When Serini realizes V killed his friends whole family line it's going to get ugly

[Dante2001]

Bonus points if it happens when they are fighting Xykon. Something like "hey Xykon why did you kill my friend!" "lol wut, I only murdered the mage and the hippie girl"

[InvisibleBison]

I don't see how Serini could possibly figure out that V killed the Draketooths unless V or Roy tells her about it.

[No good @ names]

Bonus points if it happens when they are fighting Xykon. Something like "hey Xykon why did you kill my friend!" "lol wut, I only murdered the mage and the hippie girl"

I presume Girard died of relatively normal cause given his body was entombed by his family. Had Xykon gotten to him at some other location, that would have made a proper body retrieval much more difficult.

Soon was old at death and long dead by the time of the comic. Dorukan was old too despite his magic?

I don’t play DnD so I don’t know what being part dragon does to lifespan but given it’s based on Tolkien halflings are longer lived than humans I’m guessing. The secrecy of Girard means she probably didn’t know for sure if he was still alive or not but she probably expected to him to be dead by now.

She’s only aware that Girard’s gate was destroyed and the order was involved? I don’t think she actually knows the details of what happened at pyramid, or even that Girard choose family as his Gate’s defence, as the Draketooths went to great lengths to hide their existence generally, and details from the other Scribblers?

[mjasghar]

Wait until she finds out about the whole kidnapping cult he created

[hroþila]

Alternatively, if Serini realizes V willingly and purposefully carried out a black dragon genocide, things might get ugly.

But I don't see how she'd find out unless V told her.

[Precure]

Xykon: "Elf wizard! So, that idiot was right after all. Finally I will have my revenge!"

Vaarsuvius: "Don't be so sure about yourself lich! The very last person who demanded revenge on my elven head, lost not only her own life, but also doomed her entire family!"

Xykon: "Her entire family, eh? Sounds delish. Either I misjudged you or you just pulling my bony leg."

Vaarsuvius: "I am telling you nothing but truth, lich! Very spell I casted that accursed day, day that I fought you, famous familicide, massacred countless individuals, including a quarter of all black dragons and sadly, Draketooth clan."

Serini: "What did you say! Then it was you who were responsible for their demise! I was right after all, I shouldn't have never trust people such as you!"

Vaarsuvius: "Alas, lady Serini. I'm sorry for your lost. But hear me out before making a rash decision: I wasn't aware back then, when I cast that accused spell, that human lives were at stake! I thought that my crime will only affect black dragons, who were evil by their nature."

Serini: "You just dig yourself a deeper grave, elf."

Redcloak: "So, you're showing your true colors after all. IMPLOSION!"

[Resileaf]

As if Xykon would even remember V and as if V would brag about that episode.

[Peelee]

Bonus points if it happens when they are fighting Xykon. Something like "hey Xykon why did you kill my friend!"

Yeah, I don't think anyone who has met Xykon would wonder why he killed someone. It's not exactly a question for the ages.

[Resileaf]

Yeah, I don't think anyone who has met Xykon would wonder why he killed someone. It's not exactly a question for the ages.

Roy did wonder that once.

The answer was not as satisfying as he hoped. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0434.html)

[Precure]

As if Xykon would even remember V and as if V would brag about that episode.

He remember V. That's how MitD tricked him into leaving the order alive.

[Metastachydium]

Vaarsuvius: "I am telling you nothing but truth, lich! Very spell I casted that accursed day, day that I fought you, famous familicide, massacred countless individuals, including a quarter of all black dragons and sadly, Draketooth clan."

(…)

Vaarsuvius: "Alas, lady Serini. I'm sorry for your lost. But hear me out before making a rash decision: I wasn't aware back then, when I cast that accused spell, that human lives were at stake! I thought that my crime will only affect black dragons, who were evil by their nature."

:vaarsuvius:: "I must urge you to recant this most deplorable insinuation, for it is not merely an insult to my boundless intellect, but, I'd dare say, an affront that is tantamount to libel! I speak Common with great skill and I would never make such mockery of the basic grammar and lexicon of a tongue I have good command of!"


Redcloak: "So, you're showing your true colors after all. IMPLOSION!"

[Redcloak approves of this.]

[Precure]

:vaarsuvius:: "I must urge you to recant this most deplorable insinuation, for it is not merely an insult to my boundless intellect, but, I'd dare say, an affront that is tantamount to libel! I speak Common with great skill and I would never make such mockery of the basic grammar and lexicon of a tongue I have good command of!

:vaarsuvius: "equivilent" (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1235.html)

[Metastachydium]

:vaarsuvius: "equivilent" (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1235.html)

:vaarsuvius: …
:vaarsuvius: Disintegrate! Quickened Lightning Bolt!

[Fyraltari]

:vaarsuvius: "equivilent" (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1235.html)
... It does make V's point.

[RatElemental]

Xykon: "Elf wizard! So, that idiot was right after all. Finally I will have my revenge!"

Vaarsuvius: "Don't be so sure about yourself lich! The very last person who demanded revenge on my elven head, lost not only her own life, but also doomed her entire family!"

Xykon: "Her entire family, eh? Sounds delish. Either I misjudged you or you just pulling my bony leg."

Vaarsuvius: "I am telling you nothing but truth, lich! Very spell I casted that accursed day, day that I fought you, famous familicide, massacred countless individuals, including a quarter of all black dragons and sadly, Draketooth clan."

Serini: "What did you say! Then it was you who were responsible for their demise! I was right after all, I shouldn't have never trust people such as you!"

Vaarsuvius: "Alas, lady Serini. I'm sorry for your lost. But hear me out before making a rash decision: I wasn't aware back then, when I cast that accused spell, that human lives were at stake! I thought that my crime will only affect black dragons, who were evil by their nature."

Serini: "You just dig yourself a deeper grave, elf."

Redcloak: "So, you're showing your true colors after all. IMPLOSION!"

Somehow (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0866.html) I don't see V bragging about casting familicide, or trying to defend doing so as being meant strictly to kill dragons.

[Precure]

Somehow (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0866.html) I don't see V bragging about casting familicide, or trying to defend doing so as being meant strictly to kill dragons.

Fair enough.

[Satohika]

I think she already know, considering other things she's somehow aware of, like what O-Chul said to Hinjo about Miko's blunder.

[hungrycrow]

I think she already know, considering other things she's somehow aware of, like what O-Chul said to Hinjo about Miko's blunder.

Serini didn't know about the Godsmoot, and seemed unclear on the Order's capabilities and motivations. She isn't omniscient. If she did know that V murdered every defender of the last gate, it would have been a pertinent thing to bring up when justifying her opposition to the Order.

[Psyren]

She had a crush on Girard, who clearly ended up marrying someone else, why would that need to extend to his entire family line? She already knew she was going to outlive him by at least a century.

[Precure]

She had a crush on Girard, who clearly ended up marrying someone else, why would that need to extend to his entire family line? She already knew she was going to outlive him by at least a century.

They were betting about when will Soon broke his word, so they were in good terms at least.

[Psyren]

They were betting about when will Soon broke his word, so they were in good terms at least.

We actually have no idea whether that bet was still active. The Order assumed it was, but they didn't realize at the time that Girard had long since died of old age.

They also assumed that bet would be the reason Girard's people/family might leave the Pyramid, when in reality their reason for doing so was to continue the family line by seducing strangers and stealing the children.

[Precure]

We actually have no idea whether that bet was still active. The Order assumed it was, but they didn't realize at the time that Girard had long since died of old age.

The bet doesn't have to be active. We know from the bet that Serini is in dialog with not just Girard but his family too.

[dancrilis]

She had a crush on Girard, who clearly ended up marrying someone else ...
I am dubious as to if a Mrs. Girard Draketooth existed.


... when in reality their reason for doing so was to continue the family line by seducing strangers and stealing the children.
Dubious as to if it counts as stealing when they are your own children - probably depends on the laws in the relevant countries.

[Peelee]

I am dubious as to if a Mrs. Girard Draketooth existed.
I wouldn't say "dubious", but yes, we don't know.

Dubious as to if it counts as stealing when they are your own children - probably depends on the laws in the relevant countries.
Presumably it's not stealing legally, the usual legal argument being that you can't kidnap your own child who is already in your custody, but it damn sure is stealing as far as Good/Neutral/Evil go. Stealing parenthood from the other parent, stealing childhood with that parent from the child, it's pretty damned abhorrent as far as I'm concerned.

[Mic_128]

Wait until she finds out about the whole kidnapping cult he created

Is it really 'kidnapping' when it's just you leaving one night with the kid while they're napping?

Actually, you know what, nevermind. >.>

[Psyren]

I am dubious as to if a Mrs. Girard Draketooth existed.

"Bumped uglies" then.


The bet doesn't have to be active. We know from the bet that Serini is in dialog with not just Girard but his family too.

"In dialog" seems like an overstatement. We just don't know the extent of the contact Serini has with any Draketooth.

Remember, the bet was whether it would take Soon more or less than 12 weeks (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0695.html) to come knocking. It's instead been decades since then. That is orders of magnitude of difference, plenty of time for Serini to no longer be in close contact, and possibly not even remember the bet existed until the spell itself pinged her.

[dancrilis]

Presumably it's not stealing legally, the usual legal argument being that you can't kidnap your own child who is already in your custody, but it damn sure is stealing as far as Good/Neutral/Evil go. Stealing parenthood from the other parent, stealing childhood with that parent from the child, it's pretty damned abhorrent as far as I'm concerned.

This is fair, but may not be the full story - we only see one (at my count) obvious child in panel 10 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0841.html), it is not unreasonable to conclude that perhaps children may not normally be taken based on this - as such it is possible that children are only taken when the non-Draketooth parent is deemed not to be fit for the job of parenting and in other cases that the children (if deemed suitable) are made aware of the family lineage later.

There is little to support that of course but little to oppose it either - we only have a single instance of child theft confirmed (to my memory) and we know little about if Tarquin's late wife would have been a good parent to cause this to be an unreasonable action by the Draketooth parent to protect his child.

[Peelee]

This is fair, but may not be the full story - we only see one (at my count) obvious child in panel 10 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0841.html), it is not unreasonable to conclude that perhaps children may not normally be taken based on this

You are proceeding on poor presumptions. If this were a random look, then yes, that would not be unreasonable to conclude, as one instance in a vacuum tells us nothing. However, it is not in a vacuum. That is a scene deliberately crafted as part of a specific narrative, which means concluding the opposite of what it conveys is, in fact, unreasonable.

[dancrilis]

You are proceeding on poor presumptions. If this were a random look, then yes, that would not be unreasonable to conclude, as one instance in a vacuum tells us nothing. However, it is not in a vacuum. That is a scene deliberately crafted as part of a specific narrative, which means concluding the opposite of what it conveys is, in fact, unreasonable.

You (and I historically and many on the forum) seem to have damned as abhorrent the practices of an entire family of people based on a second hand story relayed to us by a known individual of dubious morality about one specific member of that family.

The Giant's writting in general does seem against such blanket condemnation of a people for connection to other people.

Now maybe this was the standard practice of the family (and maybe The Giant has confirmed such and I am forgetting it) - but rather then training ourselves to take the face value story as laid out I do think it can be beneficial to examine the evidence that supports it, and in this case there seems to be little of such evidence to go on.

[Peelee]

You (and I historically and many on the forum) seem to have damned as abhorrent the practices of an entire family of people based on a second hand story relayed to us by a known individual of dubious morality about one specific member of that family.

And yet I am perfectly fine with that.

[dancrilis]

And yet I am perfectly fine with that.

Which is perfectly fair - it is possible that I am merely overthinking a situation which the Giant deemed broadly unimportant to the story he was telling (and that he reasonable enough didn't want to spend to much time drawing child corpses).

I may start a seperate topic on the Draketooths recruitment actions if it rattles around in my head for a while longer (or I may get distracted by a squirrel).

[RatElemental]

For male draketooths it would be kidnapping, but the female ones could just have a one night stand with someone and then go home. Though I think we learned at one point that fleecing the other parent was a huge part of the clan's gold income at one point.

No matter how you cut it they were up to some pretty bad stuff.

[Ionathus]

Dancrilis, I appreciate the dedication with which you defend your out-of-left-field theories. I mean that genuinely: I'm not being sarcastic. Debating an off-the-wall prediction you've made has often helped me examine why I believe a certain thing is true, and I'll even discover faults in my assumptions as a result.

However, this argument ("we don't KNOW the Draketooths did large-scale stealth divorces, complete with kidnapping and plundering the victim's family wealth") is definitely grasping at straws. We are shown Penelope's story, and then multiple characters theorize about it, and then that theory is proven more or less true by V's monologue and the corresponding montage of desert strangers getting Familicide'd.

Sure, much like many of your other arguments, there is not TECHNICALLY any concrete evidence to completely rule out your theory. However, much like many of your arguments, there's no in-story reason for the simplest, most apparent solution to not be true.

The main characters theorized that Girard's family propagated itself via kidnapping, and the narrative partially backs that up...and more importantly, doesn't refute it. There is no reason to make any other assumption. What would be gained?

[dancrilis]

There is no reason to make any other assumption. What would be gained?

The entire story is delivered by Tarquin based on what Penelope told him - lets ignore her for a second and focus on Tarquin and what he knew when he told the story.

Given his ring of true seeing he can be presumed to know that Nale is nearby and listening to the conversation, he also seems to be aware that the Order are a single adventuring party (even as they try to keep that quite), and the Order discuss beside him that Nale is after the same thing they are after.
Much of this can be determined from 815 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0815.html) (panels 8, 9 and 10) and 819 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0819.html) (much of the page).

Even without knowing what either group was after he likely could be assumed to be plotting some way to perhaps take it if it was useful to him (and likely planned to speak to Nale about it) - and so painting the Draketooths in a bad light might serve his purposes if it helps him potentially drive a ledge between the groups.

Even if Tarquin was not being devious Penelope might very well have painted herself as more of a victim then she really was.

Essentially we have secondhand information from a source that may have reason to deceive and who themselves got the story from someone who may not have given a fair and balanced account, and we only got one side of the story - and that story only actually indicates that one individual was engaged in poor behaviour, the Order did somewhat extend that to the entire family, but they took a lot on face value and then jumped to assumptions to do so.

If I tell you that I heard a story from Mary that 15 years ago she had a child with Bob until one day he disappeared with the child and her money and she has been searching from them ever since - you are likely to naturally believe me (why would I deceive you on this?) and are likely to think poorly of Bob, and if you think he might be with his family you may think poorly of them also.
But if you find out that I might have reason to deceive you as you and Bob being at odds may suit me ... well it might be worth reconsidering how much weight you put on the story.

[Ionathus]

So what?

Your whole theory about why Tarquin might lie about X and why the Order might assume Y doesn't really change the fact that they make that assumption and the story continues as if Y is a correct assumption.

We saw an entire room of redheads with genetic dragon tattoos and nothing else. If the Draketooths weren't doing the stealth divorcing thing, then where are all the in-laws? That room full of Only Blood Relatives, No Non-Draketooth Parents is really only feasible with this scheme. As Rat Elemental mentioned, the women in the family could just be doing one-night stands for less work...but yeah I do believe the gold income is a significant part of it.

But let's play along: we can do all this work and come up with some wild rationale that fits the facts as presented, even if it ignores most of the implicit assumptions. That still doesn't address the "so what." So what if Tarquin lied and the Draketooths didn't do a bunch of kidnappings? So what if they somehow married and had lots of children and then all the non-Draketooth parents died of other stuff or got a divorce or maybe the Draketooths laid out a big surrogacy/donor program or whatever.

How does that change the story now, eight-ish years after that fact was even partially relevant, when we see the entire Draketooth family storyline and understand how those decisions created dramatic impact? What would the point of your reveal be? How does it make the story better?

[Mike Havran]

Personally, I have no doubt that Penelope's story is 100% true; however, I do believe child taking and robbery in her case was an exception, rather than the norm for the clan. Reasons:
1. The clan wanted to operate in utmost secrecy, and draw minimum attention to themselves.
2. The Draketooth blood is strong and members of the family look very similar to each other (reddish hair of various shades, and especially the mark on their face). Orrin did not bother to glamer up when courting Penelope.
3. Even if the value of life is not especially high on the Western Continent as far as we can see, had the Draketooths perpetrated this kind of modus operandi on a larger-ish scale, the word would have spread around the continent very fast - especially since the victims, most likely wealthy families with considerable coffers, would care to find the villain and various renowned diviners would know there is something fishy going on. Maybe they would even team up to investigate this organized ploy, which is exactly the opposite of what Draketooth wanted to happen.

My headcanon is that Orrin was a black sheep of the family; the rest behaved much more decently and should not be vilified as a group. In dubio, pro reo.

[Precure]

I can't see how can Tarquin showcase Draketooths in bad light by lying in this case. Other than what Orrin done, neither Penelope nor Tarquin said or knew anything about the mass kidnapping, it was the order themselves who reached that conclusion. Not to mention they used "discern lies" and "sense motive" on Tarquin's information.

[Ionathus]

Personally, I have no doubt that Penelope's story is 100% true; however, I do believe child taking and robbery in her case was an exception, rather than the norm for the clan. Reasons:
1. The clan wanted to operate in utmost secrecy, and draw minimum attention to themselves.
2. The Draketooth blood is strong and members of the family look very similar to each other (reddish hair of various shades, and especially the mark on their face). Orrin did not bother to glamer up when courting Penelope.
3. Even if the value of life is not especially high on the Western Continent as far as we can see, had the Draketooths perpetrated this kind of modus operandi on a larger-ish scale, the word would have spread around the continent very fast - especially since the victims, most likely wealthy families with considerable coffers, would care to find the villain and various renowned diviners would know there is something fishy going on. Maybe they would even team up to investigate this organized ploy, which is exactly the opposite of what Draketooth wanted to happen.

My headcanon is that Orrin was a black sheep of the family; the rest behaved much more decently and should not be vilified as a group. In dubio, pro reo.

While I agree that this behavior would draw attention, I think you might be overselling the weight of several things:

The number of kidnapping/robberies
the victims' agency
access to divination magic

The Western Continent is an unstable place: so unstable that it's not worth it to keep maps around for multiple years. I have a hard time believing the Draketooths' 30-odd kidnap/robberies could cause any serious ripples in a continent of millions of people. It seems like Penelope paid diviners for years to attempt finding them and failed...it was only through the use of Z's high-level magic that it worked.

I mean, sure, maybe "redhead who vanished one day" became a rumor in some parts. But with the whole continent to choose from (and with the lack of reliable information that comes from a pre-digital, constantly-at-war civilization), I can't imagine that they actually left that big of a footprint even if they did it (generously, judging by the family tree) 40+ times.

[hroþila]

I would also dispute that their victims were mostly upper-class. The people killed in #843 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0843.html) seem to come from all over the social spectrum.

[Mike Havran]

While I agree that this behavior would draw attention, I think you might be overselling the weight of several things:

The number of kidnapping/robberies
the victims' agency
access to divination magic

The Western Continent is an unstable place: so unstable that it's not worth it to keep maps around for multiple years. I have a hard time believing the Draketooths' 30-odd kidnap/robberies could cause any serious ripples in a continent of millions of people. It seems like Penelope paid diviners for years to attempt finding them and failed...it was only through the use of Z's high-level magic that it worked.

I mean, sure, maybe "redhead who vanished one day" became a rumor in some parts. But with the whole continent to choose from (and with the lack of reliable information that comes from a pre-digital, constantly-at-war civilization), I can't imagine that they actually left that big of a footprint even if they did it (generously, judging by the family tree) 40+ times.I agree that a reasonable villain would consider the risk small. But a paranoid offspring of Girard? Not so much. Perhaps I'm being overly benevolent towards the clan, but I still consider my interpretation consistent with what little information we have.

[RatElemental]

With how paranoid Girard was, I think he'd weigh 30 to 40 kidnappings by anonymous drifters using aliases to be less of a risk than bringing in someone who was not related by blood. Really all it takes is for one outsider to spill the beans and oops, there's your whole cover blown.

[Precure]

Funny thing is, they can just send their females to have one-nigh stands and it would be easier, less riskier, and less morally hideous.

[hroþila]

Yeah but then the Draketooths themselves would need to take care of that baby on their own at its most annoying and sleep-depriving. Hard pass.

[Peelee]

Yeah but then the Draketooths themselves would need to take care of that baby on their own at its most annoying and sleep-depriving. Hard pass.

Not annoying at all. I miss that phase.

[hroþila]

Not annoying at all. I miss that phase.
Yeah but you say that about your own kid(s) (not those of your whole extended family all in one pyramid), and also as someone who hopefully doesn't go around kidnapping babies. I think you may have a slightly different outlook.

[Peelee]

Yeah but you say that about your own kid(s) (not those of your whole extended family all in one pyramid), and also as someone who hopefully doesn't go around kidnapping babies. I think you may have a slightly different outlook.

I may have this rugged tough-guy exterior but put me around an infant and I turn into a big ol' marshmallow. Any infant.

But yeah, that may just be me.

[hroþila]

Peelee kidnaps babies confirmed

[Peelee]

Peelee kidnaps babies confirmed

Dont tell the feds.

[Fyraltari]

Dont tell the feds.

Is that why Roland St. Jude swore revenge against you a second time?

[Peelee]

Is that why Roland St. Jude swore revenge against you a second time?

Dont tell him either.

[mjasghar]

At the very least the tale Tarquin told was fact because it wasn’t a crayon and we have word of Giant that such flashbacks are actual events. And then there’s the aspect of the non related partners. It’s possible they were in the pyramid but, assuming many of them were in the Familicide montage, they seem to be mostly outside

[Ionathus]

I presume the reason they didn't only have the Draketooth women do one-night stands is that having a baby takes awhile. If they're a small clan of 20-30 (less at the start) then it would make sense to have all child-rearing-age family members doing the work. If you limit your child-having to the women of the family then your defenses will only be half as numerous, therefore half as strong.

[InvisibleBison]

I presume the reason they didn't only have the Draketooth women do one-night stands is that having a baby takes awhile. If they're a small clan of 20-30 (less at the start) then it would make sense to have all child-rearing-age family members doing the work. If you limit your child-having to the women of the family then your defenses will only be half as numerous, therefore half as strong.

This all seems pretty questionable to me. A single person can raise more than one child at a time, especially if there are some older children to help. And from what we've seen (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0842.html), the defenses didn't take a lot of time to maintain. Even if you have a kid to look after, you can spare a few minutes to cast a single spell.

[Ionathus]

That's not the part I'm talking about: I'm talking about the physical pregnancy. If you have 2 women of childbearing age, you can only get 2 kids every 9 months. But if you have 2 men as well and then they steal the baby after it's weaned, you can get 4 kids in the same timeframe.

[Peelee]

That's not the part I'm talking about: I'm talking about the physical pregnancy. If you have 2 women of childbearing age, you can only get 2 kids every 9 months. But if you have 2 men as well and then they steal the baby after it's weaned, you can get 4 kids in the same timeframe.

I'm sorry, this math is confusing me. If you ahve two people then you have can have two babies, but if you have four people then you can have four babies in that same time frame.

That....seems to work out fine regardless of the gender of the people?

ETA: Actually, that seems to be your exact point.

[gellerche]

It's also possible that the Trio of Evil (who gave V the Soul Splice) pops in during the battle with Team Evil and lets it slip that V killed the dragons. It could be that they want Xykon to win and would turn Serini against OOTS to do it.

[dancrilis]

If the Draketooths weren't doing the stealth divorcing thing, then where are all the in-laws?

My theory is not that they are including in-laws but instead that taking children is not the norm, see the following:

... as such it is possible that children are only taken when the non-Draketooth parent is deemed not to be fit for the job of parenting and in other cases that the children (if deemed suitable) are made aware of the family lineage later.

For instance:
If the non-Draketooth parent was planning to sacrifice their first born to a demon for power (as an example) - leave the other parent in the dark, steal the child.
If the non-Draketooth parent is alright and the child is not deemed suitable for the Draketooth mission - leave the other parent in the dark, and leave the child in the dark.
If the non-Draketooth parent is alright and the child is deemed suitable for the Draketooth mission - leave the other parent in the dark, and when the child is old enough to make a firm adult decision let them in on the family mission (and name etc).



How does that change the story now, eight-ish years after that fact was even partially relevant, when we see the entire Draketooth family storyline and understand how those decisions created dramatic impact? What would the point of your reveal be? How does it make the story better?
From an in-universe prespective it might be an issue if the Serini finds out about Vaarsuvius's murder of the Draketooths.
From an out of universe prespective it might allow for The Giant to make a point about making assumptions about an entire people based on the second hand account of the actions of one individual.


Other than what Orrin done, neither Penelope nor Tarquin said or knew anything about the mass kidnapping, it was the order themselves who reached that conclusion.
That is kindof the point - the Order reached that conclusion based on very little, and then they (and we) accepted it.


The people killed in #843 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0843.html) seem to come from all over the social spectrum.
While Vaarsuvius's narrative indicates those people were related to the Draketooths - they also mention that dragons and humans are known for breeding outside their own species, it is entirely possible that some of the dead were related to other black dragons (and entirely possible that on the southern and northern continent similar deaths occured).


Yeah but then the Draketooths themselves would need to take care of that baby on their own at its most annoying and sleep-depriving. Hard pass.
This is one of the reasons that I am (somewhat) dubious about the clan kidnapping story - in the image of the dead Draketooths there is one obvious child if they were kidnapping frequently one might expect more children to be shown (and babies), also bringing children to what amounts to a secure military installation might be risky when it would be as easy to simply let them be raised by the non-Draketooth parent and have the Draketooth parent drop in from their 'work that requires lots of travel' every now and then, that way you can know that the child is suitable prior to including them in the conspiracy to protect the planet.

[brian 333]

The question here is not what the Draketooths could have done, but what they did. We need to separate what is known from what is speculative.

1) Girard was paranoid.
2) Girard only trusted family.
3) There were no children in the dining hall.
4) There were no non-Draketooths found in the pyramid.

A) Penelope told a sad tale to Tarquin that he told to Elan.
B) There is no evidence to support or refute that tale.
C) So far there has been no plot exposition to take advantage of the baby-kidnapping. For example, tracking the kidnapping ring to find their way to the pyramid.

My guess, and it is nothing more than a guess, is that Orrin found a woman of good genetic quality but poor ethical quality and arranged to have her bear, but not raise, his child. He simply didn't trust her to raise the baby to become a good Draketooth.
I believe that Tarquin speculated and extrapolated from one example, and spun the story to his advantage.

Further, I speculate that there would have been a variety of ways that the Draketooths would have expanded, from similar kidnappings to simply marrying and raising the children normally, and revealing their heritage at an appropriate time. These two extremes would have had a spectrum of options between them.

Finally, I believe the pyramid was a battle-base, and the children were raised elsewhere for their safety. The only family members present at the pyramids would have been those who passed tests of loyalty and dedication, and we're dedicated to the mission.

[InvisibleBison]

Finally, I believe the pyramid was a battle-base, and the children were raised elsewhere for their safety. The only family members present at the pyramids would have been those who passed tests of loyalty and dedication, and we're dedicated to the mission.

Except there is at least one child in the dining hall scene (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0841.html) - on the floor in the bottom right, with pigtails and a purple outfit.

[mjasghar]

If a past scene is shown and it’s not a crayon, it happened. So the child was taken. Whilst it’s likely Penelope had a non-Good alignment we can’t be sure. Therefore people shouldn’t build massive backstories justifying their own prejudices based on theories they’ve pulled out of nowhere.

[brian 333]

Except there is at least one child in the dining hall scene (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0841.html) - on the floor in the bottom right, with pigtails and a purple outfit.

I missed that, and at one time I was actually looking for Penelope's baby in the dining room scene.

Theory Revision number 2593c, there were children. Or half-halflings. Or...

[Gurgeh]

"In dialog" seems like an overstatement. We just don't know the extent of the contact Serini has with any Draketooth.

Remember, the bet was whether it would take Soon more or less than 12 weeks (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0695.html) to come knocking. It's instead been decades since then. That is orders of magnitude of difference, plenty of time for Serini to no longer be in close contact, and possibly not even remember the bet existed until the spell itself pinged her.
Echoing this. It's entirely possible that the betting pool reached its limit and paid out to whoever had bet on the longest delay. It's also ambiguous as to whether Serini was even part of the pool - Girard's message clearly distinguishes between "us" and "her" on the panel immediately before mentioning the betting pool, so it's possible the bet was entirely within the Draketooth consortium.

[InvisibleBison]

Or half-halflings.

Would a half-halfling be a quarterling or a three-quartersling?

[brian 333]

Would a half-halfling be a quarterling or a three-quartersling?

Depends on how many ppm of dragon is in her blood.

[Metastachydium]

I was actually looking for Penelope's baby in the dining room scene.

She's there. Second corpse from the left in the third row of corpses, slumped against the bald guy's body. She even has Penelope's hair (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0841.html).

[Precure]

Looking back, there (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0841.html) is 22 Draketooths in the room.
According to their (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0842.html) family (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0856.html) tree, Girard and his siblings had 23 descendants. Excluding the females, that makes 14 cases of kidnapping.


I presume the reason they didn't only have the Draketooth women do one-night stands is that having a baby takes awhile. If they're a small clan of 20-30 (less at the start) then it would make sense to have all child-rearing-age family members doing the work. If you limit your child-having to the women of the family then your defenses will only be half as numerous, therefore half as strong.

It still took less time than what Orrin done to get one child, playing lover and husband for like three years.

[Dragonus45]

Wait until she finds out about the whole kidnapping cult he created

Doubt she would care that much from what we have seen of her so far.

[Fyraltari]

Looking back, there (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0841.html) is 22 Draketooths in the room.
Could be more.

According to their (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0842.html) family (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0856.html) tree, Girard and his siblings had 23 descendants.
Are you including the cousins among the siblings?

Excluding the females, that makes 14 cases of kidnapping.
Why are you excluding the women? Also we have no idea how many children/nephews Girard already had when the kidnappings started.

Trying to get an exact number seems like an exercise in futility to me.


Doubt she would care that much from what we have seen of her so far.

What makes you say that?

[Precure]

Are you including the cousins among the siblings?

No. They died without offsprings.
EDIT: Oh wait, I misidentified the woman on the right. Yeah. Girard's siblings and cousins.

Why are you excluding the women?

They don't need to kidnap their children.

[Dragonus45]

What makes you say that?

The part where she clearly doesn't care that much for people outside of her immediate personal social circle, that Girard is in that social circle. The victims of his weird family cult thing aren't. Unless they are the ones kidnapped for it in which case they probably aren't complaining anyways.



They don't need to kidnap their children.

First off they are still complicit in the kidnapping and thievery the rest of the family is committing.

Second, they are kidnapping those children as much as the rest of the family is they just have an easier time of it.

[Ionathus]

It still took less time than what Orrin done to get one child, playing lover and husband for like three years.

But it's not an either/or thing. All the Draketooth women could go out and get pregnant and come back, but that doesn't change the fact that the Draketooth men could also be having babies too...with the kidnap/robbery plan. It nearly doubles their clan's rate of growth over the long run, even if the men's strategy takes a bit longer because they have to wean the baby off of the non-Draketooth mother.

If anything, the kidnap/robbery plan for the men is the one that can expand more quickly. A single Draketooth man can sire multiple children, "travel for work," and then steal them all in a short time span. Meanwhile a single Draketooth woman could only sire a single child every 9 months (ignoring twins, etc.).

It goes without saying that all of this is morally abhorrent. I'm just picking apart whether or not it would be feasible for a clan of paranoid "ends justify the means" wizards who guard one of the padlocks on reality.


Why are you excluding the women?

The women wouldn't have to do kidnappings because they can carry the baby to term themselves after the initial matchup.


Second, they are kidnapping those children as much as the rest of the family is they just have an easier time of it.

I don't think you can classify "siring a child with a random stranger via one-night-stand" as kidnapping. Maybe ethically questionable, but if I was looking for a "Good" way of doing the Draketooth's clan scheme, it would be exclusively through that approach because it causes a lot less harm (both physical and emotional) to have a baby secretly than it does to romance someone, make them trust you, then steal their baby and vanish without a trace.


The part where she clearly doesn't care that much for people outside of her immediate personal social circle,

I'm not seeing any evidence for Serini only caring about people inside her immediate social circle. She's rude and bad-tempered and was very hostile to the Order, but I think that's more about seeing them as an existential threat than it is about her only caring about her own people.

Through all of this, she was still working to save the entire world in her own way. I don't see how her actions could be interpreted as "**** you, got mine" -- if you want to see that mentality, look at Hilgya. She puts in a token effort but her main strategy is "wait to see if the heroes fix it, if not, Plane Shift." Serini has the resources to do that too, but she doesn't. She's still trying to save the world. I think that demonstrates caring for unknown others in a big way.

[Peelee]

I'm not seeing any evidence for Serini only caring about people inside her immediate social circle. She's rude and bad-tempered and was very hostile to the Order, but I think that's more about seeing them as an existential threat than it is about her only caring about her own people.

Through all of this, she was still working to save the entire world in her own way. I don't see how her actions could be interpreted as "**** you, got mine" -- if you want to see that mentality, look at Hilgya. She puts in a token effort but her main strategy is "wait to see if the heroes fix it, if not, Plane Shift." Serini has the resources to do that too, but she doesn't. She's still trying to save the world.
I agree with all of this wholeheartedly.

I think that demonstrates caring for unknown others in a big way.
Or, at least, wishing "hey, let's not get carried away" when faced with potential world destruction. :smallwink:

[Dragonus45]

The women wouldn't have to do kidnappings because they can carry the baby to term themselves after the initial matchup.

That doesn't make it any less kidnapping.





I'm not seeing any evidence for Serini only caring about people inside her immediate social circle. She's rude and bad-tempered and was very hostile to the Order, but I think that's more about seeing them as an existential threat than it is about her only caring about her own people.

Through all of this, she was still working to save the entire world in her own way. I don't see how her actions could be interpreted as "**** you, got mine" -- if you want to see that mentality, look at Hilgya. She puts in a token effort but her main strategy is "wait to see if the heroes fix it, if not, Plane Shift." Serini has the resources to do that too, but she doesn't. She's still trying to save the world. I think that demonstrates caring for unknown others in a big way.

She knows how terrible Xykon is, but would rather let him win and even actively sabotage the people trying to stop him then work with the Order to make a real attempt at stopping him and has made several comments that she figures it might do some good for the world anyways since her son and troll friends might benefit.

[Fyraltari]

The part where she clearly doesn't care that much for people outside of her immediate personal social circle, that Girard is in that social circle.
As a pureblooded Halfling she went to the effort of befriending a troll tribe rather than plundering them for their ressources,as would be expected of an adventurer of her level. That demonstrates that she cares a whole lot for people outside of her immediate social circle.

Regarding the Draketooth women, one-night stands are unlikely to produce offspring even if the woman tries to time them according to her menstrual cycle. Especially since ffective contraception does exist in this world. I think it's more likely that the Draketooth women had the same strategy as the men. Of course it'd be easier for them to leave with the first signs of pregancy rarher than having tonwait for weaning, but again due to the existence of contraception it likely still means a committed relationship and a stated desire to have an child.

While that may not be techically be kidnapping, I wouldn't call that ethical.

[Ionathus]

She knows how terrible Xykon is, but would rather let him win and even actively sabotage the people trying to stop him then work with the Order to make a real attempt at stopping him and has made several comments that she figures it might do some good for the world anyways since her son and troll friends might benefit.

"Cares about the wrong things" is not the same as "doesn't care."

[littlebum2002]

Would a half-halfling be a quarterling or a three-quartersling?

I mean i think that they are called halflings because they're half the size of a human so i would say a half human half halfling would be a three-quartersling

EDIT: I was trying to find a humanoid race who would produce a quarterling with a halfling but according to the D&D database there aren't any humanoid creatures smaller than small.

[Precure]

First off they are still complicit in the kidnapping and thievery the rest of the family is committing.

Second, they are kidnapping those children as much as the rest of the family is they just have an easier time of it.

We're not discussing here whether Draketooths were morally justified or not. But no, it shouldn't be labeled as kidnapping in females' case if they just had to unprotected sex with random strangers.


If anything, the kidnap/robbery plan for the men is the one that can expand more quickly. A single Draketooth man can sire multiple children, "travel for work," and then steal them all in a short time span. Meanwhile a single Draketooth woman could only sire a single child every 9 months (ignoring twins, etc.).

You're kinda exaggerating Draketooths' desire to have children. According to their family tree, they have two or three children per person, a pretty regular number. Even the one with most children, Girard, just had four.


Would a half-halfling be a quarterling or a three-quartersling?

A half-halfling would be a half-halfling since half of their parentage is halfling and other half is not halfling. Adding quarter would be weird.

[Dragonus45]

We're not discussing here whether Draketooths were morally justified or not. But no, it shouldn't be labeled as kidnapping in females' case if they just had to unprotected sex with random strangers.



If it's kidnapping for the men to do it it's kidnapping for the women to do it.

[Precure]

If it's kidnapping for the men to do it it's kidnapping for the women to do it.

By that logic, masturbation is same thing as mass killing.

[Dragonus45]

By that logic, masturbation is same thing as mass killing.


…I’m sorry could you clarify that?

[Precure]

…I’m sorry could you clarify that?

You were comparing sperms to kidnapped babies.

[dancrilis]

If a past scene is shown and it’s not a crayon, it happened. So the child was taken. Whilst it’s likely Penelope had a non-Good alignment we can’t be sure. Therefore people shouldn’t build massive backstories justifying their own prejudices based on theories they’ve pulled out of nowhere.

Exactly - the child of Penelope and Orrin was taken (I don't think anyone is denying that), the idea that the Draketooths are a kidnapping ring is taken from (effectively) nowhere.

Reading through it again Haley doesn't even accuse the Draketooths of kidnapping just that they go out to try to keep the clan going (panel 9 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0816.html)), and that doesn't require kidnapping.
Vaarsuvius does accuse the Draketooths of disappearing with the child (panel 11 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0843.html)) but they were not present when Tarquin provided the story and so they heard Penelope's story third hand (at best) which is far enough from the source as to be dubious (I heard it from a friend who heard it from their father who in turn heard it from their late wife - is not likely to stand up in any reasonable court).

[hamishspence]

V's conclusion was that there existed a whole bunch of "grieving parents, first wronged by a Draketooth"

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0843.html

Perhaps an over-extrapolation from the Penelope incident - but perhaps not.

[dancrilis]

V's conclusion was that there existed a whole bunch of "grieving parents, first wronged by a Draketooth"

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0843.html

Perhaps an over-extrapolation from the Penelope incident - but perhaps not.


That is panel 12, panel 11 mentions 'disappearing with the child' - so I think it is fair to say that Vaarsuvius does think that the clan in general did take children (it could be debated if they meant that, but I think it is a fair reading of Vaarsuvius's words).

Taking that reading of Vaarsusius's words as correct it is the only clear (to my memory) in text reference to the idea that the entire clan did take children from parents and given how far removed Vaarsuvius is from the initial (Orrin) story I am inclined not to give it too much weight - pending other evidence.

[hamishspence]

The jump from "Orrin kidnapped his kid" to "All adult Draketooths kidnap their kids" is a bit of a one, true.

[hroþila]

I'd like to see Orrin try to explain to the other Draketooths why he stayed away from the pyramid for, I dunno, at least 15 months in total?, where that baby came from and what happened to its mother. Unless it was an accepted practice in the clan, in which case there'd be no problem at all.

Sure, it's not 100% proven that this is a thing the Draketooths did, and if The Giant came out and said it was just Orrin there'd be no contradiction and it wouldn't be retconning. But this is one piece of information regarding some very minor characters. Haley* and V made the same inference in separate comics, and the idea is never called into question. Narratively, there's no reason to doubt its veracity, because what's the point of including it in the comic otherwise?

*True, Haley's exact words were "[Orrin must have been] sent out to sire another generation to keep the clan going", which wouldn't require kidnapping per se. But those words were said in a specific context, and they're all about the Draketooths not trusting non-family. No non-redheads in the pyramid, spouses were clearly not allowed. What do you think is the most likely explanation why only one parent lived with their offspring? That the babies were kidnapped, as the comic theorizes (without ever contradicting it)? Or that those parents were simply a-ok with parting with their babies?

Headcanons are great and all, but to say that the idea that the Draketooths kidnap babies is based on "effectively nothing" is pretty absurd. It's simply the most likely explanation.

[Dragonus45]

You were comparing sperms to kidnapped babies.

No I was comparing kidnapped babies to kidnapped babies. You have a child with someone and then steal that child away from the parent then the only part gender plays in that is some people can get away with it easier then others. Also you are sort of generalizing gender in such a way to ignore that men can in fact get pregnant as well.

[hamishspence]

When a person gets pregnant without the "other party's knowledge" due to having a one-night stand or equivalent, then they are not, meaningfully, "stealing the child away" from the other person.

You can only "steal the child away" from someone you're in a committed relationship with - not someone you had a one night stand with 9 months before and then never met again.


For that matter, even the pregnant person may not be aware who the father is, if they had multiple one night stands in very quick succession, 9 months before giving birth. So they themselves do not know who they would be "kidnapping the child away from" in this paradigm.

So how exactly would the child have been kidnapped from anyone, if they are just one of several potential fathers, and are unaware of siring a child, as well?

[Ionathus]

Exactly - the child of Penelope and Orrin was taken (I don't think anyone is denying that), the idea that the Draketooths are a kidnapping ring is taken from (effectively) nowhere.

Reading through it again Haley doesn't even accuse the Draketooths of kidnapping just that they go out to try to keep the clan going (panel 9 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0816.html)), and that doesn't require kidnapping.
Vaarsuvius does accuse the Draketooths of disappearing with the child (panel 11 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0843.html)) but they were not present when Tarquin provided the story and so they heard Penelope's story third hand (at best) which is far enough from the source as to be dubious (I heard it from a friend who heard it from their father who in turn heard it from their late wife - is not likely to stand up in any reasonable court).

(Emphasis mine)

It's actually funny that you make that statement, because I've been noticing a trend while watching this discussion for awhile now. You've been treating the whole discussion like a defense attorney would treat a criminal trial: "you can't prove that," "this is just a theory," "it's just a story you heard secondhand? That's what we call hearsay. Inadmissible as evidence!" You're arguing that just because something isn't 100% proven by DNA testing and video evidence, it's not a strong enough case to "convict." (in this case, the Draketooths)

But the problem is that this isn't a court of law. This is a fictional narrative. As a general rule, when a main character is having a "Eureka!" moment and is constructing a theory around new information, there is narrative weight behind it, and it's asking the audience to "go along" with the idea and follow it to its logical conclusion. When two separate main characters go on multi-page explanations of the new information, they aren't just doing it for themselves - they're doing it for the audience. The audience needs to have that information filled in, or else we won't be able to follow the plot and the stakes. And, simultaneously, the explanation must be entertaining, because this is a fictional narrative intended to entertain. By necessity, airtight factual rigor is far down on the priority list. It's not interesting or useful to bring the plot to a screeching halt to 100% prove every single assumption the story needs to make to keep moving along.

The Draketooths needed to be a family, because if even one member wasn't a blood relative then V couldn't have completely wiped out the Gate's defenses with Familicide. That is a story requirement to tell the story The Giant wanted to tell (where the Order must take over defense of Girard's Gate, and also V grasps the extent of their atrocity). The easiest way for every single member of the gate defenses to be killed by Familicide, no exceptions, is for them to have been paranoid about letting any non-family in on the secret. The kidnap/robbery scheme is a logical solution to justify that plot contrivance. It all fits together when you look at it, and indeed multiple main characters do that very thing and decide just that. They assess the situation, they make this claim, and then they move forward as if that claim were true. And the story never refutes that logic. They breeze right past Girard's gate and conclude their time in the desert, still blissfully unaware that the crackpot theory they concocted about the Draketooths was secretly somehow wrong even though its end result perfectly matched their assumptions...?

Yes, sometimes a character's theory is later proven wrong. If it improves the story. I cannot think of a reason that would be the case in this instance. You argued that it could be a way to deliver the message "don't make blanket assumptions about people", but I don't find that a compelling idea. Because there are already about 5 other ways the current story, right now, could achieve that very same thing (Serini's points about trolls being people too, Serini's rant about how the status quo isn't great for monstrous races, Roy and Durkon talking about how they never reflected on the goblins, Durkon talking to Thor about Fenrir's abandonment of the goblinoids, Fifth Example I Can't Be Arsed to Find). All without bringing up people who have been dead for 10 real-world years and 2 in-world books, who no longer relate to the current plot that's happening right now.

You can justify practically anything if you want to. I won't stop you. I just don't understand why you want to twist all of the pretty clear assumptions the narrative has built up for a payoff that wouldn't make any sense.

[hungrycrow]

This did actually happen in comic with Hilgya and Durkon. If Hilgya ran off with Kudzu now, I'd probably feel that was 'wrong' even though Durkon and Hilgya aren't in a committed relationship. On the other hand, if Hilgya had never sought out Durkon I would hardly call that kidnapping.

[Ionathus]

Also you are sort of generalizing gender in such a way to ignore that men can in fact get pregnant as well.

Can't speak for everyone, but part of my vocabulary in this thread is by necessity, given the rules of this forum. I mean no disrespect to the trans community - if I was discussing this elsewhere, I would be able to name anatomical parts and clarify the discussion a little more effectively. Please assume that when I say "men" and "women" in this context, I am speaking of biological sex and its role in reproduction, not gender identity, because it's the only concise and clear way I can think of without crossing forum lines.

[Dragonus45]

When a person gets pregnant without the "other party's knowledge" due to having a one-night stand or equivalent, then they are not, meaningfully, "stealing the child away" from the other person.

You can only "steal the child away" from someone you're in a committed relationship with - not someone you had a one night stand with 9 months before and then never met again.

No you can totally steal away a child from someone you aren't dating or in a relationship with. If you have a one night stand, get someone pregnant, then show up 9 months later to steal the child that is still kidnapping. If you use a person to get yourself pregnant and then deny them a fundamental right to access to their child that is no less kidnapping. This is ass theft of children. All of it.



For that matter, even the pregnant person may not be aware who the father is, if they had multiple one night stands in very quick succession, 9 months before giving birth. So they themselves do not know who they would be "kidnapping the child away from" in this paradigm.

So how exactly would the child have been kidnapped from anyone, if they are just one of several potential fathers, and are unaware of siring a child, as well?

Plenty of magic can work that out. They stole the child from whoever the actual other parent was. Easy as that.


This did actually happen in comic with Hilgya and Durkon. If Hilgya ran off with Kudzu now, I'd probably feel that was 'wrong' even though Durkon and Hilgya aren't in a committed relationship. On the other hand, if Hilgya had never sought out Durkon I would hardly call that kidnapping.

So you do not believe Durkon has a right to know about and be involved in the raising of his child?

[hamishspence]

No you can totally steal away a child from someone you aren't dating or in a relationship with. If you have a one night stand, get someone pregnant, then show up 9 months later to steal the child that is still kidnapping.

If you have a one-night stand, get yourself pregnant, and then never come back, you are not a kidnapper, though. This is the point we're trying to make.


On the other hand, if Hilgya had never sought out Durkon I would hardly call that kidnapping.

Exactly this.

[Dragonus45]

If you have a one-night stand, get yourself pregnant, and then never come back, you are not a kidnapper, though. This is the point we're trying to make.

I know that's the point you are trying to make. And you are wrong, because barring some form of magic we have yet to hear about there is no way for you to get yourself pregnant without someone else being involved.



Exactly this.

Which is exactly wrong.

[hamishspence]

If you use a person to get yourself pregnant and then deny them a fundamental right to access to their child that is no less kidnapping.

As far as I know, there is no legal obligation to inform potential fathers in this case.

[Fyraltari]

When a person gets pregnant without the "other party's knowledge" due to having a one-night stand or equivalent, then they are not, meaningfully, "stealing the child away" from the other person.

You can only "steal the child away" from someone you're in a committed relationship with - not someone you had a one night stand with 9 months before and then never met again.


For that matter, even the pregnant person may not be aware who the father is, if they had multiple one night stands in very quick succession, 9 months before giving birth. So they themselves do not know who they would be "kidnapping the child away from" in this paradigm.

So how exactly would the child have been kidnapped from anyone, if they are just one of several potential fathers, and are unaware of siring a child, as well?
Okay, but on what, exactly, does the assumption that the female Draketooth would only conceive through one-night stands rest? Orrin also robbed Penelope, presumably to fund all of the clan's expendive magics and equipment, something that would be considerably harder with a random stranger. Like I said upthread, having sex one time is absolutely no guarantee of conceiving as can testify many couples actively trying to. Meanwhile having many unprotected sexual encounters with strangers in quick sucession seems like an easy way to catch an STD.



(Emphasis mine)

It's actually funny that you make that statement, because I've been noticing a trend while watching this discussion for awhile now. You've been treating the whole discussion like a defense attorney would treat a criminal trial: "you can't prove that," "this is just a theory," "it's just a story you heard secondhand? That's what we call hearsay. Inadmissible as evidence!" You're arguing that just because something isn't 100% proven by DNA testing and video evidence, it's not a strong enough case to "convict." (in this case, the Draketooths)

But the problem is that this isn't a court of law. This is a fictional narrative. As a general rule, when a main character is having a "Eureka!" moment and is constructing a theory around new information, there is narrative weight behind it, and it's asking the audience to "go along" with the idea and follow it to its logical conclusion. When two separate main characters go on multi-page explanations of the new information, they aren't just doing it for themselves - they're doing it for the audience. The audience needs to have that information filled in, or else we won't be able to follow the plot and the stakes. And, simultaneously, the explanation must be entertaining, because this is a fictional narrative intended to entertain. By necessity, airtight factual rigor is far down on the priority list. It's not interesting or useful to bring the plot to a screeching halt to 100% prove every single assumption the story needs to make to keep moving along.

The Draketooths needed to be a family, because if even one member wasn't a blood relative then V couldn't have completely wiped out the Gate's defenses with Familicide. That is a story requirement to tell the story The Giant wanted to tell (where the Order must take over defense of Girard's Gate, and also V grasps the extent of their atrocity). The easiest way for every single member of the gate defenses to be killed by Familicide, no exceptions, is for them to have been paranoid about letting any non-family in on the secret. The kidnap/robbery scheme is a logical solution to justify that plot contrivance. It all fits together when you look at it, and indeed multiple main characters do that very thing and decide just that. They assess the situation, they make this claim, and then they move forward as if that claim were true. And the story never refutes that logic. They breeze right past Girard's gate and conclude their time in the desert, still blissfully unaware that the crackpot theory they concocted about the Draketooths was secretly somehow wrong even though its end result perfectly matched their assumptions...?

Yes, sometimes a character's theory is later proven wrong. If it improves the story. I cannot think of a reason that would be the case in this instance. You argued that it could be a way to deliver the message "don't make blanket assumptions about people", but I don't find that a compelling idea. Because there are already about 5 other ways the current story, right now, could achieve that very same thing (Serini's points about trolls being people too, Serini's rant about how the status quo isn't great for monstrous races, Roy and Durkon talking about how they never reflected on the goblins, Durkon talking to Thor about Fenrir's abandonment of the goblinoids, Fifth Example I Can't Be Arsed to Find). All without bringing up people who have been dead for 10 real-world years and 2 in-world books, who no longer relate to the current plot that's happening right now.

You can justify practically anything if you want to. I won't stop you. I just don't understand why you want to twist all of the pretty clear assumptions the narrative has built up for a payoff that wouldn't make any sense.

Exactly true.

[hamishspence]

Like I said upthread, having sex one time is absolutely no guarantee of conceiving as can testify many couples actively trying to. Meanwhile having many unprotected sexual encounters with strangers in quick sucession seems like an easy way to catch an STD.


True - but that's the risk one takes if one wishes to absolutely maximise one's chances of getting pregnant, and avoid the "maybe I've accidentally picked an infertile partner" issue.

[Dragonus45]

As far as I know, there is no legal obligation to inform potential fathers in this case.

I'm not familiar with the various laws in the OOTS verse so I wouldn't know, also it wouldn't be relevant to the discussion in any case.


Okay, but on what, exactly, does the assumption that the female Draketooth would only conceive through one-night stands rest? Orrin also robbed Penelope, presumably to fund all of the clan's expendive magics and equipment, something that would be considerably harder with a random stranger. Like I said upthread, having sex one time is absolutely no guarantee of conceiving as can testify many couples actively trying to. Meanwhile having many unprotected sexual encounters with strangers in quick sucession seems like an easy way to catch an STD.

Considering that most methods of easy contraception in the game system are be magical in nature I am thinking it would not be hard for a family of sorcerers to know a few ways to sabotage it.

[hamishspence]

I'm not familiar with the various laws in the OOTS verse so I wouldn't know, also it wouldn't be relevant to the discussion in any case.

I don't see any moral obligation either.

If Hilgya had never told Durkon anything about Kudzu, never gone near him again - she would still not have been, legally or morally, a kidnapper.

Neither would a hypothetical Draketooth who did the same as Hilgya.

Kidnapping has a real meaning, and "not telling all your one-night-stand partners from 9 months ago they may have a child" falls short of that meaning.

[Fyraltari]

True - but that's the risk one takes if one wishes to absolutely maximise one's chances of getting pregnant, and avoid the "maybe I've accidentally picked an infertile partner" issue.
You realize how tenuous that sounds, right? The Draketooth aren't operating withba deadline. We have no idea how long Orrin lived in the outside world before seducing Penelope. There's no hurry.

Also, that does not adress the financial aspect. High level spells literally cost money to cast and they're holed up in the desert., why would the Draketooths choose to cut one source of income in half?

[hungrycrow]

So you do not believe Durkon has a right to know about and be involved in the raising of his child?

No, I don't think single parents have an obligation to track down ex-partners.

[Fyraltari]

Considering that most methods of easy contraception in the game system are be magical in nature

Are they? What makes you say that?
And again, infection risk.

[Dragonus45]

I don't see any moral obligation either.

If Hilgya had never told Durkon anything about Kudzu, never gone near him again - she would still not have been, legally or morally, a kidnapper.

Neither would a hypothetical Draketooth who did the same as Hilgya.

Kidnapping has a real meaning, and "not telling all your one-night-stand partners from 9 months ago they may have a child" falls short of that meaning.

Yes she would be. Durkon would clearly want to know about Kudzu and be involved and it is wrong to steal that child and relationship from him.


No, I don't think single parents have an obligation to track down ex-partners.


Stealing children is stealing children, and it's remarkable that people are so easily able to point towards the "males" in the Draketooh family as manipulative kidnappers and then just give the "women" in the same family a pass for the same behaviors.


Are they? What makes you say that?


This is a "general knowledge of 3.5" thing since there hasn't been any real commentary in the comic about how contraception works I'm defaulting to that. There are a few very very easy ways to ensure no one is getting pregnant in 3.5 and while I can't think of any ways to get around something like say hiring a cleric to curse you with sterility I'm also not a borderline epic level sorcerer with access to crafting new spells if I really need some.

[hamishspence]

I'm not saying that's the way they do handle it - I'm saying that if they did handle it that way, then, it would be morally better than the other way, because, no kidnapping.


"Get someone to fall in love with you, commit to you, then abscond with the child several months after birth" like Orrin did, has an immense cruelty to it.


And the wronged people aren't just going to give up - Penelope, for example, spent the next 15 years searching.


Whereas "sleep around till you get pregnant" lacks this cruelty - and doesn't create enemies in the same fashion.


Stealing children is stealing children, and it's remarkable that people are so easily able to point towards the "males" in the Draketooh family as manipulative kidnappers and then just give the "women" in the same family a pass for the same behaviors.

The proposed second form of behaviour "just sleep around till you get pregnant, then return to the pyramid" is fundamentally different from Orrin's behaviour.


Are they? What makes you say that?


The only ones mentioned in the strip and the books so far, have been magical - a cantrip (Durkon and Hilgya) or a "protection spell" (Eugene, in Start of Darkness).

[Dragonus45]

I'm not saying that's the way they do handle it - I'm saying that if they did handle it that way, then, it would be morally better than the other way, because, no kidnapping.


"Get someone to fall in love with you, commit to you, then abscond with the child several months after birth" like Orrin did, has an immense cruelty to it.


And the wronged people aren't just going to give up - Penelope, for example, spent the next 15 years searching.


Whereas "sleep around till you get pregnant" lacks this cruelty - and doesn't create enemies in the same fashion.


The proposed second form of behaviour "just sleep around till you get pregnant, then return to the pyramid" is fundamentally different from Orrin's behaviour.

Being different doesn't just make it better. It also didn't make any of those people less dead when the bloodline got wiped out either.

[Ionathus]

Stealing children is stealing children, and it's remarkable that people are so easily able to point towards the "males" in the Draketooh family as manipulative kidnappers and then just give the "women" in the same family a pass for the same behaviors.

This has nothing to do with men vs. women and everything to do with "using someone as an unwitting donor" vs. "pretending to love someone, creating a child with them, and then stealing it (and all of their money) in the dead of night, without explanation, never to be seen again by the person who trusted you first and foremost in a cold and uncaring world." I cannot believe we're even comparing the two.

We have no evidence one way or another that the women even chose to do one night stands. Personally, I err on the side of "the women probably also got fake-married and did the kidnap/robbery thing too", because as others have said, that route is much more lucrative and it ain't a bad idea to get somebody to help you in those first few months of childrearing. All I'm saying is that the Draketooth women would have another option that they could have exercised, whether or not they did, and I would personally find the "one night stand" option far less morally abhorrent. Still iffy, but dwarfed in comparison to the cruelty of what Orrin (and likely all the other Draketooths) did.


Being different doesn't just make it better. It also didn't make any of those people less dead when the bloodline got wiped out either.

Yeah, how immensely cruel of those Draketooths to tie their bloodlines to random strangers. They should have predicted that someone would cast an insane uber-spell that wiped out their entire family line! They are definitely culpable for not preparing for that specific scenario.

[Dragonus45]

This has nothing to do with men vs. women and everything to do with "using someone as an unwitting donor" vs. "pretending to love someone, creating a child with them, and then stealing it (and all of their money) in the dead of night.

We have no evidence one way or another that the women even chose to do one night stands. Personally, I err on the side of "the women probably also got fake-married and did the kidnap/robbery thing too", because as others have said, that route is much more lucrative and it ain't a bad idea to get somebody to help you in those first few months of childrearing. All I'm saying is that the Draketooth women would have another option that they could have exercised, whether or not they did, and I would personally find the "one night stand" option far less morally abhorrent. Still iffy, but dwarfed in comparison to the cruelty of what Orrin (and likely all the other Draketooths) did.


Nothing would stop a random male draketooth from getting someone pregant in a one night stand and coming back for the baby later either.



Yeah, how immensely cruel of those Draketooths to tie their bloodlines to random strangers. They should have predicted that someone would cast an insane uber-spell that wiped out their entire family line! They are definitely culpable for not preparing for that specific scenario.

A little yeah.

[hroþila]

Being different doesn't just make it better. It also didn't make any of those people less dead when the bloodline got wiped out either.
Being different doesn't make it better. Being better does make it better, though.

There's simply no comparison. Orrin seduced Penelope on false pretenses, stayed with her for the duration of a whirlwind romance plus a pregnancy plus the baby's early months until it was weaned (that's a long time of lying to Penelope's face), then he dumped her and stole the baby that she had carried, fed, taken care of and raised until that point, and on top of that he also stole Penelope's valuables. Of course that's very different from a hypothetical Draketooth woman sleeping with some guy and then not contacting him when she has his baby, and of course it's much worse. The life of the hypothetical guy wouldn't be affected at all by Miss Draketooth, he'd go about his life exactly the same as if he'd never hooked up with Miss Draketooth, whereas Orrin's actions were traumatic to Penelope. Whatever you think about whether or not a guy has a right to know, these two scenarios are self-evidently not the same.

Nothing would stop a random male draketooth from getting someone pregant in a one night stand and coming back for the baby later either.
Yeah no that would still have been worse.

[Ionathus]

Nothing would stop a random male draketooth from getting someone pregant in a one night stand and coming back for the baby later either.

Do you honestly not see a meaningful difference between getting pregnant from a stranger and never telling them, versus stealing a stranger's child that they carried and birthed and knew about?

[Dragonus45]

Being different doesn't make it better. Being better does make it better, though.

There's simply no comparison. Orrin seduced Penelope on false pretenses, stayed with her for the duration of a whirlwind romance plus a pregnancy plus the baby's early months until it was weaned (that's a long time of lying to Penelope's face), then he dumped her and stole the baby that she had carried, fed, taken care of and raised until that point, and on top of that he also stole Penelope's valuables. Of course that's very different from a hypothetical Draketooth woman sleeping with some guy and then not contacting him when she has his baby, and of course it's much worse. The life of the hypothetical guy wouldn't be affected at all by Miss Draketooth, he'd go about his life exactly the same as if he'd never hooked up with Miss Draketooth, whereas Orrin's actions were traumatic to Penelope. Whatever you think about whether or not a guy has a right to know, these two scenarios are self-evidently not the same.


Only it's not better. It's still kidnapping.


Do you honestly not see a meaningful difference between getting pregnant from a stranger and never telling them, versus stealing a stranger's child that they carried and birthed and knew about?

Sure there is a difference, doesn't make it any better.

[Ionathus]

Only it's not better. It's still kidnapping.

Sure there is a difference, doesn't make it any better.

Hmm well, thanks for clarifying your perspective. I think it's safe to say we're coming at this from such different ideologies that further discussion is kind of a non-starter.

Now let's circle back to the part where you said the Draketooths are culpable for failing to predict and prepare for every single epic-level spell that could ever be invented.

[Dragonus45]

Now let's circle back to the part where you said the Draketooths are culpable for failing to predict and prepare for every single epic-level spell that could ever be invented.

They knew they were defending a portal of literally cosmic importance with the power to destroy all of reality. Clearly the family only and family first mind set they were working from was meant to guard them from outside influence but not once did they seem to consider the risks to their victims once they were done fleecing them.

[hamishspence]

It's still kidnapping.


Using your logic, Donna from Mamma Mia!:

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Film/MammaMia

would be a kidnapper for not trying to find out who her daughter's father is and telling them - but instead choosing to raise her daughter alone.

I can't go along with that. This simply isn't how kidnapping works.

[Dragonus45]

Using your logic, Donna from Mamma Mia!:

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Film/MammaMia

would be a kidnapper for not trying to find out who her daughter's father is and telling them - but instead choosing to raise her daughter alone.

I can't go along with that. This simply isn't how kidnapping works.

She did effectively steal the child and relationship away from him and deny him the basic right to decide if he wanted to be involved for himself. Fun movie, great soundtrack, unfortunate implications.

[hamishspence]

She did effectively steal the child and relationship away from him and deny him the basic right to decide if he wanted to be involved for himself.

I disagree. I wouldn't call it "effectively stealing the child" in this context.

"Single mother by choice" is a real thing, widespread. Calling them all "kidnappers" or "effectively stealing children" IMO demonises them unfairly.

[dancrilis]

I'd like to see Orrin try to explain to the other Draketooths why he stayed away from the pyramid for, I dunno, at least 15 months in total?, where that baby came from and what happened to its mother. Unless it was an accepted practice in the clan, in which case there'd be no problem at all.


Who knows - 'When I left to see a bit of the world and get some experience I met a woman who I thought would be a useful contact and actually feel in love, but after we had a child i found out she was insane so I took the kid and bolted, no way was I leaving my kid with her' would likely not get overly questioned by most chaotic minded people.



But the problem is that this isn't a court of law.
But it is the court of public opinion which should also perhaps be reasonable - and perhaps people shouldn't be demonised in that either without more then 'a friend's father's dead wife told him a story about one of those people behaving in a poor fashion'.

Peelee mentioned a while ago about 'this is the narrative accept it' (to paraphrase and hopefully not misrepresent) and that is fine - but I am not really approaching it from that point, and even if I was I think there is a question as to why have we taken that as the narrative when there is little to support it.


Durkon would clearly want to know about Kudzu and be involved and it is wrong to steal that child and relationship from him.
Durkon knew she might be pregnant as they discussed protection magic and never bothered to use a sending to her and check in with her (that we know) - so he wasn't that interested until he was literally faced with the child, and she had no reason to think he would be.



This is a "general knowledge of 3.5" thing since there hasn't been any real commentary in the comic about how contraception works I'm defaulting to that. There are a few very very easy ways to ensure no one is getting pregnant in 3.5 and while I can't think of any ways to get around something like say hiring a cleric to curse you with sterility I'm also not a borderline epic level sorcerer with access to crafting new spells if I really need some.
Hiring a cleric to curse you with sterility does not sound 'very very easy', there is a low level spell (they say cantrips but I am assuming orisons) to provide contraception but neither of two mid level clerics bother to have it prepared (panel 7 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1120.html)).

If they didn't have the spell on hand then there is no reason to assume that a random npc on the western continent would have it prepared when a theoretical Draketooth engages them for intercourse.

[hamishspence]

Hiring a cleric to curse you with sterility does not sound 'very very easy',

According to BOVD, sterility is an appropriate effect that Bestow Curse can grant. And Bestow Curse is a 3rd level spell (so, minimum caster level is 5th).

The "goods and services" price, for a single 5th level caster to cast a single 3rd level spell, is 150 GP:

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/goodsAndServices.htm#spell

Cheap for an adventurer, but not for an ordinary commoner or expert.

[Peelee]

As far as I know, there is no legal obligation to inform potential fathers in this case.

Are we discussing what is legal or what is right? There is no legal prohibition against one parent taking a child and deserting the other parent as depicted, after all, but I don't think that is right.

And again, infection risk.
That's a negligible concern given sufficient access to divine magic.

But it is the court of public opinion

Which, quite famously, does not require proof.

[hamishspence]

There is no legal prohibition against one parent taking a child and deserting the other parent as depicted, after all, but I don't think that is right.

Wouldn't it be kidnapping to do what Orrin did, in many jurisdictions?


Whereas I can't think of any normal jurisdictions where it would be kidnapping to do what Donna did.

[Peelee]

Wouldn't it be kidnapping to do what Orrin did, in many jurisdictions?

In all the jurisdictions I know of, perfectly legal.

[hamishspence]

In all the jurisdictions I know of, perfectly legal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_child_abduction

[Peelee]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_child_abduction

Yes, that article notably discusses how it interacts with custody agreements, which take precedence over standard legal doctrine of "you cannot kidnap your own child". As I said, as depicted (eg no sign of divorce proceedings, custody arrangements, specific guardianship, etc.), it looks legally kosher.

This might sound messed up, and obviously it can be abused, but there are also very good reasons for it.

ETA: Don't take legal advice from non-lawyers (eg me), but especially don't take legal advice from Wikipedia. :smallwink:

[hamishspence]

I was thinking of the UK example:

For example, removing a child from the UK for a period of 28 days or more without the other parent's permission (or person with parental responsibility) is a criminal offense.[2]

It doesn't specifically require divorce proceedings there.




ETA: Don't take legal advice from non-lawyers (eg me), but especially don't take legal advice from Wikipedia. :smallwink:

True.

[Dragonus45]

I disagree. I wouldn't call it "effectively stealing the child" in this context.

"Single mother by choice" is a real thing, widespread. Calling them all "kidnappers" or "effectively stealing children" IMO demonises them unfairly.

There are many ways for someone to ethically become pregnant and raise a child as a single parent. I can hardly judge all those people without knowing the specific details.



Durkon knew she might be pregnant as they discussed protection magic and never bothered to use a sending to her and check in with her (that we know) - so he wasn't that interested until he was literally faced with the child, and she had no reason to think he would be.

Starting from the end there, she knew 100% without doubt that Durkon would be interested if only out of a sense of philosophical obligation. She ran head first into that aspect of him herself. Also, even if she thinks he may not be interested, or have good reason to think he is an ******* on a personal level, she knows sending herself and she could just as easily say "hey I'm pregnant do you want to be involved, if no great goodbye lose my number."



Hiring a cleric to curse you with sterility does not sound 'very very easy', there is a low level spell (they say cantrips but I am assuming orisons) to provide contraception but neither of two mid level clerics bother to have it prepared (panel 7 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1120.html)).

If they didn't have the spell on hand then there is no reason to assume that a random npc on the western continent would have it prepared when a theoretical Draketooth engages them for intercourse.

I had forgotten that panel mentioning it was available in setting as a cantrip. That certainly works easily enough but a 0th level spell would be almost literal childs play to disrupt if one wanted to get pregnant without the others consent. In that case the Bestow Curse option would be more analogous to a long term IUD or Vasectomy I guess.


According to BOVD, sterility is an appropriate effect that Bestow Curse can grant. And Bestow Curse is a 3rd level spell (so, minimum caster level is 5th).

The "goods and services" price, for a single 5th level caster to cast a single 3rd level spell, is 150 GP:

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/goodsAndServices.htm#spell

Cheap for an adventurer, but not for an ordinary commoner or expert.

Depends on if the cleric is charging full price. It isn't unusual for the church to do discount spell casting for various reasons in alignment with a particular deities spheres of influence I can think of several who for various reasons might be willing to do it for material or a nominal fee. That is more setting dependent though and the existence of a cantrip alternative means it would likely be limited to more affluent members of society.

[Peelee]

I was thinking of the UK example:

For example, removing a child from the UK for a period of 28 days or more without the other parent's permission (or person with parental responsibility) is a criminal offense.[2]

It doesn't specifically require divorce proceedings there.

Well, I did say in all the jurisdictions I'm familiar with, and being from a group of fifty countries in a trench coat the US, it should not be terribly surprising that I am not well-versed in UK law. :smallamused:

ETA: Also, looking into it a bit more even in the UK it is not a criminal offense provided they stay in-country and are not violating court orders.

[dancrilis]

Wouldn't it be kidnapping to do what Orrin did, in many jurisdictions?

Had Inkyrius disappeared with the children instead of suing for full custody would it be kidnapping or would it merely be a parent taking their children where they wanted them to be.

My loose understanding is that it is not kidnapping when you have legal custody of the child - in whichever 'likely no longer existing country' Orrin and Penelope where in? who knows.



Which, quite famously, does not require proof.
But we as both the members of the court and the subjects of the court might be better off seeing if their is any that holds up.

[hamishspence]

My loose understanding is that it is not kidnapping when you have legal custody of the child - in whichever 'likely no longer existing country' Orrin and Penelope where in? who knows.

https://www.attorneys.com/child-custody/what-constitutes-parental-kidnapping


Parental kidnapping or parental abduction is defined as the concealment, taking, or retention of a child by his parent in violation of the rights of the child's other parent or another family member. Violated rights may include, for example, custody and visitation rights. Sadly, thousands of children are abducted by a parent and removed from the United States annually. Even more children are kidnapped by a parent within the confines of U.S. borders. Parental kidnapping also happens when a child is abducted from a custodial parent abroad and transported into the United States by the non-custodial parent illegally.

More Than Just a Custody Dispute

Make no mistake – parental kidnapping is illegal. Parental kidnapping is far more than a dispute regarding custody matters between divorcing parents. Such matters are relegated to the civil courts; however, parental kidnapping is a criminal act. In fact, parental kidnapping violates the laws of all U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and the Virgin Islands, plus U.S. federal laws and international laws.

I think, in the context of OOTS, it's reasonable to say that Orrin has violated Penelope's custody rights and visitation rights.


By contrast, in the context of Mamma Mia!, I find it less reasonable, to say Donna has violated Bill, Sam, and Harry's custody rights and visitation rights.

[Peelee]

https://www.attorneys.com/child-custody/what-constitutes-parental-kidnapping



I think, in the context of OOTS, it's reasonable to say that Orrin has violated Penelope's custody rights and visitation rights.


By contrast, in the context of Mamma Mia!, I find it less reasonable, to say Donna has violated Bill, Sam, and Harry's custody rights and visitation rights.

Pointing out a specific clause here:


by the non-custodial parent illegally.
"non custodial parent" is carrying the vast majority of the weight here.

Penelope doesn't have custody rights* and visitation rights. She has custody. As does Orrin. There is no non-custodial parent.

*not as understood in this context. Again, not a lawyer, actual lawyers would be able to put it better than me (and potentially say how I'm wrong, the law is complex).

[dancrilis]

https://www.attorneys.com/child-custody/what-constitutes-parental-kidnapping

I am not particularly interested in talking real world country laws - but the bit that stands out to me particularly is:


Parental kidnapping also happens when a child is abducted from a custodial parent abroad and transported into the 'nation'* by the non-custodial parent illegally.
*edited the quote to remove reference to a real world nation

The implication being that if the child is transported into the jurisdiction legally by a non-custodial parent it is fine, or if the child is transported illegally by a custodial parent it is also fine relating to this - this seems suspect.

The western continent has a lot of countries come and go - what laws if any Orrin may have broken are unknown and if he did break any the nation he broke them in likely does not exist.

[hamishspence]

"non custodial parent" is carrying the vast majority of the weight here.

The sentence only included the specific case of someone outside X taking a child into X.



Penelope doesn't have custody rights* and visitation rights. She has custody. As does Orrin.

As far as I know, all non-separated, non-divorced parents have custody rights by default. That's what "having custody" means. So, when a non-divorced parent disappears with their child, they are violating the other parent's custody rights.




The western continent has a lot of countries come and go - what laws if any Orrin may have broken are unknown and if he did break any the nation he broke them in likely does not exist.

Does that matter? Ian for example, "broke the laws" in Tyrinaria, but he's being held by the Empire of Blood even after Tyrinaria's replacement by the Empire of Blood.

[Dragonus45]

Does that matter? Ian for example, "broke the laws" in Tyrinaria, but he's being held by the Empire of Blood even after Tyrinaria's replacement by the Empire of Blood.

That's the thing about evil dictatorships, what matters has more to do with what the tyrant in charge wants than legal theory.

[hamishspence]

Going back to the original topic - I'd have to say that Serini will be somewhat upset.

She liked Girard a lot (as expressed by her dairy) and even if she's now willing to call him paranoid, I doubt that corresponds to her being unupset that all his remaining relatives are now dead at V's hands.

[Ionathus]

Going back to the original topic - I'd have to say that Serini will be somewhat upset.

She liked Girard a lot (as expressed by her dairy) and even if she's now willing to call him paranoid, I doubt that corresponds to her being unupset that all his remaining relatives are now dead at V's hands.

Agree, though I predict it won't come up. Familicide was so unfathomably awful that it's hard to talk about in the comic. If Serini found out, she would absolutely be enraged, but V would be going "no really, I deeply regret it and it was a horrible thing to do, I've changed since then" and the whole thing seems a little messy rather than an interesting story beat.

Especially because Serini already attacked the Order...I think it would feel repetitive to have her turn on them again. Even if it's supposedly justifiable.

[RatElemental]

Okay, but on what, exactly, does the assumption that the female Draketooth would only conceive through one-night stands rest?

I think I was the first to bring it up, and it wasn't a thing I was saying definitely happens, just a thing that conceivably could happen.


Orrin also robbed Penelope, presumably to fund all of the clan's expendive magics and equipment, something that would be considerably harder with a random stranger.

True, and I did bring that up in my original speculation. Though maybe sometimes the clan just needs a few kids, and this would be a low risk low cost way for them to do that. You can rob people without seducing and marrying them first.


Meanwhile having many unprotected sexual encounters with strangers in quick sucession seems like an easy way to catch an STD.

Not as much of an issue as it would be in (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/resistance.htm) real (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#greatFortitude) life (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#amuletofHealth), I (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/bearsEndurance.htm) suspect (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/removeDisease.htm).

Also I can't link it anywhere but there's a bunch more options to boost fort saves outside of SRD like Steadfast Determination, and ones that are SRD but would be strange to have active during the act like a Cloak of Resistance

[Peelee]

I Not as much of an issue as it would be in (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/resistance.htm) real (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#greatFortitude) life (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#amuletofHealth), I (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/bearsEndurance.htm) suspect (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/removeDisease.htm).

Also I can't link it anywhere but there's a bunch more options to boost fort saves outside of SRD like Steadfast Determination, and ones that are SRD but would be strange to have active during the act like a Cloak of Resistance

So you're saying that, with the magic item crafting feats and decisions, once could instigate sexytime by putting on a robe and wizard hat?

[RatElemental]

So you're saying that, with the magic item crafting feats and decisions, once could instigate sexytime by putting on a robe and wizard hat?

If you're putting on your fortitude boosting gear to prepare for that sort of thing I think your partner may be offended.

... Unless you two are into some slightly more kinky things, I suppose.

That said magic items do open up a lot of other interesting options in the bedroom, even before bringing in third party stuff like the book that shall not be named. Especially when you bring the custom magic item creation rules into play, you could put that fort save on a ring, or put something more fun on a cloak if you want to wear a cloak for some reason. The possibilities are pretty open.

[Peelee]

If you're putting on your fortitude boosting gear to prepare for that sort of thing I think your partner may be offended.

Eh. The elders of the internet would approve.

[RatElemental]

Eh. The elders of the internet would approve.

You know, I completely forgot that in... certain rulesets, fortitude saves start kicking in after a certain amount of... activity.

[Ionathus]

Eh. The elders of the internet would approve.

If it's any consolation, I loved the reference. Not really an "elder" myself, though. What's one step younger than that?

[Peelee]

If it's any consolation, I loved the reference. Not really an "elder" myself, though. What's one step younger than that?

Navigator of the netscape?

[Ionathus]

Navigator of the netscape?

Fitting, given that my first memory of logging into the internet is via a Netscape window in my elementary school's computer lab.

The lab had orange shag carpeting on the walls.

[Peelee]

Fitting, given that my first memory of logging into the internet is via a Netscape window in my elementary school's computer lab.

The lab had orange shag carpeting on the walls.

Oh man, I forgot about carpeted walls! Truly those were the halcyon days of our youth.

[pearl jam]

Fitting, given that my first memory of logging into the internet is via a Netscape window in my elementary school's computer lab.

The lab had orange shag carpeting on the walls.

Was that to muffle the sound of the screams? :smalleek:

[Squire Doodad]

Was that to muffle the sound of the screams? :smalleek:

Also dial up sounds!
Which could have caused the screams, come to think of it.

[Ionathus]

Was that to muffle the sound of the screams? :smalleek:


Also dial up sounds!

What are dial-up sounds, if not the digitized screams of the damned?

[Precure]

Also you are sort of generalizing gender in such a way to ignore that men can in fact get pregnant as well.

I said female and was referring to their sex, not gender.

[hamishspence]

I don't play Dungeons & Dragons, so I'm not sure how being half-dragon affects longevity, but given that it's centered on Tolkien, I'm betting halflings live longer than humans.

They do. Almost 50% longer (35 for a human is equivalent to 50 for a halfling, 53 for a human is equivalent to 75 for a halfling, maximum rollable age for a halfling is 200, for a human, 110.)

Being a half-dragon extends age according to Races of the Dragon - but there's no strict rules for how much it does.

But Girard isn't a half-dragon - he's a quarter-dragon. And, since he does not appear to have scales or claws on his hands, he probably doesn't have the Draconic template. This would suggest that, ruleswise, he's a regular human, with the only thing his "dragon heritage" does, being "why he takes sorcerer levels" (Sorcerers often have dragon ancestors).

[Psyren]

You know, I completely forgot that in... certain rulesets, fortitude saves start kicking in after a certain amount of... activity.

Endurance/longevity would be measured by an ability check rather than a saving throw in both 3e and 5e. (Not sure about 4e.)

[Xihirli]

Had Inkyrius disappeared with the children instead of suing for full custody would it be kidnapping or would it merely be a parent taking their children where they wanted them to be.

My loose understanding is that it is not kidnapping when you have legal custody of the child - in whichever 'likely no longer existing country' Orrin and Penelope where in? who knows.


Inkyrius has been raising their children by themself for the entire duration of the comic, and had reason to believe that V was a danger to their children, and KNEW that V had given in to fiendish influence. Also, V left them when given the choice to remain. A very different circumstance from what Orrin did.