings - or possibly all of them.

[Psepha]

I... I just filled a whole post with reasons why it fits the story. Only a couple words referred to their race.

I guess the thing is that even though it's been a theory for a long time, the evidence has been getting stronger.

When Serini was introduced, we had only seen Roy's family, now "family arc" is practically a theme of the series. I personally didn't put any thought into it until we saw that Serini was still alive. *Then* we saw that she likes snarky humor and doesn't think much of paladins - cut from the same cloth as someone we know.

Serini and Belkar probably haven't seen each other's faces yet, so a moment like "I didn't realize the Serini of legend was AUNT SERINI!" is totally plausible.

Sure, it's just a theory, but if Haley gets knocked out in the next strip (leaving Belkar the only really capable one left), I'm going to be awfully suspicious.

You filled a whole post with plenty of things, but none of it was evidence - it's waving about in the dark just like Belkar right now. There's been literally no foreshadowing of this. If "doesn't like paladins" qualifies then Belkar is potentially related to every single evil and chaotic halfling on the planet, and the neutral halflings are a coin toss.

What actual shared history do they have? And what does them being related bring to the story in any way beyond "it's Belkar's turn"?

You specifically said the evidence has been getting stronger - it's time for someone to present even a single piece of that evidence, because without it we don't have anything that could be called a genuine theory.

[dancrilis]

There's been literally no foreshadowing of this.

While I don't hold with the theory we can't know this unless it happens.

But to make up a story.

Serini left halfling lands because she had a troll graft, (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1227.html) it is not unreasonable that the halflings discrimated against her and called her a monster and could have picked on her family (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0125.html) and we know that Belkar has an aunt that he thinks might revel in destruction (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0165.html) which could fit some of the insults thrown at her.

If Judy is another name for Serini (which is a stretch even ignoring the other stretching - but I do know people who have a lot of seemingly unrelated names they are referred to as) then in theory it begins to fit.

More much likely they are merely two halflings that have nothing to do with each other.

[Arkku]

I see the point that Belkar is the only member of the Order whose family we have not seen, and the main argument against it – Belkar's one-dimensionality – doesn't seem particularly valid anymore. However, I also think it would be too much of a coincidence for Serini to be his relative, and indeed for Belkar to not have said anything about the possibility earlier. (Presumably he would know that he has an epic-level aunt who happens to have the same name and class as the Serini mentioned in relation to the gates, and if he's onboard with the whole saving the world thing, he might consider it relevant enough to have mentioned it to Roy.)

[brian 333]

The Aunt Judy hypothesis is contraindicated by the fact that Serini knows the whole team, including Belkar, and has done nothing to indicate she is related.

Like, make a phone call sending spell and let him know that messing around with the gates will get the whole world blown up, maybe?

[Blue Dragon]

You are not crazy, but they aren't related.

[KorvinStarmast]

And notice he's grown without interaction with family OotS is his family; Roy adopted him, or rather, took him in off the street.

Same reason I gripe and moan about Anakin Skywalker building C-3PO; it makes the world significantly smaller. Yeah, yet another blow against the prequels.

Familicide might wipe out half of all halflings - or possibly all of them. To kill half of the half lings kills a quarter of the lings, which means that a lot of fish dinners will never get served. :smallannoyed: (We have a local restaurant that serves a blackened ling that is to die for ...)

More much likely they are merely two halflings that have nothing to do with each other. I spent a lot of years in the Navy. Some people would ask me, when they heard I was in the Navy "hey, do you know so and so?" With two exceptions over a quarter of a century, my answer was usually "Well, no, there are three of four hundred thousand people in the Navy and it operates both casts" - what was remarkable was the two times I did, after clarifying where/when, say "Hey, yeah, I remember him from ________")

Weirdly, as big as it is it's also one of those small world deals ... but I am betting the under on Serini and Belkar being related.

[Rrmcklin]

Also, all of the previous family arcs with the Order were built from a base that had been established well in advance. It wasn't just "Oh, we're related! You'd think either of us would have realized it in the weeks/months we've known of each other's existences and names, but I guess not for some reason."

[Manga Shoggoth]

Also, all of the previous family arcs with the Order were built from a base that had been established well in advance. It wasn't just "Oh, we're related! You'd think either of us would have realized it in the weeks/months we've known of each other's existences and names, but I guess not for some reason."

And on top of that, none of the family arcs involved the scribblers in any way. And if theirs didn't, why should Belkar's?

[Emanick]

And on top of that, none of the family arcs involved the scribblers in any way. And if theirs didn't, why should Belkar's?

That would actually be a better argument for this theory than against it. If one of the members of the Order was already established as related to the Scribblers, it would be even more of a stretch for Belkar to be related to another Scribbler. As it is, as unlikely as it is that Belkar is related to Serini, you can at least say that it wouldn't be a retread of old plots.

[Fyraltari]

People say that Belkar's growth means The Giant's post about an origin story making him tragic rather than comedic no longer applies. That seems to me like a misunderstanding of what The Giant meant: a Belkar origin story would have to explain how Belkar became the vile monster he was at the beginning of the story* and since that kind of violence does not come from a place of happiness, that'd make him tragic. This is true no matter how much development Belkar gets and how much progress he makes during the story.

Now, introducing Serini as a relative to Belkar isn't giving him an origin story, but there's significant overlap: Ian's and Tarquin's very characters demonstrated quite handily how Haley and Nale became the people they were at the beginning of the story, for example.


*Before people say that SoD didn't do thay for Xykon, Xykon is an antagonist, as such he isn't supposed to be relatable the way protagonists are.

[RatElemental]

It's also possible that Belkar and Serini are related distantly and neither of them knows it, or Serini does know it and doesn't care because she's got a world to save, or Serini might just be a good-ish role model for Belkar to emulate leading up to his death, or...

[Chronos]

We have had a grand total of one case of a previously-introduced character turning out to be related to a main character: Elan and his father. And that's because that was Elan, the guy who things like that happen to. There's no reason to expect that to happen to anyone else without Elan involved.

If the Giant decides to give us an arc involving Belkar's family, he'll do it the same way he did it for all of the other characters: By introducing the new character or characters as Belkar's family.

[Jason]

People say that Belkar's growth means The Giant's post about an origin story making him tragic rather than comedic no longer applies. That seems to me like a misunderstanding of what The Giant meant: a Belkar origin story would have to explain how Belkar became the vile monster he was at the beginning of the story* and since that kind of violence does not come from a place of happiness, that'd make him tragic...

*Before people say that SoD didn't do thay for Xykon, Xykon is an antagonist, as such he isn't supposed to be relatable the way protagonists are.
I agree generally, except that Xykon seems to have just been bad to start with. The only "trauma" we see him go through before becoming a lich is being occasionally mocked for being a sorcerer rather than a "real" wizard, and it's mild enough that it doesn't really make him very sympathetic. It's clearly not his motivation for being evil. He just likes being evil.

[Fyraltari]

It's also possible that Belkar and Serini are related distantly and neither of them knows it
I fail to see the difference between that and "they're not related."

We have had a grand total of one case of a previously-introduced character turning out to be related to a main character: Elan and his father. And that's because that was Elan, the guy who things like that happen to. There's no reason to expect that to happen to anyone else without Elan involved.

If the Giant decides to give us an arc involving Belkar's family, he'll do it the same way he did it for all of the other characters: By introducing the new character or characters as Belkar's family.
Ian Starshine was introduced as "white-haired long-time inmate" before being revealed as being Haley's father.

I agree generally, except that Xykon seems to have just been bad to start with. The only "trauma" we see him go through before becoming a lich is being occasionally mocked for being a sorcerer rather than a "real" wizard, and it's mild enough that it doesn't really make him very sympathetic. It's clearly not his motivation for being evil. He just likes being evil.
*Sigh*


*Before people say that SoD didn't do thay for Xykon, Xykon is an antagonist, as such he isn't supposed to be relatable the way protagonists are.

[Peelee]

I spent a lot of years in the Navy. Some people would ask me, when they heard I was in the Navy "hey, do you know so and so?" With two exceptions over a quarter of a century, my answer was usually "Well, no, there are three of four hundred thousand people in the Navy and it operates both casts"

I can't remember who told it, but there was a great joke I saw recently. Something like "every time someone finds out I'm Irish they say something like, 'oh, do you know Sean Patrick O'Keeffe in Dublin?' Dublin has over a million people! I don't know what's worse, that they think I would just know Sean Patrick O'Keeffe in Dublin, or the fact that I do actually know him."

[Precure]

Same reason I gripe and moan about Anakin Skywalker building C-3PO; it makes the world significantly smaller.

https://youtu.be/CbIhYhrOJAg

[Jason]

*Sigh*


Right. You're saying "Xykon wasn't made sympathetic when his past was revealdd because he wasn't meant to be made sympathetic because he's an antagonist".
I'm saying "he wasn't made sympathetic when his past was revealed because he doesn't have any great trauma or tragedy in his background. He chose to be evil."

You're taking the Doylist perspective while I'm going Watsonian.

[Roland Itiative]

I'd say it's a 1 in 999,999 chance. Because it if it was one in a million, it would actually happen.

[Fyraltari]

Right. You're saying "Xykon wasn't made sympathetic when his past was revealdd because he wasn't meant to be made sympathetic because he's an antagonist".
I'm saying "he wasn't made sympathetic when his past was revealed because he doesn't have any great trauma or tragedy in his background. He chose to be evil."

You're taking the Doylist perspective while I'm going Watsonian.

There isn't really a point in discussing a Watsonian perspective on an author's choice. The decision wether to reveal Belkar's past won't be made on diegetic lines.

[skim172]

Not a safe bet. Halfling generations are much shorter than dragon generations, and they've had thousands of years to interbreed with one another. Familicide might wipe out half of all halflings - or possibly all of them.

Genetic drift tends to grow with faster breeding, not the other way around. Unless you're talking about a population with a hard cap to its growth.

If halflings gave birth to large numbers of children, then it would grow even faster. How many children are there per halfling brood?

(Halflings lay eggs, right?)

[danielxcutter]

I don't necessarily think Belkar being related to Serini would really change Serini's reaction to positive anyways.

For one, if she just thinks Belkar's being an idiot, then stopping an idiot family member from doing something really stupid isn't particularly more callous than she's already doing anyways, and it's not like she's planning to kill the Order.

And if she does know Belkar used to be a murderous psychopath, either she does exactly the same as she was going to already, or she tries to execute the entire Order right there and then. Though the fact that she seems to know quite well about the Order reduces the chance of the latter instance considerably.

If she does know Belkar though, perhaps she might comment on how he's not as much of a stab-happy murderhobo as he used to be, but ultimately I don't think it's going to make her stay her hand either way.

[Precure]

I know it sounds crazy, but let me say it: What if Belkar was working as a spy for Serini, his relative, this whole time? This would explain many things:

a. Belkar's reason for forcing himself into the team.
b. Belkar's reason for staying with the team.
c. Serini's knowledge about the paladins, the order, Xykon and destruction of other gates.

[danielxcutter]

I thought Belkar has the social skills of a drowned moose.

[Peelee]

I know it sounds crazy, but let me say it: What if Belkar was working as a spy for Serini, his relative, this whole time? This would explain many things:

a. Belkar's reason for forcing himself into the team.
b. Belkar's reason for staying with the team.
c. Serini's knowledge about the paladins, the order, Xykon and destruction of other gates.

Regarding C., how would Belkar know the details about the destruction of Soon's Gate? O-Chul was explicitly not sharing the details out of respect for the dead.

[Fyraltari]

I know it sounds crazy, but let me say it: What if Belkar was working as a spy for Serini, his relative, this whole time? This would explain many things:

a. Belkar's reason for forcing himself into the team.
b. Belkar's reason for staying with the team.
c. Serini's knowledge about the paladins, the order, Xykon and destruction of other gates.

You are right. It does sound crazy.

[hroþila]

As for A, we know Belkar's motive to join the Order.
He was a fugitive and he wanted to leave town with a group of armed people

[dancrilis]

Regarding C., how would Belkar know the details about the destruction of Soon's Gate? O-Chul was explicitly not sharing the details out of respect for the dead.

Is Belkar is a super secret spy then it would be reasonable that his wisdom might be higher then we have been lead to believe - thereby he may have access to spell casting and have used charm animal to assist with monitoring the gate and speak with animals to get the story later that day.

[Metastachydium]

Is Belkar is a super secret spy then it would be reasonable that his wisdom might be higher then we have been lead to believe - thereby he may have access to spell casting and have used charm animal to assist with monitoring the gate and speak with animals to get the story later that day.

OR he's actually a psion (rather than a ranger – what a TWEEST!) and he used Mind Probe on O-Chul while he and Haley were trying to carry off his body.

[InvisibleBison]

I know it sounds crazy, but let me say it: What if Belkar was working as a spy for Serini, his relative, this whole time? This would explain many things:

a. Belkar's reason for forcing himself into the team.
b. Belkar's reason for staying with the team.
c. Serini's knowledge about the paladins, the order, Xykon and destruction of other gates.

Why would Serini want to plant a spy on the Order? They weren't doing anything related to the gates at that point. Yes, they were going after Xykon, who had set up shop on top of one of the gates, but Serini had no reason to think they'd actually be able to defeat him.

[Peelee]

Why would Serini want to plant a spy on the Order? They weren't doing anything related to the gates at that point. Yes, they were going after Xykon, who had set up shop on top of one of the gates, but Serini had no reason to think they'd actually be able to defeat him.

Because they were PCs, clearly. Now, the only question is how Srini knew about the Roy in order to spy on him. Clearly she had another spy who followed them until he teamed up with Durkon and decided to fork a full group. My money is on Eugene.

[skim172]

In a world where interspecies mating is biologically possible and quite commonplace, it seems very narrowminded to focus just on Belkar as the root for our crazy theories. Serini could be related to anyone on the Order. Maybe she's Haley's aunt. Maybe she's Durkon's sister. Maybe she's Redcloak's niece. Maybe she's Roy's secret lovechild, who traveled back in time using some sort of time magic.

I mean, this is just racism, really. You see two halflings and you just assume they must be related. For shame. Halflings don't have to take this. :smallmad:

[Precure]

Regarding C., how would Belkar know the details about the destruction of Soon's Gate? O-Chul was explicitly not sharing the details out of respect for the dead.

Hinjo told others that O-Chul did it.


As for A, we know Belkar's motive to join the Order.
He was a fugitive and he wanted to leave town with a group of armed people

That explanation doesn't make much sense though, considering he could just leave with his fake mustache, and he joined them later in a very casual way.


Why would Serini want to plant a spy on the Order? They weren't doing anything related to the gates at that point.

They were planning to invade Dorukan's castle, the place build to protect the gate, and they weren't secretive about it. It's no more farfetched than Hilgya's joining the Linear Guild to get Dorukan's talisman.

[Peelee]

Hinjo told others that O-Chul did it.

Then Serini woudlnt know that he didn't but his sword was used for it. Doesn't line up.

[ORione]

Belkar knows who blew up Soon's gate because he's secretly Miko in disguise, and "he" remembers blowing up the gate.

[RatElemental]

Belkar knows who blew up Soon's gate because he's secretly Miko in disguise, and "he" remembers blowing up the gate.

That explains how "Miko" found the order then, she was clearly an ice assassin!

[Precure]

Then Serini woudlnt know that he didn't but his sword was used for it. Doesn't line up.

Maybe he managed to learn O-Chul's exact words* to Hinjo, and Serini then put the pieces together?

* I did make that decision, and it was my blade that did the deed. I will say no more about it, lest I speak ill of the dead.

[WanderingMist]

Genetic drift tends to grow with faster breeding, not the other way around. Unless you're talking about a population with a hard cap to its growth.

If halflings gave birth to large numbers of children, then it would grow even faster. How many children are there per halfling brood?

(Halflings lay eggs, right?)

Genetic drift doesn't matter when the thing that kills you is magic and goes by what it most recently killed for closest genetic relative.

[Psepha]

Belkar knows who blew up Soon's gate because he's secretly Miko in disguise, and "he" remembers blowing up the gate.

Ahhhh see THAT makes sense! Miko got cut in half, Belkar is a halfling. The math checks out!

[Robots]

Just because they're the same species doesn't make them related.

Also, I'm here to ruin everything and quash this theory, because Rich Burlew has stated that we will never see a member of Belkar's family.

Source: https://www.patreon.com/posts/answer-post-2020-34406298 Question 7.

[137beth]

Does anyone have ANYTHING to support this beyond the fact they're both halflings?

Because otherwise I assume we have to worry that Roy and Elan really ARE brothers, and we need to ask some very serious questions about Haley and Elan's relationship. Plus it's great to know that Tarquin, Ochul, Roy, Hinjo, and Julio are all one big happy family. And I certainly hope that Roy gets to take down his evil grandfather Xykon now that he's become a lich.

Oh no, you're being ridiculous. Clearly Elan and Haley can't be related, because Elan is a human while Haley is a celestial (she's not exactly what you'd call human). All the others are obviously related to each other, though.

[Peelee]

Theory: Haley is a remarkably tall Halfling.

[137beth]

People say that Belkar's growth means The Giant's post about an origin story making him tragic rather than comedic no longer applies. That seems to me like a misunderstanding of what The Giant meant: a Belkar origin story would have to explain how Belkar became the vile monster he was at the beginning of the story* and since that kind of violence does not come from a place of happiness, that'd make him tragic. This is true no matter how much development Belkar gets and how much progress he makes during the story.

Now, introducing Serini as a relative to Belkar isn't giving him an origin story, but there's significant overlap: Ian's and Tarquin's very characters demonstrated quite handily how Haley and Nale became the people they were at the beginning of the story, for example.


*Before people say that SoD didn't do thay for Xykon, Xykon is an antagonist, as such he isn't supposed to be relatable the way protagonists are.

Also, Xykon isn't really the main character of SoD: Redcloak is. (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?212381-Wouldn-t-people-like-to-buy-a-book-about-the-lives-of-Haerta-Ganonron-and-Jephton/page2&p=11686399#post11686399)


Theory: Haley is a remarkably tall Halfling.
Uh oh! Elan is part halfling (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0839.html), so if Haley is also a halfling then she and Elan may be related!

[Peelee]

Uh oh! Elan is part halfling (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0839.html), so if Haley is also a halfling then she and Elan may be related!


Let's not get silly. Clearly, they would make a wholeling.

[Fish]

Anyone think I'm on to something? Or am I crazy?
I think we've seen that Belkar probably needs parental figures in his life. That doesn't mean that Serini must be his actual, real parent.

I could see a kind of adoptive parental relationship forming. I could see Belkar giving Serini one of his patented hurtful pep talks about not wallowing in despair. I could see a level of mutual respect over the desire to befriend monsters. Not sure why "by the way, hi, mom!" would make any of that more meaningful. I bet Rich could do it, but I don't see it right now.

Story-wise, what does Belkar get out of a parental figure? Belkar is already on the road to being a better halfling, all on his own. He hit rock bottom and turned his life around. Introducing a parental figure would, in some sense, undermine his journey. Belkar doesn't need validation from Long Lost Halfling Mom telling him to clean up his act, or congratulating him for his recent choices, or saying she's proud of him. What would it add to the story at this point?

[137beth]

Genetic drift doesn't matter when the thing that kills you is magic and goes by what it most recently killed for closest genetic relative.

Okay, I just want to correct something even though it doesn't matter:
The Giant said that familicide (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?234374-Familicide-Mega-Thread/page36&p=12856280#post12856280) doesn't care about "how closely related" someone is:

Step 1: Kill everyone with the original target's blood. This is a simple yes/no effect: Is a creature (the secondary target) related by blood to the original target at all, in any way? If yes, kill it. If no, move on. Number of generations or percentage of blood or direction doesn't matter.

Step 2: Kill everyone who shares blood with any of the people killed in Step 1. Think of it as killing everyone descended from (or siblings to) any and all still-living ancestors of each secondary target. So if Penelope had a grandfather on one side and a great-grandmother on the other side who were still alive, every person who could trace their blood back to either of those people would be dead, because Penelope's daughter carries both of their bloods. If a person can only trace their blood through (say) Penelope's already-dead great-great-great-grandfather, then they're safe. Thus cousins and second-cousins and the like are all dead, but more distant genetic relations are not. It is possible for some cousins to survive if all older generations were already dead, yes, but Vaarsuvius wasn't really likely to take the time to make that distinction while sobbing on a dungeon hallway floor.

Now for some anticipated FAQs:
<Snip>
Wouldn't that spell kill everyone of the original target's species?

In our world? Maybe. The OOTS world is not ours, though. It was created fully populated, even with black dragons. So there could be 100 original black dragons who (as V noted) breed slowly over the relatively-short span of time the current world has been in existence, leading to one-quarter of them being wiped out. If it had been cast on a human first, it may well have taken half or more of the population with it, depending on how many Original Humans there had been and how much interbreeding had occurred. Good thing that's not what happened, right?


Halflings probably didn't arise via evolution, because Thor says in the comic that natural selection (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1142.html) is something the gods haven't tried.

Also, a year later the Giant later made another post clarifying how Familicide (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?287767-How-Did-Familicide-Stop/page3&p=15461169#post15461169). Among other things, he said:

1.) The people created at the moment of the planet's creation were all unrelated to each other, or perhaps only related in small groups—a family of 5 or 10 might have been created, but with no relation to all the other families being simultaneously created. Why? Because.


The reason the rate dragons and halflings breed is relevant to Familicide is because it determines how much time needs to pass before every living dragon or halfling is a blood relative of every other living dragon or halfling. If halflings have significantly shorter generations, then it's plausible that all of them would be wiped out in Step 1 of Familicide, or at least in step 2.

This is a derail, but many years ago I recall seeing a headcanon on this forum that Haerta died by casting Familicide on someone whom she didn't know was related to her, inadvertently killing herself with the spell. I'm pretty sure that was before we learned there were millions of worlds destroyed by the Snarl. Now that we know that, Haerta could have been from an earlier world, so maybe she accidentally killed all humans in her world (but the gods created new humans in some later worlds).

Now that I think about it again, Haerta inadvertently dying from her own epic spell would be a pretty good illustration of Xykon's lesson to V about power. Though Xykon didn't get to meet spliced V, he would presumably consider her a "chump who didn't have the balls to stay in the game (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html)." And he might tell her "If you can lose it by blowing two Will saves casting your custom spell the wrong enemy, you never really had any power in the first place (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0657.html)."
EDIT:
And apparently I made that same observation in 2013 (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=15428731&postcount=36), and then forgot about it.

[KorvinStarmast]

Miko got cut in half, Belkar is a halfling. The math checks out! That makes him sushi (or perhaps sashimi) since a ling is a fish (https://mk0focusfishing7od3r.kinstacdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Common-Ling.jpg). :smallsmile:

Story-wise, what does Belkar get out of a parental figure? Belkar is already on the road to being a better halfling, all on his own. Hmm, with substantial assistance from Lord Shjo, Mr Scruffy, and Durkon. :smallcool:
And I think Minrah is going to get credit for an assist before the story is over.

[skim172]

Genetic drift doesn't matter when the thing that kills you is magic and goes by what it most recently killed for closest genetic relative.

See, I think we're gonna have to assume there's more qualifications than that on the Familicide spell. Even with the explanation that this world was created with existing wholly-made individuals who shared no family ties, my feeling is that the majority of the population would still be interlinked within a blink of an eon. But that's just speculative.

I don't suppose, by any chance, we have anyone who's run the actual simulations on these forums? Someone with both a degree in reproductive biology and good knowledge of SimPy?

Maybe we can apply for a grant for this. I'm sure some research foundation would be willing to fund a project into the biological sustainability of a fantasy world of stick figures.

[KorvinStarmast]

the majority of the population would still be interlinked within a blink of an eon. OotS world hasn't been around that long in this iteration. A few millenia, it seems, is the high estimate.
Maybe we can apply for a grant for this. I'm sure some research foundation would be willing to fund a project into the biological sustainability of a fantasy world of stick figures. It's all about the funding, isn't it? :smallwink: Kickstarter might be your best bet. :smallyuk:

[Riftwolf]

Something Minrah said might be relevant to this; (paraphrased) it doesn't matter who you were, it matters who you are going forward.
Establishing a family relation to Belkar is going back to who he was, and why he was. But Belkar isn't who he was and who he was no longer needs explaining why he was, because he has a reason why he is who he is now. While it doesn't erase his past crimes, Belkar isn't going for a tearful redemption arc, he's trying to be a good... A better... Less of a jackass going forward.

[Precure]

A redemption without facing his past is pretty shallow. Belkar is not some kind of victim who needs to forget about the past and needs to move on.

[hungrycrow]

A redemption without facing his past is pretty shallow. Belkar is not some kind of victim who needs to forget about the past and needs to move on.

Belkar needs to deal with his past actions, but not necessarily his backstory. Unless he wronged Serini at some point establishing a family relation wouldn't really help his redemption arc.

[Ruck]

Belkar needs to deal with his past actions, but not necessarily his backstory.

Yep, bingo. Good way to put it. Especially with Belkar, he's done enough that he needs to account for that we know about or have seen in comic, that I don't know what adding a whole backstory to that with more stuff is going to add to his personal journey.

[Emanick]

Yep, bingo. Good way to put it. Especially with Belkar, he's done enough that he needs to account for that we know about or have seen in comic, that I don't know what adding a whole backstory to that with more stuff is going to add to his personal journey.

I think if we were to see OOTS continuing indefinitely, with Belkar not set to die in the immediate future, his backstory would come up eventually. Belkar is beginning to come to terms with questions of basic morals, and most people who stay on that path eventually have to reckon with their past. I imagine that a hypothetical Book 9 or 10 would see Belkar confronting his past victims, or his parents, or something like that.

As it is, though, there isn't time left in the story for that. Belkar has quite enough on his plate already without introducing a new backstory, as does the story as a whole. I doubt we'll see anything like that, especially as the Patreon quote Robots provided seems to rule it out.

[Rrmcklin]

The idea that we would/should confront Belkar's past/backstory assumes there's something in his past that made him the way he is. That's not assumption I think we have a basis for. He seems very much like Xykon in that regard, with the exception of actually being able to become better.

[Emanick]

The idea that we would/should confront Belkar's past/backstory assumes there's something in his past that made him the way he is. That's not assumption I think we have a basis for. He seems very much like Xykon in that regard, with the exception of actually being able to become better.

I think that knowing which choices somebody made as a child/adolescent always tells you something interesting about them, even if it's that "they are the way they are primarily because of what they chose to do, not because of what happened to them." For instance,

after reading Start of Darkness, we understand Xykon better because we know that he chose to be the way he was, and that he's more-or-less always been this messed up, even if he was a little more human originally (e.g. crying over Barky, enjoying coffee, having a sexuality, etc.). Before, it's possible to see him as somebody who time and undeath has twisted; now we know that's not the case.

Is there an interesting story that could be told about Belkar's childhood? Yeah, probably. Rich even says that giving him a backstory would probably make him much more sad and unfunny, which does suggest to me that there's something to the idea that "there's something in [Belkar's] past that made him the way he is." But I, for one, will happily take a story that focuses on redemption rather than abuse or something else tragic.

[danielxcutter]

I mean, the sob backstory makes some sense. Like Nale, it partly explains - though doesn’t justify, obviously - how he became the person he is today.

[Precure]

We learned that he was a slave at some point, before being an adventurer. At least that's what people told me about the events in Uncivil Servant.

[brian 333]

The thing that keeps getting mixed up here is the idea of forgiveness and absolution and restitution. These things have nothing to do with redemption.

To be redeemed Belkar does not have to be forgiven by anyone. He doesn't have to come to terms with his past acts, and he doesn't have to make it up to his victims.

He has to 'remake' himself. He has to cash in his old self and become something else. The author has said as much through Minrah's sermon.

We don't need Belkar's backstory for that. His past crimes only matter in that he chooses never to commit them again.

[Peelee]

The thing that keeps getting mixed up here is the idea of forgiveness and absolution and restitution. These things have nothing to do with redemption.

To be redeemed Belkar does not have to be forgiven by anyone. He doesn't have to come to terms with his past acts, and he doesn't have to make it up to his victims.

He has to 'remake' himself.

At least one character in the comic seems to disagree (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0464.html). And I, for one, don't read that as "this is only the case for that specific character." I read that as the author putting forth his beliefs.

Redemption is a rare and special thing, after all. It's not for everyone. I think V is shooting for redemption, but I think Belkar couldn't care less.

[brian 333]

At least one character in the comic seems to disagree (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0464.html). And I, for one, don't read that as "this is only the case for that specific character." I read that as the author putting forth his beliefs.

Redemption is a rare and special thing, after all. It's not for everyone. I think V is shooting for redemption, but I think Belkar couldn't care less.

In that case his backstory is not important at all.

[Peelee]

In that case his backstory is not important at all.

I agree, but I wasn't rebutting anything to do with his backstory; I was rebutting the claim that the only thing needed for redemption is to choose not to do all the things he did anymore. That's not redemption, that's the baseline of what it means to not be an *******.

[MartianInvader]

I think this is coming down to semantics a bit. Belkar's unlikely to attain (or even seek) redemption in the sense Soon was talking about.

I think the concept Brian was going for ("remaking"?) is that he's likely to fundamentally change himself, in the way a PC is likely to change when the controlling player realizes there's so much more to the game than hack n' slash.

[Peelee]

I think this is coming down to semantics a bit. Belkar's unlikely to attain (or even seek) redemption in the sense Soon was talking about.

I think the concept Brian was going for ("remaking"?) is that he's likely to fundamentally change himself, in the way a PC is likely to change when the controlling player realizes there's so much more to the game than hack n' slash.

Oh there's no doubt of that, but I wouldn't call it "redemption" in any sense of the word.

[Precure]

Don't you know, Belkar is a protagonist, it doesn't matter how many people he killed, it will be easily forgiven after he feels little bit sad. Not like Miko, who was the worst and will never deserve any redemption.

[MartianInvader]

Setting aside how much farther he has to go, I would say Belkar's already farther along the redemption continuum than Miko ever got, since he actually apologized for something.

[pearl jam]

Belkar got to live beyond his tipping point moment, and had been making some progress even before that. Miko didn't. Not to guarantee that she would have done so had she lived longer, but the opportunity window for her was very short.

[brian 333]

Hypothetical:

Someone robs a bank or two, (dozen.) Because he never gets caught there are no consequences, but he can never spend the marked money.

Later he realizes that robbery is wrong and by choice never robs again. He finds gainful employment and lives the life of a responsible citizen.

By my definition he is redeemed. And this is the kind of redemption Minrah was talking about. Remaking himself in a new mold and not worrying about what others think. Just being a better him.

He is most definately not forgiven. In fact, there may be many who seek his head on a platter if they could find him. But forgiveness is not about the guy who committed the crime. It's about the victim letting go of his anger and getting past the hurt. Many redeemed people are still hated by their victims. And some crimes can never be forgiven. Redemption would be virtually impossible if forgiveness was a requirement.

Is he absolved? No. If Joubert finds him he might even go to jail. But being absolved means to have the penalties for crimes waived, and can be given to someone who has no intention of undergoimg redemption.

Has he atoned? No. Atonement is to undergo sacrifice of some sort to pay for the crime. Whether he has changed as a person is unrelated to suffering as a recognition of a debt that cannot be repaid.

Similarly, restitution is a payback and has nothing to do with whether or not a person honestly repents.

And here is the key idea behind redemption. To be redeemed one must recognize that one has done wrong and then refuse to do that wrong again. He must thereafter resolve to be a better person and to resolve again if he should fall short. To step by lonely step walk toward the light, by himself, for himself.

A good person doesn't do good deeds for the recognition, he does good deeds because they are the right things to do. When Belkar does this once it will be the sign that he is redeemed. That he is made over in a new image. And he has to do it himself. What others think don't matter.

[Peelee]

Hypothetical:

Someone robs a bank or two, (dozen.) Because he never gets caught there are no consequences, but he can never spend the marked money.

Later he realizes that robbery is wrong and by choice never robs again. He finds gainful employment and lives the life of a responsible citizen.

By my definition he is redeemed.


Let's have another hypothetical, one that I am very fond of and go to surprisingly frequently: Darth Vader, after chopping off Luke's hand, goes to a beach and retires. Spends the rest of his life sipping space mai tais while lying on lounger. The sand is fine and soft and doesn't get anywhere so he has no problem with it. Sure, he has committed plenty of mass murder in his life, but now he's just reading a book to the sounds of the waves. Would you call him redeemed?

Spoiler alert: if so, then I do not subscribe to any definition of "redemption" that you do.

[brian 333]

Let's have another hypothetical, one that I am very fond of and go to surprisingly frequently: Darth Vader, after chopping off Luke's hand, goes to a beach and retires. Spends the rest of his life sipping space mai tais while lying on lounger. The sand is fine and soft and doesn't get anywhere so he has no problem with it. Sure, he has committed plenty of mass murder in his life, but now he's just reading a book to the sounds of the waves. Would you call him redeemed?

Spoiler alert: if so, then I do not subscribe to any definition of "redemption" that you do.

Taking a vacation from mass murder and realizing your past acts were wrong and resolving to be a better person are different things.

In my example the hypothetical subject actually set himself on a different path. In yours Darth was not doing anything to be a new and improved person.

[Peelee]

Taking a vacation from mass murder and realizing your past acts were wrong and resolving to be a better person are different things.

In my example the hypothetical subject actually set himself on a different path. In yours Darth was not doing anything to be a new and improved person.

A.) not a vacation. He does absolutely zero lightsaber slashing or Force chokes, no matter how bad the service he gets is. No death, no violence, no threats. Redeemed, yes?

2.) I have yet to see Belkar express regret, remorse, or any sort of acknowledgement that he shouldn't have murdered just tons of people, nor that he should not have sold people into slavery. So even by your definition (or what I understand it to be, since your definition is foreign to me), Belkar is not redeemed.

[brian 333]

A.) not a vacation. He does absolutely zero lightsaber slashing or Force chokes, no matter how bad the service he gets is. No death, no violence, no threats. Redeemed, yes?

2.) I have yet to see Belkar express regret, remorse, or any sort of acknowledgement that he shouldn't have murdered just tons of people, nor that he should not have elf people into slavery. So even by your definition (or what I understand it to be, since your definition is foreign to me), Belkar is not redeemed.

1. Redeemed no. He's still the same old Vader.

2. Belkar is not redeemed yet either.
He is on a path that could lead to it, but he has to acknowledge his past wrongs and to resolve to not be that person.

As of now he's playing the game. It still remains to be seen if he is going to actually repent.

[Peelee]

1. Redeemed no. He's still the same old Vader.

2. Belkar is not redeemed yet either.
He is on a path that could lead to it, but he has to acknowledge his past wrongs and to resolve to not be that person.

As of now he's playing the game. It still remains to be seen if he is going to actually repent.

A.) he's not the same old Vader at all. The waiter gives him the wrong drink? No "you have failed me for the last time, Billy." No corpse. Not even a complaint to the manager. Again, this is not a vacation from killing people. He kills zero more people for the rest of his life. He's simply a mass murderer who has decided to stop murdering and is relaxing in a beach for the rest of his life. He even likes the sand. So, by your definition (or what I can make of it), he should be redeemed.

Or hey, what about Tarkin? Let's say Tarkin felt just super bad about Alderaan. You know, the genocide he committed. Felt bad about the genocide. Of course, restitution is not required, nor forgiveness or absolution. He's not going to do anything at all for the survivors of his genocide, he's not going to care what other people think, but hes all "man, I really shouldn't have done that genocide. Bad call. No more genocide for me, like, ever." Tarkin is redeemed for you, yes? Redeemed for the genocide?

2.) Belkar has already remade himself. He is a very different person than he was before meeting Shojo (heck, even before activating the MoJ). Should he not by your definition already be redeemed?

III.) bytheway, why did the bank robber in your hypothetical not spend any of the money? Did that change things? Let's say the bank robber spent the money, still has the money, and can still spend the money. Belkar, after all, ate the candy bar he killed Solt Lurkyug for, as an example. He did profit from his crimes. Interesting that you made it very clear your bank robber did not, effectively.

[Fyraltari]

Also, I don't think Minrah was saying what you say she was saying. She was saying that people can change and become better or something, they're not stuck being what they were no matter what everybody else thinks about them.

That's not the same as saying "your past crimes don't matter".

[Hopeless]

Just a thought, but what if Belkar refuses to flee or stand down and actually starts reminding Serini of her deceased dwarven counterpart?

Imagine she now recognises she is now the Snarl end of this version of her former party?

Could Belkar by dying actually cause Serini to break down recognising what she has done has revealed those party member she's blamed for the loss of their dwarven friend were actually blameless and she has been doing far worse?

Remember that anti-magic field if Belkar can scoot out long enough to release his animal companions can turn the tide very easily!

I think Serini is in for a shock and possible an overdue slap back to her senses!

[brian 333]

Also, I don't think Minrah was saying what you say she was saying. She was saying that people can change and become better or something, they're not stuck being what they were no matter what everybody else thinks about them.

That's not the same as saying "your past crimes don't matter".

I agree with the first paragraph, not the second. Past crimes do matter. A person has to realize they were crimes and actively set himself to changing such that he never wants to commit such crimes again.

This is called repentance, and it does not require that anyone else acknowledge or accept or agree that it is enough. It doesn't require any external validation. It does require an honest commitment to change, and daily effort to make the change permanent.

And that's the problem with the Darth Vader scenario. Darth doesn't acknowledge his past crimes and do the hard work of rebuilding himself in a new image.

Belkar has set himself on the right path but he's only taken baby steps toward repentence. He is not yet redeemed.

If redemption required external validation, very few people would ever be redeemed because their victims would control the process.

P.S. The point about the money being unspent was supposed to be addressed when talking about restitution. Giving the money back was possible. I forgot to make that point at the appropriate place.

[Peelee]

I agree with the first paragraph, not the second. Past crimes do matter. A person has to realize they were crimes and actively set himself to changing such that he never wants to commit such crimes again.

This is called repentance, and it does not require that anyone else acknowledge or accept or agree that it is enough. It doesn't require any external validation. It does require an honest commitment to change, and daily effort to make the change permanent.

And that's the problem with the Darth Vader scenario. Darth doesn't acknowledge his past crimes and do the hard work of rebuilding himself in a new image.

Belkar has set himself on the right path but he's only taken baby steps toward repentence. He is not yet redeemed.

If redemption required external validation, very few people would ever be redeemed because their victims would control the process.

P.S. The point about the money being unspent was supposed to be addressed when talking about restitution. Giving the money back was possible. I forgot to make that point at the appropriate place.

What about the Tarkin scenario? Tarkin realizes that genocide is bad and decides to never commit genocide again. Does that redeem him from his genocide?


Or how a about a crime that was not deliberately done? A mistake, something that a person didn't choose to do, would never choose to do? They already decided to never do it, but despite that, it happened anyway? Is that character irredeemable? Or, possibly, do they not have anything to be redeemed from?

There's a movie that I love, probably one of my favorite movies ever. In Bruges. If you don't care abiut watching it/spoilers, there's a little critique, around ten minutes, that hits every plot point and explains the themes. That's on YouTube for free, called "the absurd worth of redemption". Wholly recommend checking it out. IB is all about redemption. It's quite good. Very relevant to the discussion here.

Anyway, I continue to wholly refuse your definition for redemption. Repentance without action or intent is worthless (and I do not count "deciding to no longer commit atrocities" as action in furthrrence of redemption. That bar is on the floor.).

[Metastachydium]

Belkar, after all, ate the candy bar he killed Solt Lurkyug for, as an example. He did profit from his crimes.

(Belkar didn't kill Solt for the candy bar (he didn't know the candy bar existed until after he looted the corpse); the closest thing to a reason why he killed the gnome beyond "I like to kill things" was that Solt had a donkey and they had a cart. (And because they put the donkey to good use afterwards, technically Haley and Celia profited from his crimes as well, and neither of them felt any moral obligation not to use the poor beast (and therefore they must be EVIL).))

[Peelee]

Imagine she now recognises she is now the Snarl end of this version of her former party?

Could Belkar by dying actually cause Serini to break down recognising what she has done has revealed those party member she's blamed for the loss of their dwarven friend were actually blameless and she has been doing far worse?
Uhhh... How was she the Snarl end? And when did she blame anyone for Kraagor?

[Metastachydium]

Uhhh... How was she the Snarl end?

Not was, is. I think what they mean is that right now, she is the problem a group similar to waht her own was has to deal with in order to save the world (and in that, she's very vaguely analogous with the Snarl).

[MartianInvader]

Spoiler alert: if so, then I do not subscribe to any definition of "redemption" that you do.
If you two could just agree to this, you can save a whole lot of argument. Unless one of you wants to claim your definition is the universal, immutable, be-all end-all definition (which is not true for any definition of any word).

[Peelee]

If you two could just agree to this, you can save a whole lot of argument. Unless one of you wants to claim your definition is the universal, immutable, be-all end-all definition (which is not true for any definition of any word).

Far be it from me to say I know exactly what redemption must always entail, but I know when it falls short. Tarkin deciding to not kill another several billion people because he regrets doing it the first time doesn't cut it.

[brian 333]

I don't think we disagree as much as you think we disagree.

I never said it is easy to become redeemed. Remaking oneself in a new image is hard. Most people I know can't do it. Some have.

But the Tarkin example is a good one. What could he ever do to be redeemed, in your opinion?

Make restitution? To whom? All of his victims are dead.

Atone? What symbolic suffering would be adequate to make up for mass murder?

Be forgiven? To whom would he apply for it?

Is he simply irredeemable by any means?

Do you see what I mean now? The measure of redemption cannot be external. There is no deed a person can perform short of going back in time and then not doing the crime that will make it all better. And if it can never be fixed or not-done, there is never an opportunity for redemption.

But sitting on a beach sipping mai tais and otherwise making no effort to become a better person is not redemption. It requires the person to recognize that their past crimes were wrong and then to actively resolve to not do them again. And when they are tempted to commit them again they have to commit to not doing it again. And again. They have to become, to some extent, a new person.

And when they have become a new person, whether you believe they have made suitable restitution, adequately atoned, or have earned forgiveness does not alter the fact that they have changed.

Note: redemption does not absolve you of your crimes. In fact, it is just the opposite. To be redeemed you have to accept responsibility for them. Blaming the Emperor for making vou do it is a sure sign that you have not repented.

[Peelee]

I don't think we disagree as much as you think we disagree.

I never said it is easy to become redeemed. Remaking oneself in a new image is hard. Most people I know can't do it. Some have.

But the Tarkin example is a good one. What could he ever do to be redeemed, in your opinion?

Make restitution? To whom? All of his victims are dead.

Atone? What symbolic suffering would be adequate to make up for mass murder?

Be forgiven? To whom would he apply for it?

Is he simply irredeemable by any means?

Do you see what I mean now? The measure of redemption cannot be external. There is no deed a person can perform short of going back in time and then not doing the crime that will make it all better. And if it can never be fixed or not-done, there is never an opportunity for redemption.

But sitting on a beach sipping mai tais and otherwise making no effort to become a better person is not redemption. It requires the person to recognize that their past crimes were wrong and then to actively resolve to not do them again. And when they are tempted to commit them again they have to commit to not doing it again. And again. They have to become, to some extent, a new person.

And when they have become a new person, whether you believe they have made suitable restitution, adequately atoned, or have earned forgiveness does not alter the fact that they have changed.

Note: redemption does not absolve you of your crimes. In fact, it is just the opposite. To be redeemed you have to accept responsibility for them. Blaming the Emperor for making vou do it is a sure sign that you have not repented.

Restitution and atonement need not be commensurate to the crime. In fact, this is usually impossible; if you kill someone, unless you can give that person life back, then you can never make up for it. That doesn't mean one can't be redeemed, but simply not doing the evil acts anymore is not redemption. Tarkin cannot unexplode a planet. He can't bring back any of the people he killed. He can't save the same number of people that he killed. But he can try. He can try to do whatever he can, however little that may be. But simply just not blowing up any more planets? No. You don't get brownie points for the absolute baseline. In the immortal (albeit heavily sanitized/edited) words of Chris Rock, "Tarkin will say some **** like, "I don't blow up planets anymore." You're supposed to! What do you want, a cookie?"

I do fully agree with redemption requiring accepting responsibility for the crimes. But simply not doing the crimes anymore is not accepting responsibility. That's avoiding the responsibility. Tarkin sitting on the beach with Vader feeling bad about blowing up Alderaan isn't Tarkin being redeemed. Again, In Bruges tackles this better than I ever could, for more than one character.

[brian 333]

Restitution and atonement need not be commensurate to the crime. In fact, this is usually impossible; if you kill someone, unless you can give that person life back, then you can never make up for it. That doesn't mean one can't be redeemed, but simply not doing the evil acts anymore is not redemption. Tarkin cannot unexplode a planet. He can't bring back any of the people he killed. He can't save the same number of people that he killed. But he can try. He can try to do whatever he can, however little that may be. But simply just not blowing up any more planets? No. You don't get brownie points for the absolute baseline. In the immortal (albeit heavily sanitized/edited) words of Chris Rock, "Tarkin will say some **** like, "I don't blow up planets anymore." You're supposed to! What do you want, a cookie?"

I do fully agree with redemption requiring accepting responsibility for the crimes. But simply not doing the crimes anymore is not accepting responsibility. That's avoiding the responsibility. Tarkin sitting on the beach with Vader feeling bad about blowing up Alderaan isn't Tarkin being redeemed. Again, In Bruges tackles this better than I ever could, for more than one character.

I agree.

My intent has never been to say that not doing it again is enough. If it appears that I did make that point, I apologise. I wanted the takeaway to be that to be redeemed one must cash in the old self and build a new self. One must admit and accept the fact that what was done was wrong, and take action to be a better person. And whether one accomplishes this or not is not based on what an outside PoV finds acceptable.

The people Belkar enslaved in the past might never forgive him, and might want him to endure suffering equal to the suffering they endured because of them. They might want his wealth in compensation. And for some, even execution would be insufficient punishment. They might never accept the idea that Belkar had redeemed himself.

But the jury on that trial is a jury of one, and all he has to do is prove to himself that he is a better person today than he was yesterday. Every day.

That ain't easy.

[Peelee]

I agree.

My intent has never been to say that not doing it again is enough. If it appears that I did make that point, I apologise. I wanted the takeaway to be that to be redeemed one must cash in the old self and build a new self. One must admit and accept the fact that what was done was wrong, and take action to be a better person. And whether one accomplishes this or not is not based on what an outside PoV finds acceptable.

The people Belkar enslaved in the past might never forgive him, and might want him to endure suffering equal to the suffering they endured because of them. They might want his wealth in compensation. And for some, even execution would be insufficient punishment. They might never accept the idea that Belkar had redeemed himself.

But the jury on that trial is a jury of one, and all he has to do is prove to himself that he is a better person today than he was yesterday. Every day.

That ain't easy.

I remember someone said years ago that this forum is perfectly represented by two people arguing with each other for days before finding out they actually agree with each other. Really feeling silly right now because of how accurate that is. :smallwink:

Anyway, one last recommendation for checking out In Bruges. I think you'd love it. The YouTube video The Absurd Worth of Redemption is a good substitute if you don't care about spoilers, don't want to watch the full movie for whatever reason, and still want to get a good smattering of the big redemption theme and how it plays out. Plus the movie is just super good.

[Riftwolf]

I apologise if my thoughts on Belkar weren't clear. Him being a better person going forward isn't meant as a redemption for past transgressions. It means, going forward, he's not going to be as chaotic stupid/mindless evil as he was. I doubt we'll get to see Belkar's afterlife review, but I can imagine his adjudicating demon saying 'yeh, you made a change to your life. Congratulations, you're no longer a hateful idiot. You progressed to being Chaotic Evil.'

[Mike Havran]

So far, every member of the Order except Belkar has had a storyline involving their immediate family. In 4 out of 5 cases, it was a parent.

And yes, as the murder hobo, Belkar's character has had the least need for family or a backstory in general. But that's become less and less true over the past couple books, as we've seen him genuinely evolve out of his old, one-dimensional self. Maybe he's gotten to the point where he's finally ready for a family arc of his own? And look! Here's an elderly halfling character being conveniently introduced into the storyline - one who enjoys lying and underhanded tactics, even.

What's more, (as of comic #1238) the anti-magic ray is hindering the casters and Roy is downed by poison, meaning Belkar's poised to be a major player in the upcoming scene. Maybe that scene will involve Belkar and/or Serini recognizing each other?

Anyone think I'm on to something? Or am I crazy?

This (https://www.patreon.com/posts/answer-post-2020-34406298)might be relevant here:


7.) David Green: We've seen a lot about most characters' families. Are there plans to learn more about Belkar's?

Rich: Nope!

[Precure]

I change my vote to Haley is a half-halfling and related to Serini.

[Rrmcklin]

Admittedly, plans can change, but I find myself doubting he'd change his plans for Belkar or Serini to just to facilitate some family connection he still never actually bothered to put any groundwork or foreshadowing into.

[brian 333]

I remember someone said years ago that this forum is perfectly represented by two people arguing with each other for days before finding out they actually agree with each other. Really feeling silly right now because of how accurate that is. :smallwink:

Anyway, one last recommendation for checking out In Bruges. I think you'd love it. The YouTube video The Absurd Worth of Redemption is a good substitute if you don't care about spoilers, don't want to watch the full movie for whatever reason, and still want to get a good smattering of the big redemption theme and how it plays out. Plus the movie is just super good.

Please don't apologise. Your challenges forced me to rethink and rewrite until I got it right.

I apologize to the OP for the digression from his topic.

But Haley can't be half-halfling because then she would be a quarterling, and since she is already half celestial, that would leave a quarter in change, and she would steal that in a heartbeat.

My bet is that Serini's only living family is her adopted family.

[KorvinStarmast]

My bet is that Serini's only living family is her adopted family. Ain't bettin' against that. :smallwink: Saw a sign at a curio shop this weekend, something along the lines of "Our friends are the family that we choose"

[137beth]

So what are the odds that Sereni and Bloodfeast are related?

[Kerching]

So what are the odds that Sereni and Bloodfeast are related?

Zero to none. Now, Bloodfeast and the green dragon girl (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0628.html), on the other hand... :smalltongue: I love being able to post links now

[Precure]

Looks like Haley and Serini are established as rivals, which gives more credence to the theory that they're somehow related and we'll focus in their relationship.

[WolvesbaneIII]

The odds? 1/10, which are one in a million. maybe worse...if they are summoning a demon. or a devil rather.

or was it a daemon?

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0584.html

whatever the devil this guy was.

[Precure]

Also, if she really belives that Haley is the leader, then her info about the order is not that good as we believed before. This makes Belkar as secret spy theory completely unworkable.

[skim172]

Zero to none. Now, Bloodfeast and the green dragon girl (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0628.html), on the other hand... :smalltongue: I love being able to post links now

If that was true, then it would mean dinosaurs and dragons are closely related. This implies that chickens are genetically the closest thing we have in the real world to dragons.

Perhaps this is why eating an omelette makes me feel so powerful.

[RatElemental]

Perhaps this is why eating an omelette makes me feel so powerful.

Well if you make them like a certain someone (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0760.html) does that probably would induce feelings of megalomania.

[Domino Quartz]

If that was true, then it would mean dinosaurs and dragons are closely related. This implies that chickens are genetically the closest thing we have in the real world to dragons.


No closer than any other bird.

[Crusher]

I change my vote to Haley is a half-halfling and related to Serini.

I think its a trick. *Belkar* is only half-halfing and not related to Serini.


But his other half is also halfling and that half *is* related to her. Maybe on her troll side?