Serini is a moron [Archive] - Page 4 - Giant in the Playground Forums

Ionathus

2021-09-22, 02:52 PM

I also don't see why having her have, well human for lack of a better term, flaws would be a bad thing. I was under the impression that was Storytelling 101.

It's not a bad thing, but the line between "flaw" and "personality trait" can sometimes be a little fuzzy: Roy's snark, Haley's greed, and Vaarsuvius's sesquipedalian loquaciousness could all be considered "flaws" in the most rigorous sense of the word, but are mostly harmless traits that give the characters their distinct flavor and never impact the story.

However, contrast this with Roy's early disdain for Elan, Haley's inability to open up, and Vaarsuvius's obsession with ultimate arcane power. These are also character traits that gave the heroes their distinctive personalities, but these ones became major plot points that the corresponding characters had to grapple with, come to terms with, and move beyond.

I don't think anybody believes Serini is without any "flaws" whatsoever, nor have I seen anyone arguing that she is acting 100% perfectly rationally. Different groups of the audience are just in disagreement about which flaws Serini possesses, and to what degree. We're all waiting to see how the narrative portrays Serini once she doesn't hold all the power in the interaction: will she be portrayed as competent, or delusional?

Is her refusal to work with The Order because of their perceived danger to the last gate a trait?

she's pragmatic
she doesn't trust loose cannons
she's got a know-when-to-fold-'em outlook
she places survival over all else, including temporary tyranny
she's gotten cynical and condescending in her old age

Or is it a flaw?

she's delusional about her own importance
she's sunk too much personal investment into being a gate guardian
she's pathologically scared of round 2 with Xykon
she's defeatist and is self-sabotaging to avoid facing another failure
...or maybe she's just a plain old regular idiot.

georgie_leech

2021-09-22, 02:55 PM

Really excellent points

Hey, stop using up all the insight and rationality in this thread and save some for the rest of us! :smallwink:

KorvinStarmast

2021-09-22, 03:34 PM

I think they did do enough that her refusing to even pick up the phone and learn more about them is showing shockingly bad judgment when the stakes are this high. It's hard not to agree if we sit on the "reader level of omniscience" perch and make that assessment.
A harder way to make that assessment is from within Serini's limited PoV/perspective/in-her-shoes-if-she-wore any.
On top of that, doesn't every high level adventurer in D&D fall prey to hubris, at least a little bit? (One example being Roy on the undead dragon with Xykon trying to solo the lich).
She's epic level rogue, I'd guess she'd have at least one serving of hubris if not two. That hubris manifests itself as "I've got this!" in her case.

I also don't see why having her have, well human for lack of a better term, flaws would be a bad thing. I was under the impression that was Storytelling 101. That too.

Psyren

2021-09-22, 05:04 PM

Actually, it is all fault of the Gods for creating that dumb world in the first place. Why did they even move away from sentient movie snacks?

Presumably it got snarled, and they were definitely right to move away from it considering that none of the previous worlds spawned a new quiddity. I know I know you were being tongue-in-cheek

It's hard not to agree if we sit on the "reader level of omniscience" perch and make that assessment.
A harder way to make that assessment is from within Serini's limited PoV/perspective/in-her-shoes-if-she-wore any.
On top of that, doesn't every high level adventurer in D&D fall prey to hubris, at least a little bit? (One example being Roy on the undead dragon with Xykon trying to solo the lich).
She's epic level rogue, I'd guess she'd have at least one serving of hubris if not two. That hubris manifests itself as "I've got this!" in her case.
That too.

I don't have to be omniscient to know that getting to know someone she considers to be an enemy (and who has no idea that she is one) is just good tactics. She could have lied and said she has no intentions of going anywhere near the final gate because she's hiding from Xykon, and we'd all have believed it too - certainly V would have. Even if they didn't and were expecting her, they'd have no way of knowing she has epic poison and a bunch of monsters in her back pocket.

Anyway, what's done is done and I'm sure we'll learn more about why she approached it the way she did, where she got her info etc.

KorvinStarmast

2021-09-22, 05:46 PM

Anyway, what's done is done and I'm sure we'll learn more about why she approached it the way she did, where she got her info etc. Indeed. I see some exposition coming in the next two or three strips.

RatElemental

2021-09-22, 06:10 PM

Indeed. I see some exposition coming in the next two or three strips.

Cue a cut to Xykon and Redcloak emerging from the dungeon and Redcloak starting to get suspicious about the whole thing because of the disappearing PCs, or to the Paladins as they attempt to break out on their own, instead.

Ruck

2021-09-22, 09:01 PM

I also don't see why having her have, well human for lack of a better term, flaws would be a bad thing. I was under the impression that was Storytelling 101.

Not at all; she certainly does, and that makes her a better character. I just don't think she's a moron, just someone operating from a different set of priorities and information than would be optimal or than would actually best for the current situation. As I said before, I think what she's doing flows logically from her priorities and the information she has; "logically" doesn't mean "optimally" or "what I would do," though.

KorvinStarmast

2021-09-23, 10:33 AM

Cue a cut to Xykon and Redcloak emerging from the dungeon and Redcloak starting to get suspicious about the whole thing because of the disappearing PCs, or to the Paladins as they attempt to break out on their own, instead. I like that one better, but I happen to have a favorable bias for both Lien and O-Chul.

danielxcutter

2021-09-23, 10:36 AM

Not at all; she certainly does, and that makes her a better character. I just don't think she's a moron, just someone operating from a different set of priorities and information than would be optimal or than would actually best for the current situation. As I said before, I think what she's doing flows logically from her priorities and the information she has; "logically" doesn't mean "optimally" or "what I would do," though.

Is it safe to say her priorities are kinda messed up even with only what she probably knows? I think they are.

Ionathus

2021-09-23, 11:00 AM

I like that one better, but I happen to have a favorable bias for both Lien and O-Chul.

My money's on us staying here and getting more dialogue with Serini. In fact, I think the whole conflict is about to be resolved, one way or another, by whatever the next few strips contain.

Also, I feel like it's been awhile since any cut to a different set of characters happened without any transition panels (wide-angle shot of the airship flying away, final panel in a different scene that serves as a punchline, Sending or Commune or another communication...).

Is it safe to say her priorities are kinda messed up even with only what she probably knows? I think they are.

"My job is to protect the entire world, not the status quo" is her highest stated priority, and while I don't agree, I don't see how that's "messed up" either.

danielxcutter

2021-09-23, 11:04 AM

"My job is to protect the entire world, not the status quo" is her highest stated priority, and while I don't agree, I don't see how that's "messed up" either.

And I very much doubt that is her actual core motivation.

Ionathus

2021-09-23, 11:13 AM

And I very much doubt that is her actual core motivation.

Gonna need you to show your work on that one, then, because all the in-comic evidence points to her statement, as far as I can see. Even in the most uncharitable interpretations, her knowledge and reasoning seems to break (e.g. "she's a moron" "she's ignorant") before her stated motivation does (e.g. "she's crazy" "she's delusional").

Psyren

2021-09-23, 11:30 AM

"My job is to protect the entire world, not the status quo" is her highest stated priority, and while I don't agree, I don't see how that's "messed up" either.

It's messed up because her assumption that Xykon's rule won't be so bad is naive at best, even putting aside the idea that the gods might unmake the world anyway if that happens.

Peelee

2021-09-23, 11:34 AM

It's messed up because her assumption that Xykon's rule won't be so bad is naive at best, even putting aside the idea that the gods might unmake the world anyway if that happens.

Her assumption isn't that Xykon's rule won't be so bad. It's that Xykon's rule will be less bad than the end of the world.

Psyren

2021-09-23, 11:53 AM

Her assumption isn't that Xykon's rule won't be so bad. It's that Xykon's rule will be less bad than the end of the world.

1) Right, but her assumption is predicated at least in part on the notion that he would only rule "for a few years." This in spite of her not only refusing to even talk to those who have firsthand knowledge of his capabilities, but also utilizing defenses that are actively making him even stronger.

2) Her complete dismissal of the clear third option (beating him and saving the Gate) is at best cowardly.

3) Had she bothered speaking with them, she'd have learned that letting Xykon win will likely result in the gods unraveling the world anyway. Clearly she has no idea why he wants the Gates in the first place, and failure to do even that basic recon is foolish.

Ionathus

2021-09-23, 01:10 PM

1) Right, but her assumption is predicated at least in part on the notion that he would only rule "for a few years." This in spite of her not only refusing to even talk to those who have firsthand knowledge of his capabilities, but also utilizing defenses that are actively making him even stronger.

2) Her complete dismissal of the clear third option (beating him and saving the Gate) is at best cowardly.

3) Had she bothered speaking with them, she'd have learned that letting Xykon win will likely result in the gods unraveling the world anyway. Clearly she has no idea why he wants the Gates in the first place, and failure to do even that basic recon is foolish.

1) Even if he ruled forever, I wouldn't be surprised if Serini found that preferable to total annihilation as well. The "oppressive safety (existence) vs. risky freedom" debate that Roy mentioned at the Godsmoot applies here. The possibility of Xykon ever being toppled makes that calculation even simpler.

2) If it risks total annihilation in any way, she's not doing it. It's a line she won't cross, so of course she's dismissing it. Having lines you won't cross does not automatically make you a coward (though I won't argue if you want to claim other aspects of her character indicate cowardice).

You are not fairly acknowledging the enormity of the "everything is annihilated, souls and all, permanently" factor. It informs everything about Serini's actions, so if you don't hold that to the same value as Serini does, then of course you're going to think her priorities are skewed. But you don't live in a world that has a "destroy literally everything in an instant" fuse, much less a fuse that you spent years of your life researching, securing, monitoring, and defending. You are filtering Serini's situation through your own worldview, a worldview that is massively different than hers, and judging her based on your own life experiences.

3) Criticizing her for not knowing what she doesn't know, especially if that information is very niche information, is full-on armchair quarterbacking. You as an omniscient reader are criticizing her for not following up on every single offer of "new" information (and that's assuming they've offered any: we have no evidence that the Order have ever said "we have information you don't." All of their references to Sending to Serini indicate they're just giving status updates and telling her their next move).

You are watching National Treasure and saying "why isn't the German love interest lady taking Nicholas Cage seriously about the Declaration?" and the answer is given in the text: Nicholas Cage is a random dude telling a random story about a high-value target whose current guardians have been guarding it perfectly fine on their own for years. There's even a line of dialogue about that defense agency getting thousands of bogus tips every day. The Order's quest is obviously important to them, but it is a mistake to assume that importance is immediately obvious to everyone who interacts with them.

Psyren

2021-09-23, 01:24 PM

1) Even if he ruled forever, I wouldn't be surprised if Serini found that preferable to total annihilation as well.

Given her age I can see why she wouldn't care about the ramifications of that, yeah. That doesn't make her any more agreeable though.

2) If it risks total annihilation in any way, she's not doing it. It's a line she won't cross, so of course she's dismissing it. Having lines you won't cross does not automatically make you a coward (though I won't argue if you want to claim other aspects of her character indicate cowardice).

Again though, she has no idea what Xykon's plans for the Gates are. For all she knows, he'll destroy the last one completely by accident anyway, or whichever hero shows up to "topple him" will do that, since blowing the Gate up apparently destroyed him twice before. (You know who else was at EVERY Gate that got destroyed? Xykon!)

Seriously though, what's her endgame here? Not only will she not stop Xykon from getting this gate, after she mindwipes this set of heroes, is she going to monitor every other one that comes along forever to make sure they won't try to get rid of the Gate too? And after she dies, then what? She certainly can't repair any of the other Gates herself. Her only real chance is helping this set of heroes so that they DON'T have to blow up the Gate to win.

3) Criticizing her for not knowing what she doesn't know, especially if that information is very niche information, is full-on armchair quarterbacking.

Actually, I'm criticizing her for refusing to even entertain the possibility that there is information she doesn't know, especially when verifying that is as easy as having a single conversation. As I would anyone who thinks they know everything, no armchair required.

Ionathus

2021-09-23, 01:59 PM

Again though, she has no idea what Xykon's plans for the Gates are. For all she knows, he'll destroy the last one completely by accident anyway, or whichever hero shows up to "topple him" will do that, since blowing the Gate up apparently destroyed him twice before. (You know who else was at EVERY Gate that got destroyed? Xykon!)

Seriously though, what's her endgame here? Not only will she not stop Xykon from getting this gate, after she mindwipes this set of heroes, is she going to monitor every other one that comes along forever to make sure they won't try to get rid of the Gate too? And after she dies, then what? She certainly can't repair any of the other Gates herself. Her only real chance is helping this set of heroes so that they DON'T have to blow up the Gate to win.

Given that she herself implied Xykon would eventually be toppled by heroes, I don't think that's part of her plan. No discussion of The Plan (as the SG or Serini understand it) has established that Xykon would need to live next to the Gate to access or use the Snarl. I find it simpler to assume that they all think The Plan doesn't require constant proximity to the Gate once control is established. You're welcome to assert otherwise, but I'm going to need a citation.

Actually, I'm criticizing her for refusing to even entertain the possibility that there is information she doesn't know, especially when verifying that is as easy as having a single conversation. As I would anyone who thinks they know everything, no armchair required.

I wish you'd have responded to the rest of my statement, because I directly referenced this with the National Treasure stuff. If a person's opening pitch does not convince you that they have unique information you don't know about, you are not morally obligated to hear them out on the miniscule chance they might reveal something new eventually. If the Order or the Paladins want Serini to pay attention to their new information, they need to make it crystal clear that the information is truly novel to her, and nothing in the story thus far has indicated they did so.

Serini is the only surviving member of the team that created these Gates -- and Shojo's narrative says that all other sources of knowledge were purged by the early Sapphire Guard to keep the information hidden from other mortals. In addition, it's been said in-story that the gods have a blackout on all information regarding the gates. So there are no feasible terrestrial OR celestial sources for information about the Gates that Serini doesn't already have...unless she wants to know the specific noise they make when they explode, in which case the Order are certified experts.

The Order only got the information they did because of this specific chain of events:

They were kidnapped by a remnant of another Scribble gate guardian and filled in on the story
One of them died to a vampire
All the other gates had been destroyed, so the gods panicked and called a Godsmoot
That one that died was a cleric, so the vampire spirit's god could send them on a specific mission to the Godsmoot
The Godsmoot happened to be about the Gates and contained enough pertinent information for Roy to understand the risk
The team was able to defeat a powerful vampire group and also resurrect the vampirized team member
The dead team member's god happened to be Chaotic Good enough AND of a specific personality to choose to wriggle out of the divine blackout on info and fill him in on all the salient details

Change any one aspect of this chain of events, and even if The Order made it to the North Pole, they would have no new info for Serini. To put it in that same god's words: "This is literally the single most special circumstance ever."

Given that this is what it took to obtain information Serini does not herself possess, does her refusal to listen make her a condescending jerk? Sure. Does it make her stupid, or at fault? That's a much harder sell.

RatElemental

2021-09-23, 02:08 PM

They do also know there's a planet inside of the rifts, which even Thor didn't know, so I'm betting Serini probably doesn't know that either. They got this information from looking through the rifts.

Ionathus

2021-09-23, 02:22 PM

They do also know there's a planet inside of the rifts, which even Thor didn't know, so I'm betting Serini probably doesn't know that either. They got this information from looking through the rifts.

I considered mentioning the planet in the rifts too, but ultimately I don't think they'd factor into Serini's decisions even if she knew, since they don't seem to impact the Xykon Conquest vs Eternal Oblivion calculation. Vaarsuvius tried to stop Roy from destroying Girard's Gate based on what Blackwing saw in the rift, but I think that was more based on "we don't understand fully what's going on" than because they strongly believed the gate needed to stay intact for whatever reason -- just that, once it's destroyed, there's no going back, and we're making a world-shattering decision with incomplete info.

Psyren

2021-09-23, 02:41 PM

Given that she herself implied Xykon would eventually be toppled by heroes, I don't think that's part of her plan. No discussion of The Plan (as the SG or Serini understand it) has established that Xykon would need to live next to the Gate to access or use the Snarl. I find it simpler to assume that they all think The Plan doesn't require constant proximity to the Gate once control is established. You're welcome to assert otherwise, but I'm going to need a citation.

He set up shop next to Dorukan's for how long? Even if she knew nothing else, she has to have known how much time elapsed between Lirian's winking out and Dorukan's doing the same from her tracking device.

I wish you'd have responded to the rest of my statement, because I directly referenced this with the National Treasure stuff. If a person's opening pitch does not convince you that they have unique information you don't know about, you are not morally obligated to hear them out on the miniscule chance they might reveal something new eventually. *snip*

I'm questioning her intelligence, not her morals. The stakes are high enough here that taking a phone call should not be a herculean effort. And assuming they laid out everything she might ever need to know in a 25-word e-mail when they clearly didn't even know for sure whether she was alive, throws that intelligence into question for me.

And pointing out the likelihood of them having new information for her isn't relevant, when it would have cost her so little to ascertain that for herself.

Ionathus

2021-09-23, 02:51 PM

He set up shop next to Dorukan's for how long? Even if she knew nothing else, she has to have known how much time elapsed between Lirian's winking out and Dorukan's doing the same from her tracking device.

That would be control of the physical gate, not control of the Snarl. Xykon never accessed the Gate itself due to Dorukan's pureheart sigil, and therefore never got the chance to complete The Ritual. Just because I camp outside a Best Buy for 2 weeks to buy a PS3 doesn't mean I have to stay in the parking lot for the rest of my life to play it. I would take what I want home, and leave the Best Buy where it is.

I'm questioning her intelligence, not her morals. The stakes are high enough here that taking a phone call should not be a herculean effort. And assuming they laid out everything she might ever need to know in a 25-word e-mail when they clearly didn't even know for sure whether she was alive, throws that intelligence into question for me.

I don't fault them for featuring that information, but if you acknowledge that they probably didn't offer unique information then I don't see why you think she was obligated to hear them out. The first rule of marketing is to clearly demonstrate the value in continuing to pay attention to you. Doesn't matter how good or necessary the product is if the customer already thinks they're fine without it.

And pointing out the likelihood of them having new information for her isn't relevant, when it would have cost her so little to ascertain that for herself.

Is it legal to quote yourself?

Anyone saying "Serini should just answer their Sendings without giving anything away, it can *only* improve her position" has never responded to a cold call from a business-to-business salesperson.

Depending on how hungry the sales team in question is, you're signing yourself up for repeated calls, emails, LinkedIn requests, mail sent to your office, gifts, trying to work their way into your circles...and the most aggressive teams are taught very pointedly how to "overcome objections" (what a creepy phrase) and to never, EVER take no for an answer. Take it from someone who spent an agonizing period of his life as a salesperson: you don't answer cold calls, even to say "no thanks." The safest option is to let them leave 15 voicemails and then get bored and move on.

As another example, I have watched friends "ghost" someone who's giving them unwanted romantic attention. It is sometimes done out of callousness, sure, but all the examples I know are from people who were legitimately concerned for their safety if they'd directly told the person to leave them alone. Sometimes "I'm aware of your request, but I'm not interested" can do more damage than blocking the number and never responding.

*Any* amount of information is too much information. "Serini Toormuck is alive and is involved in Gate 5's defenses" is ALREADY more info than Serini is willing to divulge. What if she'd responded, said the bare minimum, and then the Order charged ahead anyway like she expected them to do (and like Durkon ultimately did)? There's a non-zero risk that one of them would be captured by Team Evil, who then learn that Serini survived. Unnecessary complications. Unnecessary risk. For no discernable reward (since she thinks they have neither the juice nor any Gates info she doesn't already have herself, because why would they after the early SG's campaign to wipe out Gates info? Who could've told them? A god?).

I do not share Serini's worldview. I do not agree with Ian Starshine that any small loosening of my paranoia will be used against me. Were I in her shoes, I'd probably be more likely to respond to the Sendings. But I don't think hers is a blatantly bad choice. In a high-risk situation, free exchange of information CAN BE dangerous if you don't trust the person who's trying to contact you.

Peelee

2021-09-23, 02:57 PM

RatElemental

2021-09-23, 02:59 PM

Is it legal to quote yourself?

I think there's a bit of a qualitative difference between someone who wants to contact you to sell you something and someone who wants to contact you to collaborate with you on how to prevent the world from being destroyed by a god killing abomination.

Ionathus

2021-09-23, 03:07 PM

I think there's a bit of a qualitative difference between someone who wants to contact you to sell you something and someone who wants to contact you to collaborate with you on how to prevent the world from being destroyed by a god killing abomination.

You're right: the world being destroyed is a much bigger deal, so she needs to be even more careful about the info she gives out, even "Serini is still alive."

Psyren

2021-09-23, 03:14 PM

That would be control of the physical gate, not control of the Snarl. Xykon never accessed the Gate itself due to Dorukan's pureheart sigil, and therefore never got the chance to complete The Ritual. Just because I camp outside a Best Buy for 2 weeks to buy a PS3 doesn't mean I have to stay in the parking lot for the rest of my life to play it. I would take what I want home, and leave the Best Buy where it is.

And? She doesn't have to know what the holdup was, just that he seems fine moving in next to a Gate once captured.

I don't fault them for featuring that information, but if you acknowledge that they probably didn't offer unique information then I don't see why you think she was obligated to hear them out. The first rule of marketing is to clearly demonstrate the value in continuing to pay attention to you. Doesn't matter how good or necessary the product is if the customer already thinks they're fine without it.

Do you realize they're delivering a warning about the epic lich that almost one-shot her before, and not a sandwich toaster?

Is it legal to quote yourself?

I disagree with your analogy as much now as I did then, so quote away.

hungrycrow

2021-09-23, 03:28 PM

You're right: the world being destroyed is a much bigger deal, so she needs to be even more careful about the info she gives out, even "Serini is still alive."

Kind of agree with this about information leaking but the comparison to telemarketers is still off.

Firstly, the Order would obviously never get bored of calling her until they got reassurance the world wouldn't be destroyed. They probably called her more than if she had just answered once.

Secondly, annoying phone calls is such a hilariously petty thing to be worried about during a world-shattering crisis that Serini including that at all in her calculus would only make her look worse.

Ionathus

2021-09-23, 04:12 PM

And? She doesn't have to know what the holdup was, just that he seems fine moving in next to a Gate once captured.

I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you arguing that Xykon has no reason not to live next to the Gate once he's used it to control the Snarl? Or are you saying that Serini would have to spend several months knocking out and memory-wiping adventurers during the time it would take Xykon to complete The Ritual?

I disagree with the assumption in the first, though I can understand it. Serini seems to believe Xykon wouldn't need to hang around, though, and given she's one of the original Scribblers I'm inclined to assume her basic assumptions about it aren't flawed (see also: Hel Did the Math Wrong).

Do you realize they're delivering a warning about the epic lich that almost one-shot her before, and not a sandwich toaster?

Yeah, I do, thanks for checking. It doesn't mean the basic rules of communication and persuasion don't apply. Serini values secrecy, including secrecy about her current state of mortality. That secrecy is the cost of getting more information out of the Order, and she ain't willing to pay, because they haven't demonstrated the value by showing her that they have something she needs.

I disagree with your analogy as much now as I did then, so quote away.

Kind of agree with this about information leaking but the comparison to telemarketers is still off.

Firstly, the Order would obviously never get bored of calling her until they got reassurance the world wouldn't be destroyed. They probably called her more than if she had just answered once.

Secondly, annoying phone calls is such a hilariously petty thing to be worried about during a world-shattering crisis that Serini including that at all in her calculus would only make her look worse.

This is a misread of the analogy.

The risk is not "the Order will keep calling if I respond once." The Order is already calling, a lot. Serini has clearly accepted that as a tradeoff for not responding.

The risk is that Serini will become an ACTIVE target of their attention. If the Order (or the salesperson, or the creep who won't stop texting you) realize that you're an actual real person who is actually responsive to their messages, they will double down and focus their energy on you. It stops being a passive thing that they do while focused on other stuff, and it starts being their main goal.

Now that you've confirmed that you're listening, you're much more valuable to them. Rather than just another faceless number they call every week, you're worth the extra effort and resources it takes to close this deal or get that date or secure the Gate. They'll try to figure out where you are. They'll ask around, try to figure out who else you're in contact with. If they're unscrupulous, they might search social media or use email-testing websites to find your company's email structure and message everyone they can. Maybe they show up in person, even if you told them that wasn't necessary. Maybe they send gifts. Maybe they track down your sister and show up at her house, hoping to get her help in contacting you. Maybe they share your info with other people online. Maybe they doxx you.

I leave it to you to determine which of those risks apply to which of those three callers (The Order, the salesperson, the creep). Given the shady sales tactics of some companies, there's a truly scary amount of crossover. But my overall point is that even in our real, low-stakes, lawful society, there are already situations in which silence is the best option. The existence of Annihilation Buttons in OotS makes the risks even more tangible.

I understand why you think Serini should talk to them, and I even personally agree for the most part. But I have seen too many friends obsess over whether or not responding to a creepy text would provoke weeks of stalking, and as a result I'm not going to condemn Serini for choosing silence when the stakes are high.

Liquor Box

2021-09-23, 04:32 PM

Ionathus

2021-09-23, 04:45 PM

I don't think we've had any indication that she knows that Xykon wants the gates so he can release the Snarl and cast a spell on it to control it. She may know that he wants the gates so he can gain power, but based on what she knows it seems to me to be a pretty easy leap to the conclusion that there's no way to do that which is not dangerous.

I think Psyren's point is that basic research in this case would've been to seek to find our what the Order knows.

The Order of the Scribble also fought goblins led by the Crimson Mantle, who were trying to take Lirian's Gate. In the absence of other information, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that they would've been at least familiar with the Ritual.

Liquor Box

2021-09-23, 04:48 PM

The Order of the Scribble also fought goblins led by the Crimson Mantle, who were trying to take Lirian's Gate. In the absence of other information, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that they would've been at least familiar with the Ritual.

That's a big maybe, but I guess it's possible.

If they do understand what the ritual is, and that Xykon plans to use it to control the Snarl, then Xykon getting the gate is even more dangerous.

Peelee

2021-09-23, 04:51 PM

I think Psyren's point is that basic research in this case would've been to seek to find our what the Order knows.

The problem there is that "what the Order knows" is from four sources:

1.) What Shojo told them, which is secondhand info from Soon, which Serini already knows.
B.) That there is a planet in the rift, which was only gleaned by having destroyed a Gate.
iii.) What the heard in the Godsmoot, a meeting so secret that virtually nobody knows it has been happening despite it likely going on from the dawn of time (for their world, at least), and all members of whom are sequestered.
Δ.) What they were told by one of the gods themselves.

Discounting number 1 for obvious reasons, I would hardly call any of the others "basic research". And I would consider anyone who would as grossly mischaracterizing the situation.

Forum Explorer

2021-09-23, 05:02 PM

We already know one thing: Team Evil was expecting a tomb full of powerful monsters, and that's what they think they're dealing with.

Knowing that there is an epic rogue actually actually on-site and manning the defenses would be a major clue that there's may be more than meets the eye.

And again, I think the difference between a party (especially a party of spellcasters) knowing that they're facing "caves with strong monsters and an epic rogue" versus just "caves with strong monsters" is far, far greater than many are giving it credit for.

Can you think of some specific examples of how preperations would differ? High level monsters aren't usually simple thugs. Take Sunny for example. A beholder often has minions, uses different strategies and the like.

Now I could see it in the sense of Team Evil moving slower and more cautiously. They wouldn't want to get ambushed when they are low on HP and resources after all. But Serini isn't taking advantage of that anyways.

OK. I'm going to take it out of order because I think that lets me explain my ideas in the way that best makes sense.

Here's a question: Did the Order ever communicate in those Sendings that they had game-changing news that would affect how Serini would want to defend her Gate, or did they, like Durkon negotiating with Redcloak, withhold critical information because they didn't think it would be necessary? I'm guessing the latter. Now, I don't blame them for that: They'd have to know Serini doesn't trust them and doesn't want their assistance to think that's relevant, that they'd need to say more than "Epic sorcerer lich Xykon and his crew are coming to attempt to seize your Gate; we're on our way to help. And four more words."

So, I don't see this as a failure on Serini's part to get information she doesn't know exists.

As far as relevant information on Xykon, it seems like Serini is not planning direct confrontation, so she probably doesn't find that particularly useful, or at least not useful enough to outweigh the risk of bringing the Order in or giving away information.

A lot of this is conjecture-- not unreasonable, mind you, but try to look at it from Serini's perspective. What percentage more difficult is it to ambush them successfully if they know she's around? If nothing else, that would make it easier for them to figure out who they're dealing with sooner. Even if it's 1%, Serini doesn't think that's worth the risk. And what information could these bumbling, gate-blowing, dungeon crawlin' fools possibly offer her? (See as covered above.)

Blowing the Gate is a last resort because they couldn't defeat Xykon-- or, was intended to be as such in the case of Soon's Gate, and certainly was so at Girard's Gate. So I think the takeaway about the Order's prowess is the opposite of what you're implying.

Now, Dorukan's Gate, they didn't actually blow up for that reason, but:
a)If you know that two gates were blown to keep them out of Xykon's hands, and the same people blew a third Gate that Xykon had seized, it's reasonable to infer they blew the third for the same reason;
b)The actual reason they blew the Gate is certainly not going to inspire any more confidence in Serini to trust them with her Gate's defenses.

Unfortunately, they got into a door pretty quickly after they arrived, so she didn't really have time to do that.

And clearly, if her ambush fails, she has a problem, but she doesn't think it will. Even underestimating the Order, she got the drop on them pretty strongly, and was winning for a while-- so much so that a few people on the forums complained that it was too easy for her. It took Elan-- someone who, if Serini knows him at all, probably knows him as the dunce who blew up Dorukan's Gate because he pushed the DO NOT PUSH button-- using his charisma and storytelling skills to create an opening that allowed the Order to turn the tide. If her ambush succeeds, she sends them back home with no harm done.

I'm not really sure how her ambush would lead the Order to be more likely to destroy the Gate, though. The ambush is certainly not without its own risks, but given that Serini's goal is to keep the Order away from the Gate because they blow up Gates, she has chosen what she thinks will be the most effective way to do so.

Again, we know there's good reason to speak to the Order and to involve them in the Gate's defenses, but with the information Serini has, and her priorities, it's logical for her to conclude there's good reason to keep them away from the Gate, and everything else she's done flows logically from that.

Yes, they did. Comic 990 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0990.html). She didn't respond even with that information.

The problem is that it is 0% more difficult to ambush the Order, or even a negative percentage.

It's more that Xykon, for all his power, couldn't actually stop the Order from blowing up the Gates, as far as Serini knows anyway. I mean, we know he arrived too late to protect Girad's Gate and that Soon's Gate being destroyed actually let Xykon survive. But I'm assuming Serini doesn't know that level of detail.

Sure she did. She's had weeks to talk to and coordinate things with the Order. She just hasn't used them.

All fights go well until they don't. Now yeah, she could've won the ambush and that'd be the end of it. But the ambush could have also gone even worse. She underestimated the Order, which hey, might be her whole problem.

How would her ambush lead to them destroying the Gate? I mean, there is the expenditure of resources for one. They are down more high level spells, and have taken more damage. And if they didn't have anti-poison spells they'd be down multiple members of their team. Now we know that no matter how desperate things get, the Order won't destroy the Gate. But Serini doesn't know that. She thinks that if they get desperate enough they'll destroy the Gate to stop Xykon from winning. So making them more desperate would only make that more likely.

hungrycrow

2021-09-23, 05:03 PM

I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you arguing that Xykon has no reason not to live next to the Gate once he's used it to control the Snarl? Or are you saying that Serini would have to spend several months knocking out and memory-wiping adventurers during the time it would take Xykon to complete The Ritual?

I disagree with the assumption in the first, though I can understand it. Serini seems to believe Xykon wouldn't need to hang around, though, and given she's one of the original Scribblers I'm inclined to assume her basic assumptions about it aren't flawed (see also: Hel Did the Math Wrong).

Yeah, I do, thanks for checking. It doesn't mean the basic rules of communication and persuasion don't apply. Serini values secrecy, including secrecy about her current state of mortality. That secrecy is the cost of getting more information out of the Order, and she ain't willing to pay, because they haven't demonstrated the value by showing her that they have something she needs.

This is a misread of the analogy.

The risk is not "the Order will keep calling if I respond once." The Order is already calling, a lot. Serini has clearly accepted that as a tradeoff for not responding.

The risk is that Serini will become an ACTIVE target of their attention. If the Order (or the salesperson, or the creep who won't stop texting you) realize that you're an actual real person who is actually responsive to their messages, they will double down and focus their energy on you. It stops being a passive thing that they do while focused on other stuff, and it starts being their main goal.

But this isn't what she's apparently concerned about. She's concerned they'll focus on the gate, which they're also already focused on because she didn't respond. If the Order knew she was alive, they'd be focused on figuring out if she has a plan and if it can work. Which would mean they wouldn't be planning a last-ditch ambush on Xykon, or trying to commandeer what they think is an abandoned dungeon.

Liquor Box

2021-09-23, 05:22 PM

The problem there is that "what the Order knows" is from four sources:

1.) What Shojo told them, which is secondhand info from Soon, which Serini already knows.
B.) That there is a planet in the rift, which was only gleaned by having destroyed a Gate.
iii.) What the heard in the Godsmoot, a meeting so secret that virtually nobody knows it has been happening despite it likely going on from the dawn of time (for their world, at least), and all members of whom are sequestered.
Δ.) What they were told by one of the gods themselves.

Discounting number 1 for obvious reasons, I would hardly call any of the others "basic research". And I would consider anyone who would as grossly mischaracterizing the situation.

It wasn't basic research for the Order, it was hard to find out information. But now that the Order knows, it is basic research for Serini to ask them.

Just like it was not basic research to figure out what neanderthals were and how they lived etc. But now someone has done that research, it is basic research for us to to read the wikipedia page and find it out.

Peelee

2021-09-23, 05:35 PM

It wasn't basic research for the Order, it was hard to find out information. But now that the Order knows, it is basic research for Serini to ask them.

Just like it was not basic research to figure out what neanderthals were and how they lived etc. But now someone has done that research, it is basic research for us to to read the wikipedia page and find it out.

Except she doesn't trust the Order, and for good reason. They destroyed two Gates and committed genocide. If she did basic research into the Order, those would likely be the first things she found out. Which means they need to earn her trust to be able to impart the extra information they know which she doesnt.

The concept of "she should have done basic research" only lends credence into her not wanting to talk to the Order.

Liquor Box

2021-09-23, 05:42 PM

Except she doesn't trust the Order, and for good reason. They destroyed two Gates and committed genocide. If she did basic research into the Order, those would likely be the first things she found out. Which means they need to earn her trust to be able to impart the extra information they know which she doesnt.

The concept of "she should have done basic research" only lends credence into her not wanting to talk to the Order.

Trust them to do what? We are talking about her asking them for information. Are you suggesting she can't trust them to not give her false information?

Peelee

2021-09-23, 05:46 PM

Trust them to do what? We are talking about her asking them for information. Are you suggesting she can't trust them to not give her false information?

You have a critically endangered species. Bob, who accidr tally killed one when he didn't know what it was and then deliberately killed one when he knew what it was, wants to see yours. Also Bob committed genocide to a different species. Bob is calling on the phone right now, your caller ID says.

You may think it's a good idea to pick up for Bob. I'm not going to say one goddamn word to him. You call me illogical for this.

Do you see the problem here?

Liquor Box

2021-09-23, 06:00 PM

You have a critically endangered species. Bob, who accidr tally killed one when he didn't know what it was and then deliberately killed one when he knew what it was, wants to see yours. Also Bob committed genocide to a different species. Bob is calling on the phone right now, your caller ID says.

You may think it's a good idea to pick up for Bob. I'm not going to say one goddamn word to him. You call me illogical for this.

Do you see the problem here?

I would if you simply said what you think it is. Is she worried they will give her false information? Is she worried that she would accidently let something slip? Is she worried that them knowing about her mere existence (or her involvement) is a risk? Is she worried that if she talks to them, they'll have their hooks into her and manipulate her (the telemarketer analogy)?

This isn't necessarily a case where I disagree with you. I just don't understand what your concern is.

Peelee

2021-09-23, 06:07 PM

I would if you simply said what you think it is.

I did. Just there. You quoted it. The problem is that from her perspective, where she has no reason to believe the Order has any information helpful to her and every reason to believe they are a danger to the Gate (not our perspective where we know all context), she has no reason to want to talk to them at all. You have not given any reason why she should trust them or believe what they are saying in the Sendings.

Ionathus

2021-09-23, 06:10 PM

Is she worried that she would accidently let something slip? Is she worried that them knowing about her mere existence (or her involvement) is a risk?

A combination of these two, for me at least.

Conversation is an exchange of information, otherwise it's an interrogation, and nobody wants to be interrogated via their own Sending. I would expect Serini thinks her information ("I'm alive" "I'm guarding the last gate" "I took the paladins" "I don't think you're all qualified") is more valuable than the information she could get from the Order (she thinks she knows all of the Gates stuff already), so any conversation would be a disadvantage to her if she's trying to maintain secrecy.

And as any of my players who've rolled a Bluff1 check can tell you, every lie is a risk on its own, so I don't think she'd be keen to just lie her way through the conversation to get information she already thinks she has.

1. I'm told that this is what people called Deception checks in the Long Ago Era in which OotS is set.

Ruck

2021-09-23, 06:28 PM

Yes, they did. Comic 990 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0990.html). She didn't respond even with that information.

"impending world-shattering doom" could easily be referring to the last Gate and the possibility of its control and/or destruction. Considering this comic happened before the major plot events of book 6-- which include the Godsmoot and Thor's revelations to Durkon, which are the two key critical pieces of information that would change Serini's calculus-- I'm going to say the Sending does not include that the Order has those two key pieces of information.

The problem is that it is 0% more difficult to ambush the Order, or even a negative percentage.

You've continued to assert this as stone-cold fact, and I don't think there's any reason to conclude this is definitely true. In fact, I'll even go with "Serini, as an epic Rogue in the setting, knows more about a successful ambush than either of us."

It's more that Xykon, for all his power, couldn't actually stop the Order from blowing up the Gates, as far as Serini knows anyway. I mean, we know he arrived too late to protect Girad's Gate and that Soon's Gate being destroyed actually let Xykon survive. But I'm assuming Serini doesn't know that level of detail.

Given that the Order blew up the Gates and that's precisely why Serini wants them out of the picture, I'm not sure where this is going.

Sure she did. She's had weeks to talk to and coordinate things with the Order. She just hasn't used them.

...Because she doesn't trust the Order and isn't trying to work with them, with sound reasoning and evidence. "Managing the Order so they never even enter a door," in that sense, means actually having the time to do so once they arrive, which she did not have.

All fights go well until they don't. Now yeah, she could've won the ambush and that'd be the end of it. But the ambush could have also gone even worse. She underestimated the Order, which hey, might be her whole problem.

Again, we're just circling back to "Serini should know things about the Order that we do, that she has no reason to know and no way of knowing." (And I don't consider the Order telling her "Hey, I know we blew those Gates but we're cool now and won't do it again, and we're also a lot more competent than we were then" as "knowing" that information. Same with not knowing how many levels the Order has gained in the last week or so or that Elan has grown into someone who can use his powers competently.)

How would her ambush lead to them destroying the Gate? I mean, there is the expenditure of resources for one. They are down more high level spells, and have taken more damage. And if they didn't have anti-poison spells they'd be down multiple members of their team. Now we know that no matter how desperate things get, the Order won't destroy the Gate. But Serini doesn't know that. She thinks that if they get desperate enough they'll destroy the Gate to stop Xykon from winning. So making them more desperate would only make that more likely.

OK, the last sentence I can see a reasoning for. But I don't think it's an outcome to worry about, for a couple of reasons:

From our perspective, and possibly Serini's, if the Order defeats her and is seriously drained from the fight, we could expect them to rest and regroup before attempting to take on Team Evil-- especially in the current scenario, where they know Team Evil's on a wild goose chase because of the teleport trap.

Pursuant to Serini's reasoning, it might be along the lines of "Well, they blew the Gates to avoid a fight (Girard's), when they started the fight at full strength (Soon's), and after they won the fight (Dorukan's), so I'm not really increasing the chances they blow the Gate by attacking."

I just don't think we know enough to know if Serini's planning was poor; it seems like a results-based analysis to say so. The near-success of the ambush combined with how much the Order has grown since Serini would have likely last had relevant information on them suggests to me it was a pretty good plan based on what she knew. I'm willing to withhold judgment until this plays out and we hear more from all parties involved.

Liquor Box

2021-09-23, 06:34 PM

I did. Just there. You quoted it. The problem is that from her perspective, where she has no reason to believe the Order has any information helpful to her and every reason to believe they are a danger to the Gate (not our perspective where we know all context), she has no reason to want to talk to them at all. You have not given any reason why she should trust them or believe what they are saying in the Sendings.

I accept that Serini may not have any reason to think the Order has any useful information.

I also understand the argument that she thinks they are a danger to the gate. The thing I'm not grasping (and I don't see where you said it) is why merely talking to them crystalises any risk to the gate? What harm would talking to them do?

A combination of these two, for me at least.

Conversation is an exchange of information, otherwise it's an interrogation, and nobody wants to be interrogated via their own Sending. I would expect Serini thinks her information ("I'm alive" "I'm guarding the last gate" "I took the paladins" "I don't think you're all qualified") is more valuable than the information she could get from the Order (she thinks she knows all of the Gates stuff already), so any conversation would be a disadvantage to her if she's trying to maintain secrecy.

And as any of my players who've rolled a Bluff1 check can tell you, every lie is a risk on its own, so I don't think she'd be keen to just lie her way through the conversation to get information she already thinks she has.

1. I'm told that this is what people called Deception checks in the Long Ago Era in which OotS is set.

Well Serini could simply ask them questions and refuse to give them any information. That might mean they refuse to give her information, but then she still gets at least as much information as she gets from not talking to them.

But I do get the idea that she sees herself as a bit of a secret agent, operating from the shadows and pulling strings. Putting aside that, in my opinion, she is pulling strings that increase the risk to the gate, I can understand that she thinks people knowing about her presence might be a bad thing.

Ruck

2021-09-23, 06:48 PM

I also understand the argument that she thinks they are a danger to the gate. The thing I'm not grasping (and I don't see where you said it) is why merely talking to them crystalises any risk to the gate? What harm would talking to them do?

But I do get the idea that she sees herself as a bit of a secret agent, operating from the shadows and pulling strings. Putting aside that, in my opinion, she is pulling strings that increase the risk to the gate, I can understand that she thinks people knowing about her presence might be a bad thing.

Well, there you go.

(As a little addendum, I don't think she has to have any specific ideas of consequences that could come from talking to them. As you said, it's reasonable to think she doesn't want people to know about her presence, and from even that it's a simple step to "talking to the Order is more risky than not talking to them.")

Peelee

2021-09-23, 07:32 PM

I accept that Serini may not have any reason to think the Order has any useful information.

I also understand the argument that she thinks they are a danger to the gate. The thing I'm not grasping (and I don't see where you said it) is why merely talking to them crystalises any risk to the gate? What harm would talking to them do?

Now Im not getting something. If you have two salient facts - namley, that she does not have reason to think they have any useful information, and that she thinks they are a danger to the Gate - then she doesn't need a reason to not talk to them. She needs a reason to talk to them. Why is she obligated to talk to them? Because, from what I can tell (and I may be mistaken), that now seems to be the only reasoning for her doing so. If she is not obligated to talk to them, then those two points point to very good reason to not talk to them.

RatElemental

2021-09-23, 07:48 PM

Elenian

2021-09-23, 07:52 PM

I sort of said this before, but I think it's worth reiterating: at some point, the alternative to talking (apparently) became attacking the Order. In person. While they are armed with save-or-die magic and legacy greatswords of green glowyness and such. This is a significant reason to talk. These are not prima facie equally attractive options!

Peelee

2021-09-23, 07:53 PM

It's not like receiving a sending is just a caller ID saying "Bob's calling" it's Bob saying up to 25 words of whatever he wants to say. Given V's sendings, in this case it would be more like the caller ID was saying "Bob would like to talk to you about protecting the last polka dotted cat."

There is a reason to pick up, they're outright saying they want to protect the gate. She knows they could be potential allies, even if she doesn't want them physically anywhere near the gate. It would have been easier to just answer and send them on a wild goose chase made up quest to keep them busy while she handles Xykon. That is, if she actually has any sort of plan for Xykon beyond "hope he gets bored and gives up."

Sure, Bob is saying he wants to talk about protecting theast cat. Bob also killed two of them, one intentionally, and is directly working with Charlie, who also killed one intentionally. Bob can totally leave that message on the voicemail, and I can totally think he's full of ****.

Again, there is no reason to trust Bob when Bob has been incredibly bad for the cats. Bob saying, "just trust me" does nothing.

RatElemental

2021-09-23, 08:03 PM

Sure, Bob is saying he wants to talk about protecting theast cat. Bob also killed two of them, one intentionally, and is directly working with Charlie, who also killed one intentionally. Bob can totally leave that message on the voicemail, and I can totally think he's full of ****.

Again, there is no reason to trust Bob when Bob has been incredibly bad for the cats. Bob saying, "just trust me" does nothing.

You can think Bob is blowing hot air all you want, but you can call him back and say you need him to go get the orange scepter of polkadot cat creation to replace the dead cats, because you have the last cat handled. Then Bob stops calling you and is probably off looking for the scepter that doesn't exist and you've got time to deal with Charlie and Alice.

Peelee

2021-09-23, 08:07 PM

You can think Bob is blowing hot air all you want, but you can call him back and say you need him to go get the orange scepter of polkadot cat creation to replace the dead cats, because you have the last cat handled. Then Bob stops calling you and is probably off looking for the scepter that doesn't exist and you've got time to deal with Charlie and Alice.

Or I could just not talk to Bob because he's a genocidal cat killer and Im not obligated to talk to him.

KorvinStarmast

2021-09-23, 08:46 PM

Bob's not here.

Seven quataloo's to get the ref

Peelee

2021-09-23, 08:54 PM

Bob's not here.

What about Bob?

I did not get it.

Hurkyl

2021-09-23, 08:57 PM

I also understand the argument that she thinks they are a danger to the gate. The thing I'm not grasping (and I don't see where you said it) is why merely talking to them crystalises any risk to the gate? What harm would talking to them do?
There is the whole issue of sabotaging Serini's ability to defeat them (which, as an aside, I honestly can't understand how anyone is convinced the effect is completely nonexistent).

But for the way you ask the question, the first response that actually springs to my mind is that it changes the nature of the gate defenses from the Order's point of view.

Currently, the gate defenses are a feature of the location; something to be preserved (don't go bumbling carelessly) or exploited for their own benefit (blow the teleport trap on an ambush). Knowing Serini is alive and hostile towards their involvement means the gate defenses are now viewed as something actively working against them: they are among the obstacles to be defeated in their quest to be involved.

KorvinStarmast

2021-09-23, 09:00 PM

What about Bob?

I did not get it. I got your ref. Mine was Cheech and Chong, 1971. Dave's not here

Liquor Box

2021-09-23, 09:16 PM

Now Im not getting something. If you have two salient facts - namley, that she does not have reason to think they have any useful information, and that she thinks they are a danger to the Gate - then she doesn't need a reason to not talk to them. She needs a reason to talk to them. Why is she obligated to talk to them? Because, from what I can tell (and I may be mistaken), that now seems to be the only reasoning for her doing so. If she is not obligated to talk to them, then those two points point to very good reason to not talk to them.

While I agree she doesn't have reason to think that they have particular useful information, from Serini's perspective there is always the off-chance the have useful information (even about something as simple as Xykon's weaknesses). So there's not zero reason to talk to them. It's just that, without good reason to think that they do have good information, the reason to talk with them is much lower.

I think the missing link is how we get from her thinking they are a risk to the gate to this being a reason not to talk to them. I don't think it necessarily follows that you never talk to a person who has competing interests with yours, unless you stand to lose something by talking to them.

Is your concern the same as Ionathus, that even knowing she exists is a problem. Or do you see it like Ruck, that she hasn't thought of any particular risk, but kind of thinks there may be unforeseen risks from speaking to them?

Peelee

2021-09-23, 09:18 PM

I think the missing link is how we get from her thinking they are a risk to the gate to this being a reason not to talk to them. I don't think it necessarily follows that you never talk to a person who has competing interests with yours, unless you stand to lose something by talking to them.

By not talking to them, she does not confirm that she is even I've and keeps the element of surprise in case she needs to deal with them. She stands to lose that by talking to them.

Psyren

2021-09-23, 09:44 PM

Peelee

2021-09-23, 09:52 PM

But realistically she still has that. Even if they somehow come to suspect that she isn't their ally (epic rogue can't Bluff? What?) they'd still have no idea she has a bunch of monsters at her beck and call, or what magic items she has at her disposal, etc.

And they would also now even know if she was a piece on the board, let alone one they would have to deal with. No matter how many advantages she has, not knowing if she's even alive is another one. And, yet again, she is not obligated to answer them. I have yet to hear any convincing reason that she should respond given what she knows about them. That she could is irrelevant to whether she would. Even if we say there is nothing to be lost, there is also, as far as she knows, nothing to be gained.

I do not believe the story will play out that Serini is just a stupid old fool who doesn't just give the Order their rightful information for no reason.

danielxcutter

2021-09-23, 09:53 PM

Seriously, getting to know the basics about the Order can't take that many divinations, and given that Serini's quite obviously in the loop I doubt the info blackout would apply to her either.

Peelee

2021-09-23, 09:58 PM

Seriously, getting to know the basics about the Order can't take that many divinations, and given that Serini's quite obviously in the loop I doubt the info blackout would apply to her either.

Again, the basics about the Order:

Accidentally destroyed a Gate.
Intentionally destroyed a Gate.
Committed genocide.

I really don't think why you seem to consider that this should endear them to her. She would need to know a lot more than the basics to have any reason at all to think it would be a good idea to even talk to them, much less work with them. And yet I keep hearing the drum bang of "the basics".

Also, Durkon had to die to get the direct chat from the god he dedicated his life to in order to get anything. But Serini should just have 'em calling her up on the phone?

georgie_leech

2021-09-23, 10:06 PM

Also, Durkon had to die to get the direct chat from the god he dedicated his life to in order to get anything. But Serini should just have 'em calling her up on the phone?

Specifically, the god that was just itching to have a conversation about this very subject so that he could give a divine mission. It stands to reason that Snarl-related conversations probably aren't allowed to be started by the gods, otherwise Thor propbably just would have sent a dream or something saying "Durkon, cast a commune, we really need to have a chat about that thing I know you already know about so that I can clue you in on relevant information."

Yendor

2021-09-23, 10:18 PM

Again, the basics about the Order:

Accidentally destroyed a Gate.
Intentionally destroyed a Gate.
Committed genocide.

And in the process, removed most of the defenses of the Gate.

Forum Explorer

2021-09-23, 10:55 PM

"impending world-shattering doom" could easily be referring to the last Gate and the possibility of its control and/or destruction. Considering this comic happened before the major plot events of book 6-- which include the Godsmoot and Thor's revelations to Durkon, which are the two key critical pieces of information that would change Serini's calculus-- I'm going to say the Sending does not include that the Order has those two key pieces of information.

You've continued to assert this as stone-cold fact, and I don't think there's any reason to conclude this is definitely true. In fact, I'll even go with "Serini, as an epic Rogue in the setting, knows more about a successful ambush than either of us."

Given that the Order blew up the Gates and that's precisely why Serini wants them out of the picture, I'm not sure where this is going.

...Because she doesn't trust the Order and isn't trying to work with them, with sound reasoning and evidence. "Managing the Order so they never even enter a door," in that sense, means actually having the time to do so once they arrive, which she did not have.

Again, we're just circling back to "Serini should know things about the Order that we do, that she has no reason to know and no way of knowing." (And I don't consider the Order telling her "Hey, I know we blew those Gates but we're cool now and won't do it again, and we're also a lot more competent than we were then" as "knowing" that information. Same with not knowing how many levels the Order has gained in the last week or so or that Elan has grown into someone who can use his powers competently.)

OK, the last sentence I can see a reasoning for. But I don't think it's an outcome to worry about, for a couple of reasons:

From our perspective, and possibly Serini's, if the Order defeats her and is seriously drained from the fight, we could expect them to rest and regroup before attempting to take on Team Evil-- especially in the current scenario, where they know Team Evil's on a wild goose chase because of the teleport trap.

Pursuant to Serini's reasoning, it might be along the lines of "Well, they blew the Gates to avoid a fight (Girard's), when they started the fight at full strength (Soon's), and after they won the fight (Dorukan's), so I'm not really increasing the chances they blow the Gate by attacking."

I just don't think we know enough to know if Serini's planning was poor; it seems like a results-based analysis to say so. The near-success of the ambush combined with how much the Order has grown since Serini would have likely last had relevant information on them suggests to me it was a pretty good plan based on what she knew. I'm willing to withhold judgment until this plays out and we hear more from all parties involved.

Perhaps not. Mind you, it shows they've been sending Messages even quite late, and that the subject matter has been quite serious.

I'm stating that as a fact because the Order couldn't do anything about the method she did use to ambush them. Charming Elan was always going to work. Having that lure him away was always going to work. And the Order knew they were about to be ambushed chasing him, but they still walked into it, because they knew they needed to rescue him.

Or to put it another way, all the tricks used to ambush them have very little to do with epic level rogue and thus there isn't much they could do to protect themselves from it, just by knowing that Serini was around.

My original point was the Xykon couldn't stop the Order from blowing up the Gates, so who does she think she will be able to? Or to put it another way, if the Order was here to blow up the Gate, why does she think she can stop them when Xykon couldn't?

What? I get the first part of that sentence. But the whole reason she didn't have time to manage them is because she refused to talk to them. You don't need to be there in person to manage someone.

Not at all, you pointed out that her ambush almost succeeded and thus was a valid tactic. I was countering that it didn't succeed, and that it just as easily could have failed entirely.

Sure, she didn't know much about the Order. And before this comic 1244 I'd agree that it wasn't her fault with her lack of knowledge. But now her lack of knowledge is willful and thus her fault.

I'm doubting she knows that much about the specific details of all the Gates. But maybe she does. It's kinda up in the air how much Serini actually knows about what happens at each Gate.

But really the point boils down to 'she believes that the Order being in conflict near the Gate puts the Gate at risk, yet she is starting a fight with them near the Gate.'

Liquor Box

2021-09-23, 11:16 PM

By not talking to them, she does not confirm that she is even I've and keeps the element of surprise in case she needs to deal with them. She stands to lose that by talking to them.

Yeah, I'm going to sit on the fence on this one for a bit.

I don't think she would lose much in terms of surprise just because they knew she existed and was not an ally (so long as she didn't inform them she was hostile and would attack). But on the other hand she wouldn't have known how much information she had to gain by talking to them.

Ruck

2021-09-24, 12:18 AM

I got your ref. Mine was Cheech and Chong, 1971. Dave's not here

I got it, but it certainly could be confusing with a name besides Dave.

Hurkyl

2021-09-24, 04:33 AM

On a Xykon victory not being so bad... what happened in the aftermath of the invasion of Azure City?

Team Evil hung around and built a nation, establishing trade and diplomatic relations with the neighbors, and did not yank on the fraying edges of reality.

Even if Serini were to just give Xykon the gate on a silver platter, what direct risks do Team Evil cause?

They are too careless in their investigation of the gate and mess it up on accident
They are nihilistic enough to be willing to release the snarl

Team Evil have proven responsible enough with Dorukan's gate and Soon's rift, and there actions outwardly contradict the second point. We know both, especially the second, are serious concerns, but we have an unusual knowledge set.

Is there any reason for Serini to think control of the gate actually can grant Team Evil any amount of power? She speaks hypothetically about him achieving world domination, but it's quite plausible that the details we don't know make it unreasonable to expect anything but Team Evil poking around with it for a few months or years before deciding they can't do anything with it and return to their seat of power. Heck, they even have motive to build a new gate.

---

That aside, I was also thinking about the issue of warding off the Sapphire Guard. It seems pretty unlikely she has any chance at persuading the paladins to leave things to her, nor has any chance at converting them to her way of thinking about keeping the gate safe. Tricking them is the only real option, I think. Outside of extermination, I suppose.

danielxcutter

2021-09-24, 04:43 AM

Team Evil didn't do squat for peace relations; that was all Team TDO.

Liquor Box

2021-09-24, 05:05 AM

Even if Serini were to just give Xykon the gate on a silver platter, what direct risks do Team Evil cause?

They are too careless in their investigation of the gate and mess it up on accident
They are nihilistic enough to be willing to release the snarl

Xykon releases the Snarl and tries to control it with the ritual (what he actually plans to do) but the ritual doesn't give him control (which it wont) and the Snarl goes on to to destroy the world
Redcloak tries to use the Snarl to blackmail the gods (what he actually plans to do) but the gods (being gods) don't fall for his bluss and Redcloak has to release the Snarl on to a plane so they take him seriously.
The Gods are aware of what is going on, and don't want to be blackmailed by Redcloak or have Xykon release the Snarl, so destroy the world themselves (what many of them actually want to do).
Xykon doesn't actually release the Snarl and nor does Redcloak, but periodically adventurers turn up seeking to topple Xykon (what serini has said she thinks will happen) - and on each occasion the conflict between the adventurers and Xykon poses at least as much risk to the gate as the conflict between the Order and Xykon would (probably more if they didn't now the threat of the gate.

Is there any reason for Serini to think control of the gate actually can grant Team Evil any amount of power? She speaks hypothetically about him achieving world domination, but it's quite plausible that the details we don't know make it unreasonable to expect anything but Team Evil poking around with it for a few months or years before deciding they can't do anything with it and return to their seat of power. Heck, they even have motive to build a new gate.

I think we kind of do know that Xykon can't achieve world domination. He is relying on using the ritual to control the Snarl after he releases it, but the ritual doesn't actually achieve control, Redcloak only tricked Xykon into thinking it did. He wouldn't achieve world domination, he would destroy the world if he carries out his plan. We have been talking about Xykon being in control, because that appears to be what Serini thinks will happen when Xykon inevitably gets control of the gate (well, inevitable unless the Order stop him).

Hurkyl

2021-09-24, 05:12 AM

Xykon releases the Snarl and tries to control it with the ritual (what he actually plans to do) but the ritual doesn't give him control (which it wont) and the Snarl goes on to to destroy the world
Redcloak tries to use the Snarl to blackmail the gods (what he actually plans to do) but the gods (being gods) don't fall for his bluss and Redcloak has to release the Snarl on to a plane so they take him seriously.
The Gods are aware of what is going on, and don't want to be blackmailed by Redcloak or have Xykon release the Snarl, so destroy the world themselves (what many of them actually want to do).
Xykon doesn't actually release the Snarl and nor does Redcloak, but periodically adventurers turn up seeking to topple Xykon (what serini has said she thinks will happen) - and on each occasion the conflict between the adventurers and Xykon poses at least as much risk to the gate as the conflict between the Order and Xykon would (probably more if they didn't now the threat of the gate.

I think we kind of do know that Xykon can't achieve world domination. He is relying on using the ritual to control the Snarl after he releases it, but the ritual doesn't actually achieve control, Redcloak only tricked Xykon into thinking it did. He wouldn't achieve world domination, he would destroy the world if he carries out his plan.
I guess I didn't make it clear enough that all of this was exploring things from the point of view of someone in Serini's position, not the point of view of a near-omniscient reader.

We have been talking about Xykon being in control, because that appears to be what Serini thinks will happen when Xykon inevitably gets control of the gate (well, inevitable unless the Order stop him).
Debatable, but I guess it's already been debated.

Liquor Box

2021-09-24, 07:05 AM

I guess I didn't make it clear enough that all of this was exploring things from the point of view of someone in Serini's position, not the point of view of a near-omniscient reader.

Ah ok.

Well she does know about the risk of future adventurers (unless she's not putting quite a simple two and two together).She says in 1229 that conflict is the risk and that she expects future adventurers to come and try and topple Xykon.

She doesn't say she knows that Xykon trying to use the Snarl to take over the world is high risk. But it is pretty foreseeable based on what she knows, so if she doesn't know it, it's an oversight by her.

I agree that the godsmoot situation is not something she'd know about though.

Hurkyl

2021-09-24, 07:34 AM

Ah ok.

Well she does know about the risk of future adventurers (unless she's not putting quite a simple two and two together).She says in 1229 that conflict is the risk and that she expects future adventurers to come and try and topple Xykon.

She doesn't say she knows that Xykon trying to use the Snarl to take over the world is high risk. But it is pretty foreseeable based on what she knows, so if she doesn't know it, it's an oversight by her.

I agree that the godsmoot situation is not something she'd know about though.
Ack, I forgot to list the indirect threats their presence poses as I had planned.

The Sapphire Guard and OotS inserting themselves into the picture is a threat, of course. Aside from those, we have
Some random adventurers having a beef with Xykon or Redcloak and coincidentally tracking them down while they're at the gate
Some random adventurers having learned about the gates and coincidentally coming while Team Evil is still there
Team Evil succeeding at extracting world-dominating power, thus inviting resistance

It was the third point which made me ponder the question of just how plausible it would be for Team Evil to get anything out of it. I know the Order of the Scribble had to deal with crackpot cults or something, but none accomplishing anything of note, methinks?

I could only conclude we've not been given any of the details that would let us judge the topic. Aside, of course, from the fact that one of the Gods is specifically guiding Team Evil.

Ionathus

2021-09-24, 09:51 AM

But I do get the idea that she sees herself as a bit of a secret agent, operating from the shadows and pulling strings. Putting aside that, in my opinion, she is pulling strings that increase the risk to the gate, I can understand that she thinks people knowing about her presence might be a bad thing.

Yep, this is pretty much my position. I don't think her secrecy and ambushes have been optimal choices, but I also don't think they're obviously bad ones. Playing it safe and sticking to the shadows is what she's good at, so it makes sense that she'd lean into that.

I'm saying that whichever adventurers she is counting on to topple his rule eventually have a chance to themselves put the final Gate in danger through their conflict. She could of course devote the rest of her life to taking down anyone who might go after Xykon to protect the Gate from their conflict. It would certainly be amusing to watch her switch to defending the guy who wrecked her so thoroughly before. But even if she's perfectly successful at that, she's quite old and appears to be a spinster.

I don't know who you're arguing with here, but it's not me.

I've already established why I don't think that Xykon plans to live next to the Gate after he's completed the Ritual, and why Serini seems to think the same. I have given my reasons for this. Instead of refuting those reasons, you've continued to propose a humorously bad plan based on a position I never supported, to make your point. I like hyperbole as a rhetorical strategy as much as the next guy, but it has to match what your conversational partner is saying for it to be effective.

But realistically she still has that. Even if they somehow come to suspect that she isn't their ally (epic rogue can't Bluff? What?) they'd still have no idea she has a bunch of monsters at her beck and call, or what magic items she has at her disposal, etc.

Again, any risk is too much risk in her eyes, when she's dealing with the people who are responsible for taking the world's integrity from 80% to 20%. I'm not saying an epic rogue can't Bluff: she could probably Bluff until the cows come home and be totally fine. Just like she could probably let the Order attack Xykon on her terms and still not lose any of her own gate defenses. But neither of those probablys are a definitely, and that small margin of risk is an unacceptable amount for her when the stakes are so high.

Even if Serini were to just give Xykon the gate on a silver platter, what direct risks do Team Evil cause?

Thousands would die, millions would suffer, civilization as we know it would be fundamentally altered or, worst-case, be completely replaced. At least Class 1 and maybe Class 2 under Standard Definition (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ApocalypseHow), or an IK-Class Scenario (https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/k-class-complete-list) for fellow SCPers. The world and its inhabitants would survive, but that's about as bright as it gets.

I don't think the comparison to Azure City's aftermath works here. Team Evil conquered a kingdom and then ruled that kingdom with an iron fist, more or less. Sure Redcloak set up trade partners and they kept the human citizens alive (because slaves are the cheapest labor possible), and they didn't yank on the rift's edges, but that's not a point to their credit. They exploited the opportunity to its fullest extent, and didn't take actively suicidal actions (tampering with the rift) because they needed an intact Gate for their full plans to be realized.

I think Xykon made it pretty clear with Azure City that the stakes are as high as they can be: if he has the opportunity to take something, he will take it. If Xykon got control of the Snarl (impossible, but not according to his or Serini's understanding) I have no doubt that he would rule the planet with an iron fist. He is bona fide pure evil megalomaniac, through and through. I don't see any reason for Serini to give him the Gate, nor do I see any indication that she wants to.

georgie_leech

2021-09-24, 11:09 AM

Dion

2021-09-25, 01:10 PM

The Order has already significantly weakened the final gate defenses. Serini made a tactical blunder not taking them out earlier.

Team Evil went into the dungeon looking for The Order. They didn’t find them.

Team Evil is going to put the missing pieces together and realize there’s more to the dungeons than they realized, and they’re going to spend some effort trying to figure it out.

And frankly, The Order left Team Evil some pretty big clues.

Liquor Box

2021-09-25, 04:51 PM

The Order has already significantly weakened the final gate defenses. Serini made a tactical blunder not taking them out earlier.

Like she's taken them out now?

All she's done is weaken them (by removing the paladins), meaning they are less likely to succeed against Xykon and as far as she knows, more likely to resort to desperate measures like destroying the gate. If she'd taken her beating earlier it would've made no difference.

Hopefully the Order is able to extract the information about where the paladins are out of Serini, and undo the damage she's done. Maybe they'll even be able to, one way or another, make her tell them about the gate defences, so some good will have come from her attack on them.

Squire Doodad

2021-09-25, 06:37 PM

Speaking of Rift edges, I'm really curious about what's happened to the existing Rifts at Dorukon's (former) dungeon or Lirian's Forest. They both started significantly larger than the one that fit into Soon's Sapphire, and they've been Gate-less for significantly longer.

It's not clear about Lirian's Gate, but Dorukan's Gate is buried under a giant mass of rock. I'm not sure how it works, but it hasn't been brought up. Maybe conservation of detail, just no time to go there, or maybe the sheer amount of rock makes it a non-issue unless someone excavates it. One side of the rift or the other is blocked up for sure.

Again, the basics about the Order:

Accidentally destroyed a Gate.
Intentionally destroyed a Gate.
Committed genocide.

You know, when you put it like that, maybe Durkon should have been casting those Sendings

Dion

2021-09-25, 06:58 PM

You know, when you put it like that, maybe Durkon should have been casting those Sendings

Compared to these dunce waffles, she probably figures she’d be better off talking to *durkula*

From her point of view, this is the current situation:

The group of incompetent chuckleheads who conspired together to destroy gates two through four have shown the group that destroyed gate one the secret to finding gate five.

She’s going to need a lot more than amnesia potions to fix this.

Squire Doodad

2021-09-25, 08:55 PM

Liquor Box

2021-09-26, 12:18 AM

Compared to these dunce waffles, she probably figures she’d be better off talking to *durkula*

From her point of view, this is the current situation:

The group of incompetent chuckleheads who conspired together to destroy gates two through four have shown the group that destroyed gate one the secret to finding gate five.

She’s going to need a lot more than amnesia potions to fix this.

If we are calling people dunce waffles, I think it's fair to note that Serini writing the world's most important secrets in her diary and then letting Xykon have it is up there with Elan destorying the first gate for incompetence, and worse in terms of the risk to the world it caused. So far I haveonly been commenting on the wisdom of Serini's current decisions, but her past puts her as every bit as much an incompetent chucklehead as the Order.

danielxcutter

2021-09-26, 01:17 AM

I mean, if we're going to count every single mistake and shortcoming of the Order against them, it's only fair to count that against Serini. Like, why keep the coordinates with you in the first place?

Also, I don't think that the Order vanishing is necessarily going to tip Team Evil off right away - it's easy to assume that since they're adventurers, they might have used magic to escape. Plus, if Serini hadn't drawn them away, Team Evil would still have to fight off the Order before figuring out the trap and bypassing it.

Dion

2021-09-26, 11:28 AM

Also, I don't think that the Order vanishing is necessarily going to tip Team Evil off right away -

I agree that Xykon will probably dismiss it. As far as he’s concerned, it’s just another random encounter with a strange ending. He’ll figure the PC play session was interrupted or something.

But there are three real possibilities:

Oona may already know what’s going on with the teleport traps, and this might make her mention it.

Greyview might have enough tracking skill to give some really strong hints

Redcloak seems to have burned a lot of skill points in knowledge, and he likes to think about this kind of thing. He’s might figure it out.

hungrycrow

2021-09-26, 11:45 AM

danielxcutter

2021-09-26, 11:51 AM

I mean, there's absolutely no way it'll tip them off immediately. I'd give it a few hours after coming out of the dungeon at the very least, probably a couple of days if they do catch on at all.

Dion

2021-09-26, 01:32 PM

I mean, there's absolutely no way it'll tip them off immediately. I'd give it a few hours after coming out of the dungeon at the very least, probably a couple of days if they do catch on at all.

Sure, they’re not going to figure it out right away. And they were going to figure it out eventually anyhow.

But Team Evil has been here about a week, and until now they’ve been content to take the dungeons at face value.

And now they have some more scraps of information that might cause them to look again and reevaluate some of their assumptions.

And Serini sees the world in terms of information. She’s going to see the information Team Evil gained today, and she’s going to blame The Order for giving it to them.

Liquor Box

2021-09-26, 04:37 PM

Team Evil didn't even know that the Order went through this door, they just happened to pick it randomly. When they fail to find anything they'll just assume the Order hid some other way.

If anything this whole farce might have bought some time, because Redcloak will realize his marking system was sabotaged and focus on that.

This is true. The risk that this would lead to Team Evil figuring things out is slim.

But the bigger point is that Serini doesn't seem to placing much store in her defences anyway - instead she's contemplating what will happen when Xykon does take the gate. The defences just aren't that valuable in the scheme of things.

Hurkyl

2021-09-28, 03:38 AM

This is true. The risk that this would lead to Team Evil figuring things out is slim.

But the bigger point is that Serini doesn't seem to placing much store in her defences anyway - instead she's contemplating what will happen when Xykon does take the gate. The defences just aren't that valuable in the scheme of things.
Contemplating what will happen when Xykon does take the gate doesn't really have anything to do with the other points in that line. Given the nature of how she chastises the Paladins for their 'failure is not an option' attitude towards keeping the gate out of Xykon's hands, it would seem outright strange if Serini didn't already have at least some vague thoughts about how to proceed if someone seized the gate room. And maybe she's even had enough time to specialize those thoughts for Team Evil specifically.

KorvinStarmast

2021-09-28, 04:15 PM

Team Evil is going to put the missing pieces together and realize there’s more to the dungeons than they realized, and they’re going to spend some effort trying to figure it out. If by Team Evil you mean Redcloak, I'm buying this box of detergent.

And Serini sees the world in terms of information. She’s going to see the information Team Evil gained today, and she’s going to blame The Order for giving it to them. Given her discussion with the Paladins, a reasonable prediction to make.
We'll see what she says to the order in the next few strips.

Bookwyrm13

2021-09-29, 03:31 AM

Speaking of Rift edges, I'm really curious about what's happened to the existing Rifts at Dorukon's (former) dungeon or Lirian's Forest. They both started significantly larger than the one that fit into Soon's Sapphire, and they've been Gate-less for significantly longer.

Wild and wacky prediction: Before the end of the comic, someone (betting on Serini if anyone) is going to wind up showing the Order some Teevo'ed/scried/whatevered image of what happened to those areas to drive home even further how devastating the destruction of a Gate is.

(Obviously The Order didn't really have anything to do with the destruction of Lirian's, but still)

Liquor Box

2021-09-29, 04:04 PM

Contemplating what will happen when Xykon does take the gate doesn't really have anything to do with the other points in that line. Given the nature of how she chastises the Paladins for their 'failure is not an option' attitude towards keeping the gate out of Xykon's hands, it would seem outright strange if Serini didn't already have at least some vague thoughts about how to proceed if someone seized the gate room. And maybe she's even had enough time to specialize those thoughts for Team Evil specifically.

I think this is the underlying reason why you and I disagree. If your take is that Serini does not think her defences will succeed, her trying to stop the only other groups trying to prevent Xykon from getting the gate is a tough sell as being reasonable. If she believes her defences will hold up, then her trying to stop the Order looks less unreasonable.

My read is that she (correctly) thinks the gates defences will only delay Xykon, and holds little hope that it will stop him. In 1227 to 1229 she tells the paladins why she has imprisoned them. She makes three related points - the paladins have shown a willingness to destroy gates before, she notes that groups opposing Xykon are likely to lead to conflict and that conflict is where the risk to the gates lies and she says that Xykon getting the gat is better than risking it being destroyed. Nowhere does she mention the gates defences. She doesn't say "the gate is doing fine without you", she doesn't say "your blundering might harm the defences". Those are the sorts of things I would expect her to say if she was confident her defences would resist Xykon. It just strikes me as odd that when Serini was justifying her capture of the paladins, she didn't mention her ace in the hole (if that's what she thought her defences were).

Hurkyl

2021-09-30, 01:28 AM

If your take is that Serini does not think her defences will succeed, her trying to stop the only other groups trying to prevent Xykon from getting the gate is a tough sell as being reasonable.
Or, it makes her all the more desperate to keep some bumbling idiots from making things even worse.

If she believes her defences will hold up, then her trying to stop the Order looks less unreasonable.
Or, she doesn't need to bother because her defenses would hold. Wasn't that actually one of the arguments being made by the "Serini=moron" side earlier?

I agree that at some point, a sufficiently severe lack of confidence in the existing defenses translates into the better option being abdication and letting some other group handle it. But I am unconvinced that merely "not [thinking] her defenses will succeed" is anywhere near that point. I've not seen anything to suggest Serini ought to believe what she constructed to be so incapable that the world would be better off if she abandons her post to let the newbies handle it.

There might be the "why not both?" option -- but that depends on the nature of the existing defenses and how the Order will engage. One could imagine things could be such that allowing the Order to take their shot has a negligible impact on the Tomb's ability to keep Xykon out -- but it can also be the other way around. I'm making the working assumption it's the latter, based both on Serini feeling the need to remove others to keep the odds up, and on how the comic has shown us a way the Order in the middle of a plan that would have such an impact.

My read is that she (correctly) thinks the gates defences will only delay Xykon, and holds little hope that it will stop him.
I actually think she thinks worse; that the most probable outcome of the whole debacle is the snarl escaping and destroying all (or, at least, destroying the souls of those on the world). But I don't think she thinks it's anywhere near certain that will be the result.

Liquor Box

2021-09-30, 01:52 AM

Or, it makes her all the more desperate to keep some bumbling idiots from making things even worse.

I don't think that argument is very strong. If the defences are unlikely to hold, then there's little to lose by the Order taking a shot.

Or, she doesn't need to bother because her defenses would hold. Wasn't that actually one of the arguments being made by the "Serini=moron" side earlier?

I don't know. I didn't see it being argued, but I didn't really involve myself in the argument about whether Serini was a moron, except to say I didn't think she was one.

I agree that at some point, a sufficiently severe lack of confidence in the existing defenses translates into the better option being abdication and letting some other group handle it. But I am unconvinced that merely "not [thinking] her defenses will succeed" is anywhere near that point. I've not seen anything to suggest Serini ought to believe what she constructed to be so incapable that the world would be better off if she abandons her post to let the newbies handle it.

I disagree with the threshold you have identified here. If she doesn't think her defences will succeed then, based on what Serini knows, allowing the Order to intervene is the best way to save the gate.

It's hard to be firm on this because we don't know just how much Serini knows. But there would seem to be no good reason to think the Order would be unable to succeed against Xykon. Indeed, if she knows they destroyed Dorukan's gate (which most people assume she does) then she would probably know they've already killed Xykon once. Why would she assume they'd be unable to defeat Xykon?

There might be the "why not both?" option -- but that depends on the nature of the existing defenses and how the Order will engage. One could imagine things could be such that allowing the Order to take their shot has a negligible impact on the Tomb's ability to keep Xykon out -- but it can also be the other way around. I'm making the working assumption it's the latter, based both on Serini feeling the need to remove others to keep the odds up, and on how the comic has shown us a way the Order in the middle of a plan that would have such an impact.

Again, if Serini thinks the defences are unlikely to succeed, then whether a confrontation between the Order and Team Evil would harm those defences is probably not the highest priority.

I actually think she thinks worse; that the most probable outcome of the whole debacle is the snarl escaping and destroying all (or, at least, destroying the souls of those on the world). But I don't think she thinks it's anywhere near certain that will be the result.

Which would seem to be a scenario where should gamble on the group most likely to stop that from happening. Or better yet, ally with them. Even if she does think Xykon would be too strong for the Order, he may not be too strong for the Order, Serini and the paladins combined.

Hurkyl

2021-09-30, 04:46 AM

I don't think that argument is very strong. If the defences are unlikely to hold, then there's little to lose by the Order taking a shot.
So?

I disagree with the threshold you have identified here. If she doesn't think her defences will succeed then, based on what Serini knows, allowing the Order to intervene is the best way to save the gate.
Why? The conclusion really does not follow at all from the hypothesis.

But there would seem to be no good reason to think the Order would be unable to succeed against Xykon.
Everything prior was a distraction; this is the core point, it seems.

I don't see a good reason to think the Order would be able to succeed against Xykon either. I don't see a good reason to think Serini's defenses wouldn't hold Xykon off. And more to the point, I don't see any reason why Serini would think herself less capable than the Order.

Mind you, I don't see a particularly good reason to think the Order can't succeed or that the defenses would hold Xykon off. Much agnosticism here.

Which would seem to be a scenario where should gamble on the group most likely to stop that from happening.
And her opinion seems to be that group is herself, her monsters, and whatever else she has access to.

Liquor Box

2021-09-30, 05:37 AM

So?

Why? The conclusion really does not follow at all from the hypothesis.

Ok

If Serini's defences are strong then, if there are no third parties (like the Order) then the most likely outcome is the gate is safe. Introducing the order, with some chance of defeating Xykon, and also some chance of weakening the gate defence (assuming that's what Serini thinks of them), would overall lower that high chance of the gate remaining safe.

If Serini's defences are weak then, if there are no third parties, the most likely outcome is the gate falls. Introducing
he order, with some chance of defeating Xykon, and also some chance of weakening the gate defence (assuming that's what Serini thinks of them), would increase the chance of the gate remaining safe.

Everything prior was a distraction; this is the core point, it seems.

I don't see a good reason to think the Order would be able to succeed against Xykon either. I don't see a good reason to think Serini's defenses wouldn't hold Xykon off. And more to the point, I don't see any reason why Serini would think herself less capable than the Order.

Mind you, I don't see a particularly good reason to think the Order can't succeed or that the defenses would hold Xykon off. Much agnosticism here.

I agree with your assessment of the Order - Serini probably has no good basis to assess whether the Order can defeat Xykon one way or the other.

I think there is a good reason to think the defences cannot stop Xykon. That is because, from what we've seen of the defences, Xykon has unlimited shots at them. He fails one day he tries again the next. He can fail lots of times, but he only needs to succeed once (or at least once per layer of defences). For example, with the illusion, it might fool him for fifty days in a row, then all of a sudden he decides to case detect magic and find it. Not only that, he is getting stronger every try because he's gaining experience and items.

Further, as noted above, I read Serini's exposition in 1227-1229 as suggesting she doesn't think her defences are likely to succeed. And if she doesn't believe in them, I don't think we should.

As for why Serini should think herselt less capable than the Order, that depends on the big question of how much she knows. But a simple reason is that there's one of her (two if you count Sunny) and 7 of the Order. Further, she may well know about the Order having destroyed to previous gates, which suggests she knows that they defeated Xykon at Dorukon's gate, and defeated the defences at Girard's gate, both of which speak to their power. But she may not know, which perhaps supports Psyren;s argument, that she should have tried to gain more information on them/from them.

And her opinion seems to be that group is herself, her monsters, and whatever else she has access to.

And that is very likely not a rational view, given what she knows. First, as noted above, she probably has reason to believe the Order is more powerful than her based on what she knows. Second, if she didn't know enough to draw that conclusion, she should have investigated further. Third, whatever she has access to would undoubtedly be stronger when combined with the Order rather than acting alone.

Anyway, I don't think she actually plans to attack Xykon directly. She says in 1229 that she thinks the biggest risk to the gate is conflict, and if the paladins are removed from the picture there will be no conflict. To me, that suggests she does not intend to attack Xykon. Rather, if he does penetrate her dungeons and tricks, she falls back on her "Xykon winning is better than risking the gate being destroyed" logic, which is itself flawed.

elros

2021-09-30, 05:58 AM

Ok

If Serini's defences are strong then, if there are no third parties (like the Order) then the most likely outcome is the gate is safe. Introducing the order, with some chance of defeating Xykon, and also some chance of weakening the gate defence (assuming that's what Serini thinks of them), would overall lower that high chance of the gate remaining safe.

If Serini's defences are weak then, if there are no third parties, the most likely outcome is the gate falls. Introducing
he order, with some chance of defeating Xykon, and also some chance of weakening the gate defence (assuming that's what Serini thinks of them), would increase the chance of the gate remaining safe.

I agree with your assessment of the Order - Serini probably has no good basis to assess whether the Order can defeat Xykon one way or the other.

I think there is a good reason to think the defences cannot stop Xykon. That is because, from what we've seen of the defences, Xykon has unlimited shots at them. He fails one day he tries again the next. He can fail lots of times, but he only needs to succeed once (or at least once per layer of defences). For example, with the illusion, it might fool him for fifty days in a row, then all of a sudden he decides to case detect magic and find it. Not only that, he is getting stronger every try because he's gaining experience and items.

Further, as noted above, I read Serini's exposition in 1227-1229 as suggesting she doesn't think her defences are likely to succeed. And if she doesn't believe in them, I don't think we should.

As for why Serini should think herselt less capable than the Order, that depends on the big question of how much she knows. But a simple reason is that there's one of her (two if you count Sunny) and 7 of the Order. Further, she may well know about the Order having destroyed to previous gates, which suggests she knows that they defeated Xykon at Dorukon's gate, and defeated the defences at Girard's gate, both of which speak to their power. But she may not know, which perhaps supports Psyren;s argument, that she should have tried to gain more information on them/from them.

And that is very likely not a rational view, given what she knows. First, as noted above, she probably has reason to believe the Order is more powerful than her based on what she knows. Second, if she didn't know enough to draw that conclusion, she should have investigated further. Third, whatever she has access to would undoubtedly be stronger when combined with the Order rather than acting alone.

Anyway, I don't think she actually plans to attack Xykon directly. She says in 1229 that she thinks the biggest risk to the gate is conflict, and if the paladins are removed from the picture there will be no conflict. To me, that suggests she does not intend to attack Xykon. Rather, if he does penetrate her dungeons and tricks, she falls back on her "Xykon winning is better than risking the gate being destroyed" logic, which is itself flawed.
Serini tells O-Chul that she is not much of a threat to Xykon (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1228.html) ("old lady with a blow gun"), but then points out that the paladins are even worse than her ("two clowns who got beat by the same old lady").
She then used non-lethal force against the OOTS, suggesting that if she can defeat them, they are not up for the task, either.
I agree with her: if Serini and two allies (i.e. Mimi & Sunny) can stop a party of high level characters, then they "don't have the juice" to stop Team Evil.
I consider Serini testing the OOTS: if you cannot defeat her, they (and the World) are better off having their memory wiped and being removed.

Peelee

2021-09-30, 06:04 AM

Rather, if he does penetrate her dungeons and tricks, she falls back on her "Xykon winning is better than risking the gate being destroyed" logic, which is itself flawed.

In what way is this flawed?

Liquor Box

2021-09-30, 06:05 AM

Serini tells O-Chul that she is not much of a threat to Xykon (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1228.html) ("old lady with a blow gun"), but then points out that the paladins are even worse than her ("two clowns who got beat by the same old lady").
She then used non-lethal force against the OOTS, suggesting that if she can defeat them, they are not up for the task, either.
I agree with her: if Serini and two allies (i.e. Mimi & Sunny) can stop a party of high level characters, then they "don't have the juice" to stop Team Evil.
I consider Serini testing the OOTS: if you cannot defeat her, they (and the World) are better off having their memory wiped and being removed.

Except, they couldn't stop the Order, despite the Order being extremely unlucky with their roles.

I agree with your first point though, that Serini's comments at the start of 1228 reinforces that she does not intend to confront Xykon directly.

Liquor Box

2021-09-30, 06:09 AM

In what way is this flawed?

Because it overlooks that Xykon getting the gate also risks its destruction. For two reasons:
- Serini knows that conflict is what poses the risk to the gate, and she thinks that others would arise to topple Xykon. When this happens, the same risk of the gate being destroyed arises as if the Order challenged them now.
- Xykon is a risk of destroying the gate himself. From 1229 Serini thinks (correctly) that Xykon intends to use the Snarl to destroy the world. In my opinion it is obvious that using the Snarl in this way poses some risk of it getting loose.

Peelee

2021-09-30, 12:41 PM

Because it overlooks that Xykon getting the gate also risks its destruction. For two reasons:
- Serini knows that conflict is what poses the risk to the gate, and she thinks that others would arise to topple Xykon. When this happens, the same risk of the gate being destroyed arises as if the Order challenged them now.
- Xykon is a risk of destroying the gate himself. From 1229 Serini thinks (correctly) that Xykon intends to use the Snarl to destroy the world. In my opinion it is obvious that using the Snarl in this way poses some risk of it getting loose.

For the first, A.) that problem is not imminent, while the Order is, and 2.) she does not want Xykon to have it regardless (else, obviously, she would have just let him in).

For the second, I need to ask exactly where you're getting that from. Serini explicitly said in panel 3 of that strip that she thinks Xykon does not intend to destroy the world.

hungrycrow

2021-09-30, 01:04 PM

Peelee

2021-09-30, 01:20 PM

There's two risks that Xykon getting the gate destroys the world. One is that Xykon messes up somehow and releases the Snarl accidently. It's hard to gauge how much of a risk this is, as we don't know what Serini thinks the ritual will do exactly.

Second, Xykon could destroy the world himself. His intention not to do so is even less trustworthy than that of the paladins. He even includes a caveat that he wouldn't destroy the world unless he gets really bored when explaining his intentions to Roy. Xykon is an unhinged sociopath whose only goal is to hurt as many people as possible; of course there are circumstances where he'd destroy the world.

Those are excellent reasons for her to not give him the Gate, I agree.

Hurkyl

2021-09-30, 02:44 PM

Worse, don't we the reader have reason to believe Xykon is actually somewhat nihilistic outright? If Xykon is tired of existing, releasing the Snarl not only fixes that problem entirely, but has the bonus of taking others with him.

It's information probably not available to Serini, though.

Liquor Box

2021-09-30, 03:24 PM

For the first, A.) that problem is not imminent, while the Order is, and 2.) she does not want Xykon to have it regardless (else, obviously, she would have just let him in).

For the second, I need to ask exactly where you're getting that from. Serini explicitly said in panel 3 of that strip that she thinks Xykon does not intend to destroy the world.

On the first, you are right that the conflict with the Order will happen sooner. If it doesn't happen, we'd get some time with Xykon ruling the world before before the risk of conflict destroying the world arises. If, when a group of adventurers challenges Xykon, there's a chance that the world might end but also a chance that Xykon might be defeated, I'd probably rather that roll of the dice happens sooner rather than later. You may disagree, and if so, perhaps you;d prefer it if no group ever challenged Xykon. That doesn't seem to be Sereni's perspective though.

On the second, Sereni does say Xykon doesn't intend to destroy the world, just like she seems to know the paladins (and probably the order) don't intend to destroy the world. She think he intends to use the Snarl to rule it. My point was that I think it should be obvious to anyone who knows as much about the Snarl as Serini does, that attempting to use the Snarl in that way is risky, and risks accidently destroying the world, particularly in the context of Xykon having already destroyed a gate.

Those are excellent reasons for her to not give him the Gate, I agree.

Not just reasons to not give him the gate, but reasons to do everything you can to prevent him getting it.

Which goes back to my discussion with Hurkyl that if you believe (as I do) that Serini doesn't have much confidence in her defences, she should look to whatever forces might be available to attack Xykon more directly.

Peelee

2021-09-30, 10:02 PM

Not just reasons to not give him the gate, but reasons to do everything you can to prevent him getting it.

This includes destroying the Gate, which is Serini's entire problem with them.

Liquor Box

2021-09-30, 11:04 PM

This includes destroying the Gate, which is Serini's entire problem with them.

Yeah, sure. Let me rephrase - everything she can to avoid him getting it other than destroying the gate.

Peelee

2021-09-30, 11:07 PM

Yeah, sure. Let me rephrase - everything she can to avoid him getting it other than destroying the gate.

I agree. And as Serini openly stated that she does not believe that the paladins or the Order have that specific addendum, I cannot agree with claims of "but she should anyway".

Liquor Box

2021-09-30, 11:35 PM

I agree. And as Serini openly stated that she does not believe that the paladins or the Order have that specific addendum, I cannot agree with claims of "but she should anyway".

No, she doesn't think they have that addendum.

But she doesn't seem to be certain they would destroy the gate, she just thinks there's a risk that they would. What she has failed to do, is balance that against the risk the gate will be destroyed by Xykon or by the adventurers she thinks will come to displace him.

Hurkyl

2021-10-01, 04:32 AM

I just realized something. This was a provoked attack.

The Order of the Scribble swore an oath of "no interference in the other four gates". And what do we have here? The organization Soon founded to protect his gate has sent its own members to interfere as well as an adventuring party*.

Regardless of how justified one thinks they are in interfering, they are still acting in direct violation of the agreement.

I also see that Shinjo remarks (#0277) that the oaths taken by the Paladins of the Sapphire Guard prevent them from seeking out the other gates. Did we ever see in-comic some justification as to why those oaths should no longer apply? I have very vague memories that we might have seen something like a rationalization the oaths dissolved with the gate (which, IMO, seems rather weasely) but I don't remember anything more than that.

*: Yes, I know the Order of the Stick has independent interest in the gates. They're also acting at the behest of the Sapphire Guard.

danielxcutter

2021-10-01, 05:29 AM

Hinjo explicitly said the oath is dissolved with the loss of their Gate, so… yeah, if you start from the premise that Serini’s right and work backwards there you might come to that conclusion.

Hurkyl

2021-10-01, 06:32 AM

if you start from the premise that Serini’s right and work backwards there you might come to that conclusion.
I don't follow?

danielxcutter

2021-10-01, 06:40 AM

I’m saying that I disagree.

Peelee

2021-10-01, 06:47 AM

I’m saying that I disagree.

So were only the original Scibblers bound by non-interference, then, and not any groups they formed as part of their defense system? And, as a corollary, if you agree to that then would you also agree that the Drake tooth clan could have interfered with other Gates's defence as much as they wanted at any time, since they were not in the Order of the Scribble and they almost certainly did not swear any sort of oath?

Frankly, if there were never a panel of Hinjo saying that their Oath dissolved with the Sapphire, I would have considered all this an absolute breach of the paladins' oath long before we ever even met Serini. It's hardly required to believe Serini is right and work backwards from that (as evidenced by the simple fact that I have never moved from my position that Serini is not right yet arrived at that conclusion regardless).

danielxcutter

2021-10-01, 06:51 AM

Why do you think she’s right? Because she just doesn’t know about the Godsmoot?

Peelee

2021-10-01, 06:54 AM

Why do you think she’s right? Because she just doesn’t know about the Godsmoot?

I'm sorry, I'm confused. Who are you asking? I am forced to assume not me, since I've said on multiple occasions (including in the sole post between your two posts) that I do not believe Serini is right, so it's difficult for me to gauge who that question is aimed at.

Also, do you believe that only the original Scibblers bound by non-interference, and not any groups they formed as part of their defense system? And, as a corollary, if you agree to that then would you also agree that the Drake tooth clan could have interfered with other Gates's defence as much as they wanted at any time, since they were not in the Order of the Scribble and they almost certainly did not swear any sort of oath?

danielxcutter

2021-10-01, 07:03 AM

I'm sorry, I'm confused. Who are you asking? I am forced to assume not me, since I've said on multiple occasions (including in the sole post between your two posts) that I do not believe Serini is right, so it's difficult for me to gauge who that question is aimed at.

Also, do you believe that only the original Scibblers bound by non-interference, and not any groups they formed as part of their defense system? And, as a corollary, if you agree to that then would you also agree that the Drake tooth clan could have interfered with other Gates's defence as much as they wanted at any time, since they were not in the Order of the Scribble and they almost certainly did not swear any sort of oath?

Sorry, typo.

Also I don’t think the Draketooths really gave much of a crap about the other Gates. Not sure what they were doing besides renewing the spells and expanding the family, though.

Peelee

2021-10-01, 07:07 AM

Sorry, typo.
No worries!

also I don’t think the Draketooths really gave much of a crap about the other Gates.

Irrelevant. Do you believe that only the original Scibblers bound by non-interference, and not any groups they formed as part of their defense system? And, as a corollary, if you agree to that then would you also agree that the any hypothetical group formed.by a Scribbles could have interfered with other Gates's defence as much as they wanted at any time, since they were not in the Order of the Scribble and they almost certainly did not swear any sort of oath?

Liquor Box

2021-10-01, 07:08 AM

Also, do you believe that only the original Scibblers bound by non-interference, and not any groups they formed as part of their defense system?

Serini said "We agree no interference in the other four gates."

That could either be taken to mean just the Scribblers. Or the Scribblers and their vassals. But the paladins were no longer Soon's vassals after he died.

Hurkyl, do you think if Serini has broken the agreement (by spying) and the paladins didn't, would that justify them being there to drug and capture Serini, and keep her in manacles?

Peelee

2021-10-01, 07:11 AM

Serini said "We agree no interference in the other four gates."

That could either be taken to mean just the Scribblers. Or the Scribblers and their vassals. But the paladins were no longer Soon's vassals after he died.

Hurkyl, do you think if Serini has broken the agreement (by spying) and the paladins didn't, would that justify them being there to drug and capture Serini, and keep her in manacles?

So the corollary then. Would you agree that the Sapphire Guard, sans their specific oath, or the Draketooth Clan, or the sylphs and any other creatures employed by Dorukan, could have immediately gone and interfered with the other Gates without any issue whatsoever the second the founder passed away?

Yendor

2021-10-01, 07:13 AM

So were only the original Scibblers bound by non-interference, then, and not any groups they formed as part of their defense system? And, as a corollary, if you agree to that then would you also agree that the Drake tooth clan could have interfered with other Gates's defence as much as they wanted at any time, since they were not in the Order of the Scribble and they almost certainly did not swear any sort of oath?

I would say that Girard would certainly have considered Soon's paladins showing up as unwarranted interference. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0694.html)

Liquor Box

2021-10-01, 07:21 AM

So the corollary then. Would you agree that the Sapphire Guard, sans their specific oath, or the Draketooth Clan, or the sylphs and any other creatures employed by Dorukan, could have immediately gone and interfered with the other Gates without any issue whatsoever the second the founder passed away?

I haven't given it much thought, but I'm going to go with probably. I can't see how Dorukon or Girard etc can swear an oath that applies to everyone down through the generations. It would probably die with them.

But maybe not. The narrator only said they swore an oath to that effect. Maybe they extended it to all who worked for them, and all who guarded their gates in perpituity. It seems less likely when you think of Dorukon who seemed to have more of an employee/employer relationship though. And Celia, who had been an employee, did go to Soon's gate and noone obejected.

Peelee

2021-10-01, 07:25 AM

I haven't given it much thought, but I'm going to go with probably. I can't see how Dorukon or Girard etc can swear an oath that applies to everyone down through the generations. It would probably die with them.

But maybe not. The narrator only said they swore an oath to that effect. Maybe they extended it to all who worked for them, and all who guarded their gates in perpituity. It seems less likely when you think of Dorukon who seemed to have more of an employee/employer relationship though. And Celia, who had been an employee, did go to Soon's gate and noone obejected.

When did Celia go to Soon's Gate? I remember her being summoned by Haley after Soon's Gate was destroyed, but I don't recall her willingly going to any Gate before it fell.

That aside, I like how you broke it down there. Speaking solely for me, I would consider "we can't but our followers can" as a massive loophole that would be rife for exploitation, and this likely not the case. And, as pointed out, Girard did not believe such would be the case, so it shouldn't be surprising that Serini may also not.

Hurkyl

2021-10-01, 07:30 AM

When did Celia go to Soon's Gate? I remember her being summoned by Haley after Soon's Gate was destroyed, but I don't recall her willingly going to any Gate before it fell.
She was also there as the Order's legal defense.

danielxcutter

2021-10-01, 07:32 AM

It honestly seems more like a ploy to separate Soon from the others at the moment.

Peelee

2021-10-01, 07:38 AM

She was also there as the Order's legal defense.
Oh, right. I would still say that's not interfering in any way with the Gate, since she was only there for one sole, specific purpose which was (to her knowledge) irrelevant Soon's Gate.

It honestly seems more like a ploy to separate Soon from the others at the moment.
Except it was only Girard who lied to him, and only about Girard's Gate location. They had accurate enough knowledge on all others.

Also, it seems as if you are specifically avoiding answering the question. Of course, you're under no obligation to answer at all, that's not a problem. I'm just surprised, is all.

Liquor Box

2021-10-01, 07:54 AM

When did Celia go to Soon's Gate? I remember her being summoned by Haley after Soon's Gate was destroyed, but I don't recall her willingly going to any Gate before it fell.

When she was the Order's lawyer?

That aside, I like how you broke it down there. Speaking solely for me, I would consider "we can't but our followers can" as a massive loophole that would be rife for exploitation, and this likely not the case. And, as pointed out, Girard did not believe such would be the case, so it shouldn't be surprising that Serini may also not.[/quote]

I think it may well have extended to not sending their followers. I just don't think that continued after their death.

The Girard illusion clearly thought that Soon was there, or that Soon had sent paladins. We can tell he thinks Soon decided to come or bring his vassals when he says "I always figured that eventually you'd decide that only you could be trusted..... or some other excuse to bring your thugs." His speech would make no sense if the paladins had ventured there without having been sent by Soon.

Oh, right. I would still say that's not interfering in any way with the Gate, since she was only there for one sole, specific purpose which was (to her knowledge) irrelevant Soon's Gate.

The agreement wasn't about interfering. It included no spying, no checking in and no visits.

I also see Serini finishes by saying "after today we are done with each other" and the narrator says "no two have laid eyes on one another since" which also sounds more to me like it was the Scribblers themselves who the agreement applied to.

hungrycrow

2021-10-01, 07:55 AM

Oh, right. I would still say that's not interfering in any way with the Gate, since she was only there for one sole, specific purpose which was (to her knowledge) irrelevant Soon's Gate.

You would think if the oath was important to Dorukan and that it applied to his employees, there would have a general "don't go to Azure City" order. Had Soon been alive, he certainly would have taken it as a transgression if one of Dorukan's sylphs showed up in his throne room, even if they had an excuse.

danielxcutter

2021-10-01, 08:18 AM

I should note that nobody really followed the path at all aside from Soon.

Hurkyl

2021-10-01, 08:55 AM

Hurkyl, do you think if Serini has broken the agreement (by spying) and the paladins didn't, would that justify them being there to drug and capture Serini, and keep her in manacles?
It seems clear to me that the Sapphire Guard would be well-justified in capturing someone spying on Soon's Sapphire. I don't see any reason why Serini would be an exception.

That's not carte blanche to do whatever they want in the process or to ignore other options, but I think there would have to be something significant for the capture to actually be objectionable.

In particular, I don't see sleeping poison being used to do the capture and manacles being used as restraints as making any difference here. Is there an unspoken implication I'm missing?

RatElemental

2021-10-01, 02:49 PM

You would think if the oath was important to Dorukan and that it applied to his employees, there would have a general "don't go to Azure City" order. Had Soon been alive, he certainly would have taken it as a transgression if one of Dorukan's sylphs showed up in his throne room, even if they had an excuse.

Yeah but once Dorukan was dead and his keep went kablooey I don't think you can consider them his sylphs anymore.

Hurkyl

2021-10-01, 04:37 PM

Yeah but once Dorukan was dead and his keep went kablooey I don't think you can consider them his sylphs anymore.
It's nowhere near the level to which the Sapphire Guard is an extension of Soon's will, but there is still enough of a connection to make it worth arguing.

If we're prosecuting it, IIRC Celia's dialogs strongly imply she didn't have any information about what was in the bottom of Dorukan's Dungeon, and didn't have any duties or anything beyond whatever role it was she had regarding Dorukan's Amulet.

I think the stronger line to pin any gate interference on Celia is as an ally of the Order. (not that I think you can get anywhere with it)

a_flemish_guy

2021-10-02, 02:13 AM

I think the agreement was merely "no interference with each other's gates"
I don't think they stopped to work out the minutia of "is looking interfering?", "are mortal followers looking without orders interfering?" "how about summoned monsters, are they disallowed from interfering?"
yes, that's stupid but that happens IRL all the time

Rodin

2021-10-02, 12:03 PM

For me, what matters here is knowledge and intent.

If Celia and a band of sylphs loyal to Dorukan had said "Our gate when KRAKAKOOM, Dorukan isn't around to stop us, let's go investigate the others", then that would have been interfering and would have gone against the rules made by the scribblers. They might be able to weasel their way around the specifics of the oath, but they're violating the spirit of it.

Celia accidentally being present fulfills none of that.

1) She had left Dorukan's service, ergo she was no longer a representative of his.

2) She did not know that the Gate was there, or that Gates even existed. She was a low level flunky who didn't rank high enough in Dorukan's organization to get the skinny on the gates. She had no knowledge that would allow her to interfere with the Gate.

3) She had no intent of interfering with the Gate, because she didn't know it existed.

4) She evidently never took an oath, because she didn't know the Gates existed.

Long story short, you can't blame someone for accidentally breaking an oath they never made to a dead guy whose service they've left. Especially if the breaking of that oath occurs because they happened to stand within a certain radius of an object they don't know exists. Celia accidentally being close to Soon's Gate is totally irrelevant to any discussion about whether the minions of the Scribblers can be held to the "no interference" rule.

danielxcutter

2021-10-02, 12:10 PM

Also, it seems as if you are specifically avoiding answering the question. Of course, you're under no obligation to answer at all, that's not a problem. I'm just surprised, is all.

Uhhhhhh... what question? Sorry, haven't been able to keep track of the thread a whole lot lately.

Blue Dragon

2021-10-02, 05:52 PM

I don't think she is.

Peelee

2021-10-02, 06:48 PM

Uhhhhhh... what question? Sorry, haven't been able to keep track of the thread a whole lot lately.

Perfectly understandable!

also I don’t think the Draketooths really gave much of a crap about the other Gates.

Irrelevant. Do you believe that only the original Scibblers bound by non-interference, and not any groups they formed as part of their defense system? And, as a corollary, if you agree to that then would you also agree that the any hypothetical group formed.by a Scribbles could have interfered with other Gates's defence as much as they wanted at any time, since they were not in the Order of the Scribble and they almost certainly did not swear any sort of oath?

Yendor

2021-10-02, 08:46 PM

danielxcutter

2021-10-02, 08:58 PM

Perfectly understandable!
Hmm…

Well, if they’d wanted to, they certainly would have tried if my reading of them is correct, though probably not Soon’s Gate. Why?

elros

2021-10-03, 06:59 AM

I think Serini knew that Soon was going to be the only one who would be bound by the Oath. We know Girard and Lirian kept hooking up, and the only reason why Girard was not involved in defending her gate is that her defense (anti-magic virus) was incomparable with his (epic magic).
Girard and Serini kept in touch with each other, and for all we know, Serini could have designed some of Girard’s traps.

Liquor Box

2021-10-03, 07:05 AM

Peelee

2021-10-03, 07:22 AM

We know his booby trap was designed to inform her. That's all we know for certain about their communication after the split, though.

Also, Elros, I think you meant Dorukan, not Girard, at one point.

danielxcutter

2021-10-03, 07:44 AM

I would be very much not surprised whatsoever if Serini got help from the other Scribblers to make her dungeon, even just a little.

If nothing else, either Dorukan or Girard probably made the teleportation trap. The effects are strong enough that getting casters for that wouldn't be easy, and it appears that at least Girard was on decent terms with her.

She may not even have had to go behind anyone's back - Soon had his paladins, and each of the other three were all full-caster classes, but Serini doesn't have any magical juice to set up such strong magic on her own. It's entirely possible she straight up asked "Hey, I don't have an order of paladins or 9th-level spells to make my dungeon, can I get some help?"

Hurkyl

2021-10-05, 04:49 PM

Was it this thread that Team Evil's nihilism came up in?

It strikes me that is extremely atypical of a lich, is it not? Isn't the usual outlook of a lich a deep, ingrained desire to continue (un)living with an almost paranoid level of caution to protect their longevity?

Matt620

2021-10-05, 05:56 PM

I'm not sure if she's a moron or not. But at this point, I'd be perfectly fine if she died painfully.

Hurkyl

2021-10-05, 06:08 PM

I was shocked by how much overt malice there was towards Andi when I went to look back at threads from that time period. Are we going to see that here now?

:annoyed:

Ionathus

2021-10-05, 06:10 PM

I'm not sure if she's a moron or not. But at this point, I'd be perfectly fine if she died painfully.

For the mortal crime of...obstructing The Order for a few hours?

Wild, my dude. Wild.

Sindeloke

2021-10-06, 12:41 AM

For the mortal crime of...obstructing The Order for a few hours?

Wild, my dude. Wild.

For the mortal crime of annoying the reader. As a rule, fans of media franchises are extremely forgiving of entertaining bad guys (Xykon is a good example) no matter how brutal and sadistic they are or how many in-universe people they hurt, and extremely unforgiving of boring or annoying characters who never manage to meaningfully hurt anyone in-universe, in a way that many other fans find bewildering or even upsetting, due to the apparent moral inconsistency.

It's not bewildering at all, of course, it's simple; people engage with stories for the purpose of being entertained, and a character who is bad in an entertaining way is serving the purpose they want from that character, while a character who is neutral or even good in a tedious or irritating way is obstructing the purpose they want from that character. Because the people who are getting hurt or helped are fake, and the people being entertained or annoyed are real, it's actually a very consistent and reasonable reaction.

One can (and pretty obviously, many are) argue why Serini is or is not a bad person, or acting reasonably, or serving the role the Giant seems to intend for her, or progressing or obstructing the story, or, as per the thread title, a moron, but one certainly can't argue that a number of people aren't finding her frustrating or her role in the plot contrary to what they want from the comic, so it shouldn't really be surprising to see people wish her harm. Not for what she's doing to anyone in story, but for the effect she's having on their own ability to have the particular good experience they come to the comic for.

Forum Explorer

2021-10-06, 12:45 AM

For the mortal crime of annoying the reader. As a rule, fans of media franchises are extremely forgiving of entertaining bad guys (Xykon is a good example) no matter how brutal and sadistic they are or how many in-universe people they hurt, and extremely unforgiving of boring or annoying characters who never manage to meaningfully hurt anyone in-universe, in a way that many other fans find bewildering or even upsetting, due to the apparent moral inconsistency.

It's not bewildering at all, of course, it's simple; people engage with stories for the purpose of being entertained, and a character who is bad in an entertaining way is serving the purpose they want from that character, while a character who is neutral or even good in a tedious or irritating way is obstructing the purpose they want from that character. Because the people who are getting hurt or helped are fake, and the people being entertained or annoyed are real, it's actually a very consistent and reasonable reaction.

One can (and pretty obviously, many are) argue why Serini is or is not a bad person, or acting reasonably, or serving the role the Giant seems to intend for her, or progressing or obstructing the story, or, as per the thread title, a moron, but one certainly can't argue that a number of people aren't finding her frustrating or her role in the plot contrary to what they want from the comic, so it shouldn't really be surprising to see people wish her harm. Not for what she's doing to anyone in story, but for the effect she's having on their own ability to have the particular good experience they come to the comic for.

Kinda related to that, a villain can be awful and annoying and readers won't mind as much because there is the expectation that they'll be punished for it.

Serini may be an obstacle but she's still a 'good guy'. It's unlikely she'll actually face retribution for her actions.

danielxcutter

2021-10-06, 12:59 AM

Ionathus

2021-10-06, 01:12 AM

so it shouldn't really be surprising to see people wish her harm. Not for what she's doing to anyone in story, but for the effect she's having on their own ability to have the particular good experience they come to the comic for.

Well, I find it surprising. Wishing painful death on a character - even though you believe them to be good or at least non-malicious - just because they're annoying or ineffective, is an extremely creepy take on the situation.

Hilgya got torn into by Sigdi and Minrah. I expect Serini to at least get something on those lines.

I wouldn't really call Hilgya's experience "getting torn into." Sigdi and Minrah each got in a single jab, both of which ruffled Hilgya's feathers for all of one panel. This is in contrast to Andi's comeuppance being the focus of an entire mini-arc, and Miko's comeuppance being, well, bisection with extreme prejudice.

I am predicting that Serini will get some Hilgya-style barbs, though. That's just all I'm predicting.

danielxcutter

2021-10-06, 01:34 AM

I wouldn't really call Hilgya's experience "getting torn into." Sigdi and Minrah each got in a single jab, both of which ruffled Hilgya's feathers for all of one panel. This is in contrast to Andi's comeuppance being the focus of an entire mini-arc, and Miko's comeuppance being, well, bisection with extreme prejudice.

I am predicting that Serini will get some Hilgya-style barbs, though. That's just all I'm predicting.

I really, really hope at least that happens. I am not expecting any "Serini is entirely right except for what she has no way of knowing" stuff and would not like it at all, and before you ask yes I have seen such opinions, though not from you and in the specific case I'm thinking about it's not a guy on this forum.

Psyren

2021-10-06, 01:39 AM

I am predicting that Serini will get some Hilgya-style barbs, though. That's just all I'm predicting.

I trust the Giant to write a verbal takedown of her that I'll find satisfying and deserved.

Liquor Box

2021-10-06, 02:46 AM

Well, I find it surprising. Wishing painful death on a character - even though you believe them to be good or at least non-malicious - just because they're annoying or ineffective, is an extremely creepy take on the situation.

I don't think it's creepy. He didn't wish it on her, just said he'd be fine with it. Lots of characters have died in the comic, mostly painfully (as that is what dying by violence tends to be), how many were you truly not fine with?

Ionathus

2021-10-06, 09:08 AM

I don't think it's creepy. He didn't wish it on her, just said he'd be fine with it. Lots of characters have died in the comic, mostly painfully (as that is what dying by violence tends to be), how many were you truly not fine with?

I have nothing against "I'd accept it if this character died, especially if it makes sense in the story" as an audience opinion. But Matt620's comment felt like it implied a level of active hate for Serini: "perfectly fine if she died painfully" is one or several steps above apathy IMO.

And I can't think of any characters whose deaths I didn't accept as a fitting narrative conclusion for them, but that's because I think Rich is really good at tying up characters' arcs in satisfying ways. That's not the same as thinking that, say, Therkla or Thanh or Shojo needed to die because you didn't like them, which is what you're implying if you start talking about how it wouldn't bother you at all if a character died painfully.

Peelee

2021-10-06, 09:59 AM

For the mortal crime of annoying the reader.

I, for one, am anything but annoyed.

KorvinStarmast

2021-10-06, 10:04 AM

I trust the Giant to write a verbal takedown of her that I'll find satisfying and deserved. Since Haley already dismissed Celia, I'd love for Serini's dismissal to come at the hands of Belkar. :belkar: He's been dishing out put downs for most of the OoTS, so he's got the chops for it.

Liquor Box

2021-10-06, 10:18 AM

I have nothing against "I'd accept it if this character died, especially if it makes sense in the story" as an audience opinion. But Matt620's comment felt like it implied a level of active hate for Serini: "perfectly fine if she died painfully" is one or several steps above apathy IMO.

And I can't think of any characters whose deaths I didn't accept as a fitting narrative conclusion for them, but that's because I think Rich is really good at tying up characters' arcs in satisfying ways. That's not the same as thinking that, say, Therkla or Thanh or Shojo needed to die because you didn't like them, which is what you're implying if you start talking about how it wouldn't bother you at all if a character died painfully.

None of those characters are antagonists though. Whether Serini is an antagonist or not long term, she is certainly in that role at the moment.

When Matt said he was fine with Serini dying painfully, I don't know if he meant he wanted Serini to die. But even if he did, I don't think it's creepy. She's a character and not real, and a character who some people think is behaving badly in a context where that poor behaviour poses a threat to the world. I can understand people wanting he to be killed off so they can get to the main event in the same way people wanted Nale to be killed off. Of course, I understand why you see it differently, because you perceive Serini as acting more or less reasonably.

KorvinStarmast

2021-10-06, 10:27 AM

Whether Serini is an antagonist or not long term, she is certainly in that role at the moment. Yes, I wonder if "situational antagonist" is a term of art in writing. (Maybe there's another term for it).

When Matt said he was fine with Serini dying painfully, I don't know if he meant he wanted Serini to die. But even if he did, I don't think it's creepy. Beyond that, Serini lives in a world informed by how D&D works, with all kinds of supernatural creatures and even spells with tentacles coming out of the floor that can kill a creature like Trigak.

The number of ways to die horribly in a D&D based multiverse is staggering.
The Ancient Black Dragon in DStP, for example, also died a horrible death. IIRC, Pete in Greysky city was beaten to death by an angry cleric of Loki while his foot was nailed to the floor by a sword. :smalleek: That's rather grisly.

Serini, as an adventurer, likely caused any number of opponents to die horrible deaths (though she may have been a "I prefer a clean kill" sort of adventurer). It might be the multiverse offering her just desserts for her to die an excruciatingly painful death, but I don't think that Rich is going to go there - for a variety of reasons.

Psyren

2021-10-06, 11:28 AM

Since Haley already dismissed Celia, I'd love for Serini's dismissal to come at the hands of Belkar. :belkar: He's been dishing out put downs for most of the OoTS, so he's got the chops for it.

Nah - Belkar is good but he has no real connection to her so it wouldn't resonate.

Better would be V as the person she was most directly ignoring, or Durkon for being the most patient person finally cracking, or Haley for understanding the mindset of the party's high-level rogue.

My personal best choice however would be Sunny telling her what a tool she's being.

KorvinStarmast

2021-10-06, 11:41 AM

My personal best choice however would be Sunny telling her what a tool she's being. That would be great, particularly if before that Elan engages with Sunny to see it from the Order's point of view. :smallsmile:

Peelee

2021-10-06, 12:11 PM

Nah - Belkar is good but he has no real connection to her so it wouldn't resonate.

Better would be V as the person she was most directly ignoring, or Durkon for being the most patient person finally cracking, or Haley for understanding the mindset of the party's high-level rogue.

My personal best choice however would be Sunny telling her what a tool she's being.

This would, of course, require Serini to be a tool, so you'll forgive me if I hope that you are disappointed with how the Order eventually is able to overcome that particular hurdle.

Psyren

2021-10-06, 12:44 PM

That would be great, particularly if before that Elan engages with Sunny to see it from the Order's point of view. :smallsmile:

Indeed.

This would, of course, require Serini to be a tool, so you'll forgive me if I hope that you are disappointed with how the Order eventually is able to overcome that particular hurdle.

Yeah I got it after the first dozen or so times, thanks :smalltongue:

Peelee

2021-10-06, 01:57 PM

Yeah I got it after the first dozen or so times, thanks :smalltongue:

Ha! I'm glad you didn't read that as personal, since I didn't intend it that way and only just now realized it could have been written better to make that intent more clear. But yeah, I think I agree with you on a lot, except a singular point that I don't necessarily fault her for her reactions to the Order (yet), and so I think any resolution where she is lambasted, told she is a tool, etc. would not be satisfying I would very much prefer a resolution where both parties recognize their faults and come to a mutual understanding, rather than railroading Serini into what us effectively "how dare you not have believed we were objectively correct!" Not that this is anything you've claimed, but it seems to be the logical conclusion taken to the most direct, unfiltered end - not uncharitable, but not charitable either.

Psyren

2021-10-06, 02:33 PM

Ha! I'm glad you didn't read that as personal, since I didn't intend it that way and only just now realized it could have been written better to make that intent more clear. But yeah, I think I agree with you on a lot, except a singular point that I don't necessarily fault her for her reactions to the Order (yet), and so I think any resolution where she is lambasted, told she is a tool, etc. would not be satisfying I would very much prefer a resolution where both parties recognize their faults and come to a mutual understanding, rather than railroading Serini into what us effectively "how dare you not have believed we were objectively correct!" Not that this is anything you've claimed, but it seems to be the logical conclusion taken to the most direct, unfiltered end - not uncharitable, but not charitable either.

Well, since you brought it up... I did read a bit of personal satisfaction in it actually. It's not the first time I've seen you say something along the lines of "I hope that you, fellow poster, end up being personally annoyed / dissatisfied by the resolution to this subplot." I understand if that's not what you intended to convey, or even if you did (I acknowledge there's an element of zero-sum game here, where every step towards upbraiding Serini is a step away from vindicating her), but that's what I've noticed.

As far as "both parties" - I honestly do think both the Order and Paladins have already had their noses sufficiently rubbed in their failures to protect the previous Gates, by Serini herself no less in the case of the latter - but sure, I do expect and wouldn't have a problem with Serini reiterating those points (even if that happens offscreen so as to avoid a beat for beat repetition of #1229) as part of a proper negotiation - at least, once they can sit on her long enough for one to happen.

Ionathus

2021-10-06, 03:37 PM

When Matt said he was fine with Serini dying painfully, I don't know if he meant he wanted Serini to die. But even if he did, I don't think it's creepy. She's a character and not real, and a character who some people think is behaving badly in a context where that poor behaviour poses a threat to the world. I can understand people wanting he to be killed off so they can get to the main event in the same way people wanted Nale to be killed off. Of course, I understand why you see it differently, because you perceive Serini as acting more or less reasonably.

Sure, I don't personally think Serini's behavior is worthy of hatred. I do still think she's meant to be an annoyance/aggravation to the Order, because that's sometimes how foils work -- you can't refine and explain your point of view if there's nobody around to disagree with you.

My big issue with the "die painfully" mentality is probably stemming from how the discussion of Serini has dipped into Skyler White vibes for me on occasion. Actively wishing for Serini's death, just because she's serving her job as a narrative foil who is still trying to protect the world but just has a different approach than the heroes, is a step too far in my book. Audience reaction to characters who make themselves annoying to the heroes is often extreme, and it's not just harmless banter -- Anna Gunn got death threats over this crap.

I like the Order. I want them to win. I think they're more in the right than Serini is. But they're big kids: they don't need me to defend them from criticism. Characters are allowed to disagree with them -- it makes the story more interesting.

KorvinStarmast

2021-10-06, 03:59 PM

Anna Gunn got death threats over this crap. In Breaking Bad or in Deadwood? (I only saw a little bit of the latter, I got addicted to the former). My comments on people sending RL actors death threats for good acting cannot be posted here. :smallfurious:
I like the Order. I want them to win. I think they're more in the right than Serini is. But they're big kids: they don't need me to defend them from criticism. Characters are allowed to disagree with them -- it makes the story more interesting. As Elan might point out, the narrative demands it! :smallbiggrin:

Ionathus

2021-10-06, 04:06 PM

In Breaking Bad or in Deadwood? (I only saw a little bit of the latter, I got addicted to the former).

Breaking Bad. She wrote an opinion piece somewhere about it, it's pretty good stuff. But yeah, the show does a really good job of making you empathize with Walt, and his simultaneous badass evolution and moral descent over the series is absolutely meant to play out as a power fantasy for the audience, but they maybe set up that empathy a little too well.

The Order is way, wayyyy less in the wrong than Walt (in fact, I think they're in the right), so the comparison is barely even apples to apples. But the way people question Serini's logic and lack of respect for The Order, as if they are self-evidently deserving of respect and deference on The Gates (a topic on which Serini is herself a subject matter expert) despite all the evidence she has to the contrary, reminds me very much of that protagonist-centered mentality that refuses to allow side characters to even have contrary opinions without wishing for them to be aggressively proven wrong or killed in a painful death.

Psyren

2021-10-06, 04:36 PM

I like the Order. I want them to win. I think they're more in the right than Serini is. But they're big kids: they don't need me to defend them from criticism. Characters are allowed to disagree with them -- it makes the story more interesting.

So why doesn't that apply to Serini? She's a big girl, she doesn't need defending, the Order (and myself for that matter) are allowed to disagree with her, etc.

Ionathus

2021-10-06, 04:55 PM

So why doesn't that apply to Serini? She's a big girl, she doesn't need defending, the Order (and myself for that matter) are allowed to disagree with her, etc.

I should've specified "in-story criticism." It becomes a different discussion when audience members are criticizing a character in the story we're all reading.

The Order are allowed and expected to disagree with her in the world. I want to see them do so.

I just don't believe that forum members who call her an idiot from the outside looking in are making valid or logically-sound arguments.

Psyren

2021-10-06, 05:00 PM

I just don't believe that forum members who call her an idiot from the outside looking in are making valid or logically-sound arguments.

I can't speak for those who've called her an "idiot" as I'm not among them.

With that said, my opinion of her not even deigning to pick up the phone when the literal world is at stake is at this point well-documented, I feel.

Ionathus

2021-10-06, 05:17 PM

With that said, my opinion of her not even deigning to pick up the phone when the literal world is at stake is at this point well-documented, I feel.

After 32 pages, one would certainly hope so :smallbiggrin:

I'm beginning to think we all just like to hear ourselves talk...

Peelee

2021-10-06, 05:58 PM

Breaking Bad. She wrote an opinion piece somewhere about it, it's pretty good stuff. But yeah, the show does a really good job of making you empathize with Walt, and his simultaneous badass evolution and moral descent over the series is absolutely meant to play out as a power fantasy for the audience, but they maybe set up that empathy a little too well.

I think I was never caught in that trap since I didn't watch it until a couple years ago, long after it was already out. I could binge on it, and so it was crystal clear from the beginning that Walt just jumped into bed with the first person who came along at every possible juncture, and then stuck by and defended that decision even though it was patently obvious it was a bad decision. Every single time. He was a stubborn ass who refused to ever recognize that he could be wrong and managed to succeed despite himself. Conveniently, this also let me empathize a lot with Skylar and I never even knew there was a huge hate campaign against her until after I finished the series and looked around online. Again, probably the benefit of not having to wait a week for the next installment every time and being able to process everything within a fairly short timetable.

Hurkyl

2021-10-06, 06:14 PM

I'm beginning to think we all just like to hear ourselves talk...
No, it's just that someone's wrong on the internet! Phew, maybe now Ionathus will stop being wrong on the internet!

Liquor Box

2021-10-07, 01:38 AM

Sure, I don't personally think Serini's behavior is worthy of hatred. I do still think she's meant to be an annoyance/aggravation to the Order, because that's sometimes how foils work -- you can't refine and explain your point of view if there's nobody around to disagree with you.

My big issue with the "die painfully" mentality is probably stemming from how the discussion of Serini has dipped into Skyler White vibes for me on occasion. Actively wishing for Serini's death, just because she's serving her job as a narrative foil who is still trying to protect the world but just has a different approach than the heroes, is a step too far in my book. Audience reaction to characters who make themselves annoying to the heroes is often extreme, and it's not just harmless banter -- Anna Gunn got death threats over this crap.

I like the Order. I want them to win. I think they're more in the right than Serini is. But they're big kids: they don't need me to defend them from criticism. Characters are allowed to disagree with them -- it makes the story more interesting.

Yeah, I thought of Skyler as well. Oppose the protagonist at your own risk.

I agree characters are allowed to disagree with them. My objection is when the disagreement is poorly thought out.

danielxcutter

2021-10-07, 01:41 AM

I should point out that not everyone on the "I disagree with Serini and not because she doesn't know what we do" team wants her to die painfully.

Sindeloke

2021-10-07, 02:50 AM

Kinda related to that, a villain can be awful and annoying and readers won't mind as much because there is the expectation that they'll be punished for it.

Serini may be an obstacle but she's still a 'good guy'. It's unlikely she'll actually face retribution for her actions.

That, too.

Relatedly,

I trust the Giant to write a verbal takedown of her that I'll find satisfying and deserved.

I don't really, not after what happened (or rather, failed to happen) with Hilgya.

I anticipate something along the lines of "the Order may or may not apologize to her or at least in some way make a strong show of remorse for their destruction of previous gates; she will definitely not apologize to them or make any show of remorse for her obstruction, though a tacit admission of their validity will be obvious in her (likely still grudging) decision to free the paladins/provide some assistance to the Order against Xykon/with the Gate issue; the Order will thank her with varying levels of sincerity/politeness and go about their business." People who think she's in the wrong won't consider it an exoneration of her, people who think she isn't in the wrong will think it was, and she'll fade into the Miko zone of "no one talks about her any more because the plot has moved on, but don't think for a second that anyone has forgiven or forgotten."

Ruck

2021-10-07, 03:34 AM

I think I was never caught in that trap since I didn't watch it until a couple years ago, long after it was already out. I could binge on it, and so it was crystal clear from the beginning that Walt just jumped into bed with the first person who came along at every possible juncture, and then stuck by and defended that decision even though it was patently obvious it was a bad decision. Every single time. He was a stubborn ass who refused to ever recognize that he could be wrong and managed to succeed despite himself. Conveniently, this also let me empathize a lot with Skylar and I never even knew there was a huge hate campaign against her until after I finished the series and looked around online. Again, probably the benefit of not having to wait a week for the next installment every time and being able to process everything within a fairly short timetable.

I think Skyler was also poorly served by the pilot episode, where she really was written as much more emasculating (there's one scene in particular I'm thinking of; if you've seen it, you probably are too) in order to make Walt's decision seem more sympathetic.

The real problem with Skyler as a character is that they never really found a good dramatic role for her, waffling between moral counterpoint and co-conspirator.

Ionathus

2021-10-07, 09:19 AM

I should point out that not everyone on the "I disagree with Serini and not because she doesn't know what we do" team wants her to die painfully.

Certainly. Not even most, or perhaps even many. It seems like a niche opinion...it's just such an objectionable one to me that I came out really strongly against it.

I think Skyler was also poorly served by the pilot episode, where she really was written as much more emasculating (there's one scene in particular I'm thinking of; if you've seen it, you probably are too) in order to make Walt's decision seem more sympathetic.
Interesting. If it's the scene I'm thinking of, it never came across as emasculating to me...it just seemed like an indicator that intimacy had faded from their marriage and they were both going through the motions.

The real problem with Skyler as a character is that they never really found a good dramatic role for her, waffling between moral counterpoint and co-conspirator.

Which I don't really mind. In a show like that, it can be nice to see characters struggle with which side to take. Skyler knew the "right" choice, but making the "right" choice would ruin her entire life for no real benefit to anyone. I like how the show played with her attempts to salvage the mess Walt had made, while still objecting to it. She's not a perfect moral paragon: she seemed to behave like how a real human spouse would react to such a bonkers situation.

Psyren

2021-10-07, 11:06 AM

I too thought the Skyler hate was vastly overblown once I finally got around to watching BB, but Captain Marvel and Star Wars and Invincible etc etc have taught me that there is just a bunch of misogyny in fandom circles anyway.

I don't see the relevance of that for the situation occurring in the comic, as none of our criticisms of Serini's actions are rooted in her gender. (Hell, the Serini critics are rooting for Haley! Lean in, sister! (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1068.html))

I don't really, not after what happened (or rather, failed to happen) with Hilgya.

I anticipate something along the lines of "the Order may or may not apologize to her or at least in some way make a strong show of remorse for their destruction of previous gates; she will definitely not apologize to them or make any show of remorse for her obstruction, though a tacit admission of their validity will be obvious in her (likely still grudging) decision to free the paladins/provide some assistance to the Order against Xykon/with the Gate issue; the Order will thank her with varying levels of sincerity/politeness and go about their business." People who think she's in the wrong won't consider it an exoneration of her, people who think she isn't in the wrong will think it was, and she'll fade into the Miko zone of "no one talks about her any more because the plot has moved on, but don't think for a second that anyone has forgiven or forgotten."

Andi certainly occupies that zone too.

But honestly, I was pretty happy with Hilgya's resolution (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1181.html). Yeah what she did to Durkon was pretty heinous... because it was supposed to be. She's Chaotic Evil, remember? I'm sure if she keeps associating with Durkon and Kudzu that they'll pull her up to at least CN, and I'm equally sure I don't need to see any of that happen on-panel.

Ionathus

2021-10-07, 11:38 AM

I too thought the Skyler hate was vastly overblown once I finally got around to watching BB, but Captain Marvel and Star Wars and Invincible etc etc have taught me that there is just a bunch of misogyny in fandom circles anyway.

I don't see the relevance of that for the situation occurring in the comic, as none of our criticisms of Serini's actions are rooted in her gender. (Hell, the Serini critics are rooting for Haley! Lean in, sister! (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1068.html))

Ugh, Invincible had a toxic hatedom too? Was it Amber that triggered it? I'm going to assume it was Amber, because at one point she dared to criticize the main character?

And my reference to Skyler was less about Serini also being female and more about the specific death wishes for a relatively minor transgression -- specifically, she also criticizes and opposes the protagonists' choices, and that alone seems to be enough to set some people off into scary levels of hate. As I said earlier, the majority of Serini critics don't go this far.

Andi certainly occupies that zone too.

But honestly, I was pretty happy with Hilgya's resolution (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1181.html). Yeah what she did to Durkon was pretty heinous... because it was supposed to be. She's Chaotic Evil, remember? I'm sure if she keeps associating with Durkon and Kudzu that they'll pull her up to at least CN, and I'm equally sure I don't need to see any of that happen on-panel.

I wasn't plugged into the Andi arc, but it certainly feels like the comic itself condemns Andi and "puts her in her place" more than it does Hilgya. I expect Serini will probably fall between Andi and Hilgya (or even below Hilgya, but still greater than zero), rather than between Miko and Andi, in terms of "severity of getting called out on their worldview."

Psyren

2021-10-07, 12:39 PM

Yeah it was due to Amber. I do personally think Evincible is a superior ship, but some of the vitriol I've seen is insane.
Fair point on the Skyler analogy.

Again I don't see any issue with how the comic handled Hilgya. It's telling that even murdering Durkon in a fit of pique ultimately did less to impede the Order's goals than what Serini is currently doing. (In fact, it's implied that Hilgya's actions may have given the gods themselves* critical info (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1150.html) that they might not have gotten otherwise.)

*Anyone else find it weird that Odin doesn't seem to know what's up when his high priest is hinting that he knows about it? (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html)

KorvinStarmast

2021-10-07, 12:44 PM

The real problem with Skyler as a character is that they never really found a good dramatic role for her, waffling between moral counterpoint and co-conspirator. She was trapped, and she wasn't allowed to push an easy button to get out of that trap. (Beyond the obvious Tell Hank, he's married to your sister solution that the writers chose not to explore because they wanted to embed the 'hiding in plain sight' thing into the story. Gus was another example of that).

Interesting. If it's the scene I'm thinking of, it never came across as emasculating to me...it just seemed like an indicator that intimacy had faded from their marriage and they were both going through the motions. That came across when we watched it.

Which I don't really mind. In a show like that, it can be nice to see characters struggle with which side to take. Skyler knew the "right" choice, but making the "right" choice would ruin her entire life for no real benefit to anyone. I like how the show played with her attempts to salvage the mess Walt had made, while still objecting to it. She's not a perfect moral paragon: she seemed to behave like how a real human spouse would react to such a bonkers situation. In a no win situation, what do you do? Muddle through is sometimes the best one can manage.

RatElemental

2021-10-07, 12:47 PM

*Anyone else find it weird that Odin doesn't seem to know what's up when his high priest is hinting that he knows about it? (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html)

Maybe being connected to a mortal helps with his clarity, or he just doesn't want Thor to know he knows for some reason.

Ionathus

2021-10-07, 01:00 PM

Maybe being connected to a mortal helps with his clarity, or he just doesn't want Thor to know he knows for some reason.

Thor does mention "he has his good days and bad days." Seems like a smart way to play a prophetic character so they don't just spoil all the plot points in the wrong order.

Sindeloke

2021-10-07, 07:57 PM

Ugh, Invincible had a toxic hatedom too? Was it Amber that triggered it? I'm going to assume it was Amber, because at one point she dared to criticize the main character?

If there's a fandom bigger than twelve people, there's probably a toxic hatedom. If there's a female character who has an independent thought now and then, switch that to a fandom bigger than six.

Again I don't see any issue with how the comic handled Hilgya. It's telling that even murdering Durkon in a fit of pique ultimately did less to impede the Order's goals than what Serini is currently doing. (In fact, it's implied that Hilgya's actions may have given the gods themselves* critical info (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1150.html) that they might not have gotten otherwise.)

I mean, Durkon is like "Mom, she assaulted me in one of the most comprehensive and permanently scarring ways available in this setting" and his mom responds with "well, maybe try not to deserve it next time, then." Yeah, she then turns around and threatens Hilgya in private, and we get the one single panel in the entire arc of Hilgya looking less than smug and cocky, but comprehensively, the message "Hilgya is doing bad things, here," really does not come across. What comes across is "don't hurt him because he's mine, even if we both know he deserves it," and that's the strip's final word on that event, full stop. And that's just for killing Durkon, which is the only thing she sees any consequences for at all, even to that mild degree of "being scolded to the point of being taken aback." She's never forced to answer for or even consider her culpability in Kudzu being used as a human shield, and in fact walks off into the sunset at the end of the arc with full custody of said child, without ever even having questioned that she might have done something wrong in endangering him, much less ever feeling a moment of panic or regret about it. She also gets rewarded with an offer of tentative friendship and compromise from Durkon, and an offer of familial acceptance and support from Sigdi.

Compare this to Andi, who didn't cost anybody any character levels or recklessly endanger any infants for whom she was responsible, but got her pay docked, her ego crushed, and spent multiple panels looking chastised and miserable in the wake of a failure that she knew was a failure even as it happened, let alone after. Certainly no one we're meant to like or sympathize with (or, in fact, anyone at all) validates her behavior, or offers her anything but contempt and condemnation in the aftermath. I'm definitely with Ionathus here, that's a huge disparity in the narrative calling them out.

Of course, Andi was only ever an obstacle, while both Serini and Hilgya have crucial use to the Order as recalcitrant allies, so the Order themselves being more lenient makes a certain sense. It doesn't necessarily follow that the story framing has to agree with them, though.

Ruck

2021-10-07, 08:22 PM

She was trapped, and she wasn't allowed to push an easy button to get out of that trap. (Beyond the obvious Tell Hank, he's married to your sister solution that the writers chose not to explore because they wanted to embed the 'hiding in plain sight' thing into the story. Gus was another example of that).

Well, I think that's kind of the problem-- the writers don't want the character to take the obvious action because that would end the story. But in more practical terms, it made her a character who would sometimes scold Walter for his business and sometimes actively participate in it. I'm not surprised she came off as annoying and hypocritical, although I certainly didn't agree with or participate in the broader criticisms and harassment from the fans who thought Walter was a cool alpha male being held back by his wife. I simply find characters who commit to a course of dramatic action instead of wavering more compelling in a story.

(For the record, my dislike of Carmela Soprano-- not as a character, but as a person-- was for a similar reason, her hypocrisy in scolding Tony while luxuriating in the benefits of what he does and showing them off to her friends. Probably not a coincidence that there was a scene in The Sopranos where someone explicitly tells Carmela what the moral course of action is, and she doesn't take it.)

ETA: I'll bring it up again because it's my favorite TV drama of all time, but The Shield's Corrine Mackey is a good counterpoint here-- she's also the wife of a criminal who's the father of her children and has fondness and love for him because of that, but she also realizes (even before she knows the extent of his deeds) that the marriage is untenable and he's a chaotic force, and she takes steps to separate from him pretty early on in the series. It happens slowly and steadily, and is difficult especially because Vic is so strong-willed and aggressive about getting what he wants, but she does keep trying step by step, and eventually she succeeds.

KorvinStarmast

2021-10-07, 09:06 PM

broader criticisms and harassment from the fans who thought Walter was a cool alpha male being held back by his wife. The name of the show was Breaking Bad, and Walter was a very dark character who took Michael Douglas in Breaking Down[and turned it up to eleven, and then as the seasons went on they turned it up to eleventy nine. The writers discussed very candidly their concern with "How dark can we go before we are done" and they arrived at a good enough answer to that. (Although they milked it for another half a season beyond that beause the money was so good).
"Cool alpha male being held back by his wife" is not Walter White. Were they all taking the blue sky meth too? :smallconfused:

hungrycrow

2021-10-07, 09:08 PM

The name of the show was breaking bad, and walter was a very dark character who took Michael Douglas in Breaking Down and turned it up to eleven, and then eleventy nine. "Cool alpha male being held back by his wife" is not Walter White. Were they all taking the blue sky meth too? :smallconfused:

Walt thought he was a "cool alpha male being held back by his wife", so I guess fans fell for his hype?

KorvinStarmast

2021-10-07, 09:11 PM

Walt thought he was a "cool alpha male being held back by his wife", so I guess fans fell for his hype? Really? I have no time for that. I am married, I was still raising kids when that came out. That show was so dark my wife refused to watch it at first. It was a few years later, when my son showed her episode 1, and it was in the beginning of season 4, that she gave it a try.
And got addicted.
And we binge watched until we caught up.
Some of the best TV ever done. (With a few weak episodes).

My first episode was in season 1, ep 5 or 6, where Walter calls the bluff of a drug dealer as regards stuff that blows up. That is what caught my eye. As I watched the next ep on AMC my wife read me the riot act about watching crappy, evil TV shows.

Funny, how it all turned out. :smalltongue: We watched every episode of Better Call Saul as it came out from seasons 1 through 3.

Ruck

2021-10-07, 09:29 PM

The name of the show was Breaking Bad, and Walter was a very dark character who took Michael Douglas in Breaking Down[and turned it up to eleven, and then as the seasons went on they turned it up to eleventy nine. The writers discussed very candidly their concern with "How dark can we go before we are done" and they arrived at a good enough answer to that. (Although they milked it for another half a season beyond that beause the money was so good).
"Cool alpha male being held back by his wife" is not Walter White. Were they all taking the blue sky meth too? :smallconfused:

Falling Down, but, yeah, I know all this well enough.

Like most rotten ideas, there's a kernel of truth there-- Walter is a brilliant man who should have accomplished much more in his life than he did-- but the conclusion and assignment of blame is all wrong. Walter has no one to blame but himself, and his narcissism, pride, insecurity, and bottomless self-pity. Instead, he gave in to those traits and let them curdle for decades until they were finally unleashed in the deadliest manner possible.

My first episode was in season 1, ep 5 or 6, where Walter calls the bluff of a drug dealer as regards stuff that blows up. That is what caught my eye. As I watched the next ep on AMC my wife read me the riot act about watching crappy, evil TV shows.

Funny, how it all turned out. :smalltongue: We watched every episode of Better Call Saul as it came out from seasons 1 through 3.

I didn't start watching it until 2010 or so, but I started watching with the pilot, and that immediately hooked me-- with the pace of other dramas, I thought the opening flash-forward in the RV would be the end of the season or something; instead, it was resolved in that episode. Breaking Bad was maybe the best-paced drama on TV (at least for stretches) while it was on the air. (The Shield is still the all-time winner.)

I liked those first few seasons of BCS quite a bit, but I thought season 4 was a bit of a step back. Season 5 was better, but I still feel one of the problems of the show is that the writers don't want to move at the pace the story demands, so there's a lot of time on unnecessary plots and montages and stuff that people call a "slow burn" or "character work" but that doesn't really reveal anything new about the characters to us.

Peelee

2021-10-07, 10:30 PM

Michael Douglas in Breaking Down[and turned it up to eleven

Apropos of absolutely nothing, but speaking of heavy metal and Michael Douglas movies, Iron Maiden wrote a song about the film Falling Down.

Psyren

2021-10-07, 10:35 PM

Thor does mention "he has his good days and bad days." Seems like a smart way to play a prophetic character so they don't just spoil all the plot points in the wrong order.

Point - perhaps the Godsmoot was a "good day."

"Mom, she assaulted me in one of the most comprehensive and permanently scarring ways available in this setting"

"Permanently scarring?" :smallconfused:
They joke quite literally about the revolving door afterlife (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0487.html) (repeatedly) (=https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0669.html). While there are several similarities between our world's morals and theirs, the attitude of adventurers (especially high level ones) to sudden/repeated death is not one of them, as evidenced by the very phrase "repeated death." In short, you're applying a lens and impact to Hilgya's situation that just doesn't apply, particularly since she herself has the means to repair death.

Rynjin

2021-10-07, 10:37 PM

Ugh, Invincible had a toxic hatedom too? Was it Amber that triggered it? I'm going to assume it was Amber, because at one point she dared to criticize the main character?

I think it was more that she came across as incredibly manipulative in hindsight after the reveal. Disagreeing with him that being a superhero is the best way to save lives? Would be admirable. Eve does so right to his face as well after she ****s off from fighting crime to help people plant crops, build houses, etc. faster with her powers.

Amber, on the other hand, essentially tries to manipulate him into giving up on being a hero through deceptive means, to the point she even maintains the facade (or possibly worse, genuine anger) of being angry at him for "flaking" on helping out at the soup kitchen when he's comatose and nearly dead in the hospital.

The hatedom likely goes too far, as it always does when kids have a strong emotion about a series for the first time, but Amber's actions during the series are toxic overall, and I'm fairly certain that was meant to be intentional. Amber is meant as a contrast to Eve; someone who treats helping people out and activism in general as an ego boost and to help fuel their superiority complex, where the latter just wants to do the most good they can with what they have.

Sindeloke

2021-10-07, 11:39 PM

"Permanently scarring?" :smallconfused:
They joke quite literally about the revolving door afterlife (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0487.html) (repeatedly) (=https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0669.html). While there are several similarities between our world's morals and theirs, the attitude of adventurers (especially high level ones) to sudden/repeated death is not one of them, as evidenced by the very phrase "repeated death." In short, you're applying a lens and impact to Hilgya's situation that just doesn't apply, particularly since she herself has the means to repair death.

He lost two character levels. In a world where limbs can be regrown in minutes, the loss of a level that might take decades to earn back, if you ever even do, is about as dire a mutilation as can be done to a player character. That's permanent removal of hit points, spell knowledge, class features, potentially feats - in short, a fundamental and profound weakening of mind, body, and capability for which there is no recourse from any amount of magic.

The lens I'm applying is the one the Giant himself has imposed on the setting in his own posts: True Resurrection is not a thing here because death means something, and it is important to the setting and the verisimilitude of people's behaviors and reactions that that is true. Dying is not painless. Coming back from the dead is neither cheap nor likely, nor can it by any means get you all the way back to where you were before. We are supposed to take death seriously despite the presence of resurrection because the Giant believes that death mattering is important to the message of the story mattering. When an author is that clear about his setting or his intent, I try to take him at his word.

But quite frankly, that's completely irrelevant anyway. Because even if all she had done was hit him upside the head with a stick, that would still be assault, and it would still be a completely inappropriate response to him simply saying something she didn't like, and his own mother telling him he deserved it to both of their faces would still be an absurd piece of victim-blaming that has no place in the mouth of a character we're supposed to consider a moral and sympathetic person, and she would still have faced no judgement in story of any kind by anyone of her handing her son to a vampire on a platter. You said yourself that what she did to Durkon was heinous, but where's the evidence in the story that anyone agrees? Literally the only comment in the text that anyone made about it was to support it.

Meanwhile, Miko's gods showed up to personally tell her what an idiotic putz she is, and Andi got told off by half her crew. If we're looking at other ally/antagonists who were less obstructive but also made clear errors in moral or practical judgement, we've got Shojo watching his city die, Haley's dad sitting miserably in a dungeon stewing in his own lonely paranoia, Eugene barred from paradise and forced to watch his son run around as a fighter. Karma Houdinis are vanishingly rare in OotS, making it all the more bizarre that Hilgya doesn't even get a slap on the wrist for her behavior.

I think it was more that she came across as incredibly manipulative in hindsight after the reveal. Disagreeing with him that being a superhero is the best way to save lives? Would be admirable.

Eh. In a vacuum, maybe. In a superhero story, where everybody is watching explicitly because they want to see the protagonist go be a superhero, in a genre that has as its fundamental premise that it's effective and important to be a superhero, all this is ever gonna do is make people hate the girlfriend. I don't watch Invincible, but it was a huge problem for me in getting into Black Lightning - bad enough the man himself is spending the entire first season refusing to spit or get off the pot, we've got his wife constantly pushing him away from it? The show is literally called "Black Lightning." We know he's gonna be Black Lightning. You're preventing the plot from progressing. How are we supposed to react to that with anything other than irritation? Even without the weird "don't lie to me when I'm lying to you" aspect of the Invincible situation, that's never going to go over well.

Peelee

2021-10-08, 12:06 AM

Liquor Box

2021-10-08, 12:14 AM

I mean, Durkon is like "Mom, she assaulted me in one of the most comprehensive and permanently scarring ways available in this setting" and his mom responds with "well, maybe try not to deserve it next time, then." Yeah, she then turns around and threatens Hilgya in private, and we get the one single panel in the entire arc of Hilgya looking less than smug and cocky, but comprehensively, the message "Hilgya is doing bad things, here," really does not come across. What comes across is "don't hurt him because he's mine, even if we both know he deserves it," and that's the strip's final word on that event, full stop. And that's just for killing Durkon, which is the only thing she sees any consequences for at all, even to that mild degree of "being scolded to the point of being taken aback." She's never forced to answer for or even consider her culpability in Kudzu being used as a human shield, and in fact walks off into the sunset at the end of the arc with full custody of said child, without ever even having questioned that she might have done something wrong in endangering him, much less ever feeling a moment of panic or regret about it. She also gets rewarded with an offer of tentative friendship and compromise from Durkon, and an offer of familial acceptance and support from Sigdi.

Compare this to Andi, who didn't cost anybody any character levels or recklessly endanger any infants for whom she was responsible, but got her pay docked, her ego crushed, and spent multiple panels looking chastised and miserable in the wake of a failure that she knew was a failure even as it happened, let alone after. Certainly no one we're meant to like or sympathize with (or, in fact, anyone at all) validates her behavior, or offers her anything but contempt and condemnation in the aftermath. I'm definitely with Ionathus here, that's a huge disparity in the narrative calling them out.

Of course, Andi was only ever an obstacle, while both Serini and Hilgya have crucial use to the Order as recalcitrant allies, so the Order themselves being more lenient makes a certain sense. It doesn't necessarily follow that the story framing has to agree with them, though.

Is your point that obstructive (or evil) characters don't need to get some sort of cumeuppance, I agree. Real life doesn't always work out karmically, neither should stories (or at least those that are not fairy tails).

danielxcutter

2021-10-08, 12:37 AM

I dunno, a lot of stories (especially fantasy) tend to give bad guys a kick in the pants.

Liquor Box

2021-10-08, 04:15 AM

I dunno, a lot of stories (especially fantasy) tend to give bad guys a kick in the pants.

Yeah, a lot do, but not all. It's just not my preference - all the good guys doing great, and all the bad guys getting their just desserts is not to my taste.

Dion

2021-10-08, 08:18 AM

Yeah, a lot do, but not all. It's just not my preference - all the good guys doing great, and all the bad guys getting their just desserts is not to my taste.

I like the stories where the bad guy twirls his mustache while he monologues.

Ionathus

2021-10-08, 09:29 AM

I think it was more that she came across as incredibly manipulative in hindsight after the reveal. Disagreeing with him that being a superhero is the best way to save lives? Would be admirable. Eve does so right to his face as well after she ****s off from fighting crime to help people plant crops, build houses, etc. faster with her powers.

Amber, on the other hand, essentially tries to manipulate him into giving up on being a hero through deceptive means, to the point she even maintains the facade (or possibly worse, genuine anger) of being angry at him for "flaking" on helping out at the soup kitchen when he's comatose and nearly dead in the hospital.

The hatedom likely goes too far, as it always does when kids have a strong emotion about a series for the first time, but Amber's actions during the series are toxic overall, and I'm fairly certain that was meant to be intentional. Amber is meant as a contrast to Eve; someone who treats helping people out and activism in general as an ego boost and to help fuel their superiority complex, where the latter just wants to do the most good they can with what they have.

No, I don't think that's the arc of Amber's character at all. It's not about whether she was manipulating Mark...it was about him not trusting her with his identity, but continuing to expect her support as he let her down and made really crappy, paper-thin excuses. And then when she dumps him, he reveals his identity and expects her to just welcome him back with open arms because you don't get it, I'm a good guy!

When superheroes reveal the reason for their terrible social behavior, and their partners instantly forgive them, that's the story saying it's good and proper to sacrifice your loved ones' trust for the sake of being a superhero. And maybe the story has a point when we're talking about individuals who literally save the world in their free time. But Invincible was about deconstructing superhero tropes, and I admire them for taking a stab at "you can't have it both ways."

If Mark wants a stable, intimate relationship, then he needs to put in the time and effort and trust that requires. If he wants to be a superhero, then he needs to accept how that will impact his time and maybe not get into a super committed relationship and make lots of promises about how things are gonna be different when nothing at all has changed.

That might be a little undercut by her taking Mark back at the ending, but there's a bigger issue going on there: she realized Mark himself was being lied to his entire life, so maybe he now knows how it feels even more than she does, and she can help him work through that.

Peelee

2021-10-08, 10:06 AM

No, I don't think that's the arc of Amber's character at all. It's not about whether she was manipulating Mark...it was about him not trusting her with his identity, but continuing to expect her support as he let her down and made really crappy, paper-thin excuses. And then when she dumps him, he reveals his identity and expects her to just welcome him back with open arms because you don't get it, I'm a good guy!

When superheroes reveal the reason for their terrible social behavior, and their partners instantly forgive them, that's the story saying it's good and proper to sacrifice your loved ones' trust for the sake of being a superhero. And maybe the story has a point when we're talking about individuals who literally save the world in their free time. But Invincible was about deconstructing superhero tropes, and I admire them for taking a stab at "you can't have it both ways."

If Mark wants a stable, intimate relationship, then he needs to put in the time and effort and trust that requires. If he wants to be a superhero, then he needs to accept how that will impact his time and maybe not get into a super committed relationship and make lots of promises about how things are gonna be different when nothing at all has changed.

That might be a little undercut by her taking Mark back at the ending, but there's a bigger issue going on there: she realized Mark himself was being lied to his entire life, so maybe he now knows how it feels even more than she does, and she can help him work through that.

Oh look something I agree wholeheartedly with.

I wanted to rbeut the whole "Amber is selfish/manipulative" thing but didn't know how to put it. Fortunately someone else did. And also, seriously, claims that Amber only helped the needy because she got a superiority kick out of it? I can't even fathom that. She is a great a ample of someone with Atom Eve's ideals but without superpowers.

Psyren

2021-10-08, 10:14 AM

He lost two character levels. In a world where limbs can be regrown in minutes, the loss of a level that might take decades to earn back, if you ever even do, is about as dire a mutilation as can be done to a player character. That's permanent removal of hit points, spell knowledge, class features, potentially feats - in short, a fundamental and profound weakening of mind, body, and capability for which there is no recourse from any amount of magic.

Sorry no, that's nonsense. Roy got his lost level back in much less time. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0990.html) Haley mentions that level-appropriate encounters will fall right into their laps. Your conclusions are not borne out by the narrative.

Dying is not painless.

Never said it was. Neither is adventuring.

Coming back from the dead is neither cheap nor likely, nor can it by any means get you all the way back to where you were before.

As noted by the revolving door and frequent miles program, for adventurers it's extremely likely.

But quite frankly, that's completely irrelevant anyway. Because even if all she had done was hit him upside the head with a stick, that would still be assault, and it would still be a completely inappropriate response to him simply saying something she didn't like, and his own mother telling him he deserved it to both of their faces would still be an absurd piece of victim-blaming that has no place in the mouth of a character we're supposed to consider a moral and sympathetic person, and she would still have faced no judgement in story of any kind by anyone of her handing her son to a vampire on a platter. You said yourself that what she did to Durkon was heinous, but where's the evidence in the story that anyone agrees? Literally the only comment in the text that anyone made about it was to support it.

Meanwhile, Miko's gods showed up to personally tell her what an idiotic putz she is, and Andi got told off by half her crew. If we're looking at other ally/antagonists who were less obstructive but also made clear errors in moral or practical judgement, we've got Shojo watching his city die, Haley's dad sitting miserably in a dungeon stewing in his own lonely paranoia, Eugene barred from paradise and forced to watch his son run around as a fighter. Karma Houdinis are vanishingly rare in OotS, making it all the more bizarre that Hilgya doesn't even get a slap on the wrist for her behavior.

Oh gosh, you mean Hilgya is a chaotic evil cleric of a chaotic evil god, and Miko is a paladin? Stop the presses! I had no idea!

And Andi got "told off", oh noes, how traumatizing.

danielxcutter

2021-10-08, 10:21 AM

hungrycrow

2021-10-08, 10:37 AM

No, I don't think that's the arc of Amber's character at all. It's not about whether she was manipulating Mark...it was about him not trusting her with his identity, but continuing to expect her support as he let her down and made really crappy, paper-thin excuses. And then when she dumps him, he reveals his identity and expects her to just welcome him back with open arms because you don't get it, I'm a good guy!

When superheroes reveal the reason for their terrible social behavior, and their partners instantly forgive them, that's the story saying it's good and proper to sacrifice your loved ones' trust for the sake of being a superhero. And maybe the story has a point when we're talking about individuals who literally save the world in their free time. But Invincible was about deconstructing superhero tropes, and I admire them for taking a stab at "you can't have it both ways."

If Mark wants a stable, intimate relationship, then he needs to put in the time and effort and trust that requires. If he wants to be a superhero, then he needs to accept how that will impact his time and maybe not get into a super committed relationship and make lots of promises about how things are gonna be different when nothing at all has changed.

That might be a little undercut by her taking Mark back at the ending, but there's a bigger issue going on there: she realized Mark himself was being lied to his entire life, so maybe he now knows how it feels even more than she does, and she can help him work through that.

At one point in the show Mark and Amber are attacked by a cyborg zombie. Mark is forced to run away and come back as Invincible to save his friends and a bunch of civilians. Afterwards, he claims to have run off to get the police, and Amber yells at him for abandoning them, even though she knew he was actually risking his life to save them the whole time.

Amber definitely doesn't owe Mark a relationship just because he fesses up; Mark needed to make a choice between a superhero and being a boyfriend, and should have realized he couldn't do both and be fair to Amber. However, the reveal that Amber knew Mark was a superhero means that she was also lying the whole time, and was pretending to be mad about things she knew Mark actually had no control over.

Ionathus

2021-10-08, 11:03 AM

At one point in the show Mark and Amber are attacked by a cyborg zombie. Mark is forced to run away and come back as Invincible to save his friends and a bunch of civilians. Afterwards, he claims to have run off to get the police, and Amber yells at him for abandoning them, even though she knew he was actually risking his life to save them the whole time.

Amber definitely doesn't owe Mark a relationship just because he fesses up; Mark needed to make a choice between a superhero and being a boyfriend, and should have realized he couldn't do both and be fair to Amber. However, the reveal that Amber knew Mark was a superhero means that she was also lying the whole time, and was pretending to be mad about things she knew Mark actually had no control over.

I'd debate whether or not "playing along to see if my romantic partner continues to lie to me" is actually lying in and of itself. It's really more of a secret test of character, and while it's not the approach I'd take I don't necessarily fault her for that. Numerous numbers of people have caught their partners in a relationship-ending lie with that exact tactic in real life.

Even though Amber knew what Mark was doing at the college attack, Mark didn't know that, and so she was criticizing him for -- as far as he knew -- abandoning his girlfriend in a life-or-death scenario and letting her think that he'd gotten lost or killed, all for the sake of maintaining his secret identity. He could've just told her, gotten her to safety, and immediately come back as Invincible. Again, it's about trust, and leaving your girlfriend alone in those circumstances for what felt like several minutes is a pretty neglectful move.

To bring it back to OotS: Mark thought he deserved the benefit of the doubt, but Amber wasn't willing to give it to him -- for pretty justifiable reasons, IMO. I think a similar situation is playing out here with the Order.

Squire Doodad

2021-10-08, 01:57 PM

For what it's worth, Hilgya does seem a lot less Evil than Xykon. Or heck, early-comic Belkar. That's not a high bar to clear, but for real, I'm still not 100% sure she's CE by the time of UD. If nothing else, having Kudzu seems to have had her mellow out a bit.

Personally I feel like she's still CE, but slowly making her way towards the Neutral line. She may be a bad person, but she sees things as being more of a zero-sum game than unbridled sadism like Xykon has. Kudzu is definitely giving her something to be not terrible for, and Sigdi is going to be a positive influence on her as time goes on. However, she still is kind of, well, not a very good person regardless.

Also, on the "Hilgya handed her son to a vampire" point someone else was making: she was being controlled by a high level vampire who happens to in the body of her child's father. It is not her fault that it either was not enough to trigger a saving throw (assuming same mechanics as with Than's domination in DStP), or that it was and she rolled badly.

Psyren

2021-10-08, 02:16 PM

Handing Kudzu to Durkon is clearly not against her nature. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1181.html) She's even the one to offer it.

Squire Doodad

2021-10-08, 02:19 PM

I always saw that as a cute reversal of the scene with Greg. It's very nice.

Liquor Box

2021-10-08, 04:56 PM

For what it's worth, Hilgya does seem a lot less Evil than Xykon. Or heck, early-comic Belkar. That's not a high bar to clear, but for real, I'm still not 100% sure she's CE by the time of UD. If nothing else, having Kudzu seems to have had her mellow out a bit.

I think Hilgya's evilness is probably comparable to Belkar's. Unless you give Belkar credit for being in a party working tirelessly to save the world.

Psyren

2021-10-08, 05:06 PM

I think Hilgya's evilness is probably comparable to Belkar's. Unless you give Belkar credit for being in a party working tirelessly to save the world.

I mean, by that metric she saved the world too. Twice if you count getting Durkon out of the first dungeon in one piece, since without him the Order would have died to the bandits.

Rynjin

2021-10-08, 05:19 PM

I'd debate whether or not "playing along to see if my romantic partner continues to lie to me" is actually lying in and of itself. It's really more of a secret test of character, and while it's not the approach I'd take I don't necessarily fault her for that. Numerous numbers of people have caught their partners in a relationship-ending lie with that exact tactic in real life.

Even though Amber knew what Mark was doing at the college attack, Mark didn't know that, and so she was criticizing him for -- as far as he knew -- abandoning his girlfriend in a life-or-death scenario and letting her think that he'd gotten lost or killed, all for the sake of maintaining his secret identity. He could've just told her, gotten her to safety, and immediately come back as Invincible. Again, it's about trust, and leaving your girlfriend alone in those circumstances for what felt like several minutes is a pretty neglectful move.

To bring it back to OotS: Mark thought he deserved the benefit of the doubt, but Amber wasn't willing to give it to him -- for pretty justifiable reasons, IMO. I think a similar situation is playing out here with the Order.

"Secret tests of character" like that are exactly what I mean by her being toxic. While Mark isn't completely blameless (yes he does lie to her repeatedly) his intentions ARE pure.

Amber's actions have the same whiff as someone who is overly defensive of their relationship and takes too much ownership of her relationship partner. The "stop texting my girlfriend or I'll kick your ass" guy or the stalker girlfriend who is constantly going through "her man's" texts and messaging accounts to see who he's talking to. As for her intentions...it's hard to tell. She doesn't actually have that much screentime in the grand scheme of things, and pretty much all we see her do is from a lens of being Mark's girlfriend. Which means her actions need to speak for themselves...and her actions are not good.

Even in a completely mundane relationship Mark and Amber would have problems, I'd think.

Jasdoif

2021-10-08, 05:38 PM

You said yourself that what she did to Durkon was heinous, but where's the evidence in the story that anyone agrees?First panel of 1151 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1151.html); Roy and Haley are saying it's messed up that they're just letting Hilgya follow them, but aren't going to start something unless she or Durkon want to start something. (Two comics later (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1153.html), Sigdi didn't even need to say it.)

Durkon's forgiveness exceeding Hilgya's deservedness is...the only reason I could come up with for how soft the "pushback" Hilgya got was.

georgie_leech

2021-10-08, 05:43 PM

First panel of 1151 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1151.html); Roy and Haley are saying it's messed up that they're just letting Hilgya follow them, but aren't going to start something unless she or Durkon want to start something. (Two comics later (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1153.html), Sigdi didn't even need to say it.)

Durkon's forgiveness exceeding Hilgya's deservedness is...the only reason I could come up with for how soft the "pushback" Hilgya got was.

You know, come to think of it, it kinda says something about Durkon that he can move past "they literally killed me" as a reason for violence. There's a character that doesn't use violence just because it's expedient.

danielxcutter

2021-10-08, 09:33 PM

I think the fact that Hilgya literally rezzed him right back softened the blow somewhat. So less murder and more battery I guess.

Peelee

2021-10-08, 09:37 PM

I think the fact that Hilgya literally rezzed him right back softened the blow somewhat. So less murder and more battery I guess.

Not how it works. Still murder. If I rob a bank and then give the money back, what I did doesn't get dropped down to trespassing.

danielxcutter

2021-10-08, 09:39 PM

Hurkyl

2021-10-08, 09:40 PM

Not how it works. Still murder. If I rob a bank and then give the money back, what I did doesn't get dropped down to trespassing.
If you prosecute fantasy murder with real life penal codes, sure. But the point is that the act of killing someone has highly relevant qualitative differences between the OotS setting and real life.

Peelee

2021-10-08, 09:44 PM

No, I mean one of the biggest reasons murder is such a heinous crime is that it can’t ever be reversed, unlike say, theft. It’s still a very crappy thing to do, don’t get me wrong, I’m just saying it’s marginally less of a big deal than killing him and leaving him for dead.

That doesn't make it not murder. Let's swap the analogy and say I stab you and then bandage you up and treat you. Or poison you, then make you drink ipecac. Just because I fix the damage doesn't mean I didn't do the damage to start with.

Emanick

2021-10-08, 09:57 PM

That doesn't make it not murder. Let's swap the analogy and say I stab you and then bandage you up and treat you. Or poison you, then make you drink ipecac. Just because I fix the damage doesn't mean I didn't do the damage to start with.

I actually think a serious assault in the real world is a pretty good equivalent to what Hilgya did to Durkon (counting both the murder and the resurrection; otherwise that changes the calculus). It was (presumably) highly painful and had lasting repercussions - he was weaker after it, maybe permanently, although, like with real-world assault victims, he might be able to fully recuperate with enough time and effort - time and effort he could otherwise have spent much more productively.

So yeah, I view what Hilgya did as morally on par with somebody seriously assaulting her ex-lover and putting him into the hospital. Because she resurrected him, a murder analogy really doesn't work, but the pain, risk of permanent disability, and injury that requires time and effort to fix maps relatively well onto the level loss D&D inflicts, IMO. (In terms of moral equivalence, that is. Not in terms of actual mechanics, obviously.)

danielxcutter

2021-10-08, 10:00 PM

That sounds about right, yeah. Really big deal, sure, just not quite equal to killing someone and leaving him there.

Psyren

2021-10-09, 12:53 AM

What she did was both evil and reproachful. Where I tap the brakes though is equating it to our world.

Liquor Box

2021-10-09, 01:55 AM

I mean, by that metric she saved the world too. Twice if you count getting Durkon out of the first dungeon in one piece, since without him the Order would have died to the bandits.

I'm not sure it's the right way to think about it. But if we were actually counting, Belkar has saved the world in that manner at least ten times that often.

Not how it works. Still murder. If I rob a bank and then give the money back, what I did doesn't get dropped down to trespassing.

If you gave it back without being caught it wouldn't downgrade the charge, but it would be a significant consideration in terms of sentencing.

I actually think a serious assault in the real world is a pretty good equivalent to what Hilgya did to Durkon (counting both the murder and the resurrection; otherwise that changes the calculus). It was (presumably) highly painful and had lasting repercussions - he was weaker after it, maybe permanently, although, like with real-world assault victims, he might be able to fully recuperate with enough time and effort - time and effort he could otherwise have spent much more productively.

So yeah, I view what Hilgya did as morally on par with somebody seriously assaulting her ex-lover and putting him into the hospital. Because she resurrected him, a murder analogy really doesn't work, but the pain, risk of permanent disability, and injury that requires time and effort to fix maps relatively well onto the level loss D&D inflicts, IMO. (In terms of moral equivalence, that is. Not in terms of actual mechanics, obviously.)

Agree with this

Sindeloke

2021-10-09, 02:16 AM

I actually think a serious assault in the real world is a pretty good equivalent to what Hilgya did to Durkon (counting both the murder and the resurrection; otherwise that changes the calculus). It was (presumably) highly painful and had lasting repercussions - he was weaker after it, maybe permanently, although, like with real-world assault victims, he might be able to fully recuperate with enough time and effort - time and effort he could otherwise have spent much more productively.

So yeah, I view what Hilgya did as morally on par with somebody seriously assaulting her ex-lover and putting him into the hospital. Because she resurrected him, a murder analogy really doesn't work, but the pain, risk of permanent disability, and injury that requires time and effort to fix maps relatively well onto the level loss D&D inflicts, IMO. (In terms of moral equivalence, that is. Not in terms of actual mechanics, obviously.)

Yeah, that's basically what I was aiming at.

You know, come to think of it, it kinda says something about Durkon that he can move past "they literally killed me" as a reason for violence. There's a character that doesn't use violence just because it's expedient.

The man takes that "good" entry on his alignment sheet just as seriously as he takes everything else.

KorvinStarmast

2021-10-09, 11:39 AM

Durkon's forgiveness exceeding Hilgya's deservedness is...the only reason I could come up with for how soft the "pushback" Hilgya got was. I suspect that is a message the author intended to pass on.

You know, come to think of it, it kinda says something about Durkon that he can move past "they literally killed me" as a reason for violence. There's a character that doesn't use violence just because it's expedient. Yeah.

What she did was both evil and reproachful. Where I tap the brakes though is equating it to our world. Yeah, digressions like that are a buzz kill.

Psyren

2021-10-09, 12:17 PM

I'm not sure it's the right way to think about it. But if we were actually counting, Belkar has saved the world in that manner at least ten times that often.

He's also committed ten times as many evil acts :smalltongue:

More importantly however, Belkar still has a permadeath coming soon. So if we're trying to compare their actions vs. whatever form of narrative comeuppance, he hasn't gotten his yet.

Durkon's forgiveness exceeding Hilgya's deservedness is...the only reason I could come up with for how soft the "pushback" Hilgya got was.

"Screw him and the general empathy for people he rode in on!" (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1115.html)

Honestly though, I'm not sure what other outcome people might have been expecting there. Jailtime? If all the other crap she's done didn't result in that, it's clear that the dwarves don't really care. An execution followed by the cool lounge upstairs in Valhalla, and Kudzu being passed off to Durkon's mom? What?

Hurkyl

2021-10-09, 12:32 PM

You know, come to think of it, it kinda says something about Durkon that he can move past "they literally killed me" as a reason for violence. There's a character that doesn't use violence just because it's expedient.
I don't think it's all Durkon. IIRC Dwarven society in OotS was portrayed as having a very different outlook on a lot of things. They don't get hung up on the same things we do, but do get hung up on an entirely different class of things altogether.

Jasdoif

2021-10-09, 01:13 PM

"Screw him and the general empathy for people he rode in on!" (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1115.html)Not "general" empathy....If Durkon doesn't want to take action against Hilgya for his own death, who are Roy and Haley to say it isn't Durkon's decision to make?

Honestly though, I'm not sure what other outcome people might have been expecting there. Jailtime? If all the other crap she's done didn't result in that, it's clear that the dwarves don't really care. An execution followed by the cool lounge upstairs in Valhalla, and Kudzu being passed off to Durkon's mom? What?Hilgya acknowledging that dragging Kudzu along into a room full of vampires for her vengeance quest might not have been the best thing for his well-being would probably have worked.

Durkon was raised and killed in the same strip (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1149.html), so I accept that as a comedy attempt that just didn't work for me; but it wasn't the only instance of stuff like this in the book and I can certainly understand why "Kudzu could have died" doesn't look as emphatic as "Durkon did die".

Psyren

2021-10-09, 01:51 PM

I don't think it's all Durkon. IIRC Dwarven society in OotS was portrayed as having a very different outlook on a lot of things. They don't get hung up on the same things we do, but do get hung up on an entirely different class of things altogether.

This. We even have one openly saying he was going to murder his friend (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1166.html) to get him over the line.

Hilgya acknowledging that dragging Kudzu along into a room full of vampires for her vengeance quest might not have been the best thing for his well-being would probably have worked.

"I'm a powerful cleric with a ton of high-level abjuration spells. He's safest right here with me, where I can keep an eye on him." (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1107.html)

Sure those buffs got dispelled, but she's not the first high-level cleric to have that particular blind spot. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0906.html)

Jasdoif

2021-10-09, 02:05 PM

....but she's not the first high-level cleric to have that particular blind spot. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0906.html)And that is supposed to mean...what, exactly?

Psyren

2021-10-09, 02:07 PM

And that is supposed to mean...what, exactly?

That she got cocky and made a mistake, like Malack did.

Darth Paul

2021-10-09, 02:07 PM

I realize I haven't looked in for a while, and there are a lot of pages I haven't read, but.... Didn't this thread start out as being about Serini? :smallconfused:

Jasdoif

2021-10-09, 02:27 PM

That she got cocky and made a mistake, like Malack did.Indeed she did, which is why acknowledging that she had made the mistake would mean anything. (Kudzu dying for Hilgya's mistake, the way Malack did for his own, would be too dark for my own tastes and the comic's general tone...which is why that wasn't really an "expected" outcome)

RatElemental

2021-10-09, 02:34 PM

Indeed she did, which is why acknowledging that she had made the mistake would mean anything. (Kudzu dying for Hilgya's mistake, the way Malack did for his own, would be too dark for my own tastes and the comic's general tone...which is why that wasn't really an "expected" outcome)

Kudzu did briefly get used as a shield by Greg, and seemed to be rather unhappy about the whole thing, so I guess that's something. I don't recall Hilgya getting called out for that after the fact, though.

Psyren

2021-10-09, 02:57 PM

Indeed she did, which is why acknowledging that she had made the mistake would mean anything. (Kudzu dying for Hilgya's mistake, the way Malack did for his own, would be too dark for my own tastes and the comic's general tone...which is why that wasn't really an "expected" outcome)

Acknowledging how though? If she were to do that entire scene all over again, she most likely still wouldn't have chosen to leave Kudzu with a bunch of Thor worshippers. And in Loki's eyes, she might have been seen as correct to take that risk, even if it put her kid on the line.

In other words, if she felt she made the right decision regardless, acknowledging it doesn't do anything narratively speaking.

Jasdoif

2021-10-09, 03:15 PM

In other words, if she felt she made the right decision regardless, acknowledging it doesn't do anything narratively speaking.Conversely, acknowledging it would narratively imply she didn't feel she made the right decision.

...I could attempt to make some belabored point about how every sentence in your post except the first contains a qualifier like "most likely", "might have", and "if"; but really, I'm talking to the expectations I had while the strips were coming out, so naturally they'd establish things in the coming strips rather than simply reinforce what was already there...so what would be the point in arguing uncertainty vs guessing? (And a rational discussion between Durkon and Hilgya about Kudzu did happen eventually (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1181.html), so guess I wasn't horrifically off the mark....)

Psyren

2021-10-09, 03:32 PM

I'm still not seeing a "how." Is there something specific that didn't happen regarding the resolution to the Hilgya arc that you wanted to see happen? If so, what might that be? And if not, then I think we're on the same page. Broad terms like "acknowledging" don't tell me anything substantive.

And to bring this back to Serini (*waves at Darth Paul*), all I was saying was that the Giant so far has a good track record of wrapping up antagonist* arcs in a way that I personally find satisfying, and I expect that to be the case with her as well. (At least, that was my personal on-ramp to this tangent.)

Please note that I'm not calling Serini a villain or evil here, just currently antagonistic to the Order.

Jasdoif

2021-10-09, 03:57 PM

I'm still not seeing a "how." Is there something specific that didn't happen regarding the resolution to the Hilgya arc that you wanted to see happen? If so, what might that be? And if not, then I think we're on the same page. Broad terms like "acknowledging" don't tell me anything substantive.Well....Hilgya saying to Durkon that bringing Kudzu along into a room she knew would be filled with vampires was not a great idea. Probably in response to Durkon saying he was just glad that none of the vampires, "himself" included, felt like hitting her and their son with a spell out of spite. At which point it looks less like "expectation" and more like "how I'd do it if I wrote it". And I'm still reading this comic because I trust the Giant to be able to expertly showcase stuff I haven't thought of in ways I would struggle to emulate. Including the Giant's ability to get stuff across without necessarily using lots of dialog, which is why I chose "acknowledging" instead of "saying" earlier.

Psyren

2021-10-09, 04:15 PM

Well....Hilgya saying to Durkon that bringing Kudzu along into a room she knew would be filled with vampires was not a great idea. Probably in response to Durkon saying he was just glad that none of the vampires, "himself" included, felt like hitting her and their son with a spell out of spite. At which point it looks less like "expectation" and more like "how I'd do it if I wrote it". And I'm still reading this comic because I trust the Giant to be able to expertly showcase stuff I haven't thought of in ways I would struggle to emulate. Including the Giant's ability to get stuff across without necessarily using lots of dialog, which is why I chose "acknowledging" instead of "saying" earlier.

Thanks, I understand where you're coming from a little better now.

To your own point though, Durkon saying that (even if he actually believes she shouldn't have done that*) would just get smacked down with a cutting rejoinder from Hlgya anyway (e.g. something like "oh now you care about us?"), and nothing would change. I view that as a waste of panel space personally.

*As mentioned above, dwarf culture is weird, so I think expecting Durkon to upbraid her for taking their child into danger is a bit of a leap. And being a cleric of Loki seems to add yet another layer of weirdness on top of that - would leaving her son with Thorites be enough for her to fall? Probably not, but Loki almost certainly looked favorably on her enduring spite towards them even if that attitude put Kudzu in more danger.)