OOTS #1256 - The Discussion Thread

[The Giant]

New comic is up.

[thorr-kan]

Go, Belkar!

[Pablo360]

Belkar continues to be MVP. Character development is more powerful than any class feature.

Except Action Surge, of course.

[Neponde]

Eleven puppy dog eyes.. Hah!

[RMS Oceanic]

Diplomacy works!

[hamishspence]

Hilarious punchline in the final panel.

[link3710]

And hopefully this puts an end to all the debates about Serini's motivations. While I wouldn't say she was exactly correct, the lack of even factoring in the gods makes perfect sense for her.

[RMS Oceanic]

And hopefully this puts an end to all the debates about Serini's motivations. While I wouldn't say she was exactly correct, the lack of even factoring in the gods makes perfect sense for her.

I did like her probing Roy's limits of what the right thing to do would be.

[dancrilis]

Belkar is the hero that the world needs.

Seperately nice to get insight into if Roy would possibly help Xykon if pushed.

[Shining Wrath]

There may be those who would shame you for failing to resist 11 puppy dog eyes, but I stand not among them.

O Chul is hilarious when he wants to be.

Also, score one for Belkar realizing what sort of arguments would sway a bitter old halfling rogue. Which had the advantage of being true. The gods really do more or less view mortals as a food source.

The Elan / Sunny friendship is amazing and I wish to see more of it. Also, I want to see an extended dialogue between Sunny and Greyview. The amount of "You can't seriously believe that!' would be epic, in both directions.

[Schroeswald]

Enjoy Belkar being the one to convince Serini mostly, he gets her after all.

[Kareeah_Indaga]

“Every part of this is hideously complicated.” :smallbiggrin: Best line! Though the one about eleven puppy eyes comes close.

[littlebum2002]

The new art style is worth it just for Sunny's teeth. They wouldn't have looked nearly as cool in the old style.

[3SecondCultist]

I did not think it would be so easy to make an [eye-creature-trademarked] look so... well, adorable. Kudos.

[mjasghar]

Thanks Rich

[vonBoomslang]

Psst, if you're wondering about the squiggly part - one of the Twelve Gods is Snake.

[Psyren]

Shh, no one tell her that the gods WERE willing to negotiate with the Dark One until he blocked everybody.

[locksmith of lo]

ah, now that was worth the wait! :smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin:

[Toper]

Aw, so heartwarming! A very talky strip, and it totally works.

[danielxcutter]

Y’know I actually kinda expected Belkar to be the MVP here. He’s always been good at putting it in a way that cuts through all the surrounding stuff.

Also, I am not surprised one bit that Elan is getting along with Sunny well, and I don’t think I’m the only one.

[Peelee]

I did like her probing Roy's limits of what the right thing to do would be.
Seconded. I also like how l he's figured out that just being straight with people tends to yield good results.

Enjoy Belkar being the one to convince Serini mostly, he gets her after all.
He gets her!

Shh, no one tell her that the gods WERE willing to negotiate with the Dark One until he blocked everybody.
Well, some gods.

[farothel]

Eleven puppy dog eyes.. Hah!

Am I the only one that actually counted them to see if it was in fact 11?

[Coyote0715]

Belkar saves the day!

[mjasghar]

Haley doesn’t seem to happy about Elan spending so much time with Sunny though.

[Zhorn]

Belkar being the one to talk some sense into them... Yup, that works for me. Out of everyone in the party, his world view would be the closest.

Also Elan and Sunny, that's the optimistic buddy dynamic I'm here for :smallsmile:

[Rilmani]

Belkar did a thing! And it helped! Neat. Now let’s dig through all of these magical items our new ally is nice enough to share.

[Quizatzhaderac]

Great chaotic empathy check by Belkar there.

I almost missed Lien's "Jump the shark" reference.

Given the setting, I'd have additional questions about Sunny's "Cool dead bug". Bug sized or creature sized? Dead or "dead"? Does it have ice properties? "Bug" as in an arthropod or as in bugbear/bugaboo/bogeyman?

[Primeone]

Love the puppy dog eyes :)

[SavageWombat]

I knew Belkar would be the one to get through to her.

[dmc91356]

Belkar's argument is remarkably like some philosophy my daughter is reading about in school. He's deeper than we think . . .

[Duiker]

Am I the only one that actually counted them to see if it was in fact 11?

You were not. I actually counted them like... 3 times because my brain hasn't woken up and I kept not being sure I got it right.

[danielxcutter]

You were not. I actually counted them like... 3 times because my brain hasn't woken up and I kept not being sure I got it right.

9 of Sunny’s, 2 of Elan’s.

[chy03001]

Aw... Elan's new friendship warms my heart :-)

[Fyraltari]

Of course the Chaotic types would bound over distrusting the highest possible authority. Gotta love Lien's attempts to defend her gods' good standing though. I also wish we could see Durkon's face when Roy says his opinion of the gods is getting lower and lower.


And hopefully this puts an end to all the debates about Serini's motivations. While I wouldn't say she was exactly correct, the lack of even factoring in the gods makes perfect sense for her.

I dunno, I'm not a fan of "this character conveniently forgot this important piece of information they know." Then again it's not exactly clear how speculative the Scribblers' understanding of the gods' intention was. Did they even know about the Godsmoot?

[Sybarith]

I dunno, I'm not a fan of "this character conveniently forgot this important piece of information they know." Then again it's not exactly clear how speculative the Scribblers' understanding of the gods' intention was. Did they even know about the Godsmoot?

As she said herself, Serini hasn't had a Druid in the party for some time. Besides, no characters but the villains were even considering what the Gods would do until the dangling Godsmoot plot smacked them in the face, so it's not just her.

[danielxcutter]

Well, considering that not having the gods blow the world up was part of the Scribblers’ motivation…

That being said she did mention she’s mad at herself for forgetting about it, so yeah.

[Breccia]

"It's been a long time since I used to hang out with a druid."

Aww :(

[Gwynfrid]

Such a superb strip, the characterization is just perfect. And hilarious too, of course!

[neriractor]

Got a little typo on the first speech bubble, 4th panel of page 2 says "when was I working the angles" instead of "when I was working the angles", love the fact that Belkar is the one to convince her.

[Frozenstep]

Once again, sometimes it takes a Belkar to deliver the hard-hitting line needed. Love these moments.

[Kapeji]

Ha, Elan makes Puppy eyes with just his eyebrows alone, a master! :D

[hroþila]

I loved Lien's line in the last panel.

[Psyren]

As she said herself, Serini hasn't had a Druid in the party for some time. Besides, no characters but the villains were even considering what the Gods would do until the dangling Godsmoot plot smacked them in the face, so it's not just her.

It's not that massive a leap to conclude that the party with a high-level cleric in it might have a divine mandate of some kind. Especially when the Order literally told her they do. But at least she acknowledged she was wrong to not have thought of that herself.

[Jaziggy]

My kingdom for a puppy-dog-eye beholder t-shirt.


New comic is up.

[Nehoyminoynoy]

The “I’m sure your gods will wring their hands” bit has to be a reference to Soon’s role in Kraagor’s death, right?

[Peelee]

The “I’m sure your gods will wring their hands” bit has to be a reference to Soon’s role in Kraagor’s death, right?

I just pegged it as pretending to care while not really caring very much. Not alluding to any specific incident, just a generalization.

[danielxcutter]

My kingdom for a puppy-dog-eye beholder t-shirt.

Or a Sunny plushie.

[gatemansgc]

the jump the shark reference was PERFECT.

[drazen]

Would Roy concede something to Xykon if it fixed the problem?

Looks like my "Xykon supplants Hel" theory has some juice. Or at least a wink and a nod.

[Tundar]

Eleven puppy dog eyes.. Hah!

Yep, that's a force not to be ignored.
Oh how I love this comic!

And Belkar, you wise little bastard. Go for it!

[enq]

Or a Sunny plushie.

I felt an immediate urge to demand a puppy eyes Sunny emoji here.

[Wraithfighter]

I loved Lien's line in the last panel.

I love all of Lien's lines in this, she's kinda been my favorite non-party character for a while now :D.

[Fyraltari]

Would Roy concede something to Xykon if it fixed the problem?

Looks like my "Xykon supplants Hel" theory has some juice. Or at least a wink and a nod.

What problem would that solve?

[pendell]

Well worth the wait!


Knock me over with a feather, but of all people it's Belkar who brings the diplomacy home. But really, it makes sense. He's a cynical CE halfling, the other is a cynical CG halfing with an equally dismal view of the "good guys". If there wasn't such an age gap they might just make an item, they hit it off so well.

...

Then again, maybe that can be a sequel comic when our halfling friends go on a crime spree.

Puppy dog eyes from Sunny for the win! Elan and Sunny happy together! I'm delighted to see them getting along, and our characters have formed an alliance! Yay!

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Psyren]

Would Roy concede something to Xykon if it fixed the problem?

Looks like my "Xykon supplants Hel" theory has some juice. Or at least a wink and a nod.

The story rewarding Xykon for being an unrepetant/unmitigated {{redacted}} doesn't feel like the best resolution to me.

[vonBoomslang]

Well, considering that not having the gods blow the world up was part of the Scribblers’ motivation…

That being said she did mention she’s mad at herself for forgetting about it, so yeah.

The scribblers were in it to stop the snarl, I don't think they had any idea divine M.A.D. was on the table.

[Sybarith]

What problem would that solve?

Overpopulation. :smallcool:

[WindStruck]

I just pegged it as pretending to care while not really caring very much. Not alluding to any specific incident, just a generalization.

Also of note, the old expression: "Actions speak louder than words."

[brionl]

So, are we *sure* his name is Sunny, and not "Floaty Elan"?

[Peelee]

Knock me over with a feather, but of all people it's Belkar who brings the diplomacy home. But really, it makes sense. He's a cynical CE halfling, the other is a cynical CG halfing with an equally dismal view of the "good guys".
Eh, I'd peg Serini as CN at best.

Also of note, the old expression: "Actions speak louder than words."

Aye.

[Snails]

As she said herself, Serini hasn't had a Druid in the party for some time. Besides, no characters but the villains were even considering what the Gods would do until the dangling Godsmoot plot smacked them in the face, so it's not just her.

The Scribblers as a group completely succeeded at their initial goal. The aftermath where someone might figure out the Gates themselves might be used as a weapon was given barely any thought. Yes, they figured out this possibility but I think it is fair to say they did not have a plan or consider the larger ramifications at all.

Heck, they apparently knew a Gate could be weaponized, but they may not have realized that this could actually be used to kill a god. The gods live Out There and the Gates wrap Rifts in the fabric of This World Here. Whether they did or did not recognize this specific possibility is speculation.

[Morgaln]

Sunny meeting the MitD will be gold. I wouldn't be surprised if the two ended up as long-term friends in the end.

[Joebob]

Eh, I'd peg Serini as CN at best.

oh no, here we go again...

[KorvinStarmast]

Shh, no one tell her that the gods WERE willing to negotiate with the Dark One until he blocked everybody. Ninja'd.

I almost missed Lien's "Jump the shark" reference. :smallbiggrin: One of the best lines in the strip.

Sunny meeting the MitD will be gold. I wouldn't be surprised if the two ended up as long-term friends in the end. It might get overly cute, though.

Strip assessment:
1. Belkar returns to his Truth Teller role: he's been doing that since way early in OoTS.
2. Lien: shark jump reference nicely slipped in.
3. O-Chul's eleven puppy dog eyes line was perfect.
4. Expression on Lien's face as regards "Yes, we're all friend now" was nicely presented.

The rest of it was like eating popcorn rather than a meal, given the inevitability of the need to get Serini on their side.

I had yet another Talkie man talkie too much :thog: flashback.

[137beth]

Oh Nine Hells yes, Belkar is helping in a way that doesn't involve fighting!

[elros]

Sunny meeting the MitD will be gold. I wouldn't be surprised if the two ended up as long-term friends in the end.
I would wager on that outcome happening.

Also impressive role playing and use of charisma-based skills by all of the parties involved. Sunny gets extra points for making a paladin change her mind :smallwink:

[Wowlock]

Well, you need a halfling to convince halfling I guess.
And yes, one thing you can count on about the gods, they will self-preserve first and foremost.

[StragaSevera]

What I loved most in this strip was a subtle probe of Roy by Serini - asking about "what if the best way to solve the situation involves helping Xykon". It is a nice way of testing him - is he on a vengeance quest? Can he be trusted to make judgements, or will he warp truth to fit his point of view?

[Fyraltari]

What I loved most in this strip was a subtle probe of Roy by Serini - asking about "what if the best way to solve the situation involves helping Xykon". It is a nice way of testing him - is he on a vengeance quest? Can he be trusted to make judgements, or will he warp truth to fit his point of view?

And don't forget: "will he lie to me about it?"

[Ronfar]

What's the DC for a will save against puppy dog eyes?

[Jason]

Serini really needs to work on her "never trust a lawful good person" issue. It's understandable given her past, but it has almost resulted in the world being destroyed. Good thing Belkar and Haylee are here.

[KorvinStarmast]

Serini really needs to work on her "never trust a lawful good person" issue. It's understandable given her past, Hardly, but I'd offer that it is more understandable given that she was sweet on Girard and his issues with LG was nearly a mania. It seems to have rubbed off on her.

[Ruck]

Would Roy concede something to Xykon if it fixed the problem?

Looks like my "Xykon supplants Hel" theory has some juice. Or at least a wink and a nod.


What problem would that solve?

And how would that even work?

----

Anyway, very satisfying strip. I tried to find somewhere I may have mentioned that Belkar would be the one to-- or at least play a major part to-- convince Serini, but I couldn't find anything with a search. (And I very much doubt I was the only one.) And it may have just been a hypothetical "I'd like to see that" imagined conversation rather than a prediction. Anyway, again, very satisfying, and vindicating, and I get the sense we're close to wrapping up this chapter so I'm excited to see what comes next.

[Jacky720]

Is it just me, or does Belkar crane his head forward the littlest amount in panels 5 and 11? It feels like a really subtle change having a big impact on his expressivity.

And when was the last time he smiled like in page 2, panel 6? It looks good on him.

[TheNecrocomicon]

Hallelujah, there's nothing like previously resolutely obstinate characters finally actually coming around to seeing some genuine sense.

Roy and Durkon should frankly never be in charge of any diplomatic efforts again unless there are no other choices available. Leave that to Belkar, Haley and Elan whenever possible.

So now that this one tentative ray of cooperative hope has been cast into the situation, what fresh horrors await in a couple of strips? I wonder.

[arimareiji]

Too much to love about this comic. Great job, Giant. :smallbiggrin:<3

Not sure (there really is too much) but if I had to pick, my favorite aspect would be Belkar as the realist diplomat and Lien as his foil.


Great chaotic empathy check by Belkar there.

I almost missed Lien's "Jump the shark" reference.

Given the setting, I'd have additional questions about Sunny's "Cool dead bug". Bug sized or creature sized? Dead or "dead"? Does it have ice properties? "Bug" as in an arthropod or as in bugbear/bugaboo/bogeyman?

Thank you, I did miss it and that would have been a shame. (^_^)b

I'm going with "an ankheg that's now literally stoned".
(Now I'm imagining Sunny as Frank N. Furter, with Elan as Magenta and Columbia comforting him: "It just took a small accident... an accident!")

[Edreyn]

Some time ago, I posted an idea that heroes will have to defeat not only Team Evil, but also gods themselves. In this strip, Roy admits that he wants to protect the world from gods aswell. So, who knows, maybe my idea was right. Mortals can't actually cause damage to gods, but maybe they will somehow, with help/use of Snarl for example, render them uncapable to impact the world, or maybe force them to leave it alone.

After all they can't be sure that gods won't erase everything even if Snarl is defeated, just in case. And if the author will use the not so rare idea, to make the plot turn upside down in the almost end, and the Snarl will be revealed as a good guy or at least his struggle with gods will be revealed as "turf war" with no good guys at all, protagonists will want to achieve true freedom.

[hungrycrow]

Some time ago, I posted an idea that heroes will have to defeat not only Team Evil, but also gods themselves. In this strip, Roy admits that he wants to protect the world from gods aswell. So, who knows, maybe my idea was right. Mortals can't actually cause damage to gods, but maybe they will somehow, with help/use of Snarl for example, render them uncapable to impact the world, or maybe force them to leave it alone.

After all they can't be sure that gods won't erase everything even if Snarl is defeated, just in case. And if the author will use the not so rare idea, to make the plot turn upside down in the almost end, and the Snarl will be revealed as a good guy or at least his struggle with gods will be revealed as "turf war" with no good guys at all, protagonists will want to achieve true freedom.

What would be the point of that? The Gods already refrain from interfering in the material world outside of empowering mortals. That's even an obstacle to the heroes, since they can't get the Gods to offer anything that could placate TDO. The only threat they pose is potentially destroying the world, which they wouldn't want to do if the Order actually manages to save the day.

[Psyren]

Well, you need a halfling to convince halfling I guess.

More like you need a crook to convince a crook. Or a cynic to convince a cynic.

(I will say however that this exchange is a great example of how being aware of and properly appealing to a NPC's Ideals, Bonds and Flaws trumps natural charisma.)


And yes, one thing you can count on about the gods, they will self-preserve first and foremost.

Considering that they literally can't even go talk to the DO if he doesn't want them to without making Snarl 2.0, I'm inclined to be just a bit more charitable toward them than she and Belkar are being. It's not as black and white as saying the gods are inherently selfish; Thor is doing the best he can within their byzantine rules to safely effect change, because the cost of breaking those rules is far too high, especially now.

[Quizatzhaderac]

Some time ago, I posted an idea that heroes will have to defeat not only Team Evil, but also gods themselves.#388 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0388.html) aside, this is not final fantasy.

In this strip, Roy admits that he wants to protect the world from gods aswell. So, who knows, maybe my idea was right. Mortals can't actually cause damage to gods, but maybe they will somehow, with help/use of Snarl for example, render them uncapable to impact the world, or maybe force them to leave it alone.In 3.5e gods can be fought. I forget the exact rules, and they tend to have stats and abilities well into the epic, but they are technically fightable.


And if the author will use the not so rare idea, to make the plot turn upside down in the almost end, and the Snarl will be revealed as a good guy or at least his struggle with gods will be revealed as "turf war" with no good guys at all, protagonists will want to achieve true freedom.My understanding (and I believe there are qoutes from the giant to support this) is that the snarl isn't a character, it's a macguffin.

Also, if you're going to turn a story upside down at the end, it should look better upside down. Like a good murder mystery may surprise you at the very end, but you'll agree that the final understanding of events is logical, more-so even that presumptions before the big reveal.

Given the themes, I really don't see this story looking better upside down.

[KorvinStarmast]

render them uncapable to impact the world, or maybe force them to leave it alone. Baby out with the bathwater noted. That doesn't solve anything, the world is still close to being eaten by the snarl. Thor isn't lying about that based on the extended encounter Durkon and Minrah had with Thor in the afterlife.

More like you need a crook to convince a crook. Or a cynic to convince a cynic. Or a jerk to speak in a jerk's language.


It's not as black and white as saying the gods are inherently selfish; Thor is doing the best he can within their byzantine rules to safely effect change, because the cost of breaking those rules is far too high, especially now. And not just for the gods.

[Jaecp]

Some time ago, I posted an idea that heroes will have to defeat not only Team Evil, but also gods themselves. In this strip, Roy admits that he wants to protect the world from gods aswell. So, who knows, maybe my idea was right. Mortals can't actually cause damage to gods, but maybe they will somehow, with help/use of Snarl for example, render them uncapable to impact the world, or maybe force them to leave it alone.

After all they can't be sure that gods won't erase everything even if Snarl is defeated, just in case. And if the author will use the not so rare idea, to make the plot turn upside down in the almost end, and the Snarl will be revealed as a good guy or at least his struggle with gods will be revealed as "turf war" with no good guys at all, protagonists will want to achieve true freedom.

Sounds like Babylon 5

The real question for me is if the Greek coded gods exist still on that planet inside the snarl or if thats the "real world"

[Fyraltari]

Sounds like Babylon 5

The real question for me is if the Greek coded gods exist still on that planet inside the snarl or if thats the "real world"

Thr Giant is on the record saying that Earth isn't the planet in the Rift and that it (Earth) will never feature in the comic.

No word on Zeus's clan, though.

[Hiro Quester]

Sunny meeting the MitD will be gold. I wouldn't be surprised if the two ended up as long-term friends in the end.

I would pay to watch that spinoff series

[Sargraz]

Great page

I really hope (but doubt) that Eugene can watch them right now. His reaction to Roys answer would be interesting

[Matt620]

I don't know how I feel about this one. It feels more like a "bash the gods" moment more than anything else.

[Ruck]

a cynic to convince a cynic.

I think that's what it is. Serini is cynical about the Order's chances and their confidence in their ability not to screw this up, and-- funnily enough, in a parallel to Redcloak-- finds it rather convenient that their argument about what the gods will do just happens to line up with their pre-existing goals. It takes Belkar-- not just a fellow halfling but someone nobody would mistake as having the best of intentions-- to lay it out in terms of the gods' own motivations, which is something Serini, being also cynical about authority and power, readily understands.

[P. G. Macer]

That was amazing! I really enjoyed Roy’s “Actually, it’s hideously complicated” line, and of course Elan an Sunny’s tag-team puppy eyes was both adorable and hilarious!

Of course it’d be Belkar who is the one to break through! It’s so obvious in hindsight, but I still didn’t see it coming before now.

[Lord Torath]

Got a little typo on the first speech bubble, 4th panel of page 2 says "when was I working the angles" instead of "when I was working the angles", love the fact that Belkar is the one to convince her.I had to read your post about 5 times before I saw what was different between your two quotes. :smallredface:


What's the DC for a will save against puppy dog eyes?Maybe about 5 per eye? Against 11 eyes, that's a DC 55 will save.


Looks like my "Xykon supplants Hel" theory has some juice. Or at least a wink and a nod.
What problem would that solve?
And how would that even work?Don't get him started. Just go get some tissues for all the epileptic trees (https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1993/06/15).

[Fyraltari]

I don't know how I feel about this one. It feels more like a "bash the gods" moment more than anything else.

I mean, given the way they voted, can you say they don't deserve it?

[Edward15]

Yeah, I have a feeling that if anything happens to Serini, Elan is going to have his own familiar.

Btw, is it just me, or did Serini's question regarding Xykon sound a bit suspicious?

[Seramus]

Am I the only one that actually counted them to see if it was in fact 11?I love that it was also a joke about how many eyes a trademark beholder actually has. :D

[hungrycrow]

I mean, given the way they voted, can you say they don't deserve it?

They were split, and I imagine some of the destroy the world votes might have been trying to avoid mortal souls getting annihilated by the Snarl.

Though I can see how that reasoning wouldn't be particularly compelling to Roy and the others.

[pearl jam]

And hopefully this puts an end to all the debates about Serini's motivations. While I wouldn't say she was exactly correct, the lack of even factoring in the gods makes perfect sense for her.

I dunno, I'm not a fan of "this character conveniently forgot this important piece of information they know." Then again it's not exactly clear how speculative the Scribblers' understanding of the gods' intention was. Did they even know about the Godsmoot?

People forget things all the time, even important things they would not want to forget. Aging can increase this and certain diseases can do so devastatingly. Also, I don't think it's accurate to say that Serini forgetting this information was "convenient" in story terms because forgetting was not the solution to a dilemma, but rather a factor in the cause. Additionally the reasons given for her forgetting to include the gods in her calculus seem reasonable and we could even possibly add on the trauma of facing Xykon again as another possible reason that could have clouded her thinking in a way that allowed her to forget to consider what the gods might do.

[Mad Humanist]

Sunny meeting the MitD will be gold. I wouldn't be surprised if the two ended up as long-term friends in the end.

I think it is quite likely that Sunny knows the MitD already from his time in Dorukan's dungeon. Maybe Serini had various ways of keeping tabs on the gates and sending Sunny there to look for work was probably one. So we might get a Sunny/MitD flashback.

[KorvinStarmast]

Yeah, I have a feeling that if anything happens to Seirini, Elan is going to have his own familiar.

Btw, is it just me, or did Seirini's question regarding Xykon sound a bit suspicious? Serini (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1249.html). Serini Toormuck.

[woweedd]

Belkar...BELKAR, Mr. Wisdom of a coffee table, just successfully empathized with another person and then phrased a compelling argument about his viewpoint using his understanding. And he didn't even do it on purpose, it was just them connecting through natural Chaotic cynicism. I...What the...WHAT?

[Lvl45DM!]

While Belkar and Haley did well, I can't help but feel that the most decisive factor in Serini changing her mind was having a Paladin to yell at. Lien coming in put her back up and she starts agreeing with the Order without even thinking about it.

[Crimsonmantle]

Haley doesn’t seem to happy about Elan spending so much time with Sunny though.

She looks downright jealous. My mind is going off on a number of tangents there.

[Baelzar]

Is "Adorbeholder" copyrighted?

[Schroeswald]

One fun thing I noticed was that Lien doesn’t actually know Belkar’s name. That makes sense because they’ve only incidentally met before today.

[brionl]

Yeah, I have a feeling that if anything happens to Serini, Elan is going to have his own familiar.

Btw, is it just me, or did Serini's question regarding Xykon sound a bit suspicious?

Cohort, not familiar.

[t209]

I love the beholder with cute little eyes.
For some reason, I am starting to see Bob from YAFGC vibe here.

[Thermophille]

Serini's comment about letting Xykon live brought back a theory I saw discussed a while ago: The order could literally tell Xykon that Redcloak plans to give the Gate to the Dark One, that there was never a way to control the Snarl, and that the gods are a hairs breath away from hitting the Big Red Button. He probably wouldn't believe it at first, but he has plenty of reason to be suspicious of Redcloak, and creating that rift in Team Evil might quickly dissolve their ability to accomplish anything.

Of course, it might damage their ability to negotiate with Redcloak, but that's better than being steamrolled by approximately 10 butt-tons of epic lich sorcerer.

[ben-zayb]

Oh, I always love seeing Belkar's unfiltered speech knocking some sense back into people. Did he take a feat that added his attack roll and/or damage roll to his diplomacy checks or something?

[Thermophille]

Oh, I always love seeing Belkar's unfiltered speech knocking some sense back into people. Did he take a feat that added his attack roll and/or damage roll to his diplomacy checks or something?

No, he gets to make an attack roll against bull****.

[NoHaxJustPi]

Serini's comment about letting Xykon live brought back a theory I saw discussed a while ago: The order could literally tell Xykon that Redcloak plans to give the Gate to the Dark One, that there was never a way to control the Snarl, and that the gods are a hairs breath away from hitting the Big Red Button. He probably wouldn't believe it at first, but he has plenty of reason to be suspicious of Redcloak, and creating that rift in Team Evil might quickly dissolve their ability to accomplish anything.

Of course, it might damage their ability to negotiate with Redcloak, but that's better than being steamrolled by approximately 10 butt-tons of epic lich sorcerer.

"Damage their ability to negotiate"?
I suppose negotiating with a stain on the floor would​ be rather difficult.

[No good @ names]

Serini's comment about letting Xykon live brought back a theory I saw discussed a while ago: The order could literally tell Xykon that Redcloak plans to give the Gate to the Dark One, that there was never a way to control the Snarl, and that the gods are a hairs breath away from hitting the Big Red Button. He probably wouldn't believe it at first, but he has plenty of reason to be suspicious of Redcloak, and creating that rift in Team Evil might quickly dissolve their ability to accomplish anything.

Of course, it might damage their ability to negotiate with Redcloak, but that's better than being steamrolled by approximately 10 butt-tons of epic lich sorcerer.

Don’t need to mention the Gods and big red button. Just got to split Xykon from Redcloak. Got two rogues now, shouldn’t be too hard. Like you said he’s already suspicious of Redcloak, (feigned) betrayal would be enough. Xykon’s shown in the Throne room to (belatedly) retreat if he’s at risk of losing. Particularly if he gets suspicious about his phylactery/Astral Fortress.

He of course sets MitD on Redcloak, and then O’Chul outpaladins every paladin ever and tries to stop Monster-san from eating Redcloak. Redcloak is amazed that an Azure City Paladin would save him, as he was with the hobgoblin saving him from the catapult boulder. Monster-san upset about killing his only friend is enough to break the spell, as with Thanh with pretend Shojo.

Redcloak has now lost his arcane caster for the plan and developed some sympathy for the cause.

[Michaeler]

Belkar...BELKAR, Mr. Wisdom of a coffee table, just successfully empathized with another person and then phrased a compelling argument about his viewpoint using his understanding. And he didn't even do it on purpose, it was just them connecting through natural Chaotic cynicism. I...What the...WHAT?

I think it probably was deliberate. It parallels what Roy tried to drunkenly explain at the end of the dwarven lands, that Belkar is effective when he can be bothered to be.

In this case Belkar, looking at this from a Chaotic perspective, realised that the problem was that the talkers were all Lawful and so couldn't frame their arguments as anti-authoritarian, which Serini would find credible. So he stomped in there with all the tact of a lit match in a bottle of high strength sake and insulted all the gods in front of a pair of paladins. It's kinda what he does.

On an aside, anyone else getting a distracted boyfriend meme vibe from the last panel?

[danielxcutter]

I think it probably was deliberate. It parallels what Roy tried to drunkenly explain at the end of the dwarven lands, that Belkar is effective when he can be bothered to be.

In this case Belkar, looking at this from a Chaotic perspective, realised that the problem was that the talkers were all Lawful and so couldn't frame their arguments as anti-authoritarian, which Serini would find credible. So he stomped in there with all the tact of a lit match in a bottle of high strength sake and insulted all the gods in front of a pair of paladins. It's kinda what he does.

On an aside, anyone else getting a distracted boyfriend meme vibe from the last panel?

And thank you for that lovely mental image.

[Liquor Box]

The Scribblers as a group completely succeeded at their initial goal. The aftermath where someone might figure out the Gates themselves might be used as a weapon was given barely any thought. Yes, they figured out this possibility but I think it is fair to say they did not have a plan or consider the larger ramifications at all.

Heck, they apparently knew a Gate could be weaponized, but they may not have realized that this could actually be used to kill a god. The gods live Out There and the Gates wrap Rifts in the fabric of This World Here. Whether they did or did not recognize this specific possibility is speculation.

Dorukon did seem to foresee that a gate could be weaponised, and did have a plan to prevent it - the self destruct button.

[Fyraltari]

Belkar...BELKAR, Mr. Wisdom of a coffee table, just successfully empathized with another person and then phrased a compelling argument about his viewpoint using his understanding. And he didn't even do it on purpose, it was just them connecting through natural Chaotic cynicism. I...What the...WHAT?
Pretty sure he did it on purpose. And for all his failings as a ranger, Belkar hasnalways been pretty perceptive about people. So he can better insult them, true, but still, since the pyramid he's been channelling that in more useful ways.

"Damage their ability to negotiate"?
I suppose negotiating with a stain on the floor would​ be rather difficult.
Durkon has Speak with Dead. Granted, it didn't work so hot last time, but you never know...

[Adun]

Eleven puppy dog eyes: the most powerful eye attack in the manual!!!

[Grey Watcher]

Did Rich just make the cute beholder unspecified eye creature even cuter?

[Ruck]

She looks downright jealous. My mind is going off on a number of tangents there.

I wouldn't go that far-- on either point-- but I'm still not sure what Haley's expression is or means. My thought was perhaps some befuddlement that, as soon as the conflict is resolved, Elan is immediately back off to doing childish things. Maybe a bit of concern about him wandering off with a strange monster they just met (even if they seem friendly).


Serini's comment about letting Xykon live brought back a theory I saw discussed a while ago: The order could literally tell Xykon that Redcloak plans to give the Gate to the Dark One, that there was never a way to control the Snarl, and that the gods are a hairs breath away from hitting the Big Red Button. He probably wouldn't believe it at first, but he has plenty of reason to be suspicious of Redcloak, and creating that rift in Team Evil might quickly dissolve their ability to accomplish anything.

Of course, it might damage their ability to negotiate with Redcloak, but that's better than being steamrolled by approximately 10 butt-tons of epic lich sorcerer.


"Damage their ability to negotiate"?
I suppose negotiating with a stain on the floor would​ be rather difficult.

Yeah, leaving Redcloak a grease spot wouldn't help matters much, and there's no real reason Xykon wouldn't still just kill the Order. Plus, Roy's got the blood oath.

However, when I started to think about it, it would be a hell of an interesting play in combat. I don't know if Xykon would believe them, but if he did, in theory it could force Redcloak to switch sides-- because after that cat's out of the bag, Xykon is definitely going to kill him, and the Order definitely needs his help.

It could also be of a theme with cooperation and the friends we made along the way-- the final ally the Order needs to win over in order to succeed, leaving Xykon all alone. That said, I'm not sure how well the theme sticks if the cooperation is effectively coerced.

[Reboot]

Eh, I'd peg Serini as CN at best.

oh no, here we go again...

Eh, her "good guys love that line" chuckle here pushed me a long way into "she's Neutral"


One fun thing I noticed was that Lien doesn’t actually know Belkar’s name. That makes sense because they’ve only incidentally met before today.

There's also the fact that, as Roy once mentioned (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0489.html), neither Lien nor O'Chul are actually allowed to associate with Belkar:

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/paladin.htm
While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code

At best, they're walking a tightrope with this party by not "knowing" Belkar is CE. One "Detect Evil" in the wrong direction, and they have a problem.

[Peelee]

Serini's comment about letting Xykon live brought back a theory I saw discussed a while ago: The order could literally tell Xykon that Redcloak plans to give the Gate to the Dark One, that there was never a way to control the Snarl, and that the gods are a hairs breath away from hitting the Big Red Button. He probably wouldn't believe it at first, but he has plenty of reason to be suspicious of Redcloak, and creating that rift in Team Evil might quickly dissolve their ability to accomplish anything.
How would they come by this knowledge in order to tell Xykon? Only Tsukiko was able to figure it out, and they that took having Xykon directly give her everything she needed to even be able to guess that.

Dorukon did seem to foresee that a gate could be weaponised, and did have a plan to prevent it - the self destruct button.
I do wonder if that would have been the case had the author gone in on panel 1 with the story outlined and plotted.

Eh, her "good guys love that line" chuckle here pushed me a long way into "she's Neutral"
Yep. I may have been a bit flippant when I said "at best" but I believe she is firmly Neutral.

[Coyote0715]

Was it just me, or did anyone else get emails this morning about the last 10 strips being posted?

[Noodz]

I'm sure you get these posts a lot Rich, but still: brilliant writing.

I was ready to grudgingly accept Serini as another bull headed minor antagonist, a bit like Tarquin. I mean, fiction has taught us that old people are incredibly good at not changing their opinion, and I was ready to bin Serini there.

Having Belkar upstage the entire party and present facts in a viewpoint no other party member even considers is cathartic. I want the cool rogue-ish grandma to be on the heroes side! Thank you and once again props.

As an aside, I started reading webcomics before I was 20 years old. It did take me a while to discover OotS, i think my first archive binge led me to around comic 400 or something, which would make my OotS discovery at 2007, so i would be on my late 20s. Now i recently broke the 40s. I have already dropped every single other webcomic, except for OotS. It's the sole comic I still check at least once a week to see if new comics came up. It sounds insane to me that you held my attention for so long even as I changed so much, but that is exactly what you're doing.

[Darth Paul]

"Every part of this is hideously complicated," indeed. About every 6 months, I have to go back and read from the beginning just to make sure I've got it all. But it's totally worth it.

[drazen]

[QUOTE=Ruck;25440808]And how would that even work?

----

Don't look at me, I'm not the author.

But there's a dying god who is fading into nothingness (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1176.html) and a character who said, "Oh, you poor dumb elf. Don't you get it? Be a vampire, or a ghost, or an immortal with a paint-by-numbers portrait in the rec room. Hell, even a brain-in-a-jar, in a pinch. Anything to avoid the Big Fire Below." (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html)

Seems like with Serini asking the question, there may be some sort of opportunity there. Xykon's blasted essentially everything that moves out of his way except for Lirian (when he was human, and he won the rematch, when he wasn't) and the epic ghost of Soon Kim.

My thought process is simple: would Xykon rather rule the world or be raised to godhood? He's explicitly stated he intends to avoid damnation. If he's thinking ultra long term, ascension would be a logical next step.

[derfenrirwolv]

Damn. What level do bards get puppy dog eyes?

[Doug Lampert]

Eh, her "good guys love that line" chuckle here pushed me a long way into "she's Neutral"



There's also the fact that, as Roy once mentioned (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0489.html), neither Lien nor O'Chul are actually allowed to associate with Belkar:

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/paladin.htm
While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code

At best, they're walking a tightrope with this party by not "knowing" Belkar is CE. One "Detect Evil" in the wrong direction, and they have a problem.

No. Association does not mean, "is in the general vicinity of" or even "is on the same side as". Nor is there ANY exception in the Paladin code for not knowing, it makes atonement easier, but if detect evil would be a problem, then they already have that problem.

Otherwise ANY paladin who enters a Big Bad Evil Guy/Gal's throneroom to kill the Big Bad Evil Guy/Gal would fall since they are in the same area and are engaged in the extremely important association of "attacker and target".

For that matter, ANY paladin who kills a devil would fall for helping demons, and ANY paladin who kills a demon would fall for helping devils.

This is nonsensical. Paladins can live in the same city as evil guys, no problem; they can serve in the same army as evil guys, no problem; they can even recruit evil guys to help defend Azure city when they rule the city, and the only problem is if the evil guys mostly turn on them, still no problem with being a Paladin.

Roy associates with Belkar. Lien can cooperate with Roy and his allies all week long and twice on Sunday without any problem even if this also means cooperating with Belkar, because association in this sense means a personal alliance.

If Lien set out on an adventure, and deliberately included Belkar in her team, or joined a team that included Belkar, that would be a problem, but three groups with the same goal pursue that goal? Go back to the fact that for the most part demons want devils dead, pursuing the same goal is not an association.

[CountDVB]

Oh, I always love seeing Belkar's unfiltered speech knocking some sense back into people. Did he take a feat that added his attack roll and/or damage roll to his diplomacy checks or something?

Wonder how's he gonna react if he learns basicall the big problem of the gods is that negotiation is your only option since doing so otherwise creates more Snarls? Heck, given Righteye's view that the Dark One is just a petty vindinctive god, what's the plan if he is wholly right and the Dark One is threatening to kill mortals and gods out of veageance? How does one negotiate with someone unwilling to admit that they were wrong or cares more about their impulses?

Of course, being a god is different from being a mortal. The Dark One may be locked in rage and desruction, but Redcloak is not as far as we know, though the Crimson Mantle is screwing wit that.

[arimareiji]

Don't look at me, I'm not the author.

But there's a dying god who is fading into nothingness (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1176.html) and a character who said, "Oh, you poor dumb elf. Don't you get it? Be a vampire, or a ghost, or an immortal with a paint-by-numbers portrait in the rec room. Hell, even a brain-in-a-jar, in a pinch. Anything to avoid the Big Fire Below." (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html)

Seems like with Serini asking the question, there may be some sort of opportunity there. Xykon's blasted essentially everything that moves out of his way except for Lirian (when he was human, and he won the rematch, when he wasn't) and the epic ghost of Soon Kim.

My thought process is simple: would Xykon rather rule the world or be raised to godhood? He's explicitly stated he intends to avoid damnation. If he's thinking ultra long term, ascension would be a logical next step.
Indeed, an interesting possibility. There's less distance between "Evil people should be wiped out" and "Evil people should never get what they want" than is obvious on first glance. Thor may not have "realized he was wrong" to immediately want to wipe out TDO, but I think there's room for a reader to wonder whether he might now have second thoughts - and whether Evil gods need to exist for balance, whether we hate them or not.

That said, I have no idea whether Loki swearing vengeance on Thor if Hel doesn't make it was raising a flag or lowering a flag. The Giant does seem to have fun with subverting tropes, or subverting their subversion when subversion has become the new trope. (^_~)


No. Association does not mean, "is in the general vicinity of" or even "is on the same side as". Nor is there ANY exception in the Paladin code for not knowing, it makes atonement easier, but if detect evil would be a problem, then they already have that problem.

Otherwise ANY paladin who enters a Big Bad Evil Guy/Gal's throneroom to kill the Big Bad Evil Guy/Gal would fall since they are in the same area and are engaged in the extremely important association of "attacker and target".

For that matter, ANY paladin who kills a devil would fall for helping demons, and ANY paladin who kills a demon would fall for helping devils.

This is nonsensical. Paladins can live in the same city as evil guys, no problem; they can serve in the same army as evil guys, no problem; they can even recruit evil guys to help defend Azure city when they rule the city, and the only problem is if the evil guys mostly turn on them, still no problem with being a Paladin.

Roy associates with Belkar. Lien can cooperate with Roy and his allies all week long and twice on Sunday without any problem even if this also means cooperating with Belkar, because association in this sense means a personal alliance.

If Lien set out on an adventure, and deliberately included Belkar in her team, or joined a team that included Belkar, that would be a problem, but three groups with the same goal pursue that goal? Go back to the fact that for the most part demons want devils dead, pursuing the same goal is not an association.
I think you have a really strong point, but I suspect the original intent of RAW was to have a game-mechanical way to make being a paladin genuinely difficult. (Which unfortunately gets twisted by the Mikos of the world to rationalize being "a mean socially inept bully who hides behind a badge and her holier-than-thou morality as excuses to treat other people like crap. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0251.html)") In that sense, depending on the DM you may indeed have a problem. (Though as you point out, such a DM would probably step on such behavior eventually even if "they didn't know".)

Plus, I suspect it may have originated with people who were twisting the lack of a rule in the other direction: "I didn't poison the benevolent priest, I only helped someone do it while not formally allying with them." Scratch the origin of any rule, and you'll find someone who was breaking it. The trouble comes about because the purpose of rules is to thwart intent, but they can only measure behavior that has historically coincided with such intent.

[Psyren]

I mean, given the way they voted, can you say they don't deserve it?


I don't know how I feel about this one. It feels more like a "bash the gods" moment more than anything else.

Don't get me wrong, they deserve bashing for a number of things, but "do nothing and let Xykon and the Dark One win" isn't one of them.



But there's a dying god who is fading into nothingness (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1176.html) and a character who said, "Oh, you poor dumb elf. Don't you get it? Be a vampire, or a ghost, or an immortal with a paint-by-numbers portrait in the rec room. Hell, even a brain-in-a-jar, in a pinch. Anything to avoid the Big Fire Below." (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html)

Seems like with Serini asking the question, there may be some sort of opportunity there. Xykon's blasted essentially everything that moves out of his way except for Lirian (when he was human, and he won the rematch, when he wasn't) and the epic ghost of Soon Kim.

My thought process is simple: would Xykon rather rule the world or be raised to godhood? He's explicitly stated he intends to avoid damnation. If he's thinking ultra long term, ascension would be a logical next step.

Yes obviously godhood would appeal to Xykon. But in the words of one of our heroes: "I don't want you to get what you want! Forget it!" (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0936.html)

[Thermophille]

How would they come by this knowledge in order to tell Xykon? Only Tsukiko was able to figure it out, and they that took having Xykon directly give her everything she needed to even be able to guess that.


Let's see what they know:

Redcloak plans to use the Gate to give it to TDO, to extort the gods for concessions (Redcloak said as much to Durkon).

Xykon is slaughter innocents for lulz level of psychopathically evil.


From this, they can likely conclude:

Xykon would not be okay with giving the gate up to TDO.

If he knew how it was going to be used, he'd likely turn on Redcloak.


Seems pretty cut and dry to me. Whether they've connected those dots is another matter.

[Psyren]

Let's see what they know:

Redcloak plans to use the Gate to give it to TDO, to extort the gods for concessions (Redcloak said as much to Durkon).

Xykon is slaughter innocents for lulz level of psychopathically evil.


From this, they can likely conclude:

Xykon would not be okay with giving the gate up to TDO.

If he knew how it was going to be used, he'd likely turn on Redcloak.


Seems pretty cut and dry to me. Whether they've connected those dots is another matter.

You're forgetting that Redcloak is the one they need most of the pair. The most likely result of telling Xykon about Redcloak's trickery is that Xykon slaughters him, which means the world is doomed. Hell, even raising Redcloak later (assuming Xykon leaves anything to raise) might still mean we're screwed, because whoever TDO's priest is specifically needs to be able to contribute a 9th-level spell slot for Thor's quiddity plan to work.

[Robots]

This was a great strip. And I love how Belkar is the one who talked some sense into Serini and made her understand immediately. Those two really are kindred spirits.

Also the ending of the strip is probably the best one yet.

[Vikenlugaid]

Oh, really good comic, full of good arguments and good jokes. Belkar is just brilliantly smart when he wants.

[ManuelSacha]

Love Haley staring at Elan buddying up with the "beholder" with a :smallconfused: on her face. :smallbiggrin:
She gotta be asking herself a bunch of questions right now...

[Thermophille]

You're forgetting that Redcloak is the one they need most of the pair. The most likely result of telling Xykon about Redcloak's trickery is that Xykon slaughters him, which means the world is doomed. Hell, even raising Redcloak later (assuming Xykon leaves anything to raise) might still mean we're screwed, because whoever TDO's priest is specifically needs to be able to contribute a 9th-level spell slot for Thor's quiddity plan to work.

In Pathfinder, Greater Restoration can remove negative levels from being raised. Is that not how it worked in 3.5?

[Psyren]

In Pathfinder, Greater Restoration can remove negative levels from being raised. Is that not how it worked in 3.5?

Nope - in 3.5, being raised means you actually lose those levels and must go regain them.

There are some cheesy tricks to get around it e.g. Thought Bottle, but I imagine the more dramatic approach for the webcomic (and also the one that requires the least ludonarrative minutiae) will be that the Order must keep Redcloak alive at all costs.

[hungrycrow]

The bigger problem with letting Xykon kill Redcloak is that Redcloak would probably refuse to be raised. He doesn't want to come back just to get coerced into concessions.

[Fish]

Seems to me the easiest way to create a solution that is what Xykon wants is to
turn him into a demilich — an evil skull that cannot move or leave — and set him to guard the last gate. After moving that gate to the inside of Xykon’s fortress on the astral plane.

Anything to avoid the Fire Below, he says. Even being a brain in a jar.

[LadyEowyn]

As far as Paladins associating wuth evil characters, I think them allying with the Order (which contains an Evil character) is fine, given that Hinjo was also willing to leave Belkar free to assist in the defense of Azure City.

If they stood by and did nothing while Belkar did something Evil in front of them (which I expect is what that rule was meant to address), that would be an issue - but Belkar hasn’t done anything Evil in Book 7 so far. (That doesn’t mean he’s not still Evil, for reference - Neutral means something more than “haven’t slaughtered innocents for lulz in the past few weeks”).

[NoHaxJustPi]

You're forgetting that Redcloak is the one they need most of the pair. The most likely result of telling Xykon about Redcloak's trickery is that Xykon slaughters him, which means the world is doomed. Hell, even raising Redcloak later (assuming Xykon leaves anything to raise) might still mean we're screwed, because whoever TDO's priest is specifically needs to be able to contribute a 9th-level spell slot for Thor's quiddity plan to work.

I mean, if the monsters in the dungeons were (at least sometimes) strong enough for Xykon to gain EXP, then wouldn't Redcloak probably have leveled at least once? (I don't expect killing Redcloak and then raising him to be the solution, but still.)

[Thermophille]

I mean, if the monsters in the dungeons were (at least sometimes) strong enough for Xykon to gain EXP, then wouldn't Redcloak probably have leveled at least once? (I don't expect killing Redcloak and then raising him to be the solution, but still.)

Nor do I expect powerlevelling Jirix to be the solution.

Regardless, I still think Serini's line in this comic may have been foreshadowing. Especially with MitD ready to turn, breaking apart Xykon and Redcloak might offer a solution that doesn't involve fighting them together. Who knows, maybe the gods will offer Xykon a cushy spot on the pantheon in exchange for not killing RC and screwing everything up. It's not like Hel is going to last much longer if current trends continue.

[Liquor Box]

As far as Paladins associating wuth evil characters, I think them allying with the Order (which contains an Evil character) is fine, given that Hinjo was also willing to leave Belkar free to assist in the defense of Azure City.

If they stood by and did nothing while Belkar did something Evil in front of them (which I expect is what that rule was meant to address), that would be an issue - but Belkar hasn’t done anything Evil in Book 7 so far. (That doesn’t mean he’s not still Evil, for reference - Neutral means something more than “haven’t slaughtered innocents for lulz in the past few weeks”).

It may be that neither O-Chul or Lien even knows Belkar is evil.

[drazen]

Show
Indeed, an interesting possibility. There's less distance between "Evil people should be wiped out" and "Evil people should never get what they want" than is obvious on first glance. Thor may not have "realized he was wrong" to immediately want to wipe out TDO, but I think there's room for a reader to wonder whether he might now have second thoughts - and whether Evil gods need to exist for balance, whether we hate them or not.

That said, I have no idea whether Loki swearing vengeance on Thor if Hel doesn't make it was raising a flag or lowering a flag. The Giant does seem to have fun with subverting tropes, or subverting their subversion when subversion has become the new trope. (^_~)

One of my other predictions is that Eugene Greenhilt will get a comeuppance where he is left to wander the clouds for all of eternity, never entering Celestia. Should Roy "defeat" Xykon by elevating him to godhood, where the lich will be bound by The Rules, Roy will have done a Lawful Good thing "to the best of his ability, including his ability to judge what is best" as the Deva says. Even Xykon himself points out to Roy how crazy a direct physical showdown is. But then there is no "horrible vengeance" nor is Xykon destroyed "once and for all."

My final prediction is V will lose their magic spellcasting. Probably by destroying the red cloak with a Disintegrate spell (I am not too familiar with D&D rules, but saw something in a thread once about destroying artifacts having a chance to remove all spellcasting powers).

After all, only Elan (and likely by extension Haley, Roy, and Durkon) gets a happy ending, according to the Oracle... although I suppose he already got one of those on the back of the purple worm in the desert, ba-dum-tsh.

[Peelee]

One of my other predictions is that Eugene Greenhilt will get a comeuppance where he is left to wander the clouds for all of eternity, never entering Celestia. Should Roy "defeat" Xykon by elevating him to godhood, where the lich will be bound by The Rules, Roy will have done a Lawful Good thing "to the best of his ability, including his ability to judge what is best" as the Deva says. Even Xykon himself points out to Roy how crazy a direct physical showdown is. But then there is no "horrible vengeance" nor is Xykon destroyed "once and for all."

And all the story around the Greenhill sword being broken, then reforged in starmetal, culminating in becoming a Weapon of Legacy, along with the spellsplinter maneuver, all amount to absolutely nothing? Along with Eugene's prediction that Roy, as a fighter, would be unable to defeat Xykon (not withstanding elevating him to godhood, which somehow is a thing Roy is able to do now), ultimately being proved correct?

That's certainly a bold prediction, I'll give you that.


After all, only Elan (and likely by extension Haley, Roy, and Durkon) gets a happy ending, according to the Oracle
"Only Elan is guaranteed a happy ending" is quite different from "only Elan gets a happy ending".

[No good @ names]

Regardless, I still think Serini's line in this comic may have been foreshadowing. Especially with MitD ready to turn, breaking apart Xykon and Redcloak might offer a solution that doesn't involve fighting them together.
Strong agree




Who knows, maybe the gods will offer Xykon a cushy spot on the pantheon in exchange for not killing RC and screwing everything up. It's not like Hel is going to last much longer if current trends continue.

Alternatively Xykon just needs to THINK he’s getting what he wants. If Xykon thinks he’s getting a “get out of jail free” by bugging out to his astral fortress to watch the world crumble and getting to start again on a new Prime Material Plane with essentially meta knowledge for easy world domination, unaware that his real phylactery is actually still down there (with Redcloak?)

Edit: This is if Xykon becomes aware of the Gods’ plan, at the moment to my knowledge he has no direct knowledge.

[danielxcutter]

Considering how the comic tends to treat its villains, I don't imagine Xykon to get an even remotely satisfying conclusion at the end of this story.

[drazen]

And all the story around the Greenhill sword being broken, then reforged in starmetal, culminating in becoming a Weapon of Legacy, along with the spellsplinter maneuver, all amount to absolutely nothing? Along with Eugene's prediction that Roy, as a fighter, would be unable to defeat Xykon (not withstanding elevating him to godhood, which somehow is a thing Roy is able to do now), ultimately being proved correct?

That's certainly a bold prediction, I'll give you that.

"Only Elan is guaranteed a happy ending" is quite different from "only Elan gets a happy ending".

Roy has pointed out he got into the quest for the wrong reason of proving his father wrong. But nothing is written in stone that Roy absolutely HAS to destroy Xykon with a pointy metal stick. Even if it is a special magic stick with a cool maneuver.

Besides, even if he DOES win -- and the odds are stacked against the OOTS and friends with just Xykon, let alone 17+ Redloack and a bunch of bugbears -- Redcloak has the real phylactery in a bag of holding. So... then what? How can OOTS *truly* win a straight up fight in this situation when they don't even know where the phylactery IS?

[Jacky720]

The bigger problem with letting Xykon kill Redcloak is that Redcloak would probably refuse to be raised. He doesn't want to come back just to get coerced into concessions.

Would he rather stay dead and get nothing (ultimate failure of the Plan, unless someone smuggles the cloak out somehow) or come back and get a compromise? It's not a long shot versus a compromise anymore, just nothing vs a little. Is he that stubborn? I don't know.

[Peelee]

Roy has pointed out he got into the quest for the wrong reason of proving his father wrong. But nothing is written in stone that Roy absolutely HAS to destroy Xykon with a pointy metal stick. Even if it is a special magic stick with a cool maneuver.

Besides, even if he DOES win -- and the odds are stacked against the OOTS and friends with just Xykon, let alone 17+ Redloack and a bunch of bugbears -- Redcloak has the real phylactery in a bag of holding. So... then what? How can OOTS *truly* win a straight up fight in this situation when they don't even know where the phylactery IS?

Never said they would win a straight up fight. I said I think that Xykon becoming a god through Roy's doing (which, if Roy could make people gods, would be an odd choice for him to use his rather insane powers on) would make large swaths of the story so for irrelevant. Not to mention the entire theme of systemic injustice in the world, to boot.

It's not a binary choice of either your theory or them hitting Xykon and Redcloak with a magic sword. Other options exist. I strongly suspect the answer is one of the other options, even if I don't know what it is.

[ziproot]

Got a little typo on the first speech bubble, 4th panel of page 2 says "when was I working the angles" instead of "when I was working the angles", love the fact that Belkar is the one to convince her.

Ah, so that's the bug Sunny found.

[Thermophille]

Never said they would win a straight up fight. I said I think that Xykon becoming a god through Roy's doing (which, if Roy could make people gods, would be an odd choice for him to use his rather insane powers on) would make large swaths of the story so for irrelevant. Not to mention the entire theme of systemic injustice in the world, to boot.

It's not a binary choice of either your theory or them hitting Xykon and Redcloak with a magic sword. Other options exist. I strongly suspect the answer is one of the other options, even if I don't know what it is.

Strawmanning aside, I don't think we've been made terribly clear on the exact ascension process. Is it possible to oust a god? Does character level help in this endeavor? Does targeting a dying god make it easier? Does making a deal with the gods not to mess up their plans help? We don't know.

Granted, I don't think Xykon ascending to godhood is likely. Far more likely is that he gets annoyed and leaves.

[Saint-Just]

Do we even know what The Dark One's desires/conditions would be if he managed to successfully get his "assassin"? Because I am under impression that even godly consensus cannot override "no major alterations" clause, so he either would not believe the other gods, or try to coerce them into participating into relatively mundane and violent redistribution of resources in the goblinoids' favour.

[danielxcutter]

I imagine "stop letting your mortal worshipers killing goblins for no real reason" would be relatively doable.

[Ruck]

Don't look at me, I'm not the author.


Strawmanning aside, I don't think we've been made terribly clear on the exact ascension process. Is it possible to oust a god? Does character level help in this endeavor? Does targeting a dying god make it easier? Does making a deal with the gods not to mess up their plans help? We don't know.

We don't know any of this, which is why any theory that it might happen also has to come up with an idea of how it would work. If you have an idea for the story but you can't make it make sense, how do you expect other people to?


And all the story around the Greenhill sword being broken, then reforged in starmetal, culminating in becoming a Weapon of Legacy, along with the spellsplinter maneuver, all amount to absolutely nothing? Along with Eugene's prediction that Roy, as a fighter, would be unable to defeat Xykon (not withstanding elevating him to godhood, which somehow is a thing Roy is able to do now), ultimately being proved correct?

That's certainly a bold prediction, I'll give you that.

While the godhood thing is well off the rails as I see them, I do still believe Eugene is not exactly going to get what he wants after Roy defeats Xykon.

[Saint-Just]

I imagine "stop letting your mortal worshipers killing goblins for no real reason" would be relatively doable.

I may have mixed something up but I was under impression that there were economical grievances to be settled.

Plus, half of the Evil gods have no issues with killing whomever for no real reason. And as we've seen in Empire of Blood evil societies can wield significant influence.

[danielxcutter]

I may have mixed something up but I was under impression that there were economical grievances to be settled.

Plus, half of the Evil gods have no issues with killing whomever for no real reason. And as we've seen in Empire of Blood evil societies can wield significant influence.

Perhaps, but at the least making it clear that yes, killing sentient, free-willed mortals for no real reason is BadTM wouldn't exactly hurt.

[Saint-Just]

Perhaps, but at the least making it clear that yes, killing sentient, free-willed mortals for no real reason is BadTM wouldn't exactly hurt.

Can we please discuss what we know from the comic or what we can reasonably conclude? Specifically conclude about TDO's demands or conditions, not how you would solve the problems of monstrous humanoids.

[Liquor Box]

I imagine "stop letting your mortal worshipers killing goblins for no real reason" would be relatively doable.

The gods don't usually control their mortal worshippers do they? How would they stop them?

[Rikmach]

The gods don't usually control their mortal worshippers do they? How would they stop them?

Depends on what you mean by "Control". The Gods don't order their rank and file followers around, no, but they can and do communicate with their priests, who can create new doctrines in their faith, and spread the word of their god's new position on matters. Yes, it's an indirect, unreliable, slow sort of control, but it does exist.

[TuringTest]

Also, score one for Belkar realizing what sort of arguments would sway a bitter old halfling rogue. Which had the advantage of being true. The gods really do more or less view mortals as a food source.




This is how I was expecting Serini to listen and get convinced: not by lining up all the details in a logical theory, but by starting with a mostly emotional appeal from an angle that resonates with her. It's fitting that Belkar would be the one who pulls it off, and it has been in the works since they began their relationship. Chaotic characters just don't think the same way as lawful characters with all their logic and legalese.

Double plus that the law guys look all pissed up :-D I LOLed at Lien realizing she should shut up rather than complaining. Rich certainly understand the Chaotic and Lawful alignments and know how to write them.

[Thermophille]

We don't know any of this, which is why any theory that it might happen also has to come up with an idea of how it would work. If you have an idea for the story but you can't make it make sense, how do you expect other people to?


I was wildly speculating, not theorizing. I don't have to meet the standards of a theory if I'm not shooting for it.

[faustin]

I know the comic's art style made Sunny seem as adorable as possible, but I wonder about the "realistic" look of a Beholder making a puppy crying face.

[Vikenlugaid]

Eh, her "good guys love that line" chuckle here pushed me a long way into "she's Neutral"

Pretty sure she us not meaning good as an aligment there, more like people who thinks they are doing the greater good, or even just "not monster races".
Maybe she is neutral, I don't know, but this comic has taught us that alignments aren't all, I mean, Miko was lawful good... And almost every good aligned adventurer in this world would kill Sunny on sight.

[Doug Lampert]

My final prediction is V will lose their magic spellcasting. Probably by destroying the red cloak with a Disintegrate spell (I am not too familiar with D&D rules, but saw something in a thread once about destroying artifacts having a chance to remove all spellcasting powers).

Disintegrate won't do it. It's a specific rule in Disjunction that causes loss of spellcasting.
SRD (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magesDisjunction.htm)

Mage’s Disjunction
Abjuration
Level: Magic 9, Sor/Wiz 9
Components: V
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Area: All magical effects and magic items within a 40-ft.-radius burst
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will negates (object)
Spell Resistance: No
All magical effects and magic items within the radius of the spell, except for those that you carry or touch, are disjoined. That is, spells and spell-like effects are separated into their individual components (ending the effect as a dispel magic spell does), and each permanent magic item must make a successful Will save or be turned into a normal item. An item in a creature’s possession uses its own Will save bonus or its possessor’s Will save bonus, whichever is higher.

You also have a 1% chance per caster level of destroying an antimagic field. If the antimagic field survives the disjunction, no items within it are disjoined.

Even artifacts are subject to disjunction, though there is only a 1% chance per caster level of actually affecting such powerful items. Additionally, if an artifact is destroyed, you must make a DC 25 Will save or permanently lose all spellcasting abilities. (These abilities cannot be recovered by mortal magic, not even miracle or wish.)

Note: Destroying artifacts is a dangerous business, and it is 95% likely to attract the attention of some powerful being who has an interest in or connection with the device.

So this is an unlikely but possible thing. If V reaches level 17 and takes disjunction for V's one non-evocation (a fair choice), then V has a 17% chance of taking out the cloak, and if so, then V has a base will save of about +10 (by the order's level this should be improved by items or spells, but the order is very unoptimized), so he'll fail the save up to about 70% of the time.

Cumulative chance is up to 11.9%, which is plenty high enough to be plausible.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Seems like the chaotic characters got the motivations of the gods quite easily. On that subject, it took the lawful characters a while to wrap their minds around the idea that the literal law-bringers of the universe might use their most powerful (if chaotic) option whenever it is most convenient for them.

Rules are for us little people to follow. Celestial or Earthly dictators don't care about the rules unless they are forcing them on others. They willingly break whatever rules they want all the time. See: any tinpot dictatorship in the real world.

Laws are for those ruled, not for those who rule. At least, in their minds.

Chaotic types note the hypocrisy in lawbringers breaking their own rules whenever they want, and they too break the rules when it makes sense to them.

Lawful types wish to uphold and enforce the law and naturally expect their leaders to do the same. Then they get surprised more often when the rules don't apply to their superiors.

Often when it is too late for the ruled to object.

[Thermophille]

Ironically, I think that the whole 'killing everyone on the planet' is the smallest concern for the gods, to the point where it's really just a footnote. TDO and the gates are way more important, and is the real thing the gods were arguing about, and the potential destruction of millions of tasty souls is also more important than the lives of the mortals.

[Aaron L]

.

O Chul is hilarious when he wants to be.

Also, score one for Belkar realizing what sort of arguments would sway a bitter old halfling rogue. Which had the advantage of being true. The gods really do more or less view mortals as a food source.


Well to be fair, as far as the Gods understand the situation, The Snarl is not only capable of deicide, but it would also destroy the souls of all the mortals on the world. So having them all "simply" die and pass on to their respective afterlives, rather than being obliterated at the metaphysical level, does seem like the best option for both the divinities and mortals. Thor and Odin, certainly (and even Loki, in his own warped way) do seem to genuinely care.

(In fact, Thor really seems like a wonderful, textbook example of a Lawful Good figure, wanting "whatever brings the most benefit to the greater number of decent, thinking creatures and the least woe to the rest," as the Alignment is defined in the 1st Edition AD&D Dungeon Master's Guide. And even being personable, considerate, and personally kind on top of it. Thor seems like a really great person/Power/whatever.)

I really want to find out what the actual situation is with The Snarl and that mysterious apparently hidden world, as it's become clear that not even the Gods actually understand what's really going on with everything; The Snarl seems to be somewhat beyond their understanding, and there is more to it than they comprehend.

[KorvinStarmast]

Ironically, I think that the whole 'killing everyone on the planet' is the smallest concern for the gods, to the point where it's really just a footnote. Yep, they can make a new one.

[Peelee]

(In fact, Thor really seems like a wonderful, textbook example of a Lawful Good figure, wanting "whatever brings the most benefit to the greater number of decent, thinking creatures and the least woe to the rest," as the Alignment is defined in the 1st Edition AD&D Dungeon Master's Guide. And even being personable, considerate, and personally kind on top of it. Thor seems like a really great person/Power/whatever.)

I've never played, but everything I hear about AD&D basically sounds like Lawful equated to Good and Chaotic equated to Bad.

[hamishspence]

I've never played, but everything I hear about AD&D basically sounds like Lawful equated to Good and Chaotic equated to Bad.

That was more BECMI D&D. Even that had a few exceptions - creatures portrayed as both Chaotic and Good, or Lawful and Evil - but it did seem that the default was Chaotic-Evil, Lawful-Good.

[Vikenlugaid]

Considering how the comic tends to treat its villains, I don't imagine Xykon to get an even remotely satisfying conclusion at the end of this story.
Well then him becoming a god fits perfectly, cause as a god he can't kill indiscrimiminately anymore, he needs to obey rules, he needs to "work"... I don't think he would be satisfyed at all with that, I imagine that being similar to Jafar becoming a genie, seems great til he understand is not so great.

Man, now I can't imagine a better ending for him, is hilarious.


Anyway, Roy has already killed Xykon using spellsplinter and has prove that fighters don't suck and that... In the ilusion. Yes, it wasn't real in his life, but we readers have already seen exactly that, the end should be different, and not different just in details, different for real.

[KorvinStarmast]

I've never played, but everything I hear about AD&D basically sounds like Lawful equated to Good and Chaotic equated to Bad. Since AD&D had the two axis model, you may be thinking of Original D&D that had C/N/L with no evil and no good.

It was a lot more flexible than the two-axis-turned-into-9-stupid-boxes approach, but yes, Lawful was roughly good (forces of order and civilization) and chaotic was roughly bad (forces of entropy / disorder / not civilization).

But there was a lot of room in between.

It is worth your time, I think, to read the original Strategic Review article that introduced the two axis model. It didn't make a nine box presentation.

[Throknor]

So I've been getting the stick-up-the-rear-paladin vibes from Lien and a couple of things stand out. First, she hasn't reached the 'kill all evil' level yet but she definitely seems ready to ignore why Serini kidnapped her and O'chul and would love to just lock her up somewhere. Second she has yet to hear the 'Thor would like us to negotiate with Redcloak to save the planet' message yet. Something tells me that's going to be a hard sell as she's only barely going along with working with Serini and might take a bit to be convinced the 12 gods would even consider willfully destroying the world.

I mean, she may have been told that the gods would destroy the world. But that doesn't mean she believes it of her gods.

[Thermophille]

So I've been getting the stick-up-the-rear-paladin vibes from Lien and a couple of things stand out. First, she hasn't reached the 'kill all evil' level yet but she definitely seems ready to ignore why Serini kidnapped her and O'chul and would love to just lock her up somewhere. Second she has yet to hear the 'Thor would like us to negotiate with Redcloak to save the planet' message yet. Something tells me that's going to be a hard sell as she's only barely going along with working with Serini and might take a bit to be convinced the 12 gods would even consider willfully destroying the world.

I mean, she may have been told that the gods would destroy the world. But that doesn't mean she believes it of her gods.

I got the impression that Lien is more annoyed about the whole situation than anything. She hasn't expressed disbelief about the Order's findings, and she's willing to shut up even while her gods are being slandered because Serini's actually on their side now.

At this point, I feel she'd be on board with anything that doesn't blow up the planet.

[danielxcutter]

Considering that Serini poisoned and kidnapped her and O-Chul, and attempted to do the same with the Order, and was vocally willing to let Xykon win at first I don't exactly blame her for being a bit salty about this. Besides it's not like she's trying to sabotage them or anything.

[Carl]

a bit salty

I see what you did there:smalltongue:.

[Saint-Just]

Seems like the chaotic characters got the motivations of the gods quite easily. On that subject, it took the lawful characters a while to wrap their minds around the idea that the literal law-bringers of the universe might use their most powerful (if chaotic) option whenever it is most convenient for them.

Rules are for us little people to follow. Celestial or Earthly dictators don't care about the rules unless they are forcing them on others. They willingly break whatever rules they want all the time. See: any tinpot dictatorship in the real world.

Laws are for those ruled, not for those who rule. At least, in their minds.

Chaotic types note the hypocrisy in lawbringers breaking their own rules whenever they want, and they too break the rules when it makes sense to them.

Lawful types wish to uphold and enforce the law and naturally expect their leaders to do the same. Then they get surprised more often when the rules don't apply to their superiors.

Often when it is too late for the ruled to object.

I am definitely under impression that Belkar's diatribe was not intended to be factual-if-emotional description of the situation.

Unless we are to believe that Thor and Odin are still lying to Durkon and Minrah then however much you blame the old gods for allowing this situation to exist in the first place they did not have any direct option to "let the new guy get a piece of action" for decades, long before they voted on whether to "burn the heap". Even ignoring the difficulties of achieving consensus in the first place you cannot negotiate with someone who straight up does not take your calls.

[Vikenlugaid]

I am definitely under impression that Belkar's diatribe was not intended to be factual-if-emotional description of the situation.

Unless we are to believe that Thor and Odin are still lying to Durkon and Minrah then however much you blame the old gods for allowing this situation to exist in the first place they did not have any direct option to "let the new guy get a piece of action" for decades, long before they voted on whether to "burn the heap". Even ignoring the difficulties of achieving consensus in the first place you cannot negotiate with someone who straight up does not take your calls.
As far as we know, only Thor, Odin and Loki are really trying to solve the thing this way, and only because this way can lead to end the Snarl problem, Thor wasn't going to negociate a crap with TDO before Loki told him about the purple quiddity. So yes, Belkar description is like 90% accurate or more.

[danielxcutter]

I see what you did there:smalltongue:.

That actually wasn't intended, lol.


As far as we know, only Thor, Odin and Loki are really trying to solve the thing this way, and only because this way can lead to end the Snarl problem, Thor wasn't going to negociate a crap with TDO before Loki told him about the purple quiddity. So yes, Belkar description is like 90% accurate or more.

I mean, TDO was a warlord who killed a lot of his(probably Good-aligned) worshipers and I believe is canonically Evil. Working with TDO is worth it if it makes the world better, but otherwise...

[Saint-Just]

As far as we know, only Thor, Odin and Loki are really trying to solve the thing this way, and only because this way can lead to end the Snarl problem, Thor wasn't going to negociate a crap with TDO before Loki told him about the purple quiddity. So yes, Belkar description is like 90% accurate or more.

At the stage when they weren't going to negotiate they also had zero intention of risking "the heap". Belkar's denunciation was not that the existing gods did not allow TDO something that is due, but that they would rather "destroy than share", and I maintain that any question of possible destruction arose after the option to share was de-facto rejected by the other party.

You can even broadly compare the mindset of the initial rejection of TDO because the old gods had no need to settle for something less than what they already had and the current TDO's behaviour where he thinks he has no need to settle for anything less than dictating the conditions unilaterally. In both cases the possibility of loosing the "heap" is not accounted for.

[Vikenlugaid]

That actually wasn't intended, lol.



I mean, TDO was a warlord who killed a lot of his(probably Good-aligned) worshipers and I believe is canonically Evil. Working with TDO is worth it if it makes the world better, but otherwise...
There haven't been wars in this world between dwarves, or humans? I mean, being a warlord who kill enemies doesn't mean being a monster. And those wars vs TDO surely made high lvls souls for Thor.

The thing is Belkar is saying that the gods will destroy the world rather than give anything to Xykon or Redcloak, and that's absolutely likely true for most of the gods, even Durkon "a god defender" is asuming that id Xykon gets the gate the gods destroy the world as a certainty. And the only ones who are maybe thinking in give anything are Odin, Loki and Thor, and only because the purple quiddity thing, if not for that, they would be in "destroy the world once team evil gets the gate, or even sooner" team.

[Quizatzhaderac]

There haven't been wars in this world between dwarves, or humans?If we accept that most dwarves die in actual battle, and not secondary war deaths like hunger and disease, dwarves are in a fantastic number of wars (as is, literally too many to be possible outside of a fantasy setting). About ten times the rate of violence of the Iraq war as the average level of violence.


I mean, being a warlord who kill enemies doesn't mean being a monster. And those wars vs TDO surely made high lvls souls for Thor.That's a lot of objectivity to ask of a person. I think the way OotS gods work is that they have supernaturally less objectivity, not more.


And the only ones who are maybe thinking in give anything are Odin, Loki and Thor, and only because the purple quiddity thing, if not for that, they would be in "destroy the world once team evil gets the gate, or even sooner" team.And Rat and Tiamat. I suspect the story with the 12 gods might have details not shown in comic (maybe Rich decided showing the votes of 27 gods was enough).

And as I see it, Odin, Loki, and Thor and more of an organized faction than the whole list of gods that can be persuaded. For example Heimdall might believe that destroying the world immediately is safest, but if that's off the table then working towards a permanent seal is worth sacrifices. The evil gods don't care much about goblins one way or another, and so are probably persuadable to vote yes on the goblin enhancement package.

[bunsen_h]

One possible reason for Haley's expression in the last panel is that naive Elan is leaving the party to wander in a dungeon with a creature who, while friendly and powerful, is also very naive. How safe is this? How many D&D monsters could reasonably be described as "bugs" but are extremely dangerous even when apparently dead? And Sunny is currently partly handicapped by having his anti-anti-magic contact lens in. I'm guessing that it would take him a couple of rounds to take it out.


Am I the only one that actually counted them to see if it was in fact 11?

I did.

[woweedd]

If we accept that most dwarves die in actual battle, and not secondary war deaths like hunger and disease, dwarves are in a fantastic number of wars (as is, literally too many to be possible outside of a fantasy setting). About ten times the rate of violence of the Iraq war as the average level of violence.

That's a lot of objectivity to ask of a person. I think the way OotS gods work is that they have supernaturally less objectivity, not more.

And Rat and Tiamat. I suspect the story with the 12 gods might have details not shown in comic (maybe Rich decided showing the votes of 27 gods was enough).

And as I see it, Odin, Loki, and Thor and more of an organized faction than the whole list of gods that can be persuaded. For example Heimdall might believe that destroying the world immediately is safest, but if that's off the table then working towards a permanent seal is worth sacrifices. The evil gods don't care much about goblins one way or another, and so are probably persuadable to vote yes on the goblin enhancement package.

I mean, this is a world where actual monsters just exist, so...Wars aren't the only option.

[Pax_Chi]

Hallelujah, there's nothing like previously resolutely obstinate characters finally actually coming around to seeing some genuine sense.

Roy and Durkon should frankly never be in charge of any diplomatic efforts again unless there are no other choices available. Leave that to Belkar, Haley and Elan whenever possible.


I'd say it depends more on who they're talking to. Roy and Durkon were both being completely reasonable, but they're both Lawful Good characters trying to convinced a Chaotic Neutral Serini of something. Belkar, Haley and Elan worked better because they have similar alignments and knew how to frame things in a way Serini could relate to and get her to pull her head out of her rear. Meanwhile Roy and Durkon have worked very well when interacting with other Lawful or Good people.

[Thermophille]

I'd say it depends more on who they're talking to. Roy and Durkon were both being completely reasonable, but they're both Lawful Good characters trying to convinced a Chaotic Neutral Serini of something. Belkar, Haley and Elan worked better because they have similar alignments and knew how to frame things in a way Serini could relate to and get her to pull her head out of her rear. Meanwhile Roy and Durkon have worked very well when interacting with other Lawful or Good people.

Imagine Belkar trying to negotiate with Redcloak.

[Wintermoot]

You know, in BECMI, the "basic" D&D version that predates 2nd Edition, Lawful, Neutral and Chaotic were the only three alignments AND they had alignment languages, so that Lawful people could speak "Lawful" to other Lawful people and Chaotic people could speak Chaotic to other Chaotic people and so on.

I imagine this is somewhat emblematic of that. Roy and Durkon understand themselves better than Haley, Belkar and Elan do and vice versa.

So really Serini needed someone to explain it to her in Chaotic to understand it.

I remember as a kid thinking the "alignment languages" were pretty stupid. But I'd say Rich has illustrated the purpose and thought behind them pretty clearly.

[urbanwolf]

I mean, this is a world where actual monsters just exist, so...Wars aren't the only option.

Not only that but dwarves live 4 times as long as humans. 252 to 450 years 100 years of peace is doable for most dwarves.

[KorvinStarmast]

You know, in BECMI, the "basic" D&D version that predates 2nd Edition, Lawful, Neutral and Chaotic were the only three alignments AND they had alignment languages, so that Lawful people could speak "Lawful" to other Lawful people and Chaotic people could speak Chaotic to other Chaotic people and so on. And to make it even more confusing, from the Strategic Review article in 1976 that tried to explain alignment, he said that there were five, not three, alignments.


... words describing the concepts in increasing order of magnitude (more or less) as far as the comparison with the meanings of the two terms in D&D is concerned:
LAW
Reliability
Propriety
Principled
Righteous
Regularity
Regulation
Methodical
Uniform
Predictable
Prescribed Rules
Order
CHAOS
Unruly
Confusion
Turmoil
Unrestrained
Random
Irregular
Unmethodical
Unpredictable
Disordered
Lawless
Anarchy
Basically, then, “Law” is strict order and “Chaos” is complete anarchy, but of course they grade towards each other along the scale from left to right on the graph. (Note, there were no boxes)

Now consider the terms “Good” and “Evil” expressed in the same manner:
GOOD
Harmless
Friendly
Honest
Sincere
Helpful
Beneficial
Pure
Kind
EVIL
Unfit
Mischievous
Dishonest
Bad
Injurious
Wicked
Corrupt
Unpleasant

The terms “Law” and “Evil” are by no means mutually exclusive. There is no reason that there cannot be prescribed and strictly enforced rules which are unpleasant, injurious or even corrupt. Likewise “Chaos” and “Good” do not form a dichotomy. Chaos can be harmless, friendly, honest, sincere, beneficial, or pure,
for that matter. This all indicates that there are actually five, rather than three, alignments, namely:

LAWFUL/GOOD, LAWFUL/EVIL, CHAOTIC/GOOD, CHAOTIC/EVIL, NEUTRAL {all caps is original}

The lawful/good classification is typified by the paladin, the chaotic/good alignment is typified by elves, lawful/evil is typified by the vampire, and the demon is the epitome of chaotic/evil. Elementals are neutral. The general reclassification of various creatures is shown on Illustration II
That illustration had none of that 9 boxes stuff - it had two axes and about 50 creatures spread out all over the plane in various grades of each alignment combo with a few in each corner and the following in the middle where neutral was there was a (neutral) field with:
Pixies, Centaurs, Giants, (just above the L-C axis) Elementals, Druids, (on the L-C axis) Zombies, Thieves (just below the L-C axis)

If only they'd stuck to that.
(Heck, I'd have been happy to see the L/N/C be what they stuck to, but if wishes were beers I'd be having one now)

[tanonx]

Is it just me, or is this argument being won by virtue of Belkar making an emotional appeal to Serini's kneejerk contrarian impulses? Sure, we might've spent ages discussing the complexity of the situation at hand... but have you considered that gods are people in charge, and people in charge are bad?

That, and sharing a race and alignment tendencies. Which kind of undercuts the whole grudge against people mistreating "monsters" and "evil-aligned" civilizations.

There's a lot of time and care put into this whole argument, and it's won for some of the wrong reasons. I wonder how that'll pan out...

[Precure]

I still believe that the whole "gods gonna destroy everything if Xykon took control of the gate" is a claim unsupported by the text itself.

[Thermophille]

I still believe that the whole "gods gonna destroy everything if Xykon took control of the gate" is a claim unsupported by the text itself.

Perhaps, but it requires almost zero extrapolation. We've been explicitly told that a god's vote is considered null if their cleric is killed, and a god could certainly instruct their cleric to commit suicide.

If any of the gods or demigods who voted no have their cleric commit suicide, the vote would be overturned and the world would be destroyed. I'll rank the gods based on 'no', 'maybe', or 'probably' based on what we know that they'd do so.

Odin. No.
Thor. No.
Sif. Maybe.
Baldur. Maybe.
Freya. Maybe.
Freyr. Maybe.
Frigg. Maybe.
Mani. Probably.
Loki. No.
Bragi. Maybe.
Iounn. Maybe.
Hermod. Maybe.

The vast majority are debatable, and while I doubt all of them would flip the moment Xykon got the gate, it'd be an uphill battle to claim that none of them would, especially when Mani was motivated by laziness.

And maybe none of them would flip immediately, but how long would it take? A day into the ritual? A week? How long before survival motivates even a single god to change their mind?

[hungrycrow]

I still believe that the whole "gods gonna destroy everything if Xykon took control of the gate" is a claim unsupported by the text itself.

The text supports that claim by having Durkon, Roy and Belkar believe it to be the case.

[LadyEowyn]

Well to be fair, as far as the Gods understand the situation, The Snarl is not only capable of deicide, but it would also destroy the souls of all the mortals on the world. So having them all "simply" die and pass on to their respective afterlives, rather than being obliterated at the metaphysical level, does seem like the best option for both the divinities and mortals. Thor and Odin, certainly (and even Loki, in his own warped way) do seem to genuinely care.

(In fact, Thor really seems like a wonderful, textbook example of a Lawful Good figure, wanting "whatever brings the most benefit to the greater number of decent, thinking creatures and the least woe to the rest," as the Alignment is defined in the 1st Edition AD&D Dungeon Master's Guide. And even being personable, considerate, and personally kind on top of it. Thor seems like a really great person/Power/whatever.)

I really want to find out what the actual situation is with The Snarl and that mysterious apparently hidden world, as it's become clear that not even the Gods actually understand what's really going on with everything; The Snarl seems to be somewhat beyond their understanding, and there is more to it than they comprehend.
Yes, the world being destroyed by the Snarl would be worse in many ways (though not for the dwarves) than the world being destroyed by the gods.

But the gods giving the Dark One what he wants and removing the threat has a solid shot at being better than either of those two terrible options, and for the most part the gods aren’t showing much interest in that. Even Thor doesn’t offer Durkon any meaningful concessions to take back to Redcloak.

[tanonx]

But the gods giving the Dark One what he wants and removing the threat has a solid shot at being better than either of those two terrible options, and for the most part the gods aren’t showing much interest in that. Even Thor doesn’t offer Durkon any meaningful concessions to take back to Redcloak.

I do want to note, the conversation between Thor and Durkon got cut off right when Durkon was starting to ask about getting some, which was immediately after Durkon explained what Redcloak's stance was to begin with. There hasn't really been a chance to brainstorm and get those concessions, and this whole situation is time-sensitive, to say the least.

Even if they did have the time, Thor noted that the gods are "intentionally locked out" of making widespread changes in the world, which implies it's not just a ruling they could go back on. There's a plausible reason to keep it that way, too - playing fast and loose with creation got the world into this mess to begin with.

It looks like the mortals have to pull their weight where the immediate threat is concerned. Which makes sense - as the whole situation with Gobbotopia illustrates, there's no inherent reason for anyone to stay where the gods plunked them down, so mortals still had a hand in kicking that whole cycle off.

Thor has also explained that the Dark One's response to emissaries is melting them, anointing his legions with them, and so on. Forcing the issue in person, it's said, would lead to disagreements, which would lead to a two-color Snarl, which could well wipe out both parties. Hence approaching his high priest, instead - the proxy meeting is safer, as well as easier.

[Saint-Just]

Even if they did have the time, Thor noted that the gods are "intentionally locked out" of making widespread changes in the world, which implies it's not just a ruling they could go back on. There's a plausible reason to keep it that way, too - playing fast and loose with creation got the world into this mess to begin with.

I even got the impression that it is not merely a matter of a previous agreement, but that it is to a degree baked in the world itself.

[Mike Havran]

The text supports that claim by having Durkon, Roy and Belkar believe it to be the case. That is a very shaky support at best. For quite a while, the entire Order (sans Belkar, who didn't care) believed that Girard will help them against Xykon.

[KorvinStarmast]

but have you considered that gods are people in charge, and people in charge are bad? That's a rather blinkered view.

playing fast and loose with creation got the world into this mess to begin with. Worlds, plural, as in millions of them.


It looks like the mortals have to pull their weight where the immediate threat is concerned. Correct, the story is built on the adventures and exploits of the Order of the Stick, not "Gods versus Snarl", in its scope. Resolving the extant Snarl threat is an element of tension built into the overarching plot.

And on top of that, both V and Roy had, on screen, pointed out that "We really don't know what's going on" and Belkar pointed out that "everyone's chain is being yanked". While some of what they don't know has been revealed, there are still some reveals to be presented to clear up some of what they don't know. The element of discovery is also part of the various story arcs that the Order experiences/slogs through.

IFCC's next move is but one of the course changes that we can expect to see.

[ScreamingGod]

I love it when "boots on the ground" have it right (even when they're bootless, or shoeless).

Thanks, Giant.

[tanonx]

That's a rather blinkered view.

This is indeed the case. But it seems to be what worked best in the argument. Belkar isn't the first to bring up that the gods are ready to destroy the world, he's just the first to filter it through the lens of Ian Starshine grade paranoia.

As for the gods not being what the story's about... well, the IFCC has already pegged the "good gods" as a target. Redcloak has them all in his sights, and that Godsmoot is still going. If we're talking about revelations to come, the gods aren't off the hook just yet. But they may wish they had someone to pray to.

[arimareiji]

I love it when "boots on the ground" have it right (even when they're bootless, or shoeless).

Thanks, Giant.

Indeed, bootless speculation is rarely fruitful. *drum sting* :smallbiggrin:

[Precure]

If any of the gods or demigods who voted no have their cleric commit suicide, the vote would be overturned and the world would be destroyed.

Pretty sure that would be cheating, due to "not backsies" rule, etc.

[Thermophille]

Pretty sure that would be cheating, due to "not backsies" rule, etc.

If it was, wouldn't someone have told Roy when he was trying to kill his cleric and invalidate Hel's vote?

[Dragonus45]

Perhaps, but at the least making it clear that yes, killing sentient, free-willed mortals for no real reason is BadTM wouldn't exactly hurt.

It certainly already is. At least certainly for all the good gods, most of the neutral, and I could even imagine a couple of the Evil ones if they skew Lawful enough.

[arimareiji]

It certainly already is. At least certainly for all the good gods, most of the neutral, and I could even imagine a couple of the Evil ones if they skew Lawful enough.

In the sense of "Is it true that killing people for looking different and being inconvenient to you is bad?", it absolutely already is.

But not so much in the sense of "And all the good gods have made this crystal-clear to their followers."

[Dragonus45]

In the sense of "Is it true that killing people for looking different and being inconvenient to you is bad?", it absolutely already is.

But not so much in the sense of "And all the good gods have made this crystal-clear to their followers."

Probably as clear as they make anything, the tricky part about free will is that it's hard to just make people do things from the gods perspectives.

[KorvinStarmast]

they may wish they had someone to pray to. I doubt that very much. Others pray to them, they don't pray to anybody.

They are working without a net, and have known that since the green pantheon got consumed way back when. Per the exposition between Thor and Durkon/Minrah, the gods all keep tinkering and trying something different, and they are immortal so time is not a problem for them.

Millions and millions of worlds later, they are still stuck in the rut of make a world and see how long it will last. This, as I see it, puts the gods of the OoTSverse in very good company with a guy called Sisyphus.

That exposition also reveals where Thor is being quite the progressive in wanting to break all of creation/existence out of the rut that the gods have been in for millions and millions of years. He's involved in some out of the box thinking (credit to Loki here, I think, also) while most of the other gods are just arguing about "end this world now or later" with a lot of them choosing to end it now (or sooner, not later) as a practical matter of survival.

[JonahFalcon]

What I like is the three Lawful characters (LG, to be precise) unable to get through to Serini, but the two Chaotic characters get her to understand quickly.

[Ruck]

The text supports that claim by having Durkon, Roy and Belkar believe it to be the case.

I think even more relevant is that the god who made the case at the godsmoot for not destroying the world yet included in the argument that they could still pull the plug quickly if the last gate falls.

[hungrycrow]

I think even more relevant is that the god who made the case at the godsmoot for not destroying the world yet included in the argument that they could still pull the plug quickly if the last gate falls.

Loki used the important qualifier "if we all agree on that course of action today." That leaves open what the Gods could do if Xykon captures but doesn't destroy the last Gate, having not made any decision at the Godsmoot.

Durkon has Durkula's memories concerning the Gods' rules and how the decision to destroy the world gets made. He's also the one that came up with the plan to stall the vote indefinitely. Yet he's still certain that the Gods could change their minds if Xykon wins. It's possible that he's wrong, but he's better equipped to make that assessment than we are.

[Shoelessgdowar]

I did not think it would be so easy to make an [eye-creature-trademarked] look so... well, adorable. Kudos.

There are other (https://twitter.com/BabyBestiary/status/1180470698894082049?t=8CemDzxV-CYOCXgXygIk6Q&s=19) examples, you just have to look.

[Katasi]

Of course the Chaotic types would bound over distrusting the highest possible authority. Gotta love Lien's attempts to defend her gods' good standing though. I also wish we could see Durkon's face when Roy says his opinion of the gods is getting lower and lower.

One thing I love about this comic is that it really shows off all the facets good and bad that come into play with Paladins, showing off several different takes on them rather than just the standard knight in shining armor or lawful stupid bully (not that we didn't see those as well)




I dunno, I'm not a fan of "this character conveniently forgot this important piece of information they know." Then again it's not exactly clear how speculative the Scribblers' understanding of the gods' intention was. Did they even know about the Godsmoot?

To me the impression seems that up until Durkon, anyone who knew about the snarl at all believed the current world to be the second. The concept of just undoing the world and remaking the prison doesn't seem to have existed.

[arimareiji]

What I like is the three Lawful characters (LG, to be precise) unable to get through to Serini, but the two Chaotic characters get her to understand quickly.

It probably didn't help that her intro to the subject (through Lien and O-Chul) were primarily variations on "You should trust us because we're Lawful." (http://https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1228.html)

But more importantly, good luck ever convincing someone whose perspective you don't understand. If you're Lawful, the best argument (and thus where you come from) is likely to hinge on trust that Authority and Order will keep their word and are best able to work things out. And between that or the converse, that's the direction Roy and Durkon's argumentation leans in 1256.

But how well are such arguments going to play with someone whose life experience has led them to conclude neither are inherently trustworthy? Belkar, with a big assist from Haley, reframes the points Roy and Durkon were making in 1255, and makes it clear that Serini has argued herself into a circle - now it's actually her own position that hinges on trusting Law and Authority to act the way she would.

[JonahFalcon]

now it's actually her own position that hinges on trusting Law and Authority to act the way she would.

Unfortunately, she still has the mindset that Xykon is completely and totally unbeatable, when he's been defeated at least twice.

[danielxcutter]

I mean she’s at least going to make a token effort now it seems. She doesn’t have to join combat herself to aid them immensely.

[bunsen_h]

There are other (https://twitter.com/BabyBestiary/status/1180470698894082049?t=8CemDzxV-CYOCXgXygIk6Q&s=19) examples, you just have to look.

Searching the net with the terms "baby bestiary" and "beholder" turns up a few.

[JonahFalcon]

Searching the net with the terms "baby bestiary" and "beholder" turns up a few.

Well, judging by your avatar, I assume you agree with me that the way to defeat Xykon is giant prunes.

[arimareiji]

Well, judging by your avatar, I assume you agree with me that the way to defeat Xykon is giant prunes.

And now I'm imagining the universe sitting on the toilet, straining to expel Xykon... until the heroic bunsen_h comes along to save the day. It tracks. (^_~)

[Precure]

If it was, wouldn't someone have told Roy when he was trying to kill his cleric and invalidate Hel's vote?

Difference is, Roy is not following an order from Hel.

[Thermophille]

Difference is, Roy is not following an order from Hel.

It was made eminently clear that intention does not matter in the godsmoot, which is why the other priests weren't able to attack Durkon, even after learning that he had killed members of godsmoot staff.

This was likely included as an intentional loophole by Loki, in case he really needed to circumvent his vote, and he'd likely suggest it to any gods who wanted to switch but didn't think of it on their own.

If you have any basis for your point though, feel free to say, but I can't think of why Roy's independent actions would be fully within the rules, but a bodyguard killing their cleric at the behest of their god would be a violation.

[Precure]

If you have any basis for your point though, feel free to say, but I can't think of why Roy's independent actions would be fully within the rules, but a bodyguard killing their cleric at the behest of their god would be a violation.

Because it would ruin the whole point of "no backsies" rule. Every god who changed their mind would simply order their church's guardian to kill the cleric, automatically disqualify their own vote.

[hungrycrow]

Because it would ruin the whole point of "no backsies" rule. Every god who changed their mind would simply order their church's guardian to kill the cleric, automatically disqualify their own vote.

Or this situation never came up before and they didn't think of bodyguards killing their own clerics when making the rule. If they were aware that was a loophole, they would have just ruled that bodyguards can't kill their own clerics at all, rather than some weird thing where they can as long as their god doesn't order them to. That would be very obviously abusable.

[Thermophille]

Because it would ruin the whole point of "no backsies" rule. Every god who changed their mind would simply order their church's guardian to kill the cleric, automatically disqualify their own vote.

And you think most gods would be willing to kill their high priest on a whim? Besides, it still doesn't allow you to flip your vote, just eliminate it, which is much weaker.

[JonahFalcon]

The entire point of the rules is for all of the gods to tell each other "no". As Thor noted, the Good gods are vastly outnumbered by Evil and Neutral ones.

[Xenocide586]

Lol, I thought she said elven not eleven eyes.

[KorvinStarmast]

Lol, I thought she said elven not eleven eyes.

speaking of eyes... (https://youtu.be/EPOIS5taqA8)

[Satohika]

Elan x Sunny is my new OTP.

[T.D.O.W.]

Lol, I thought she said elven not eleven eyes.

Glad that I was not the only one!

"... failing to resist elven puppy dog eyes" was indeed a head-scratcher, until I squinted at the text more closely. :)

[Quizatzhaderac]

This was likely included as an intentional loophole by Loki....I'm of the opinion that the OotS gods are incompetent. Specifically, that just because a thing has happened because of them, that doesn't mean that anybody specifically wanted that.

You'd think after billions of years they would have found and eliminated all the simple loop holes, but no, their parliamentary procedure is actually so basic webcomic readers can find faults in their first read through. This is conjecture on my part, but I suspect that they're not really capable of rationally looking at themselves and their institutions rationally, (or maybe much less rationally that humans).

[Thermophille]

I'm of the opinion that the OotS gods are incompetent. Specifically, that just because a thing has happened because of them, that doesn't mean that anybody specifically wanted that.

You'd think after billions of years they would have found and eliminated all the simple loop holes, but no, their parliamentary procedure is actually so basic webcomic readers can find faults in their first read through. This is conjecture on my part, but I suspect that they're not really capable of rationally looking at themselves and their institutions rationally, (or maybe much less rationally that humans).

I was actually thinking something similar, which is supported by text. The way gods think is dictated by their worshippers, and this is restrictive enough that gods are sometimes physically unable to perform certain actions, even if they want to (Loki's rant to Thor). It is perhaps the case that doing things like finding loopholes in policies is just something most gods are actually unable to do, leaving Loki to essentially dominate as the only one able to think up his various schemes.

Of course, this is largely conjecture (which is why I didn't mention it), but it was mentioned rather early on that the gods are more vulnerable to the Snarl than mortals, which leaves the door open for the narrative to show that gods are less capable than mortals in many areas, which is a concept I really like.

[hungrycrow]

I'm of the opinion that the OotS gods are incompetent. Specifically, that just because a thing has happened because of them, that doesn't mean that anybody specifically wanted that.

You'd think after billions of years they would have found and eliminated all the simple loop holes, but no, their parliamentary procedure is actually so basic webcomic readers can find faults in their first read through. This is conjecture on my part, but I suspect that they're not really capable of rationally looking at themselves and their institutions rationally, (or maybe much less rationally that humans).

I think it's more that OotS gods are exactly as competent and rational as humans. If you pointed those same readers at real world rule systems, they'd point out flaws just as quickly, but they'd never agree on what a "rational" system would look like. OotS gods have radically different competing worldviews, so the only system they can agree on is a flawed one that all of them think is dumb.

Also, this loophole is obvious because we happen to be in an iteration where that loophole comes up. None of the other bodyguards considered attacking their own cleric even after Roy pointed out the loophole. Roy only thought of it because Durkula betrayed him by making his vote, so Roy wanted to kill Durkula anyways. So this situation only happened because Hel's cleric could only get to the Godsmoot by tricking a friend into taking him, which in turn only came up because of the bet Hel made. That's a special circumstance a rational person wouldn't think of when brainstorming rules.

[tanonx]

You'd think after billions of years they would have found and eliminated all the simple loop holes, but no, their parliamentary procedure is actually so basic webcomic readers can find faults in their first read through. This is conjecture on my part, but I suspect that they're not really capable of rationally looking at themselves and their institutions rationally, (or maybe much less rationally that humans).

It's possible, but I'd like to suggest a simpler answer: The gods don't play by Air Bud rules.

Just because "there ain't no rule" doesn't mean you'll get away with an obvious workaround. And it will be obvious. Durkon's knowledge and ability to handle the end of the world is currently being limited by his lack of prepared spells, so I think it's safe to say the gods don't generally do outbound calls. Your prospective cleric will need to cast something to get your instruction, then carry it out. There are a lot of ways this can go wrong, and you have everyone's eyes on you, from gods to curious Outsiders to your fellow high priests.

So, let's say you convince your high priest to bite it for the greater Good/Evil/Neutral. You tell your fellow gods, "well, the priest isn't there, so there's no vote. I didn't technically take back the vote." And, for the sake of argument, let's say the response isn't "technically doesn't cut it" or "you already cast your vote" or even "nobody cares, this whole rules thing won't mean jack if we get Snarl'd." You're feeling pretty good.

Then you remember your high priest is in a room full of the highest level divine casters in the area, and they take a dim view of their gods' will being subverted. The "internal church dispute" argument no longer applies, and casting helpful spells on your fellow high priests has already been threatened. Good luck trying to outdamage a fistful of the world's biggest healing machines.

So, let's say you think of that, and don't clue in your high priest, and make sure your bodyguard designate is ready and willing to off them, if needed. Let's say you build your entire priestly hierarchy around cheesing a Godsmoot tiebreaker... and that the other bodyguards in the area aren't willing to sacrifice themselves in turn, in order to take yours out and save the world. Hey, it's a story-driven world out there, you know the odds are good.

Well, you have 6-12 seconds to complete the procedure for closing up the vote before someone drops a Miracle on the corpse and brings it back, willing or not. And we've already had the final voting count interrupted for a while by a scruffy-looking dwarf's ominous line, so a bloody and violent fight to the death will probably give you enough pause for that.

These are the highest-level divine casters in the area, after all. Sure, there are plausible lower-level alternatives, like trapping the soul or doing some crazy undead shenanigans, but why settle? Could that be construed as hostile? Maybe. But your whole argument hinges on that corpse not being your high priest anymore, so it's fair game.

I could go back and forth for a bit (and it is fun), but let's just say that, somehow, despite all odds, you pull it off. Well, now you get to deal with the diplomatic fallout for the rest of eternity. And you're stuck being the one whose escape from punishment relies on heretofore-unseen malicious rules lawyering being fair play.

I think I'd look at my other options, myself.

[Thermophille]

I mean practically speaking, it doesn't apply much outside of "Crap, everything is going downhill, and if we don't change our votes right now everything is going to explode"

Since voting usually happens over the course of, oh, about a minute, I can't imagine that scenario pops up terrible often. Outside of the situation where you A: Have a deadlock; B: The tiebreaker refuses to vote because of an oath, and C: Circumstances radically change that require changing votes by any means necessary....

This just might be the first time this has ever happened, because normally, most gods wouldn't kill their high priest over 'Wait, Loki voted the same way I did. Maybe I should reconsider", which is exactly the sort of thing Loki was trying to prevent when he instated the no backsies rule.

[Peelee]

This just might be the first time this has ever happened, because normally, most gods wouldn't kill their high priest over 'Wait, Loki voted the same way I did. Maybe I should reconsider", which is exactly the sort of thing Loki was trying to prevent when he instated the no backsies rule.

We don't know instituted the "no backsies" rule, or for what reason.

[JonahFalcon]

All of the bodyguards and priests are 100% loyal to their gods.

Roy is NOT loyal to Hel.

[Thermophille]

We don't know instituted the "no backsies" rule, or for what reason.

Loki's exact line is "Ugh, I should have never pushed for that 'no backsies' rule", which indicates that Loki considers himself responsible for the institution of that rule. Why might a god of mischief and schemes institute such a rule? Because I can't think of one that makes more sense than 'keeping people from backing out when they realize they got caught up in a scheme'.

[arimareiji]

It's possible, but I'd like to suggest a simpler answer: The gods don't play by Air Bud rules.

Just because "there ain't no rule" doesn't mean you'll get away with an obvious workaround. And it will be obvious. Durkon's knowledge and ability to handle the end of the world is currently being limited by his lack of prepared spells, so I think it's safe to say the gods don't generally do outbound calls. Your prospective cleric will need to cast something to get your instruction, then carry it out. There are a lot of ways this can go wrong, and you have everyone's eyes on you, from gods to curious Outsiders to your fellow high priests.

So, let's say you convince your high priest to bite it for the greater Good/Evil/Neutral. You tell your fellow gods, "well, the priest isn't there, so there's no vote. I didn't technically take back the vote." And, for the sake of argument, let's say the response isn't "technically doesn't cut it" or "you already cast your vote" or even "nobody cares, this whole rules thing won't mean jack if we get Snarl'd." You're feeling pretty good.

Then you remember your high priest is in a room full of the highest level divine casters in the area, and they take a dim view of their gods' will being subverted. The "internal church dispute" argument no longer applies, and casting helpful spells on your fellow high priests has already been threatened. Good luck trying to outdamage a fistful of the world's biggest healing machines.

So, let's say you think of that, and don't clue in your high priest, and make sure your bodyguard designate is ready and willing to off them, if needed. Let's say you build your entire priestly hierarchy around cheesing a Godsmoot tiebreaker... and that the other bodyguards in the area aren't willing to sacrifice themselves in turn, in order to take yours out and save the world. Hey, it's a story-driven world out there, you know the odds are good.

Well, you have 6-12 seconds to complete the procedure for closing up the vote before someone drops a Miracle on the corpse and brings it back, willing or not. And we've already had the final voting count interrupted for a while by a scruffy-looking dwarf's ominous line, so a bloody and violent fight to the death will probably give you enough pause for that.

These are the highest-level divine casters in the area, after all. Sure, there are plausible lower-level alternatives, like trapping the soul or doing some crazy undead shenanigans, but why settle? Could that be construed as hostile? Maybe. But your whole argument hinges on that corpse not being your high priest anymore, so it's fair game.

I could go back and forth for a bit (and it is fun), but let's just say that, somehow, despite all odds, you pull it off. Well, now you get to deal with the diplomatic fallout for the rest of eternity. And you're stuck being the one whose escape from punishment relies on heretofore-unseen malicious rules lawyering being fair play.

I think I'd look at my other options, myself.
I'm 100% with you on "When you start playing fast and loose with the spirit of the rules, don't be surprised when others do the same and find a way to subvert your clever ploy... let alone whether "Just tell your high priest to kill themselves" is particularly believable. (For me, it calls to mind the mind games Lee was playing with Vaarsuvius (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0634.html).)

And I'm pretty sure that 1) they'd just find another way, and 2) we're already debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, so I'm being silly to take it further.

But technically, if our cheating deity convinced their high priest... then when the high priest gets the notification that a rival priest is trying to resurrect them, they'll just send it to voicemail and resume their dinner at All Steaks Go To Heaven. And even if a Miracle is used, it's hard for me to imagine the DM not rolling with "You're duplicating a spell effect, so you're bound by the same rules that govern Resurrection."

[Larsaan]

Loki's exact line is "Ugh, I should have never pushed for that 'no backsies' rule", which indicates that Loki considers himself responsible for the institution of that rule. Why might a god of mischief and schemes institute such a rule? Because I can't think of one that makes more sense than 'keeping people from backing out when they realize they got caught up in a scheme'.

Or he's just easily bored by bureaucracy (as many Chaotic characters are), and was fed up with other gods flip-flopping and extending the debates.

[mjasghar]

The high priests aren’t necessarily the highest level priests the deity has - they merely have to be high enough in level to cast the spell to manifest the avatars.
High priest is more about political rank
It’s almost certain there are adventurer priests that are higher level.

[Jacky720]

I think it would come down more to the climate of all the other clerics and how many are focused on the spirit of the rules vs. the vote nullification being good for them. The argument in #1002 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1002.html) isn't over the rules, but over everyone else's loyalty to their gods. Either nobody interfering or everybody interfering would be within the rules. Clerics in favor of the nullification could counterspell the healing/resurrection, no?

[Quizatzhaderac]

It's possible, but I'd like to suggest a simpler answer: The gods don't play by Air Bud rules. The main problem with that is that the gods have been playing by air-bud rules. "Don't kill the ushers" strikes me as a much more obvious unwritten rule than "Dogs can't play basketball".

However, I think you are right in that after this Hell will have earned the scorn of multiple gods, and such tricks would have been extremely unwise without such a huge potential payoff.


Or he's just easily bored by bureaucracy (as many Chaotic characters are), and was fed up with other gods flip-flopping and extending the debates.I can't really see this taking up much time. In real live I'd say changing votes midcount is only something that would happen with maybe with one voter on every few hundred issues.

With the Oots pantheon I can see an average of two or three changing their vote once because of another god's stated reason, another god didn't vote as promised, or an unsavory ally, but we're still looking at less than a minute of haranguing.

2) we're already debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, so I'm being silly to take it further.Zero: 3.5e angels don't have the skill Perform (dance).

[Fyraltari]

Zero: 3.5e angels don't have the skill Perform (dance).

Unless the dance in question is a gavotte, in which case there's exactly one angel who has the necessary skill.

[KorvinStarmast]

All of the bodyguards and priests are 100% loyal to their gods.

Roy is NOT loyal to Hel. A much better observation if you remove the 100% from the first sentence.

Or he's just easily bored by bureaucracy (as many Chaotic characters are), and was fed up with other gods flip-flopping and extending the debates. I like the other explanation of why a Trickster god would advocate for no backsies rule: he sets people up to be pranked/gotcha'd due to who he is and what he is.
The high priests aren’t necessarily the highest level priests the deity has - they merely have to be high enough in level to cast the spell to manifest the avatars. A case in point being Hilgya.

[Peelee]

A case in point being Hilgya.

Is it? We don't know what level Hilgya or the high priest of Loki were, I don't believe.

[KorvinStarmast]

Is it? We don't know what level Hilgya or the high priest of Loki were, I don't believe.She is able to cast high level spells; per class and level and geekery thread she is reasonably estimated at level 14+.
Not adventuring does not gain levels. We see no evidence that HPofLoki has power at that level.
Adventurers get higher levels.

[Thermophille]

Or he's just easily bored by bureaucracy (as many Chaotic characters are), and was fed up with other gods flip-flopping and extending the debates.

Good point. Granted, I don't think that's the reason, but it is valid.

[hungrycrow]

She is able to cast high level spells; per class and level and geekery thread she is reasonably estimated at level 14+.
Not adventuring does not gain levels. We see no evidence that HPofLoki has power at that level.
Adventurers get higher levels.

We know all the high priests have enough experience to reach mid level, why assume they stopped there?

Also, Crystal got levels for free for being a rival. There could be other nonadventuring methods of gaining levels.

[Mike Havran]

We know all the high priests have enough experience to reach mid level, why assume they stopped there?

Also, Crystal got levels for free for being a rival. There could be other nonadventuring methods of gaining levels.Shojo got to level 14 while being heir apparent (and ruler) his entire life, so I doubt he did much adventuring either.

[Peelee]

She is able to cast high level spells; per class and level and geekery thread she is reasonably estimated at level 14+.
Not adventuring does not gain levels. We see no evidence that HPofLoki has power at that level.
Adventurers get higher levels.

So you're saying we don't know what level Hilgya or the high priest of Loki were? :smalltongue:

[Ruck]

Loki's exact line is "Ugh, I should have never pushed for that 'no backsies' rule", which indicates that Loki considers himself responsible for the institution of that rule. Why might a god of mischief and schemes institute such a rule? Because I can't think of one that makes more sense than 'keeping people from backing out when they realize they got caught up in a scheme'.

I don't think we know this is why, but it's a very reasonable and sound conclusion given what we do know.

[Fyraltari]

Also becoming the high priest sounds like a swell retirement plan for a high-level adventurer Cleric. Tarquin once refered to Malack as "a high priest" (though maybe not the high priest of Nergal) and he used to be a high level adventurer.

Would not be surprised to learn that most people at the godsmoot are (retired) adventurers.

Well, I would be surprised to learn it, because that's so insignificant I can't really see a situation where the story or The Giant would need to give us this information, but I wouldn't be surprised by the content of the learning.

[danielxcutter]

I think the High Priest of Loki was at least level 11; IIRC he used Flame Strike?

[brian 333]

Shojo got to level 14 while being heir apparent (and ruler) his entire life, so I doubt he did much adventuring either.

He got there as an NPC, so level 14 Aristocrat is a lot easier to achieve, but the paperwork is a big itch. Rogues get experience for trapsetting and other rogueish things, Bards get exp for whatever it is bards do, and NPCs get exp for whatever they do.

Carpenters build houses, so I can imagine this scene:

(Apprentice Carpenter, Level 1)
Oh boy! My first house! I'll make 10 silver and 100 exp building it!

(Journeyman Carpenter, Level 5)
I need to build 25 more of those to level up. I wish we were building a barn or a warehouse.

(Master Carpenter, level 10)
I need to build a Parliament building to level up. Let's go to the tavern and find out where the adventurers are going to overturn a government next.