OOTS #1261 - The DIscussion Thread

[The Giant]

New comic is up.

[Emanick]

"All endings are dead."

I love Greyview so much.

[wilphe]

Redcloak doubling down on his chosen path again.

Noting that the only two options he considers are:

1) MITD being stupid

2) Things being uppped in response to their presence (and then taking that as proof he is doing the right thing)


Conspicuously NOT getting closer to figuring out that MITD is working against them or having any insight into how the dungeon actually works

[LadyEowyn]

I’m liking Oona a lot.

[Fyraltari]

:redcloak: Normally, carelessness would be the most logical explanation for [...] anything that happens to, near or because of us.

Red is really aware of the kind of story he's in.

[LadyEowyn]

Redcloak cast a spell in the middle panel, do we think that’s important? Rich has used that before: for example, here:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0828.html

Fortunately Redcloak hasn’t reached any of the right conclusions, either about MITD being deliberately undermining them or about the dungeons being just a distraction.

[dancrilis]

Those look like some somewhat formidable monsters - and like they did no damage at all to our heroes.

Still liking Oona and Greyview - but getting more suspicious if the bugbears are in league with Serini.

Edit:

Redcloak cast a spell in the middle panel, do we think that’s important? Rich has used that before: for example, here:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0828.html

Could be but I think it is likely just him dismissing his true seeing spell (his eye pops at the same time).

[Murk]

Redcloak cast a spell in the middle panel, do we think that’s important? Rich has used that before: for example, here:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0828.html

Think he was just dismissing some kind of magical vision (see also his eye returning to normal colour). Not sure what the D&D name is - True Seeing?

[Ciffo]

Redcloak cast a spell in the middle panel, do we think that’s important? Rich has used that before: for example, here:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0828.html

He's dispelling something that he has cast before, perhaps true vision (see the change in the color of the eye)

[LadyEowyn]

Could be but I think it is likely just him dismissing his true seeing spell (his eye pops at the same time).
Oh, good catch, you’re right.

[Ruck]

Redcloak cast a spell in the middle panel, do we think that’s important? Rich has used that before: for example, here:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0828.html

Looks like the red effect on his eye is dispersed when he does that, and it goes back to its natural yellow. (I don't know what that effect is and don't know enough to try to guess.)

edit: Wow, when I previewed this there wasn't a response yet. Anyway, yeah, True Seeing makes sense.

[SlashDash]

Those look like some somewhat formidable monsters - and like they did no damage at all to our heroes.

Red Cloak is the healer in the gang. I think it's more likely he just healed them.
Xykon said those monsters there can even give him some XP, so they have to be a threat.



Any idea what those monsters are?

[Fyraltari]

I’m liking Oona a lot.

I love that I can't quite tell whether her sassing of Redcloak is intentional or not.

[RMS Oceanic]

I like the demon roaches' metacommentary on the art style.

[Savil]

Redcloak and persistent misinterpretation of clues. Classic (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0546.html).

[hroþila]

:redcloak: Normally, carelessness would be the most logical explanation for [...] anything that happens to, near or because of us.

Red is really aware of the kind of story he's in.
That was refreshing - usually it's the Order saying stuff like that even though it applies equally well to Team Evil

[Breccia]

"All endings are dead."

Man, I'm redeciding my new favorite side character today.

[Thecommander236]

All I'm reminded of is that Red Cloak could've had a normal life and settled down.

[HUMVEE Driver]

Finally an update on the other bad guys! I've been missing them. Redcloak deserves more time lol So cool to see the... dead dinos? That a Jurrasic Dominion reference?

Pretty great strip. A lot of good discussion, even if it didn't exactly advance the plot. Good stuff. Entertaining at least!

[137beth]

I laughed pretty hard at the roaches comments, but I think Redcloak jumping to the wrong conclusions is even better.

[Shining Wrath]

Redcloak demonstrates how a smart person can reach a wrong conclusion a dumb one would never have conceived.

Also, if Team Evil picks up the pace, Team Evil will weaken themselves.

Finally, Redcloak's contempt for MitD is really starting to cost him.

[KorvinStarmast]

Noting that the only two options he considers are:

1) MITD being stupid
2) Things being upped in response to their presence (and then taking that as proof he is doing the right thing)

Conspicuously NOT getting closer to figuring out that MITD is working against them or having any insight into how the dungeon actually works Sometimes, folks attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity (Hanlon's Razor territory) but we see here an inverse of Hanlon's Razor: attributing to stupidity that which can be attributed to malice, as well as "the Order is creating problems!" (which is more or less true but for a different reason).

That a Jurrasic Dominion reference? Had not thought of that (I got tired of Jurrasic Park after two) but given the way Rich tosses in pop culture references I'll go with that.

The return of Greyview: :smallsmile:

[Oromin]

Greyview and Oona are great as always.

Interesting, it sounds like Redcloak is planning to abandon the search for Durkon and Minrah. I guess the thought is that by clearing all the doors he can determine if the doors were marked in error or not.

[danielxcutter]

Those look like some somewhat formidable monsters - and like they did no damage at all to our heroes.

Still liking Oona and Greyview - but getting more suspicious if the bugbears are in league with Serini.

Edit:


Could be but I think it is likely just him dismissing his true seeing spell (his eye pops at the same time).

…”Heroes”?

[Psyren]

I wonder what Redcloak's ideas to "pick up the pace" are. (And why he didn't use them before.)


All I'm reminded of is that Red Cloak could've had a normal life and settled down.

That would have just meant another goblin wearing the cloak; probably a less effective one. (Though maybe not one who would have tried imploding the first cleric who actually came to negotiate.)


I’m liking Oona a lot.

I am too. So Xykon fridging her in passing or a fit of pique is feeling increasingly likely. (I hope I'm wrong.)

[Ivrytwr]

Wonderful wisdom from Oona and Greyview.
And of course, Redcloak has to out-smart himself too.
Thanks Giant! Last line made me laugh-out-loud.

[Windscion]

So the art on the stone is "crude." Good to know. And the demon roaches are winking at the fourth wall again.
(There was some speculation that the art style was meant to be realistic because of cartoon world.)

[Fyraltari]

Redcloak is being perfectly reasonnable in his conclusions here. He is in fact correct to think that the fake Xs are due to enemy action. He just doesn't realize which enemy.


…”Heroes”?
Heroically struggling against people cruelly denying them the right to bloody murder.


That would have just meant another goblin wearing the cloak; probably a less effective one. (Though maybe not one who would have tried imploding the first cleric who actually came to negotiate.)
Redcloak's track record isn't that great if we're being honest. Sure the Plan is the closest it's ever been to success, bit also the closest to crashing and burning.

Another goblin wearing the cloak would habe lead to an altogether different story. Maybe that one who have ditched Xykon after Lirian's Glade.




I am too. So Xykon fridging her in passing or a fit of pique is feeling increasingly likely. (I hope I'm wrong.)
Nah, Xykon don't kill his minions we know the name of.

[InvisibleBison]

I wonder what Redcloak's ideas to "pick up the pace" are. (And why he didn't use them before.)

He could be thinking of using planar ally and/or gate to recruit a bunch of outsiders to back them up. Since those spells cost XP and Team Evil could handle the monsters on their own, it would make sense for him to have not been using them so far.

[remetagross]

I'm not quite sure Red Cloak's comment about the MitD "messing up" could not be understood as Red Cloak implying maliciousness on the part of the MitD. Is there any reason for him, due to the MitD's prior behaviour, to suspect the MitD in any way?

[Zonkerbl]

I'm glad O'chul was right about Redcloak, but this makes me worried that he will never see reason. And they need Redcloak to cooperate in the end.

[Windscion]

I'm glad O'chul was right about Redcloak, but this makes me worried that he will never see reason. And they need Redcloak to cooperate in the end.

Probably be easier to get TDO to cooperate. Thing is, we know so little about TDO.

[wilphe]

I'm glad O'chul was right about Redcloak, but this makes me worried that he will never see reason. And they need Redcloak to cooperate in the end.

They need TDO

Redcloak's cooperation is only necessary to get in contact with TDO


Therefore I suspect that that Redcloak's story will end with him no longer working for TDO

[Malloon]

Ha, BURN! Oona correctly points out Redcloak is only assuming that the reason people want to stop him is because he might gain all that power over them.

And you know what happens when you assume, Redcloak? :xykon:

[danielxcutter]

Ha, BURN! Oona correctly points out Redcloak is only assuming that the reason people want to stop him is because he might gain all that power over them.

And you know what happens when you assume, Redcloak? :xykon:

Huh? Not sure where that comes from.

[Frozenstep]

They need TDO

...Kind of? Didn't Thor say a 9th level spell from Redcloak is all it would take to make the new 4-color seal?

That said, they probably do want to have TDO's cooperation going forward to weld any issues that develop, but that can be negotiated later. A 9th level spell now, even if unapproved by TDO, still saves the world and removes the threat of the gates entirely.

[mjasghar]

Foreshadowing of WrongEyes eventual death?

[Dragonus45]

Recloak flexing that talent at being correct yet also terribly wrong at the same time like always.

[DreadPirateDB]

Redcloak and persistent misinterpretation of clues. Classic (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0546.html).

Ha, I missed the drive-by diss on Incarnum users: less useful than fortune cookies or a Magic 8 Ball.

[Oromin]

...Kind of? Didn't Thor say a 9th level spell from Redcloak is all it would take to make the new 4-color seal?

That said, they probably do want to have TDO's cooperation going forward to weld any issues that develop, but that can be negotiated later. A 9th level spell now, even if unapproved by TDO, still saves the world and removes the threat of the gates entirely.

There are five rifts so they might need to do the ritual five times. If so tricking him probably wouldn't work.

[TuringTest]

:redcloak: Normally, carelessness would be the most logical explanation for [...] anything that happens to, near or because of us.

Red is really aware of the kind of story he's in.

Beware! We know how a powerful weapon that knowledge may be in this setting.



...Kind of? Didn't Thor say a 9th level spell from Redcloak is all it would take to make the new 4-color seal?

That said, they probably do want to have TDO's cooperation going forward to weld any issues that develop, but that can be negotiated later. A 9th level spell now, even if unapproved by TDO, still saves the world and removes the threat of the gates entirely.

I don't think they can cast that spell without TDO's cooperation. Clerics can usually cast unapproved spells without a direct god's intervention because of the Domain Agreement (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0954.html), and TDO wasn't there when that was created.

Also, a newly created one-shot ad-hoc spell? Surely Redcloak would require approval from his boss for that?

[danielxcutter]

Ha, I missed the drive-by diss on Incarnum users: less useful than fortune cookies or a Magic 8 Ball.

I mean incarnum isn’t that bad; Incarnate is a fantastic dip and Totemist has quite frightening damage potential.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Beware! We know how a powerful weapon that knowledge may be in this setting.
Yeah, but it is a double-edged sword. See: Tarquin, who knew exactly what story he was in, and still managed to get it completely wrong.


I don't think they can cast that spell without TDO's cooperation. Clerics can usually cast unapproved spells without a direct god's intervention because of the Domain Agreement (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0954.html), and TDO wasn't there when that was created.

Also, a newly created one-shot ad-hoc spell? Surely Redcloak would require approval from his boss for that?

No, it wouldn't be an ad-hoc spell. It would be taking a 9th level spell and turning it into energy (spontaneous casting). That undiluted energy either heals or harms, but in either case it is it's quiddity's colour, which is what Thor requested, AFAICT.

GW

[Jason]

Do you suppose Redcloak has the Knowledge domain and is casting detect secret doors?

[Malloon]

Huh? Not sure where that comes from.

Redcloak thinks the people trying to stop him (the sign in Oona's drawn-from-real-life analogy) are doing that because he has a chance of succeeding in using the ritual to get concessions from the gods (whatever the reason Oona's cousin ignored the sign in the analogy), and is ignoring the possibility that they are doing it because his actions will have some other hideous consequence, one that Durkon and Minrah have already told him about, namely ending the world (dying by poisonous berries in the analogy).

In short, Oona is pointing out that Redcloak's insistence that he's on the right track because he's getting pushback has a leap of logic or two. Just like her cousin who ignored (or was perhaps even emboldened by) the sign and decided to eat the berries anyway.

[danielxcutter]

Do you suppose Redcloak has the Knowledge domain and is casting detect secret doors?

Probably Find Traps or True Seeing. That being said the only reason I don’t think he has the Knowledge domain is because he already has… I think Destruction and Evil? And he’s not a Cloistered Cleric either.


Redcloak thinks the people trying to stop him (the sign in Oona's drawn-from-real-life analogy) are doing that because he has a chance of succeeding in using the ritual to get concessions from the gods (whatever the reason Oona's cousin ignored the sign in the analogy), and is ignoring the possibility that they are doing it because his actions will have some other hideous consequence, one that Durkon and Minrah have already told him about, namely ending the world (dying by poisonous berries in the analogy).

In short, Oona is pointing out that Redcloak's insistence that he's on the right track because he's getting pushback has a leap of logic or two. Just like her cousin who ignored (or was perhaps even emboldened by) the sign and decided to eat the berries anyway.

Ohhh. That makes sense!

[Jason]

Probably Find Traps or True Seeing. That being said the only reason I don’t think he has the Knowledge domain is because he already has… I think Destruction and Evil? And he’s not a Cloistered Cleric either.
But then, if he used find traps he would have found the mechanism by which the dungeon operates, wouldn't he?

[danielxcutter]

Eh, the bonus isn’t that high I think? I forget how it works.

[Thales]

:redcloak: Normally, carelessness would be the most logical explanation for [...] anything that happens to, near or because of us.

Red is really aware of the kind of story he's in.

He is really sounding a lot like Roy in this strip. (Albeit more Roy pre-character-development.) Much like Belkar was well-suited for getting through to Serini, I feel like Roy will be relatively well-suited for talking to Redcloak when the time comes.

[Fyraltari]

He is really sounding a lot like Roy in this strip. (Albeit more Roy pre-character-development.) Much like Belkar was well-suited for getting through to Serini, I feel like Roy will be relatively well-suited for talking to Redcloak when the time comes.
Redcloak and Roy have always had a lot in common (probably comes with being the straight men of their respective parties).

[Jason]

Eh, the bonus isn’t that high I think? I forget how it works.

Looked it up: it's "may detect traps as a Rogue, +one-half cleric level as an insight bonus (max +10)". So Redcloak with the spell and his Wisdom bonus probably still doesn't have as high a bonus as Haylee does and might not spot how the dungeon works if he gets a low roll.

[tomaO2]

I thought that Redcloak would believe that someone else is going around painting Xs on the doors when they are not watching. That seems more logical to me than the dungeon respawning faster, or that the monster is doing it himself.

[gatemansgc]

"he ate poison berries and died"

so straight to the point.

[masamune1]

I'm not quite sure Red Cloak's comment about the MitD "messing up" could not be understood as Red Cloak implying maliciousness on the part of the MitD. Is there any reason for him, due to the MitD's prior behaviour, to suspect the MitD in any way?

Well, he's a mass murdering bigoted fanatic who killed his own brother and is trying to take the world hostage, who is hiding important information from his boss as well as said bosses' phylactery. He's not the sort of person who "needs" a reason to suspect somebody, and he's got a history of killing his own allies as well.

That being said...he doesn't suspect the MitD. He suspects that "other people" (likely the OotS or their allies- which is technically true of course) are the ones sabotaging the doors. He doesn't seem to think that the MitD did it but rather that an unseen enemy is doing it instead.

[KorvinStarmast]

A few thoughts I could not get to earlier.
And the demon roaches are winking at the fourth wall again.
It's their schtick.

I'm not quite sure Red Cloak's comment about the MitD "messing up" could not be understood as Red Cloak implying maliciousness on the part of the MitD. If not strictly malicious, then certainly (a) covert and (b) contra Redcloak's goals / mission / plan, and Reddie is all about The Plan.

They need TDO

Redcloak's cooperation is only necessary to get in contact with TDO. Therefore I suspect that that Redcloak's story will end with him no longer working for TDO That's an interesting line of thinking. Reminds me of a TV show from a decade or so ago where the tag line "you're fired" featured. (Not going further to avoid RL banned topics).

Yeah, but it is a double-edged sword. See: Tarquin, who knew exactly what story he was in, and still managed to get it completely wrong. +1. His blind spots included his assumption that Elan had to be the leader / main character despite Elan explaining (truthfully and in some detail) that the facts were otherwise.
I feel like Roy will be relatively well-suited for talking to Redcloak when the time comes. As do I, Durkon's skills in wordplay are shown to be 'improving' but not 'polished' do date.

[Crusher]

Redcloak and persistent misinterpretation of clues. Classic (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0546.html).

Though... don't we find out later that at some point RC (possibly well before that scene, but I don't recall the timing) decided O'chul really didn't know anything? The torture and trying to get info out of O'chul eventually stopped being about trying to get information and was really just an act so that Team Evil would stay in place longer, giving RC more time to build up Gobbotopia?

[RMS Oceanic]

Do you suppose Redcloak has the Knowledge domain and is casting detect secret doors?

Not sure if his current design still supports it, but there was debate a while back that he was in fact a cloistered cleric. Depends if he's still wearing light armour or not.

[KorvinStarmast]

What I liked about strip 1261, selected panels:
Panel 2: (a) the nice overhead light fixture, (b) "all endings are dead"

Panel 6: "But the sudden appearance of opposing clergy strongly implies that enemy forces are secretly moving against us"

- Comments: I am not sure what implies "secret" but for sure the paladins and the order are moving against Reddie now, however, he is not aware that the paladins are present.

- There's a lot packed into panel 6 that sets up Redcloak being right to be concerned for perhaps the wrong reason.

Panel 8: nice closing humorous ending.

[Crusher]

His blind spots included his assumption that Elan had to be the leader / main character despite Elan explaining (truthfully and in some detail) that the facts were otherwise.

I might be misunderstanding, but Tarquin gradually became perfectly aware Elan wasn't the leader of the OOTS. And Tarquin knows what kind of story is going on, but he's not happy with it and tries to force Elan into the story Tarquin wants.

Which is kind of ironic, because Tarquin lectures Elan at some length about the perils of trying to rush or change narratives.

[masamune1]

I might be misunderstanding, but Tarquin gradually became perfectly aware Elan wasn't the leader of the OOTS. And Tarquin knows what kind of story is going on, but he's not happy with it and tries to force Elan into the story Tarquin wants.

Which is kind of ironic, because Tarquin lectures Elan at some length about the perils of trying to rush or change narratives.

Not exactly. He knows that's the sort of story the OotS "appear" to be in, but he genuinely believes that "Elan leading his own group to overthrow his father's evil empire culminating in an epic showdown with the father himself" is what the story is ACTUALLY about, and the whole business with the Lich is just some sidequest or story arc that isn't part of the main story.

He doesn't truly fathom that Roy is the actual main character, rather than something like the Morpheus to Elan's Neo or the Kenobi to his Luke.

[Savil]

Though... don't we find out later that at some point RC (possibly well before that scene, but I don't recall the timing) decided O'chul really didn't know anything? The torture and trying to get info out of O'chul eventually stopped being about trying to get information and was really just an act so that Team Evil would stay in place longer, giving RC more time to build up Gobbotopia?
Unless I'm forgetting something, you're talking about the scene two strips later (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0548.html)?
Sorry if I'm wrong, I just really got this deja vu of Redcloak going for the overcomplicated conclusion instead of straightforward.

[wilphe]

That's an interesting line of thinking.

I suspect that TDO will be quite willing to do a deal with the other gods, originally he was going to blackmail them with the Snarl - but if he gets what he wants without that fine

RC, as you said is all about The Plan and would regard that as the ultimate betrayal

[Sky_Schemer]

Sorry if I'm wrong, I just really got this deja vu of Redcloak going for the overcomplicated conclusion instead of straightforward.

In this case, he even has proof that enemy forces are working against him. So that is a seemingly simpler conclusion.

That being said, Occam's Razor is great and all, but the simplest solution is not always the correct one.

[Wildstag]

RC's righteous stubbornness is just so funny to me, it really does not get old. Even in the face of "the gods created this world, and could end it any time they please", and even with zero evidence his cause could win, he still blindly chugs along because "opposition means we're a threat".

Usually such blind devotion to a cause opposite the villain's interests is boring but darn if it isn't funny here.

[Duiker]

Nah, Xykon don't kill his minions we know the name of.

Yeah. That's Redcloak's job.

[arimareiji]

Redcloak thinks the people trying to stop him (the sign in Oona's drawn-from-real-life analogy) are doing that because he has a chance of succeeding in using the ritual to get concessions from the gods (whatever the reason Oona's cousin ignored the sign in the analogy), and is ignoring the possibility that they are doing it because his actions will have some other hideous consequence, one that Durkon and Minrah have already told him about, namely ending the world (dying by poisonous berries in the analogy).

In short, Oona is pointing out that Redcloak's insistence that he's on the right track because he's getting pushback has a leap of logic or two. Just like her cousin who ignored (or was perhaps even emboldened by) the sign and decided to eat the berries anyway.

I love this interpretation and wouldn't be a bit surprised if Oona makes this point, but I don't think Oona was criticizing Redcloak for assuming "They only want to stop me because having the Gate will give me power to get concessions from the gods" in this specific interaction. (I think he is stuck in that assumption, but I don't think Oona was addressing it here.)

To me, Redcloak is saying active opposition proves they're on the right track to find the Gate. The opposition's motive for keeping him from finding the Gate, and whether finding the Gate will actually lead to concessions, don't directly enter into it.

[Eric the White]

In this case, he even has proof that enemy forces are working against him. So that is a seemingly simpler conclusion.

That being said, Occam's Razor is great and all, but the simplest solution is not always the correct one.

Its okay, but people seem to often leave out a couple parts: All other things being equal, the simplest solution is usually correct.

[Crimsonmantle]

Well, he's a mass murdering bigoted fanatic who killed his own brother and is trying to take the world hostage, who is hiding important information from his boss as well as said bosses' phylactery. He's not the sort of person who "needs" a reason to suspect somebody, and he's got a history of killing his own allies as well.

That being said...he doesn't suspect the MitD. He suspects that "other people" (likely the OotS or their allies- which is technically true of course) are the ones sabotaging the doors. He doesn't seem to think that the MitD did it but rather that an unseen enemy is doing it instead.

His "boss"? Ahem.

[Agi Hammerthief]

But then, if he used find traps he would have found the mechanism by which the dungeon operates, wouldn't he?
only if he cast it early enough.
If he cast it past the swap over and now dismisses it at the far end of the dungeon, no amount of temporary bonus is going to reveal the trap.

[Windscion]

Yeah. That's Redcloak's job.

Someone seems to have forgotten Shelby (the Dragonslayer).

[Quild]

For those wondering like me, according to this thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621022), we're on day 29 or 30 since Belkar's prophecy and the Girard's Gate day was on day 20.

So Team Evil must have been doing that dungeon thing since a maximum of 9 days.

[Wizard_Lizard]

Cool! New comic! Definetly hope that MITD's ruse lasts a wee while longer!

[H_H_F_F]

Oona's little joke feels very prophetic. Are we being told that Redcloak's refusal to believe others might not be out to get him will kill him?

[Wowlock]

Redcloak is truly that one 'smart dumb person' every party has.

Wonder how he will feel at the end of the road.

[Fyraltari]

Wonder how he will feel at the end of the road.

My money's on "guilty".

[Ruck]

Wonder how he will feel at the end of the road.

Appropriately for someone whose lifespan has been extended by the Crimson Mantle: He can't let go. It's unnatural.

[JonahFalcon]

I love this interpretation and wouldn't be a bit surprised if Oona makes this point, but I don't think Oona was criticizing Redcloak for assuming "They only want to stop me because having the Gate will give me power to get concessions from the gods" in this specific interaction. (I think he is stuck in that assumption, but I don't think Oona was addressing it here.)

To me, Redcloak is saying active opposition proves they're on the right track to find the Gate. The opposition's motive for keeping him from finding the Gate, and whether finding the Gate will actually lead to concessions, don't directly enter into it.

I think Oona is warning Redcloak and Redcloak is too stupid to take the hint.

[Verdruss]

So, any theories on what these new tactics are that RC is talking about? How to pick up the pace of exploration? Using the bugbears? doing something to the dungeon itself? Just checking and not killing everything inside?

[bengator]

Can anyone tell me what kind of monsters those dead guys were? Thanks!

[Ellye]

Can anyone tell me what kind of monsters those dead guys were? Thanks!They look like a few type of dinosaurs.

But dinosaurs tend to have a relatively low Challenge Rating in D&D, so they would be a bit out of place there.

[CountDVB]

Oona's little joke feels very prophetic. Are we being told that Redcloak's refusal to believe others might not be out to get him will kill him?

More like dogmatically purusing a reckless quest in spite of the overwhelming signs telling you it's a bad idea?

Then again, Redcloak is at his core, a moody angsty teenager way in over his head and not mature enough to really grapple with his screwups.

[Grey Watcher]

Redcloak, sweetie, O-Chul tried to teach you about Occam's Razor. Did you not listen?

[CountDVB]

Redcloak, sweetie, O-Chul tried to teach you about Occam's Razor. Did you not listen?

The Crimson Mantle surrounding his fragile sense of self protected him from such criticism

[Jay R]

And of course, Redcloak has to out-smart himself too.

Well, somebody has to do it.


I don't think they can cast that spell without TDO's cooperation. Clerics can usually cast unapproved spells without a direct god's intervention because of the Domain Agreement (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0954.html), and TDO wasn't there when that was created.

He just needs TDO's cooperation to grant the spell in the morning, not to approve the specific application of it later.

[Silent Wrangler]

The most hilariously tragic thing about Redcloak is that he has already won . He is already in a position to demand concessions, and there are gods who are willing to provide, if only he is willing to listen.

[carrion pigeons]

I really like the punchlines where people are talking out of both sides of their mouth, and Oona is great at it.

[Fyraltari]

The most hilariously tragic thing about Redcloak is that he has already won . He is already in a position to demand concessions, and there are gods who are willing to provide, if only he is willing to listen.

It's a bit more complicated than that isn't it? He's not in this position because of anything he's done, but because of the nature of his god. It's less "you've already won" and more "you never had to play in the first place".

Can't be easy to hear that your life's work was pointless.

[faustin]

Redcloak and persistent misinterpretation of clues. Classic (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0546.html).

To be fair, he later confessed Jirix it was less about obtaining useful intel, and more about having an excuse for keeping Team Evil in "Gobbotopia" until its position in the geopolitical arena was secured (and out of reach of Shinjo and co.).

[danielxcutter]

True, but he did kinda expect O-Chul to know something, even if that wasn't his only motivation.

[arimareiji]

I think Oona is warning Redcloak and Redcloak is too stupid to take the hint.
Indeed and a half.


More like dogmatically purusing a reckless quest in spite of the overwhelming signs telling you it's a bad idea?

Then again, Redcloak is at his core, a moody angsty teenager way in over his head and not mature enough to really grapple with his screwups.
I feel for his self-honesty (size S strength 7), having to go up against his ego (size C strength 21). That grapple check was kindofa foregone conclusion.


The Crimson Mantle surrounding his fragile sense of self protected him from such criticism
And gave his ego a +4 circumstance bonus on the grapple check. :smallbiggrin:


The most hilariously tragic thing about Redcloak is that he has already won . He is already in a position to demand concessions, and there are gods who are willing to provide, if only he is willing to listen.
"But it doesn't count if I don't force them to obey my will!"
Angsty teenager indeed.

[MaverickMopete]

Then again, Redcloak is at his core, a moody angsty teenager way in over his head and not mature enough to really grapple with his screwups.

Redcloak: Look, I've spent my entire life--

Right-Eye: Your life? Your life?? Brother, you may have had a lifetime, but you haven't had a life since the day you put on that cloak. Life is about growing--growing older, growing wiser, growing closer to your loved ones. But you, you're frozen in time. You're the same angry kid who took that artifact off your master's corpse that day.

Nailed it.

[danielxcutter]

I mean I do have some sympathy for him; he got dealt a really crappy lot in life and most of it really wasn't his fault.

Doesn't justify his actions of course. But he's still more of a symptom than a cause.

[LadyEowyn]

The most hilariously tragic thing about Redcloak is that he has already won . He is already in a position to demand concessions, and there are gods who are willing to provide, if only he is willing to listen.
Yes!

It’s a question of carrots and sticks - incentives vs threats.

He’s spent his whole life searching for the world’s biggest stick, and he knows that the consequences of using it could be disastrous; now he’s been told outright that he has a carrot instead and would be in an equally good if not better bargaining position with it, and he’s willfully ignoring that.

He would have a decent shot at everything he wants for his people if he would just realize he had it.

But that wouldn’t give him what he wants for himself, which is self-justification for everything he’s done up to this point.

[dancrilis]

The most hilariously tragic thing about Redcloak is that he has already won . He is already in a position to demand concessions, and there are gods who are willing to provide, if only he is willing to listen.

Redcloak works for The Dark One - nothing that has been offered to him satisfies his understanding of what his boss wants.

Also the offer he was made is 'give up some of the stuff you already have and we might be able to help you keep the rest of what you already have' it is not that great an offer, when he made it clear that divine recognition was a requirement of his Durkon effectively said 'lets sort that out later' with a healthy dose of 'and it might not be possible'.

[elros]

I think the Giant is calling out critics of his art style in panel 1. I believe the Giant went to art school, so he could make the characters a lot more detailed if he wanted to, and it really is a case that "the art style fits the story he's telling."
And it's another example of the demon cockroaches breaking the fourth wall.
I really like how the Giant makes little touches like that!

[faustin]

It's a bit more complicated than that isn't it? He's not in this position because of anything he's done, but because of the nature of his god. It's less "you've already won" and more "you never had to play in the first place".

Can't be easy to hear that your life's work was pointless.

This. It doesn't matter how convincing Durkon tried to present his arguments; at this point, Redcloak cannot accept anything less than the culmination of the Plan.

[brian 333]

Redcloak once again demonstrates that very smart people, having reached an incorrect conclusion, can dismiss a correct solution offered by someone else.

A handicap of being the smartest person in the room is trusting one's own judgement over the judgement of less intelligent persons. This is why popular personalities from career paths having nothing to do with medicine or finance feel free to dispense medical and financial advice. And why shouldn't you take their advice? It worked for them!

Convincing such persons that they are wrong is nearly impossible, because they have spent a lifetime being the smartest person In the room, and look at all those other times people nay-sayed them but they were right!

But that skinny actress weight loss program would have worked for skinny actress if it included daily infusions of butter and pork rinds, because she is naturally skinny.

Redcloak will never be able to accept someone else's proof that he is wrong. Like Miko, he is stuck on the Imright train and can't get off until it crashes.

[drazen]

I am stuck -- I do not understand why Redclock thinks his opposition supplying more monsters behind marked doors is somehow a deterrent to him.

What would be the point of more monsters in empty dungeons that go nowhere? If the "opposition" knows the dungeon is empty, it probably knows the doors are being marked, too.

[Fyraltari]

Redcloak once again demonstrates that very smart people, having reached an incorrect conclusion, can dismiss a correct solution offered by someone else.
He's not though. Nobody suggested that the MitD is betraying them. He is in fact correct that the additional Xs are not due to carelesness but enemy action. He just doesn't know which enemy.

His reasoning is perfectly sound working from what he has to work with: either someone tampered with the markings, in which case it is more likely to be the enemy than one of his own team, or it's new monsters behind already visited doors.


Redcloak will never be able to accept someone else's proof that he is wrong. Like Miko, he is stuck on the Imright train and can't get off until it crashes.
I dunno, he's got a specific hang-up with regards to the plan, but beyond that, I don't think we've got enough to make a call. At the very least, he accepted Jirix's reasoning that the new Prime Minister ought to appear more relaxed and personnable than he did.

I am stuck -- I do not understand why Redclock thinks his opposition supplying more monsters behind marked doors is somehow a deterrent to him.

What would be the point of more monsters in empty dungeons that go nowhere? If the "opposition" knows the dungeon is empty, it probably knows the doors are being marked, too.
I think Redcloak suspects that the presence of monsters behind already visited doors is a byproduct of the dungeon spawning more monsters behind the others. If whatever process is bringing monsters is accelerated it's not absurd to imagine it's bringing in more monsters everywhere, not just behind specific doors.

[JonahFalcon]

So, something I don't know if it's been brought up in this DIscussion...

What is the purpose of that door?

[Fyraltari]

So, something I don't know if it's been brought up in this DIscussion...

What is the purpose of that door?

Keeping the cold out?

[dancrilis]

What is the purpose of that door?

Doors can have many purposes - controlling windflow in a room, privacy, blocking a doorway, hanging coats on etc.

My suspicion is that that door was part of a set seperating the room from the corridor and the paired door was removed in the conflict.

[Coppercloud]

My suspicion is that that door was part of a set separating the room from the corridor and the paired door was removed in the conflict.
Since we only see a cross-section of the dungeon, the corridor could actually be narrow enough that the door does block it entirely.


The most hilariously tragic thing about Redcloak is that he has already won . He is already in a position to demand concessions, and there are gods who are willing to provide, if only he is willing to listen.

It's a bit more complicated than that isn't it? He's not in this position because of anything he's done, but because of the nature of his god. It's less "you've already won" and more "you never had to play in the first place".

Can't be easy to hear that your life's work was pointless.

Then again, Redcloak is at his core, a moody angsty teenager way in over his head and not mature enough to really grapple with his screwups.

"But it doesn't count if I don't force them to obey my will!"
Angsty teenager indeed.
Thank you to the posters quoted above for helping me understanding Redcloak better (at least, I hope so). He is smart enough to understand his mistakes, but he can't bring himself to cast aside his life's work and sufferings. Even considering any other option than the Plan is painful to him because it forces him to relive the horrors he faced and inflicted upon other people and to wonder if those were in vain. This is why he can't (yet) think with a cool head about what Durkon and Minrah told him.
Redcloak does look down on Xykon for not thinking things through and acting impulsively instead of following the scientific method and a planned schedule, but he is himself incapable of reconsidering his course of action. I wonder if some of his very rational and organized tendencies stem from an attempt to shield himself from the consequences of his own actions. By creating a dull routine and obsessing over his goal, he can avoid looking back.
What an amazing tragic villain.

[Locnil]

I am stuck -- I do not understand why Redclock thinks his opposition supplying more monsters behind marked doors is somehow a deterrent to him.

What would be the point of more monsters in empty dungeons that go nowhere? If the "opposition" knows the dungeon is empty, it probably knows the doors are being marked, too.

I don't see how that follows - it is entirely possible for the enemy to know when a dungeon is emptied (such as when the monsters fail to report in, for example) and not realise the entrances are being marked.

Alternatively, it may be that whatever force replenishes the monsters, can't do so for specific dungeons and has to replenish every dungeon at the same time. Maybe they don't have full control over the monsters and can't direct them only to specific dungeons.

Just thinking from Redcloak's perspective here.

[Jason]

Redcloak hasn't won, because his win condition isn't "concessions from the gods for the goblin peoples," it's "everything I did was justified."

He cannot accept someone else handing him a win, he must have earned the win with the sacrifices he chose to make. Otherwise he is a fanatic who destroyed all he once loved for nothing.

[bunsen_h]

So, any theories on what these new tactics are that RC is talking about? How to pick up the pace of exploration? Using the bugbears? doing something to the dungeon itself? Just checking and not killing everything inside?

The last one is my guess. Some way of scouting out each dungeon in detail that lets them ignore the monsters, rather than spending time killing them.

[JonahFalcon]

Doors can have many purposes - controlling windflow in a room, privacy, blocking a doorway, hanging coats on etc.

My suspicion is that that door was part of a set seperating the room from the corridor and the paired door was removed in the conflict.

No. There's a monster where a wall would be. It's just a free swinging door that opens or closes nothing. :smallbiggrin:

[arimareiji]

Redcloak hasn't won, because his win condition isn't "concessions from the gods for the goblin peoples," it's "everything I did was justified."

He cannot accept someone else handing him a win, he must have earned the win with the sacrifices he chose to make. Otherwise he is a fanatic who destroyed all he once loved for nothing.

Much closer to the mark than my take. (^_^)

https://i.gifer.com/2zce.gif

[Duncun]

No. There's a monster where a wall would be. It's just a free swinging door that opens or closes nothing. :smallbiggrin:

Maybe it is a double door and you just can't see the other door.

[bunsen_h]

So, something I don't know if it's been brought up in this DIscussion...

What is the purpose of that door?

It explodes if it's touched. It's a trap door.

In one of my D&D groups, way back when, one of the players took over as DM for a day. He told us that we saw a door suspended in the air. We asked for, and received, a description of the door. We collectively decided that it was very weird, and opted to leave it alone. The DM then told us that it swooped down and hit us, and teleported us away to a different location. Because it was a "dimension door", as in the Magic User spell list He hadn't bothered to look at the spell's description to see how it was supposed to work.

[Blatt]

Interesting stuff in panel 2, notably a dome light in the ceiling which is very insulting to adventurers. It's the dungeon creator saying: "here let me illuminate everything just to show how much you're wasting your time even being here." Also, that wooden door? That's the dungeon creator saying: "dungeons have doors, so here's a door. It doesn't go anywhere - so sue me."

[Thermophille]

Convincing such persons that they are wrong is nearly impossible, because they have spent a lifetime being the smartest person In the room, and look at all those other times people nay-sayed them but they were right!


I'll just point out that you don't actually have to be right most of the time to believe you're right most of the time. If you enter an argument thinking you are right, and leave the argument still thinking you're right, it reinforces the idea that you're always right, regardless of whether you were actually right during that argument. This in turn, continuously compounds onto itself, and leads to people who are so confident about things that are totally incorrect but are unable to believe that they're incorrect.

Redcloak is nowhere near the worst end of the scale. He briefly considered Durkon's offer, even if he was never realistically going to take it.

[H_H_F_F]

But that wouldn’t give him what he wants for himself, which is self-justification for everything he’s done up to this point.

Exactly; It's been clear since SoD that Redcloak Cannot turn back. Not without immense emotional growth, which is held back by the crimson cloak and his absolute devotion to the cause. He'll rationalize anything and everything to never let himself believe that he was wrong in that climactic moment.

[Mastikator]

I wish I had that dog so much

[elros]

Redcloak reminds me of V before the deal with the IIFC, because V was so focus on arcane power that V lost the partner and children.
Redcloak is so focused on the plan that he not only lost his family, but could lose everything he cares about.
I wonder if V will be one of the characters that helps Redcloak realize his error.

[Peelee]

I'll just point out that you don't actually have to be right most of the time to believe you're right most of the time. If you enter an argument thinking you are right, and leave the argument still thinking you're right, it reinforces the idea that you're always right, regardless of whether you were actually right during that argument. This in turn, continuously compounds onto itself, and leads to people who are so confident about things that are totally incorrect but are unable to believe that they're incorrect.

Redcloak is nowhere near the worst end of the scale. He briefly considered Durkon's offer, even if he was never realistically going to take it.

Aye.

Based solely on dealing with people in a HIPAA-regulated environment, I can say with a rather large degree of confidence that a shocking amount of the time, the more incorrect someone is, the fiercer they'll believe they are correct.

[sotanaht]

Think he was just dismissing some kind of magical vision (see also his eye returning to normal colour). Not sure what the D&D name is - True Seeing?
Forgive me if this has already been asked, but why would anyone EVER want to dispel their own true seeing spell?

Ok maybe if they were headed into some kind of lovecraft themed dungeon where seeing the true shape of things causes insanity, or else if they have a class feature that allows them to have true seeing for x not-necessarily-consecutive rounds (that's more of a pathfinder thing though). Neither of those situations should apply here. Dispelling your own buffs for no good reason is just dumb.

[danielxcutter]

Forgive me if this has already been asked, but why would anyone EVER want to dispel their own true seeing spell?

Ok maybe if they were headed into some kind of lovecraft themed dungeon where seeing the true shape of things causes insanity, or else if they have a class feature that allows them to have true seeing for x not-necessarily-consecutive rounds (that's more of a pathfinder thing though). Neither of those situations should apply here. Dispelling your own buffs for no good reason is just dumb.

Would you keep looking through a magnifying glass even though you think you've seen all you need?

[bunsen_h]

Would you keep looking through a magnifying glass even though you think you've seen all you need?

You're reminding me of an old-school video game, "Dung Beetles" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dung_Beetles_(video_game)). Part of what made the game challenging is that the "magnifying glass" centred on the player's icon showed an enlarged view of the immediate surroundings, but hid everything between the enlarged area and the frame of the "magnifying glass". You could see the dung beetles that were about to jump on you, but not the ones that were just getting fairly close. You could see the part of the maze that was right around you, but not how it connected to the rest of the maze -- and therefore not how the beetles might approach you, nor how you might escape them, nor routes that could get you to parts of the maze you hadn't explored yet.

"True Seeing" would be problematic if it was flooding you with irrelevant information, and causing you to not notice stuff that was important.

[Thermophille]

"True Seeing" would be problematic if it was flooding you with irrelevant information, and causing you to not notice stuff that was important.

Or even if it's just annoying.

[Blatt]

Forgive me if this has already been asked, but why would anyone EVER want to dispel their own true seeing spell?

Ok maybe if they were headed into some kind of lovecraft themed dungeon where seeing the true shape of things causes insanity, or else if they have a class feature that allows them to have true seeing for x not-necessarily-consecutive rounds (that's more of a pathfinder thing though). Neither of those situations should apply here. Dispelling your own buffs for no good reason is just dumb.

Maybe it's a courtesy to the God supplying the spell; not using His power unnecessarily.

[Fyraltari]

Forgive me if this has already been asked, but why would anyone EVER want to dispel their own true seeing spell?

[...]

Dispelling your own buffs for no good reason is just dumb.

Reminds me of players whose characters sleep with their armour on.

Edit: or who go from their house to the tavern while being hypervigilant and checking for people following them. Every. Single. Time.

[arimareiji]

Reminds me of players whose characters sleep with their armour on.

Edit: or who go from their house to the tavern while being hypervigilant and checking for people following them. Every. Single. Time.

You might also love my college group's DM - after we graduated he started a new campaign with those of us who moved to Birmingham, including just such a character*.

Our DM had a house rule that you could make ability rolls at increasingly high difficulty to increase and maintain your running speed, and our friend did that while running through thick woods to escape the villain. At night. While checking for traps in the undergrowth. And constantly looking over his shoulder, and in the air, for pursuit. And other activities I can't remember.

So our DM periodically made rolls while this was transpiring, as was his habit in general (so people wouldn't know something was up when he made a roll).

Our friend was appalled when told he had run headlong into a tree at Olympic-level speed and knocked himself out, trying to do all those things at once.

Edit: * - Yes, he was first and foremost a player. But I stand by my Freudian slip, that he was also a character. (^_~)

[danielxcutter]

I mean honestly, I can see someone being chased both trying to do that and ending up running face first into a tree because of that actually happening.

[arimareiji]

I mean honestly, I can see someone being chased both trying to do that and ending up running face first into a tree because of that actually happening.

This is going to sound made-up, but funny thing: While we were in college (i.e. before this - and yet he still did it again), our friend was out on the poorly-lit college green one night. One of the frats thought it was hysterical to pelt people trying to walk through the area with water balloons (from some sort of cannon or oversized slingshot), and he chased them at top speed after he saw them hitting some coeds.

Fortunately, the college green didn't have all that many trees!

...but unfortunately, it had a number of long movable wooden benches with backrests. Painted dark green, so they wouldn't stand out and be unsightly.

(He did an involuntary 270° somersault. After an ambulance ride and surgery he healed up, but it left a wicked scar just above his knee.)

[Fyraltari]

You might also love my college group's DM - after we graduated he started a new campaign with those of us who moved to Birmingham, including just such a character*.

Our DM had a house rule that you could make ability rolls at increasingly high difficulty to increase and maintain your running speed, and our friend did that while running through thick woods to escape the villain. At night. While checking for traps in the undergrowth. And constantly looking over his shoulder, and in the air, for pursuit. And other activities I can't remember.

So our DM periodically made rolls while this was transpiring, as was his habit in general (so people wouldn't know something was up when he made a roll).

Our friend was appalled when told he had run headlong into a tree at Olympic-level speed and knocked himself out, trying to do all those things at once.
*Kisses fingers*
Love it.


Edit: * - Yes, he was first and foremost a player. But I stand by my Freudian slip, that he was also a character. (^_~)
The best friends (or at least the most meorable) usually are quite the characters.


I mean honestly, I can see someone being chased both trying to do that and ending up running face first into a tree because of that actually happening.
As someone who once ran into (not through, into) an open door. Yes.

[danielxcutter]

This is going to sound made-up, but funny thing: While we were in college (i.e. before this - and yet he still did it again), our friend was out on the poorly-lit college green one night. One of the frats thought it was hysterical to pelt people trying to walk through the area with water balloons (from some sort of cannon or oversized slingshot), and he chased them at top speed after he saw them hitting some coeds.

Fortunately, the college green didn't have all that many trees!

...but unfortunately, it had a number of long movable wooden benches with backrests. Painted dark green, so they wouldn't stand out and be unsightly.

(He did an involuntary 270° somersault. After an ambulance ride and surgery he healed up, but it left a wicked scar just above his knee.)

No, no, I've heard way weirder. That does sound legit.

[Silent Wrangler]

Redcloak hasn't won, because his win condition isn't "concessions from the gods for the goblin peoples," it's "everything I did was justified."

He cannot accept someone else handing him a win, he must have earned the win with the sacrifices he chose to make. Otherwise he is a fanatic who destroyed all he once loved for nothing.

Well, from a certain twisted view point, it's not really all for nothing. It's not like he had these 9th level spell slots before he did all the murder. He obtained his carrot while chasing a stick.

[Fyraltari]

Well, from a certain twisted view point, it's not really all for nothing. It's not like he had these 9th level spell slots before he did all the murder. He obtained his carrot while chasing a stick.

But that's entirely coincidental. He had no need of Xykon to reach that level.

[Jason]

But that's entirely coincidental. He had no need of Xykon to reach that level.
It is at least an open question. Could Redcloak have survived to reach 9th level spellcaster status without Xykon backing him up? Maybe?

[Fyraltari]

It is at least an open question. Could Redcloak have survived to reach 9th level spellcaster status without Xykon backing him up? Maybe?

I'm going to say yes.

Redcloak and Right-Eye were already doing some adventuring before they met Xykon, and they were doing alright even if they hadn't gained any ground towards taking Lirian's Gate.

When Team Evil was attacked by adventurers before Dorukan's Dungeon, Redcloak and Right-Eye killed them without any help from Xykon.

I also think he did some adventuring himself when Xykon was gone for a while.

[Quizatzhaderac]

I am stuck -- I do not understand why Redclock thinks his opposition supplying more monsters behind marked doors is somehow a deterrent to him.Redcloak doesn't believe that monsters were added to a properly marked door; he believes a mark was improperly added to an uncleared door.

Redcloak did also mention the possibility that the spawn rate was increasing, but he used the passive voice. This implies that he's talking about the automatic mechanisms that maintain the dungeon, rather than enemy agents. The point of those mechanism being to stop the next group of adventurers, not the current one.


What is the purpose of that door?Apart from regular door things (like maybe keeping monsters in) the doors make the switchover traps less obvious. One can only see the switchover being enabled/disabled if they happen to have that specific door open.

[Riftwolf]

My guess for Redcloaks idea to speed up exploration; he triggers earthquakes to "open" multiple doors at once.

[Fyraltari]

My guess for Redcloaks idea to speed up exploration; he triggers earthquakes to "open" multiple doors at once.

A) How would that help?
B) Wouldn't that pose a huge risk to the last Gate?

[InvisibleBison]

My guess for Redcloaks idea to speed up exploration; he triggers earthquakes to "open" multiple doors at once.

If Redcloak wanted to open a bunch of doors simultaneously, couldn't he just recruit a bunch of bugbears to open the doors?

[dancrilis]

A) How would that help?
B) Wouldn't that pose a huge risk to the last Gate?

If it breaks the last gate then he has been told the gods will destroy the world (and if they don't the snarl will) - thereby granting the Dark One a seat at the next worlds table, he might even be able to talk himself into not bothering with the ritual and simply going for its destruction as the safer bet (after all the ritual apparently takes weeks and the heroes might actually manage to kill him, stop him or tell tales to Xykon during that time).

[hroþila]

Yes but that's Plan B. It's called that instead of Plan A because Plan A is preferable.

[dancrilis]

Yes but that's Plan B. It's called that instead of Plan A because Plan A is preferable.

Sure but it isn't unreasonable to move to plan B while plan A is viable if plan B is deemed more likely to succeed and less likely to be foiled.

[Duncun]

If it breaks the last gate then he has been told the gods will destroy the world (and if they don't the snarl will) - thereby granting the Dark One a seat at the next worlds table, he might even be able to talk himself into not bothering with the ritual and simply going for its destruction as the safer bet (after all the ritual apparently takes weeks and the heroes might actually manage to kill him, stop him or tell tales to Xykon during that time).

Except the Dark One won't survive till the next world.

[Ruck]

Sure but it isn't unreasonable to move to plan B while plan A is viable if plan B is deemed more likely to succeed and less likely to be foiled.

Okay, but that's not what's happening in this hypothetical.

[Doug Lampert]

If it breaks the last gate then he has been told the gods will destroy the world (and if they don't the snarl will) - thereby granting the Dark One a seat at the next worlds table, he might even be able to talk himself into not bothering with the ritual and simply going for its destruction as the safer bet (after all the ritual apparently takes weeks and the heroes might actually manage to kill him, stop him or tell tales to Xykon during that time).


Except the Dark One won't survive till the next world.

Redcloak neither knows that, nor would he believe that. Thus that particular fact is irrelevant to his decision making as to whether the destruction of the current world is now a better plan than trying to blackmail the other gods. He considers both possibly viable and desirable plans, he prefers blackmail, but considers destruction a net gain, he could swap to destruction as the main plan if it appears substantially easier or more likely than blackmail.

[andowero]

Yeah, RC has, from his POV, perfectly viable plan of destroying the last gate which has less prerequisites than the plan to blackmail other Gods. This is a good plan B in my opinion. After finding the gate, he can switch to plan B in no time.

[JonahFalcon]

The Sunk Cost Fallacy is strong with Redcloak.

Oona will take up the Mantle and resume negotiations with Durkon. Watch.

[Fyraltari]

Oona will take up the Mantle and resume negotiations with Durkon. Watch.
Oona has how many levels in Cleric, again?

[danielxcutter]

I still prefer those to “the Order finds a way to throw out the entire Redcloak subplot” frankly.

[Ruck]

I still prefer those to “the Order finds a way to throw out the entire Redcloak subplot” frankly.

Functionally it's really not that different.

[MaverickMopete]

The Sunk Cost Fallacy is strong with Redcloak.

To Redcloak, The Plan™ is all he has left at this point. If he turns away from The Plan™ now, then

all the goblins that he sent to their deaths, including his own brother, whom he killed personally, died for nothing.

[elros]

This is going to sound made-up, but funny thing: While we were in college (i.e. before this - and yet he still did it again), our friend was out on the poorly-lit college green one night. One of the frats thought it was hysterical to pelt people trying to walk through the area with water balloons (from some sort of cannon or oversized slingshot), and he chased them at top speed after he saw them hitting some coeds.

Fortunately, the college green didn't have all that many trees!

...but unfortunately, it had a number of long movable wooden benches with backrests. Painted dark green, so they wouldn't stand out and be unsightly.

(He did an involuntary 270° somersault. After an ambulance ride and surgery he healed up, but it left a wicked scar just above his knee.)
Sorry to hear about the injury, but it sounds like your friend was dealing with attacks from a funnelator:
https://www.instructables.com/how-to-make-a-funnelator/?amp_page=true

[Peelee]

Sorry to hear about the injury, but it sounds like your friend was dealing with attacks from a funnelator:
https://www.instructables.com/how-to-make-a-funnelator/?amp_page=true

That's a DIY version but water balloon slingshot have been around for a while.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00AL57GEW/

[danielxcutter]

Functionally it's really not that different.

I mean, to me it's a different whether it's about Redcloak as a character or the goblin thing in general.

[dancrilis]

Okay, but that's not what's happening in this hypothetical.

The hypothetical is Redcloak deciding to use earthquake to help search for the gate, a potential issue that was raised was that such an action might destroy the gate - my point was that Redcloak might regard that as acceptable.

From Redcloak's prespective if he uses earthquake he gets one of three outcomes.
1) It helps him find the gate.
- He likes this option.
2) It destroys the gate.
- This is an acceptable option for him.
3) It doesn't help him at all.
- He is no really worse off then he currently is.

Now I don't think Redcloak will use earthquake to help him search but if he did it could be logically presented from his position - after all he knows that adventurers are in the area trying to stop him, if they succeed then his plan is trashed, destroying the Gate to avoid the chance of the entire plan failing sounds like a reasonable option for him to convince himself of.

[Fyraltari]

From Redcloak's prespective if he uses earthquake he gets one of three outcomes.
1) It helps him find the gate.
How?

3) It doesn't help him at all.
- He is no really worse off then he currently is.
Yes, he is because now all the tunnels have collapsed. And also the bugbears are pissed, but he doesn't really care about that.

[dancrilis]

How?


If the complex is not protected from earthquakes and collapses it would still be credible for the gate room to be better protected, which might expose the gate to him immediately.

Serini would have to build her defences for people who don't know about the gate also and just see a series of dungeons to explore - and adventurers can be terrible, if a single casting of a spell that an earth domain cleric can cast at level 13 can destroy her gate accidently she might have been better putting more thought into it. Or such might be logic that Redcloak might have (frankly I suspect the entire complex would stand up pretty well to an earthquake).



Yes, he is because now all the tunnels have collapsed.

Making it more difficult to explore the tunnels from a walking prespective but likely easier from a not having to deal with as many monsters prespective - he could just get in a mining team to turn over the rubble (and given the special construction of the stone might be worth a bit and boost the Gobbotopia economy and perhaps the standard of life for the bugbears).

[Duncun]

Redcloak neither knows that, nor would he believe that. Thus that particular fact is irrelevant to his decision making as to whether the destruction of the current world is now a better plan than trying to blackmail the other gods. He considers both possibly viable and desirable plans, he prefers blackmail, but considers destruction a net gain, he could swap to destruction as the main plan if it appears substantially easier or more likely than blackmail.

He was also told that his god would not survive. But, as you have mentioned, he does not believe that. On the surface, he doesn't believe any of it. The real question is, how much does he believe deep down. That will influence his decisions and plans.

[Dame_Mechanus]

Serini would have to build her defences for people who don't know about the gate also and just see a series of dungeons to explore - and adventurers can be terrible, if a single casting of a spell that an earth domain cleric can cast at level 13 can destroy her gate accidently she might have been better putting more thought into it. Or such might be logic that Redcloak might have (frankly I suspect the entire complex would stand up pretty well to an earthquake).

I don't quite see this being Redcloak's logic here, to be quite honest. Redcloak (and Xykon, to the extent he really plans this stuff) has been working from the a priori assumption that behind one of these doors lies the gate. They don't have a Haley or anyone to point out what Serini made quite clear at this point, that the whole thing is a shell game, and even though Redcloak was smart enough to run a shell game he doesn't think this is one. At the same time... if we assume that behind one of the doors is the Gate, that obviously means one of the doors is the way to access that Gate, and destroying all the doors may very well lead to the Gate being inaccessible - or at the very least, buried under tons of rubble instead of having an actual hallway you can just walk down to reach it.

Not to mention that when we first see the door-picking ritual, Redcloak specifically calls out that their search pattern is random and wants a more methodical approach (strip #1040; sorry, still too new to be allowed to place links). If he thought that he had a superior approach by "just bring it all down," he probably would have proposed that earlier, so either he thought of it and discarded the idea or he proposed it and got shot down. And since Xykon is unlikely to agree that the plan is a good one now just because of Redcloak's "stupid nerd reasoning," I don't think he'd list it as an idea to speed things up.


2) It destroys the gate.
- This is an acceptable option for him.

Again, politely disagree on this point. If Redcloak destroys the last gate, the Plan has failed. Completely. He has to now deal with the fact that not only has he resulted in the destruction of the world, but he has failed to accomplish any of his goals in the process. He might be willing to play the long game and play with high stakes, as he indicated to O-Chul, but I don't see him being willing to destroy the world just to ensure that nobody gets to save it from him. So the risk of destroying the Gate is, even based on his current knowledge, as high as the risk is for the Order. He may not have a complete picture of just how badly his actions are endangering everyone and how fruitless his Plan will ultimately be, but he does understand that his Plan requires one (1) Gate to still be intact.

[Fyraltari]

Again, politely disagree on this point. If Redcloak destroys the last gate, the Plan has failed. Completely. He has to now deal with the fact that not only has he resulted in the destruction of the world, but he has failed to accomplish any of his goals in the process. He might be willing to play the long game and play with high stakes, as he indicated to O-Chul, but I don't see him being willing to destroy the world just to ensure that nobody gets to save it from him. So the risk of destroying the Gate is, even based on his current knowledge, as high as the risk is for the Order. He may not have a complete picture of just how badly his actions are endangering everyone and how fruitless his Plan will ultimately be, but he does understand that his Plan requires one (1) Gate to still be intact.

Err, no. Redcloak has stated several time that the destruction of the world is an acceptable outcome, if less desirable than victory on a still-standing world, because he thinks his god would get to take part in the next one and make it fair to goblins. As Maxrah rightfully pointed out, he cares more for the well-being of hypothetical future goblins than he does for the very alive flesh-and-blood goblins in the now.

[Canisius]

[QUOTE=dancrilis;25509666]Those look like some somewhat formidable monsters - and like they did no damage at all to our heroes.

The battle's been over for a bit. Redcloak probably just healed everyone before we cut to him talking with Oona.

[Dame_Mechanus]

Err, no. Redcloak has stated several time that the destruction of the world is an acceptable outcome, if less desirable than victory on a still-standing world, because he thinks his god would get to take part in the next one and make it fair to goblins. As Maxrah rightfully pointed out, he cares more for the well-being of hypothetical future goblins than he does for the very alive flesh-and-blood goblins in the now.

My apologies, my explanation wasn't clear enough; I wasn't trying to say "Redcloak would never try to destroy the world" or even "Redcloak doesn't understand his actions are pushing the world closer to destruction." My point was that while Redcloak thinks "destroying the last gate if necessary" is an acceptable sacrifice, it's not his first objective. He doesn't consider destroying the gate without trying to seize it as an acceptable outcome. Destroying the gate is the "better than losing it" option, not the "eh, if we never find it but destroy it first, that's fine too" option. Especially as he's only known about the idea that there will be another world after this one for a couple of hours, tops.

[Fyraltari]

My apologies, my explanation wasn't clear enough; I wasn't trying to say "Redcloak would never try to destroy the world" or even "Redcloak doesn't understand his actions are pushing the world closer to destruction." My point was that while Redcloak thinks "destroying the last gate if necessary" is an acceptable sacrifice, it's not his first objective. He doesn't consider destroying the gate without trying to seize it as an acceptable outcome. Destroying the gate is the "better than losing it" option, not the "eh, if we never find it but destroy it first, that's fine too" option.
Agreed.

Especially as he's only known about the idea that there will be another world after this one for a couple of hours, tops.
Sorry to correct you again, but Redcloak and Right-Eye discussed this possibilty in Start of Darkness, he's always considered this an acceptable consolation prize. The notion that gods would rebuild the world comes naturally when you know it's happened before (especially if you are well-read enough to know the gods need mortals for sustenance).

What he's learned recently is that the Gods might blow up the planet before he does (which he may even consider a plus, since it means the goblins get to go to their god) and that the next world might not have goblins at all, which he's poorly tried to rationalize away.

[Dame_Mechanus]

Sorry to correct you again, but Redcloak and Right-Eye discussed this possibilty in Start of Darkness, he's always considered this an acceptable consolation prize. The notion that gods would rebuild the world comes naturally when you know it's happened before (especially if you are well-read enough to know the gods need mortals for sustenance).

Hey, don't apologize for correcting me! If I'm wrong I'm wrong and should be corrected; either my idea was poorly communicated in the first place or it just turns out that I am, in fact, factually wrong. In this case, not having access to SoD meant I didn't know that detail and I am incorrect that it would never have factored into his prior planning. Regardless, though, I think we agree that while he considers it an acceptable outcome it's not something he would consider a preferred outcome.

[Vikenlugaid]

Since we only see a cross-section of the dungeon, the corridor could actually be narrow enough that the door does block it entirely.





Thank you to the posters quoted above for helping me understanding Redcloak better (at least, I hope so). He is smart enough to understand his mistakes, but he can't bring himself to cast aside his life's work and sufferings. Even considering any other option than the Plan is painful to him because it forces him to relive the horrors he faced and inflicted upon other people and to wonder if those were in vain. This is why he can't (yet) think with a cool head about what Durkon and Minrah told him.
Redcloak does look down on Xykon for not thinking things through and acting impulsively instead of following the scientific method and a planned schedule, but he is himself incapable of reconsidering his course of action. I wonder if some of his very rational and organized tendencies stem from an attempt to shield himself from the consequences of his own actions. By creating a dull routine and obsessing over his goal, he can avoid looking back.
What an amazing tragic villain.

Yeah, Redcloak is one of the best written villains of all time. And the most complex character in this comic. I just love everythimg of him as a character.

Anyway, there are people saying that RC "cannot go back" and maybe that's true but... For now, there hasn't been any single reason for him to go back, if he sees a real reason to do that, then we will know what happens, but til now we don't really know if he really is in that level of sunk cost fallacy.
And not, Durkon's offer doesn't count, not even close, RC has absolutely 0 reason to trust him, and anyway Durkon didn't offer something close to "divine concesions to goblin race", he just offered a "peace treaty" between mortals without any warranty and without any god involved, that's just like if someone wants to buy a car and the seller offers him a skateboard...

[LookieLouE1707]

They need TDO

Redcloak's cooperation is only necessary to get in contact with TDO


Therefore I suspect that that Redcloak's story will end with him no longer working for TDO

Or redcloak's story will end with him dead at the phalanges of xykon and the gods making peace with the snarl, obviating them from the necessity of making a deal with TDO - thus heightening the ethical dilemma: do you still make concessions to the enemy when you are no longer compelled by necessity to do so?

[Fyraltari]

Or redcloak's story will end with him dead at the phalanges of xykon and the gods making peace with the snarl, obviating them from the necessity of making a deal with TDO - thus heightening the ethical dilemma: do you still make concessions to the enemy when you are no longer compelled by necessity to do so?

What's the dilemma supposed to be there exactly?

[brian 333]

The Evil gods very likely do not see TDO as a threat to their resources: he is tapping a power supply they have to this point overlooked or ignored.

They would likely include TDO in their parlimentary caucus for no better reason than to gain an extra vote over the Good guys. The question, then, is why is TDO reluctant to join them?

Whether or not he can survive the destruction-rebuilding cycle depends more on his willingness to grant concessions to other Evil gods, who would doubtless support him if he grows weak if for no reason other than to add weight to their side of the wheel in their next world.

I think he thinks rightly. If he accepts a candy bar now, he will owe his cellmate, and how will they ask it to be repaid? If, on the other hand, he rides it out as long as he can, when the world ends he will be in the position Hel wanted: with a crapton of devotion and a multitude of goblin souls.

[Ruck]

The hypothetical is Redcloak deciding to use earthquake to help search for the gate, a potential issue that was raised was that such an action might destroy the gate - my point was that Redcloak might regard that as acceptable.

I don't think destroying the gate is nearly as acceptable an outcome as completing the Plan; it's just something he's willing to do if there are no other options. Hence, "Plan B."


From Redcloak's prespective if he uses earthquake he gets one of three outcomes.
1) It helps him find the gate.
- He likes this option.
2) It destroys the gate.
- This is an acceptable option for him.
3) It doesn't help him at all.
- He is no really worse off then he currently is.

As Fyraltari said, there is no guarantee of 1-- he could just collapse all the tunnels and have no way to access the Gate. That would actually leave him worse off. Destroying the Gate might be "acceptable" but only as a last resort, not as a "this is equally fine" option. You seem to think that Redcloak will turn to "Plan B" just if it becomes easier to execute than Plan A, instead of only as a last resort. I don't agree.


I mean, to me it's a different whether it's about Redcloak as a character or the goblin thing in general.

Well, I think any solution that functionally sidelines Redcloak is not going to be in play, since that would make so much of the story pointless in the end-- whether that's a runaround with a different goblin, or somehow the Eastern gods show up again, or Banjo becomes the fifth quiddity (all of which have been suggested, multiple times).

[Dame_Mechanus]

I think he thinks rightly. If he accepts a candy bar now, he will owe his cellmate, and how will they ask it to be repaid? If, on the other hand, he rides it out as long as he can, when the world ends he will be in the position Hel wanted: with a crapton of devotion and a multitude of goblin souls.

I don't think he's thinking rightly at all. He's thinking based on the assumption that he will survive to the next world without a problem and that the evil gods want him around as an ally. Neither of these things is true; the evil gods want him around because he was naturally in contact with them first and so they were the first to notice he had a different quiddity, and his survival to the next world is altogether uncertain. Heck, right now Thor is the one trying to keep the Dark One around, while the other deities are of divided opinions at the least.

He's making rational decisions based on the information he has, yes, but that doesn't mean that he's right, and he's crippled by the fact that he's stopped talking to the people who can actually give him better information. (And his lead cleric tried to implode the person telling him that.) It's a quality he shares with Redcloak and Oona's deceased cousin. He's making the rational decision based on what he thinks he knows, but gosh, he really does not know half as much as he thinks he does.

[dancrilis]

You seem to think that Redcloak will turn to "Plan B" just if it becomes easier to execute than Plan A, instead of only as a last resort. I don't agree.

No, but I do think he could logic himself into that mindset if he was put under pressure - and he might start feeling under pressure.



Well, I think any solution that functionally sidelines Redcloak is not going to be in play, since that would make so much of the story pointless in the end ...
Based on the online comics (or even the non-online non-SOD comics) Redcloak is not that relevant (nor is Xykon or any non-Order of the Stick character) - the story is not about Redcloak.

[Dame_Mechanus]

Based on the online comics (or even the non-online non-SOD comics) Redcloak is not that relevant (nor is Xykon or any non-Order of the Stick character) - the story is not about Redcloak.

The story is also not about Tarquin, Therkla, Kubota, Qarr, Tsukiko, Nale, or Bozzok - yet all of them have a complete narrative arc that closes when their utility to the story has finished. (Well, Qarr's still in play, to be fair.) While there's a lot of room to believe that Redcloak may not live to see the end of the comic and it seems almost certain that his plans will ultimately not bring him the fulfillment he wants in terms of emotional rewards or material gains, it seems a given that he is going to be in play all the same.

Whether or not Redcloak is a protagonist is not the issue; he is a major character who has been built up in the comic for years, and he is intimately tied to both the themes and the storyline of the comic along with that. It would ultimately be just as weird for him to not play a major role in the resolution as it would have been for him to immediately say to Durkon "actually, yes, I will save the goblins by agreeing to your plan and completely abandoning the plan that my entire life to date has been predicated upon, dwarf whom I have only directly interacted with this one time and whom I primarily know as the person who killed a bunch of goblins working under me back at the start of this comic." Saying that Redcloak is not that relevant is like saying that Legolas isn't that relevant in Lord of the Rings because he's not Frodo or Aragorn, to use an overly obvious example.

It seems patently obvious that the end of this comic is going o have to directly deal with the future fate of the goblins in a way that changes things materially, and that directly involves interacting with Redcloak. Whether or not it ends with him having a change of heart, dying tragically, dying unrepentant making things worse, or whatever is as yet undetermined, but he and his fate are highly relevant to the resolution of the plot.

[Ruck]

Based on the online comics (or even the non-online non-SOD comics) Redcloak is not that relevant (nor is Xykon or any non-Order of the Stick character) - the story is not about Redcloak.

You will have to support that because I find the idea that one of the two primary antagonists-- or both, in your estimation!-- is "not that relevant" to the story to be preposterous on its face.

[Doug Lampert]

The Evil gods very likely do not see TDO as a threat to their resources: he is tapping a power supply they have to this point overlooked or ignored.

They would likely include TDO in their parlimentary caucus for no better reason than to gain an extra vote over the Good guys. The question, then, is why is TDO reluctant to join them?

Whether or not he can survive the destruction-rebuilding cycle depends more on his willingness to grant concessions to other Evil gods, who would doubtless support him if he grows weak if for no reason other than to add weight to their side of the wheel in their next world.

I think he thinks rightly. If he accepts a candy bar now, he will owe his cellmate, and how will they ask it to be repaid? If, on the other hand, he rides it out as long as he can, when the world ends he will be in the position Hel wanted: with a crapton of devotion and a multitude of goblin souls.

Evil is not a side. Evil fights Evil at least as often and as bitterly as if fights Good. The whole reason for existence of the IFCC is to try to CREATE an Evil side that cooperates.

The Evil gods have no more reason to support The Dark One than any other god does. Because to an evil god, more evil gods doesn't mean more friends for me, it means more competition for me.

[Fyraltari]

They would likely include TDO in their parlimentary caucus for no better reason than to gain an extra vote over the Good guys. The question, then, is why is TDO reluctant to join them?
Say it with me now: "Being evil makes us all one big happy family? Screw that! (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0668.html)"


I don't think he's thinking rightly at all. He's thinking based on the assumption that he will survive to the next world without a problem and that the evil gods want him around as an ally. Neither of these things is true; the evil gods want him around because he was naturally in contact with them first and so they were the first to notice he had a different quiddity, and his survival to the next world is altogether uncertain. Heck, right now Thor is the one trying to keep the Dark One around, while the other deities are of divided opinions at the least.

He's making rational decisions based on the information he has, yes, but that doesn't mean that he's right, and he's crippled by the fact that he's stopped talking to the people who can actually give him better information. (And his lead cleric tried to implode the person telling him that.) It's a quality he shares with Redcloak and Oona's deceased cousin. He's making the rational decision based on what he thinks he knows, but gosh, he really does not know half as much as he thinks he does.

We don't actually know what the The Dark One is thinking at all. We're all just kind of assuming that he's basically Redcloak writ large because his function so far in the narrative is to empower Redcloak. However, his steadfast refusal to communicate with anyone, especially his High Priest, makes it seem to me that there's going to be a twist of some kind. I half-seriously believe that he, Loki, Rat and Tiamat are playing some kind of con on the other pantheons to become the sole deities of the next world or something along those lines.

Regardless of this theory, I think the only way for Redcloak to give the Plan up at this stage is for it to fail. Either the last gate is destroyed, Xykon turns on him or The Dark One reveals (after Redcloak temporarily dies or something) that he isn't pleased with his alliance or that he doesn't intend to use the Snarl for the betterment of the goblin people at all. Note that in Star of Darkness Red almost gives up on the Plan twice: once when he thought all the Gates were destroyed and once when Xykon was gone for an extended period of time.

[arimareiji]

Say it with me now: "Being evil makes us all one big happy family? Screw that! (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0668.html)"

Possibly just my notion, but I wonder if the Giant has been trying to show us that's not a one-way street.

One early, but perhaps facile, example of Good people who other Good people bitterly oppose: Miko.
If Shojo* could have easily relied on other non-paladin Good allies close by, why did he gamble on something as hare-brained as 1) hoping to guilt-trip a party into helping 2) if Miko actually brought them back alive?
Eugene vs Roy. Not only is Good not one big happy family, not even Good families are necessarily on the same side vs working together reluctantly when interests coincide.
The rebel factions in what was left of Azure City.
Haley vs Celia.
Etc.

* - sorry, but as an anime/manga fan his name will never stop being funny to me

[Dame_Mechanus]

We don't actually know what the The Dark One is thinking at all. We're all just kind of assuming that he's basically Redcloak writ large because his function so far in the narrative is to empower Redcloak. However, his steadfast refusal to communicate with anyone, especially his High Priest, makes it seem to me that there's going to be a twist of some kind. I half-seriously believe that he, Loki, Rat and Tiamat are playing some kind of con on the other pantheons to become the sole deities of the next world or something along those lines.

We don't know precisely what The Dark One is thinking, that's true, but we can ascertain pretty well given that he outright told Jirix to pass a message along to Redcloak (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0704.html). Furthermore, while we don't know with absolute certainty that what Thor tells us about the whole situation is the truth (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1143.html), we do know that Loki telling the truth is totally fine when it comes to saying something Thor doesn't want to hear (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1177.html). Moreover, I would point out that his lack of direct communication with his high priest isn't actually unusual; Thor didn't directly communicate with Durkon or Minrah until both of them died, after all, and there didn't seem to be any indication that Malak had direct contact with Nergal on a regular basis.

(All right, Durkon did directly commune with Thor early on (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0040.html), but that was for gag purposes and I don't think we're supposed to take that totally seriously.)

This isn't to kick dirt on your theory or anything; my default assumption is just that all else being equal, there's no reason to assume a twist that would recontextualize everything (especially not this late in the game) when the non-twist situation already has plenty of stakes, motivations, and explanations. While it's certainly possible that there's another long con at play and The Dark One's motives are less aligned with Redcloak's than we think, at this point his goals and motivations are perfectly dangerous and motivating and interesting based on what we do know and is already demonstrably true. And while we can't know precisely what he's thinking or planning because we're not the Giant or inside the head of fictional characters, it feels safe to me to assume that it's going to be more or less what it looks like.


Regardless of this theory, I think the only way for Redcloak to give the Plan up at this stage is for it to fail.

On this we are in complete agreement. Redcloak is going to keep riding this train until he can't. (If I were feeling like a betting woman, my bet for a twist at this point would be much more mundane: Xykon figured out that the ritual doesn't do what Redcloak said it did ages ago and has been manipulating him, just like Redcloak is doing to Xykon. Seems appropriately double-crossing and it would immediately take the wind out of Redcloak's sails as he realizes that he was actually being played by someone he assumed wasn't paying attention.)

EDIT TO ADD:


* - sorry, but as an anime/manga fan his name will never stop being funny to me

The true sequel to OotS, Bishoujo Senshi Shojo-kun, Ganbatte!

[Larsaan]

I wonder if Redcloak would go so far as to enact plan B (break the Gate and doom the world) if the other gods somehow managed to get in touch with TDO without his help, and it looked like a deal would be made without the use of The Plan.

[Fyraltari]

Possibly just my notion, but I wonder if the Giant has been trying to show us that's not a one-way street.

One early, but perhaps facile, example of Good people who other Good people bitterly oppose: Miko.
If Shojo* could have easily relied on other non-paladin Good allies close by, why did he gamble on something as hare-brained as 1) hoping to guilt-trip a party into helping 2) if Miko actually brought them back alive?
Eugene vs Roy. Not only is Good not one big happy family, not even Good families are necessarily on the same side vs working together reluctantly when interests coincide.
The rebel factions in what was left of Azure City.
Haley vs Celia.
Etc.
Yup, everyone has their own priorities and objectives, and even when people want what's best for everybody, they rarely agree on what that means.

See also the whole "sides" thing.


* - sorry, but as an anime/manga fan his name will never stop being funny to me
It is a good joke.

We don't know precisely what The Dark One is thinking, that's true, but we can ascertain pretty well given that he outright told Jirix to pass a message along to Redcloak (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0704.html).
Yes, we know that he wants Redcloak to keep going, but that doesn't tell us more than that.

Furthermore, while we don't know with absolute certainty that what Thor tells us about the whole situation is the truth (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1143.html), we do know that Loki telling the truth is totally fine when it comes to saying something Thor doesn't want to hear (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1177.html).
Which doesn't mean that Loki isn't lying to Thor.

Moreover, I would point out that his lack of direct communication with his high priest isn't actually unusual; Thor didn't directly communicate with Durkon or Minrah until both of them died, after all, and there didn't seem to be any indication that Malak had direct contact with Nergal on a regular basis.
Neither Durkon nor Minrah were Thor's high priest. Malack may have been Nergal's (it's unclear), but he wasn't involved with anything important to nergal (as far as we know) until the Order came along. Also, Nergal wouldn't have been allowed to tell Malack anything about the Snarl.

Durkon*, Hel's high priest who was acting as her main agent, carrying out her grand plan, was in constant contact with her, updating her on the situation several times. Redcloak, is in the exact same situation and yet he is not in contact with his boss. the fact that it has been mentioned a couple times is evidence that this is a conscious decision on the part of The Giant, not something that just happened because there was no need for Redcloak to talk to him. I may be wrong, of course, but I find that the only reason I can find to keep a character such as TDO in the shadows like that is that he is not what exactly what he seems.





On this we are in complete agreement. Redcloak is going to keep riding this train until he can't. (If I were feeling like a betting woman, my bet for a twist at this point would be much more mundane: Xykon figured out that the ritual doesn't do what Redcloak said it did ages ago and has been manipulating him, just like Redcloak is doing to Xykon. Seems appropriately double-crossing and it would immediately take the wind out of Redcloak's sails as he realizes that he was actually being played by someone he assumed wasn't paying attention.)
Oh, I definitely see something like that happening. Xykon is the big bad of the story and I'm sure that, at the end of the days, his designs will prove more dangerous than Redcloak's.

[Dame_Mechanus]

Which doesn't mean that Loki isn't lying to Thor.

Well, yeah, but by that same principle you could assume that Odin is lying to Thor when he seems confused about the nature of the world within the rift. You can't be certain that anyone isn't lying to anyone else, but Loki's fairly limited actions up to this point in his appearances and his general interactions with Thor seem to indicate that if anyone, Loki is double-crossing Hel and feels pretty awful about it. Especially since he, y'know, says that outright.

Where I fall in this particular bit of speculation is just that unless there's a compelling reason to assume that someone is lying or an entirely plausible theory that relies upon very specific omitted information, it makes more sense to assume that the evidence lines up in the way it appears to. We can't be certain Loki isn't lying to Thor, because he certainly could be... but that doesn't actually enhance the story or give us new insights or provide a clearer picture or support a specific theory with any evidence beyond "this could happen." Evidence that The Dark One could be pulling a long con of some sort would make sense, but right now we have plenty of evidence that the situation is what it seems like on the surface, informed in no small part by the information the other gods seem to have access to.


Durkon*, Hel's high priest who was acting as her main agent, carrying out her grand plan, was in constant contact with her, updating her on the situation several times. Redcloak, is in the exact same situation and yet he is not in contact with his boss. the fact that it has been mentioned a couple times is evidence that this is a conscious decision on the part of The Giant, not something that just happened because there was no need for Redcloak to talk to him. I may be wrong, of course, but I find that the only reason I can find to keep a character such as TDO in the shadows like that is that he is not what exactly what he seems.

Redcloak isn't quite in the same situation as Greg, though; Greg was specifically a spirit conjured in Hel's realm and was also literally the only substantially leveled Cleric of Hel in the world. We even have direct dialogue making it clear that Thor - who is pretty clearly being up-front with Durkon - doesn't always answer requests to commune (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1148.html). It just feels to me like unless we can actually hang something on the idea of Redcloak being kept very specifically in the dark based on more than "this is a twist that wouldn't be specifically inconsistent with what has come before," it's not the way that makes sense to bet on from my perspective. Everyone else is free to keep whatever speculation they want, naturally.

[Thermophille]

Thor...doesn't always answer requests to commune

I would like to point out that Thor is likely a lot busier than The Dark One, and Durkon is not and has never been his high priest, meaning that Thor not responding to a Commune is weak evidence at best.

Now, I actually agree with your general point, because I think there's a different explanation; I don't think Redcloak has ever cast commune. I think that part of him doesn't want to face TDO; maybe it's guilt, maybe it's just anxiety, but I think Redcloak doesn't actually want to speak to his god directly for some reason (or at the very least has subconscious hangups); after all, RC never mentioned that he was denied a commune, just that he's never spoken to TDO.

Gods on the other hand, don't seem to have a strong ability to initiate conversation with mortals, since Thor had to wait until Durkon and Minrah were dead before he could initiate a conversation on his own.

[Dame_Mechanus]

I would like to point out that Thor is likely a lot busier than The Dark One, and Durkon is not and has never been his high priest, meaning that Thor not responding to a Commune is weak evidence at best.

Hey, we don't know what The Dark One is doing most of the time any more than we know what Thor is doing most of the time. We've seen little hints here and there but my point wasn't that we could figure out who's busier and who should really be taking calls; the point is just saying "Are you there, my god? It's me, your priest/high priest/Margaret" does not inherently mean you get on a divine Zoom call with your deity of choice. Which ties in to the rest of your point - there are a lot of explanations for why The Dark One has not spoken to Redcloak directly beyond inherent deception.

[Vikenlugaid]

I don't think he's thinking rightly at all. He's thinking based on the assumption that he will survive to the next world without a problem and that the evil gods want him around as an ally. Neither of these things is true; the evil gods want him around because he was naturally in contact with them first and so they were the first to notice he had a different quiddity, and his survival to the next world is altogether uncertain. Heck, right now Thor is the one trying to keep the Dark One around, while the other deities are of divided opinions at the least.

He's making rational decisions based on the information he has, yes, but that doesn't mean that he's right, and he's crippled by the fact that he's stopped talking to the people who can actually give him better information. (And his lead cleric tried to implode the person telling him that.) It's a quality he shares with Redcloak and Oona's deceased cousin. He's making the rational decision based on what he thinks he knows, but gosh, he really does not know half as much as he thinks he does.

Well, can we blame him? Last time TDO stopped his plans and trusted others to make some kind of treaty they betrayed and killed him. Now he has a new plan, and he won't stop it to make parlament with any potential backstabber.

[Dame_Mechanus]

Well, can we blame him? Last time TDO stopped his plans and trusted others to make some kind of treaty they betrayed and killed him. Now he has a new plan, and he won't stop it to make parlament with any potential backstabber.

Not in the slightest. The Dark One's actions are incorrect from our perspective, but we say that in no small part because we as readers have information he doesn't. Similarly, we can say that Redcloak's conclusions are equally incorrect, but they rely on him believing someone he's disinclined to trust at all and whom he absolutely believes is trying to deceive him. That's what makes the whole thing tragic instead of just awkward; everyone's making reasonable and comprehensible choices that have logical reasons and are generally completely incorrect.

[Fyraltari]

Well, yeah, but by that same principle you could assume that Odin is lying to Thor when he seems confused about the nature of the world within the rift. You can't be certain that anyone isn't lying to anyone else, but Loki's fairly limited actions up to this point in his appearances and his general interactions with Thor seem to indicate that if anyone, Loki is double-crossing Hel and feels pretty awful about it. Especially since he, y'know, says that outright.
Of course, there isn't any evidence for this theory, which is why I only half-believe it myself and don't fault anyone for not buying it. That said, I feel there's better odds for Loki, the god of liars and swindlers, to be lying than Odin. And it's not like he can't double-cross Hel and Thor at the same time.


Where I fall in this particular bit of speculation is just that unless there's a compelling reason to assume that someone is lying or an entirely plausible theory that relies upon very specific omitted information, it makes more sense to assume that the evidence lines up in the way it appears to.
Agreed, but while there isn't anything I would actually call evidence, there are a few details that point to something... odd.
In no particular order:

A) The lack of communication. This has already been discussed.
B) The Dark One had one "ally" from each pantheon. While this may simply be to show that Thor's scheme has cross-pantheon support, it also means they could theoretically beat the Snarl by the four of them. Also they had a private chat group, meaning that Thor was not party to some contacts with TDO.
C) Thor says the Dark One learned about the Snarl on his own and then cut all ties. That's not exactly true. The dark One discovered a Rift and Rat and Tiamat then told him about the Snarl. While this could simply be Thor glossing over details, it could also be him being lied to by Loki about what exactly happened.
D) Redcloak does not know about all the worlds between the first and current one. Why would Tiamat and Rat not tell the Dark One about them while explaining the Snarl? Especially since Tiamat seemed intent on impressing how dangerous it is to him ("No, seriously, you don't want to mess with this thing.")
E) Right-Eye came to the conclusion that the Dark One was "a petty spiteful god [who] doesn't care about [goblins]". Given this is the conversation where he understands why Redcloak is so attached to fulfilling the Plan, I think he's meant to be right that the dark One no longer has the goblins' best interests at heart.


We can't be certain Loki isn't lying to Thor, because he certainly could be... but that doesn't actually enhance the story or give us new insights or provide a clearer picture or support a specific theory with any evidence beyond "this could happen." Evidence that The Dark One could be pulling a long con of some sort would make sense, but right now we have plenty of evidence that the situation is what it seems like on the surface, informed in no small part by the information the other gods seem to have access to.
All we have evidence for is that the Dark One wants Redcloak to keep going with the Plan to hand him over the most powerful weapon in existence, no matter how many lives he sacrifices along the way and that he wants Jirix to lead Gobbotopia through "trade, logistics, diplomacy and intrigue". Redcloak believes that he intends to use the threat of the Snarl to bargain from a position of strength, but he might as well immediately use it to kill Thor or Marduk. Or something different altogether.

As to what it would bring to the story. I don't know, besides maybe forcing Redcloak to face his own guilt. But I used to think that Hilgya turning up with durkon's child would be the dumbest, most pointless thing ever.
Also, Redcloak and the Dark One interacting would have been a great opportunity to showcase Redcloak's character in a situation we don't usually see him in (talking to someone he admires). PAssing it up for no reason seems strange to me.


Redcloak isn't quite in the same situation as Greg, though; Greg was specifically a spirit conjured in Hel's realm
So?


and was also literally the only substantially leveled Cleric of Hel in the world. We even have direct dialogue making it clear that Thor - who is pretty clearly being up-front with Durkon - doesn't always answer requests to commune (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1148.html).
And now that Durkon is on a mission specifically given to him by Thor, Thor has set up a special ringtone to be sure not miss any more calls. Yes, Thor rarely answered Commune when Durkon was a random Cleric among Thor-knows-how-many but now that he is his special agent, he's paying special attention. Redcloak has been the Dark One's special agent for thirty years. The Dark One has let him throw away lives after lives in pursuit of his alliance to Xykon and called him "his true prophet". And yet.

[Dame_Mechanus]

Before going into this, I just want to make it clear that this sort of utter deep-diving discussion is absolutely wonderful from my perspective, so please don't get the impression "she thinks I'm wildly wrong and is kicking sand on my theories." This is not "someone is wrong on the Internet," this is "we're debating points and refuting one another's assumptions in spirited and rational back-and-forth." You know, just in case it was unclear.


That said, I feel there's better odds for Loki, the god of liars and swindlers, to be lying than Odin. And it's not like he can't double-cross Hel and Thor at the same time.

True, but one usually does not directly say to someone you're planning to backstab the conditions under which you will stab that person in the front depending on circumstances. Not to mention that if Loki really did have some elaborate backstab scheme planned...

Well, let's take a step back. We can assume broadly that what Thor tells Durkon is true from his perspective. To his knowledge, the Western Pantheon doesn't believe that the violet quiddity is real, the Southern Pantheon is divided on what to do, and the Northern Pantheon is pretty well divided as well... despite the fact that all they have to go on are the promises of Loki. Even though Thor outright says that while contact with The Dark One was actually very limited, the Northern Pantheon does believe that Loki is telling the truth, even if they disagree about what to do with that information.

It's hard to see how a scheme could span three pantheons when they all have different reactions to the information, one of them not even believing it's true in the first place. Consider the following possibility: If Loki was working with The Dark One, wouldn't it be easier for him to have his clerics contact Redcloak directly? Why would he rely on Thor telling one of his clerics to go talk with The Dark One's high cleric and negotiate with him, with the full knowledge that both Thor and said cleric acknowledge that this plan might not work and they might actually need to just kill Redcloak and find someone more receptive to reason? It doesn't even involve anyone breaking the actual rules between the gods, so it's not like Loki can rely on Thor getting caught or something.

Right now, this theoretical conspiracy is a lot like Nale's plans: way too many moving parts for goals that can be accomplished much more simply. (Especially when you consider that if Loki is lying about the violet quiddity... we already know he'd be just helping Hel dunk the world into the trash and destroying it. Because he said that directly to Thor to rub his face in it.)


A) The lack of communication. This has already been discussed.

Agreed, and I think we've reached the point where we've exhausted all of the information in either direction; if you aren't convinced that this is not all that weird, there's not another strip for me to cite to point to it being pretty predictable, and likewise there's not much more evidence to be shown that would prompt a "huh, that is unusual" from me. We have provided all of the relevant data and taken that discussion as far as it can go.


B) The Dark One had one "ally" from each pantheon. While this may simply be to show that Thor's scheme has cross-pantheon support, it also means they could theoretically beat the Snarl by the four of them. Also they had a private chat group, meaning that Thor was not party to some contacts with TDO.

Yes, which serves mostly to illustrate the sort of alignment that The Dark One's allies had and to make it clear that these were deities who would be willing to bend the rules and find a way to let him know about the Snarl, which you will remember the gods aren't allowed to talk about with people who don't already know about it. It also, I think, explains why these particular allies wouldn't bend or just break the rules that may or may not apply to The Dark One; Tiamat and Loki in particular were no doubt hoping at one point to use this as some degree of leverage with this new deity. As it has been all down the line, a comedy of errors and tragedies.


C) Thor says the Dark One learned about the Snarl on his own and then cut all ties. That's not exactly true. The dark One discovered a Rift and Rat and Tiamat then told him about the Snarl. While this could simply be Thor glossing over details, it could also be him being lied to by Loki about what exactly happened.

I don't know, I think "found a rift and was then told what it was" counts in the broad strokes as "he learned about it on his own." Remember, Thor also figured that Minrah having heard it mentioned in passing was enough to count her as "she knows, she's passed the test," so clearly this is a case where Thor is more concerned about the letter of the law than the spirit.


D) Redcloak does not know about all the worlds between the first and current one. Why would Tiamat and Rat not tell the Dark One about them while explaining the Snarl? Especially since Tiamat seemed intent on impressing how dangerous it is to him ("No, seriously, you don't want to mess with this thing.")

I can think of two possibilities there. The first is that Tiamat and Rat didn't want The Dark One to realize just how much power he actually had at that moment; as soon as they tell him "you are basically the key to stopping a cycle that has gone on for a very large number of worlds" The Dark One has no reason not to demand a whole lot of concessions from the other gods. Possibly ones they're not even able to provide. The second possibility is that they either were in the process of doing so or actually did explain, but by the time that came up The Dark One no longer believed them.

:roy: "Why would you possibly not believe me?"

:belkar: "Well, you're an admitted liar, for starters."


E) Right-Eye came to the conclusion that the Dark One was "a petty spiteful god [who] doesn't care about [goblins]". Given this is the conversation where he understands why Redcloak is so attached to fulfilling the Plan, I think he's meant to be right that the dark One no longer has the goblins' best interests at heart.

I mean, let's be real here, even if you ignore Minrah's observation, Redcloak was perfectly willing to kill a lot of hobgoblins over what he realized was, in fact, a childish grudge. And The Dark One was perfectly fine with it. The Dark One has been perfectly fine with everything else Redcloak has done, it seems. It is possible for The Dark One to be a petty, spiteful god who mostly cares about his followers in terms of the power that they personally bring him while still being honest about his intentions. Heck, depending on the scripture that might actually be pretty intentional; the way Jirix talks about The Dark One definitely highlights a doctrine wherein utility rather than morality is the key factor in your afterlife.

(That being said, trying to retroactively construct an actual doctrine here is wandering deep into the weeds and is not an activity I intend to undertake; it's enough to just observe that Right-Eye can be correct without it being evidence of hidden malice.)


All we have evidence for is that the Dark One wants Redcloak to keep going with the Plan to hand him over the most powerful weapon in existence, no matter how many lives he sacrifices along the way and that he wants Jirix to lead Gobbotopia through "trade, logistics, diplomacy and intrigue". Redcloak believes that he intends to use the threat of the Snarl to bargain from a position of strength, but he might as well immediately use it to kill Thor or Marduk. Or something different altogether.

The thing is that these two things are only inconsistent if we assume The Dark One is a benevolent deity, something that has never been said or really implied. Certainly the bugbears don't think very much of him. Or, to put it another way - it's entirely plausible that The Dark One's primary goal is to make things better for himself and acquire more power, but from what we know of the way the gods work, that directly involves empowering his followers. While making things better for the goblins is quite possibly not his actual direct goal, there is no particular reason to assume that he intends to in some way harm or subvert his followers.


As to what it would bring to the story. I don't know, besides maybe forcing Redcloak to face his own guilt. But I used to think that Hilgya turning up with durkon's child would be the dumbest, most pointless thing ever.

I think Redcloak being forced to face his guilt is definitely a thing that's going to happen - but I think it's more likely to happen when he realizes that all of his actions didn't actually bring the Plan to fruition in the first place. A double-cross from Xykon, the gods deciding to bring everything down, even being faced with the reality of what his plan would actually accomplish, I don't know the exact form. I just feel confident that Redcloak is going to have to answer for his actions and he is going to realize that he was wrong.

Probably at the same time that he's getting eaten by an allosaurus or something, but hey, timing is everything.

[Ruck]

Not in the slightest. The Dark One's actions are incorrect from our perspective, but we say that in no small part because we as readers have information he doesn't. Similarly, we can say that Redcloak's conclusions are equally incorrect, but they rely on him believing someone he's disinclined to trust at all and whom he absolutely believes is trying to deceive him. That's what makes the whole thing tragic instead of just awkward; everyone's making reasonable and comprehensible choices that have logical reasons and are generally completely incorrect.

I like the way you put this. Part of what makes the story so engaging for me is the tragic element. Characters like Redcloak and TDO are not cartoonishly evil or having Idiot Ball of Plot-Forced Misunderstanding shenanigans. They've got goals and they're making what they reasonably think are rational steps to achieve them, but they don't have all the relevant information, or their perspective is skewed by past experiences.

P.S. Love the location. Skylarking is a classic.

[Dame_Mechanus]

I like the way you put this. Part of what makes the story so engaging for me is the tragic element. Characters like Redcloak and TDO are not cartoonishly evil or having Idiot Ball of Plot-Forced Misunderstanding shenanigans. They've got goals and they're making what they reasonably think are rational steps to achieve them, but they don't have all the relevant information, or their perspective is skewed by past experiences.

It's a big part of what keeps me reading, too, and part of why I absolutely loved the whole meeting with Durkon and Redcloak toward the beginning of this chapter. So often you wind up with media where the plot could be instantly solved by people taking five minutes to talk to one another, but this strip consistently makes it clear that you can have two people who are even potentially operating with most of the same information... and yet because they draw such wildly different conclusions due to different base assumptions, no actual communication takes place.

My suspicion is that when the dust settles we're going to look at Redcloak's overall arc as a deeply tragic villain turn, and the groundwork for that has been set for a long darn time.


P.S. Love the location. Skylarking is a classic.

It's not my favorite XTC album but it's absolutely a classic and should be on everyone's playlist if they have any interest in music. (My wife and I like to talk about how XTC is the band that almost no non-musician knows about but has influenced every band you like.)

[Peelee]

My wife and I like to talk about how XTC is the band that almost no non-musician knows about but has influenced every band you like.

Whoah, they influenced The Beatles? :smalltongue:

[Ruck]

So often you wind up with media where the plot could be instantly solved by people taking five minutes to talk to one another, but this strip consistently makes it clear that you can have two people who are even potentially operating with most of the same information... and yet because they draw such wildly different conclusions due to different base assumptions, no actual communication takes place.

I think Roger Ebert called the "if they'd just take five minutes to talk to one another" plot the "Idiot Plot," which may have influenced my use of "Idiot Ball" there.

I have a friend who's a brilliant critic, among other things, and the line he uses to describe effective tragedy is the necessity of the idea expressed in Robert Penn Warren's All The King's Men: "It could have all been different, Jack. You got to believe that."

If it couldn't have been different, then there's no tragedy-- just cruel fate. But things could have been different for so many of our characters: Redcloak if the Sapphire Guard had never found his village. TDO if the humans hadn't backstabbed him. As I've said a couple of times recently, Miko if she'd been raised and socialized better instead of to be an unstable lone-wolf warrior with a chosen-one complex. The same qualities that have driven so many characters down their tragic roads could have led them to much better things, if different events had shaped them and the choices they made differently.


It's not my favorite XTC album but it's absolutely a classic and should be on everyone's playlist if they have any interest in music. (My wife and I like to talk about how XTC is the band that almost no non-musician knows about but has influenced every band you like.)

It is my favorite album of theirs, actually, though they do have a number of great ones. I'm just always tickled to find someone here who shares an interest of mine, because other than OOTS itself, mine tend not to overlap with other posters.


Whoah, they influenced The Beatles? :smalltongue:

No, you're thinking of The Velvet Underground.

[Peelee]

No, you're thinking of The Velvet Underground.

Whoah, they influenced Chuck Berry? :smalltongue:

[Dame_Mechanus]

Whoah, they influenced Chuck Berry? :smalltongue:

No, that was Michael J. Fox.

[Ruck]

Whoah, they influenced Chuck Berry? :smalltongue:

It's like Brian Eno said, "Almost nobody listened to the Velvet Underground, but everyone who did invented rock and roll."

[Peelee]

No, that was Michael J. Fox.
I feel like nobody took that movie's exposé aspects critically enough.

It's like Brian Eno said, "Almost nobody listened to the Velvet Underground, but everyone who did invented rock and roll."
Velvet Underground's time travel capabilities seem like they should far exceed any musical accomplishments they have had.

[Ruck]

Velvet Underground's time travel capabilities seem like they should far exceed any musical accomplishments they have had.

Their music was just that good.

[Peelee]

Their music was just that good.

Well, it's not Coldplay. It's not Fix You.

[Ruck]

Well, it's not Coldplay. It's not Fix You.

I bet "Venus in Furs" could fix you. (the generic "you," not you specifically)

[arimareiji]

The true sequel to OotS, Bishoujo Senshi Shojo-kun, Ganbatte!

Awww, not Bokusatsu Tenshi Shojo-kun? *evil grin*

[Coppercloud]

On the topic of communication between gods, I think the ideal solution would be for Durkon to teach Summon Proxy to Redcloak, and let Thor and The Dark One sort everything out. The rock and melon analogy (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1138.html) could mean Durkon would be able to prepare the spell, instead of having to research it himself like he did with Masked Death Gourd, and Redcloak might be eager to hear from the Dark One himself.

[Dame_Mechanus]

On the topic of communication between gods, I think the ideal solution would be for Durkon to teach Summon Proxy to Redcloak, and let Thor and The Dark One sort everything out. The rock and melon analogy (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1138.html) could mean Durkon would be able to prepare the spell, instead of having to research it himself like he did with Masked Death Gourd, and Redcloak might be eager to hear from the Dark One himself.

The only problem is that even if Durkon can cast Summon Proxy successfully (unlike Mast Depth Word), to teach it to Redcloak, Redcloak has to listen to him and not try to implode him. And, uh... the track record on "sit down and have a polite conversation with Redcloak" is not promising.

[Fyraltari]

Also, the Dark One could just not pick up the phone.

[Peelee]

On the topic of communication between gods, I think the ideal solution would be for Durkon to teach Summon Proxy to Redcloak, and let Thor and The Dark One sort everything out. The rock and melon analogy (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1138.html) could mean Durkon would be able to prepare the spell, instead of having to research it himself like he did with Masked Death Gourd, and Redcloak might be eager to hear from the Dark One himself.

In my own headcanon, Summon Proxy is on the standard cleric spell list but simply has the prerequisite that it can only be cast during a godsmoot. So virtually no utility whatsoever, purely a device for the gods.

[Fyraltari]

In my own headcanon, Summon Proxy is on the standard cleric spell list but simply has the prerequisite that it can only be cast during a godsmoot. So virtually no utility whatsoever, purely a device for the gods.

Can Clerics cast everything on the standard list, or do they have to pick spells when they gain levels like Sorcerers do? Because we know it's a haigh-level spell, so it being that situational would mightily suck.

[Peelee]

Can Clerics cast everything on the standard list, or do they have to pick spells when they gain levels like Sorcerers do? Because we know it's a haigh-level spell, so it being that situational would mightily suck.

Clerics and druids have access to everything on the clericand druid spell list, respectively. They prepare whatever spells they want every day into the appropriate spell slots.

Wizards have access to everything on their spell book (which must be selected from the sorcerer/wizard spe list). They prepare whatever spells they want every day from the spells in the book into the appropriate spell slots. A wizard could potentially have access to every Wizard spell, but they would need multiple books and it's more hassle than it's worth.

Sorcerers and bards must pick their known spells at level up from the sorcerer/wizard and bard spell lists, respectively, and only have access to these spells. They do not prepare spells and can cast whatever they want from their known spells, provided they have the appropriate spell slots.

[KorvinStarmast]

I think the Giant is calling out critics of his art style in panel 1. I believe the Giant went to art school, so he could make the characters a lot more detailed if he wanted to, and it really is a case that "the art style fits the story he's telling."
I think he's well over that as of quite a few years ago. He has explored the stick figure style, and has given it depth, and, he's made little adaptations and improvement on his own along the way. In particular the art style upgrade that Book Six represents is very pleasing to see (at least to my eyes; tastes will vary on that I am sure) in terms of the use of shadow and colors and improved backgrounds.

Redcloak hasn't won, because his win condition isn't "concessions from the gods for the goblin peoples," it's "everything I did was justified." Thanks for putting a finger on something I could not quite find the right words for.

In one of my D&D groups, way back when, one of the players took over as DM for a day. He told us that we saw a door suspended in the air. We asked for, and received, a description of the door. We collectively decided that it was very weird, and opted to leave it alone. The DM then told us that it swooped down and hit us, and teleported us away to a different location. Because it was a "dimension door", as in the Magic User spell list He hadn't bothered to look at the spell's description to see how it was supposed to work. This. This is why we play D&D. :smallsmile: I may steal borrow this for adaptation into an upcoming side quest.

I wonder if V will be one of the characters that helps Redcloak realize his error. That would be kind of neat; as of right now, that's a big river to build a bridge over and eventually cross.

Forgive me if this has already been asked, but why would anyone EVER want to dispel their own true seeing spell? I'd never do that. (My bard in 5e, once she got it, would never let go of that once cast. It eats a precious level 6 slot).

Could Redcloak have survived to reach 9th level spellcaster status without Xykon backing him up? Maybe? Even though he's got that amazing cloak, it still takes a lot of adventuring and XP earning to get to level 17, so probably not (though if he did find a few adventuring parties of evil persuasion here and there he'd be able to make a lot of progress).

They would likely include TDO in their parlimentary caucus for no better reason than to gain an extra vote over the Good guys. The question, then, is why is TDO reluctant to join them? Nice analogy, but I'd have to delve into too much RL stuff to comment further.

Their music was just that good. Hmm, for me it was hit and miss, just as Lou Reed has some amazingly good stuff and some {Meh} stuff, but I think it's fair to say that they were the foundation upon which progressive rock's edifice was built.
FWIW: for my money, John Cale's version of Hallelujah is the best one.

[BrotherHanson]

For those wondering like me, according to this thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?621022), we're on day 29 or 30 since Belkar's prophecy and the Girard's Gate day was on day 20.

So Team Evil must have been doing that dungeon thing since a maximum of 9 days.

Being reminded that Team Evil has only been dungeon delving for a short time, I'm curious. Even a few extra marked doors should be pretty obvious. Same goes for a few other MitD shenanigans like talking them into leaving the desert without killing Roy again, or the Escape for that matter - very suspicious when all taken together! I can definitely see Xykon knowing but not caring. But Redcloak should be on to it by now, even with his giant ego and tunnel vision. Any chance that "being overlooked" is a bona-fide MitD special power?

[Peelee]

Being reminded that Team Evil has only been dungeon delving for a short time, I'm curious. Even a few extra marked doors should be pretty obvious.

People aren't good at visualizing big numbers. And by "big", I mean more than 10. Let's say you start with an empty bucket, and every day you add between 3-5 apples. After a few days, do you really think you're going to notice that there are 18 apples when there should be 17, without going through and counting each one? They're just going to look like a pile of apples at that point.

[bunsen_h]

The Dark One has let him throw away lives after lives in pursuit of his alliance to Xykon and called him "his true prophet". And yet.

Do remember that to the gods, mortals are food, not friends. Except for the relatively few individuals who can make strong contributions to the gods' prioritized goals.


Being reminded that Team Evil has only been dungeon delving for a short time, I'm curious. Even a few extra marked doors should be pretty obvious. Same goes for a few other MitD shenanigans like talking them into leaving the desert without killing Roy again, or the Escape for that matter - very suspicious when all taken together! I can definitely see Xykon knowing but not caring. But Redcloak should be on to it by now, even with his giant ego and tunnel vision. Any chance that "being overlooked" is a bona-fide MitD special power?

My thought is that the doors rearrange themselves while nobody is watching, to make it harder for would-be investigators to search them exhaustively. One could go into "the leftmost door on the bottom tier" repeatedly and keep finding a different dungeon.

[Dame_Mechanus]

Being reminded that Team Evil has only been dungeon delving for a short time, I'm curious. Even a few extra marked doors should be pretty obvious. Same goes for a few other MitD shenanigans like talking them into leaving the desert without killing Roy again, or the Escape for that matter - very suspicious when all taken together! I can definitely see Xykon knowing but not caring. But Redcloak should be on to it by now, even with his giant ego and tunnel vision. Any chance that "being overlooked" is a bona-fide MitD special power?

It seems like Redcloak knows that some dungeons they can complete without having to stop for the evening and some dungeons are hard enough to put a full stop. Sometimes they can do multiple dungeons a day. Heck, they cleared out one of the falsely-marked doors with only Redcloak, Oona, and Greyview just now, and Redcloak didn't note it as being unusually easy in any way; it was just a full dungeon where one shouldn't be.

Consider this from Redcloak's perspective. Which is more likely? That one of the people he knows in his mind is pursuing the exact same goal as he is has been deliberately ensuring that they'll fail, or that some outside force is stepping up and trying to make things harder for them? The former requires him to abandon all of his existing allegiances and re-examine them, while the latter just relies on synthesizing information he already has (people are showing up to get him to stop because the gods are getting anxious). Logically speaking, that makes far more sense.

As always, the problem with logic is that it only leads you to correct conclusions when all of your premises are correct.

[BrotherHanson]

People aren't good at visualizing big numbers. And by "big", I mean more than 10. Let's say you start with an empty bucket, and every day you add between 3-5 apples. After a few days, do you really think you're going to notice that there are 18 apples when there should be 17, without going through and counting each one? They're just going to look like a pile of apples at that point.

Fair enough. I was thinking of something like Go Fish where you have some sense of what's been seen even if you can't remember all of it. If an impish nine year old swaps cards around while the adults are in the kitchen, it doesn't take too long to figure it out, and Redcloak doesn't seem like a fun uncle who'd let it slide. Not that it *must* be a special power of course - they literally keep MitD shrouded in magical darkness and regularly ignore him! - but it feels like more than mere comic inattentiveness to me. And thinking about it more...Oona knows Monster Hollow well, is very observant, and hasn't shown herself to be so dismissive of MitD. Seems fishy!

[hungrycrow]

People aren't good at visualizing big numbers. And by "big", I mean more than 10. Let's say you start with an empty bucket, and every day you add between 3-5 apples. After a few days, do you really think you're going to notice that there are 18 apples when there should be 17, without going through and counting each one? They're just going to look like a pile of apples at that point.

At the rate Mitd was working though, it'd be more like expecting 17 apples and finding 50.

[BrotherHanson]

Consider this from Redcloak's perspective. Which is more likely? That one of the people he knows in his mind is pursuing the exact same goal as he is has been deliberately ensuring that they'll fail, or that some outside force is stepping up and trying to make things harder for them? The former requires him to abandon all of his existing allegiances and re-examine them, while the latter just relies on synthesizing information he already has (people are showing up to get him to stop because the gods are getting anxious). Logically speaking, that makes far more sense.

As always, the problem with logic is that it only leads you to correct conclusions when all of your premises are correct.

All true, and adequate to explain Redcloak in particular being blind to signs of MitD growing more independent.

[ziproot]

This is especially true when you note that two people who claimed to represent the gods explicitly stated that they came because the gods were getting anxious, then appeared to go into the very dungeon that later had monsters that weren't supposed to be there.

EDIT: After rereading strip 1205 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1205.html), it appears like Durkon didn't explicitly state that he came because the gods were anxious, but Durkon did imply that the gods sent him because he was being threatened and implied that the gods wanted Redcloak to stop.

Future edits were made for clarity.

[Jason]

A few points I haven't seen on this thread yet:

In my mind, the obvious reason Redcloak hasn't spoken to The Dark One yet is so that when he finally does on panel it will be a big disillusionment for him. Whatever his true nature, it seems obvious that TDO will not be what Redcloak expected from his god.

What we know of TDO's origin story in Start of Darkness is all told from Redcloak's perspective as his High Priest. It probably is not entirely accurate.

[dancrilis]

You will have to support that because I find the idea that one of the two primary antagonists-- or both, in your estimation!-- is "not that relevant" to the story to be preposterous on its face.

My phrasing left a lot to be desired.

I think of the story as the story of the Order rather then the other characters, for instance if Xykon and Redcloak had disintegrated walking across a line in the floor the story of the Order would continue they would still need to figure out some method of fixing the issues facing the world (or fail to find a way to fix such).
On the other hand if the order had all died to vampires last book then story over.

Redcloak exists to help tell the Order's story but he his personal story (while compelling) isn't overly relevant to the Order's story (nor is Xykon's personal story) - maybe their personal stories might be relevant later as things come to a head.

I sometimes get the feeling that some people are looking at the story as that of the courageous goblin seeking justice for his people and being opposed by some good-natured but misguided adventurers - i.e that the Order is there to help tell Redcloak's story, and that is a fine way to look at the story (stories can be looked at a lot of different ways after all) but it is not how I view it.

Hopefully that makes it clearer what I meant.

[brian 333]

There are multiple storylines in play simultaneously, so naturally, there are varying interpretations of which are most important. I, for example, am far more interested in MitD's developments than Belkar's. Both have a redemption arc, both are assumed to be Evil while doing not-evil things, and both have simple, child-like views of how the world works. So why my preference?

This applies to many characters and their sub-plots. I was sad to see Haley's arc wrap because for a while there was new information in almost every strip, not only about Haley, but her world too. At the same time, I was disappointed in how Elan's and Haley's arcs overlapped.

Don't get me wrong, I liked the story. I just have preferences. I find intentional malice to be unsympathetic and stupid heroes sympathetic. So I find it easy to enjoy disliking Tarquin and liking Ian. (Tasty parasites and all.)

So, while I enjoy Belkar's part in the story, in my opinion he is about as unlikeable as a character can be. On the other hand, MitD is as likeable as a character can be, even though we have so very little of his story.

That others prefer Tarquin over Ian, Redcloak over Durkon, etc. is understandable. It's a matter of personal preference.

[Fyraltari]

Both have a redemption arc
What has the MitD done that he needs to be redeemed of?

both are assumed to be Evil while doing not-evil things
I'm not sure what you mean by "assumed to be evil". Belkar is evil, this is obvious to most people in-universe (Minrah being the exception). The readership may need a minute. I don't think any fan thinks the Monster in the Dark is evil, characters in-universe may need a minute.

and both have simple, child-like views of how the world works.
Belkar has a childlike view of the world?

[brian 333]

What has the MitD done that he needs to be redeemed of?

Nothing, so far as I know, but Team Evil certainly makes that assumption. Among other things, Xykon feeding babies to her. MitD is in an arc that redeems her of the guilt by association with TE.


I'm not sure what you mean by "assumed to be evil". Belkar is evil, this is obvious to most people in-universe (Minrah being the exception). The readership may need a minute. I don't think any fan thinks the Monster in the Dark is evil, characters in-universe may need a minute.

Again, what we as fans know and what the characters in comic know are different things. How and when will MitD betray Xykon, and will it be a betrayal at all, given that MitD was never given the choice whether to join TE in the first place?


Belkar has a childlike view of the world?

Absolutely. Refer to the episode where Belkar kissed V, (and liked it.) Belkar has only very recently begun to think of his world as other than, 'pro-me, anti-me' which puts his social development at about age 5.

But all of this is not really relevant to the point I was making, that different people read the comic and come away placing different degrees of importance on the various characters and their arcs. Miko, for instance, still has fans and haters years after her arc was resolved. And some people would rather the story focus on Redcloak's noble quest for goblin equity rather than Roy's quest to kill a character because his father made, then abandoned, an oath of revenge before Roy was born.

[Jason]

Belkar has a childlike view of the world?
I would say Belkar has a generally juvenile (delinquent) or immature view of the world.
He is not "childlike" in the sense that Elan and Thog are.

[Eric the White]

I'm not sure what you mean by "assumed to be evil". Belkar is evil, this is obvious to most people in-universe (Minrah being the exception). The readership may need a minute. I don't think any fan thinks the Monster in the Dark is evil, characters in-universe may need a minute.



Minrah is the exception because Belkar hasn't really been evil since before she met him. What Brian said is pretty valid. Most of the characters in the story think those two are evil. We as the readers know that they are not. Mirnah and O'Chul serve as our validation from the author that there are respected people in story that agree with us, helping to confirm that we are correct.

[hamishspence]

Minrah is the exception because Belkar hasn't really been evil since before she met him. What Brian said is pretty valid. Most of the characters in the story think those two are evil. We as the readers know that they are not.

Minrah met Belkar here:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1094.html

Belkar was confirmed to be Still Evil (his Protection from Evil amulet hurting him when activated) here:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1130.html

[arimareiji]

It seems like Redcloak knows that some dungeons they can complete without having to stop for the evening and some dungeons are hard enough to put a full stop. Sometimes they can do multiple dungeons a day. Heck, they cleared out one of the falsely-marked doors with only Redcloak, Oona, and Greyview just now, and Redcloak didn't note it as being unusually easy in any way; it was just a full dungeon where one shouldn't be.

Consider this from Redcloak's perspective. Which is more likely? That one of the people he knows in his mind is pursuing the exact same goal as he is has been deliberately ensuring that they'll fail, or that some outside force is stepping up and trying to make things harder for them? The former requires him to abandon all of his existing allegiances and re-examine them, while the latter just relies on synthesizing information he already has (people are showing up to get him to stop because the gods are getting anxious). Logically speaking, that makes far more sense.

As always, the problem with logic is that it only leads you to correct conclusions when all of your premises are correct.
The second paragraph strongly reminded me of probably the best single installment of a webcomic I've ever seen (sorry, Giant)... the underpinnings of the backfire effect (https://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe).


At the rate Mitd was working though, it'd be more like expecting 17 apples and finding 50.
I could see this if it were in one large chunk (i.e. Redcloak comes back after a few days and Oona tells him they cleared 6, but it's actually gone from 14 to 29), or from the start (i.e. expecting 2 and coming back to 5)... but the impression I got was that after they'd been at it for a while, MITD started working incrementally. Thus Redcloak has to realize that it's 14 when it should've been 12, then 18 (14+4) when it should've been 16 (14+2), then 21 (18+3) when it should've been 19 (18+1), etc.

And humans really do suck at noticing incremental change in a large quantity, if they're exposed to it all along. I love seeing the sharp differences between high and low tide where I live, but if I'm there paying attention the entire time I can't pick up the changes. Even though Wednesday, for instance, it's set to drop 15.5 feet in just over 7 hours.

[Peelee]

If the readers know a Belkar that isn't evil, that's certainly need to me.

The And humans really do suck at noticing incremental change in a large quantity
Not even change. We're bad at visualizing large amounts of things, period. And when numbers get really big, we're even worse. If someone asks the difference between a millionaire and a billionaire, it's hard to fathom in terms of money, but slightly simpler in terms of time. A million seconds is last Tuesday. A billion seconds is the year 1990. It's an enormous jump that, even with that analogy, is hard to actually imagine.

We're great at abstract math. We're horrible at concrete evaluations.

[Dame_Mechanus]

The second paragraph strongly reminded me of probably the best single installment of a webcomic I've ever seen (sorry, Giant)... the underpinnings of the backfire effect (https://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe).

Ironically, I was specifically calling back to Redcloak's chain of logic in this strip (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0546.html). But the point stands regardless!


Minrah is the exception because Belkar hasn't really been evil since before she met him. What Brian said is pretty valid. Most of the characters in the story think those two are evil. We as the readers know that they are not. Mirnah and O'Chul serve as our validation from the author that there are respected people in story that agree with us, helping to confirm that we are correct.

That... I'm sorry, no. On any count.

We know Belkar is evil. We know from both in-universe dialogue and out-of-universe statements that Belkar is evil. That doesn't mean he wants the world to be destroyed or that he's incapable of love or that he can't be anything more than a vicious sociopath hurting people for momentary amusement. What has changed is not Belkar's alignment but his depth as a person; the fact that his alignment hasn't changed is, I would argue, even core to how he finally gets Serini to realize what's going on with the gods, because he's not in the Lawful Good side of the bucket and can argue from a perspective they don't have.

And why should Belkar being evil mean he can't be in favor of saving the world? Tarquin doesn't want the world destroyed, and he's evil. Loki doesn't want the world destroyed, and he's evil. Redcloak doesn't want the world destroyed, and he's not only evil but one of the people actively making it more likely!

Minrah isn't validating that Belkar isn't evil any more. She's validating that he's capable of personal growth. Period end.

As for the MitD... well, even O-Chul isn't sure that the MitD isn't evil. Whenever someone tries to state that he's totally a good guy, O-Chul is the first to say "we shouldn't go that far." He is aware that the potential is there, but he's also quick to point out that this does not necessarily roll over from potential to actual. Grain of salt and all that fun stuff.

[dancrilis]

What has the MitD done that he needs to be redeemed of?


I don't think redeemed it the right word - but he did used to laugh at the pain of others (panel 2 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0037.html)), engage in behaviour which summoned the forces of the abyss (panel 6 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0082.html) and panel 3 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0095.html)), laughed at the idea of Xykon's evil plan coming to fruition (panel 8 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0097.html)), decided to eat the order or bath in their blood (panel 6 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0103.html) and panel 9 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0103.html)), wanted to kill people solely as an excuse to step out of the shadows (panel 7 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0117.html)), and scraps live children into the trash (panel 8 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0549.html)).

Now I see his story as more a story about him maturing rather then him being redeemed (though he perhaps should have done more to help those children).


If the readers know a Belkar that isn't evil, that's certainly need to me.
Well there was this guy (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0058.html), the implication being that is who Belkar is deep down if only he was a little wiser (I suspect he might be putting some points into wisdom and we might see him use a ranger spell before the comic ends).



We're bad at visualizing large amounts of things, period.

I suspect that Xykon has noticed, a +8 bonus to racial spot and search likely helps with such things.



As for the MitD... well, even O-Chul isn't sure that the MitD isn't evil. Whenever someone tries to state that he's totally a good guy, O-Chul is the first to say "we shouldn't go that far." He is aware that the potential is there, but he's also quick to point out that this does not necessarily roll over from potential to actual. Grain of salt and all that fun stuff.

O-Chul calls him a good man (panels 9 and 10 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0654.html)), he just doesn't know if he would turn on his other friends or not.

[Dame_Mechanus]

O-Chul calls him a good man (panels 9 and 10 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0654.html)), he just doesn't know if he would turn on his other friends or not.

Right, and O-Chul specifically cautions against assuming too much about what that means for the MitD (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1259.html). He was not saying that the MitD was definitely Good and aligned Good in that panel; he was demonstrating exactly what Durkon was talking about here (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1151.html). The MitD spent most of his life either being treated as an oddity to be gawked at or an assumed servant of evil, and O-Chul was encouraging him to think of himself as capable of Good because it, well, throws off his axis.

Remember - the first act that the MitD performs that we could arguably consider wholly good happens after that conversation, and it isn't even altogether a conscious act. (No, I don't count trading a spoonful of stew for all of O-Chul's gruel to count; that's transactional. Not malicious, but just a cooperative moment as much as anything.)

We do not know the MitD's alignment just like we don't know the MitD's true identity. O-Chul doesn't know it either, and he's come closer than anyone else by engaging with him as a person. Does that mean he is Evil or Good or Neutral? No. It just means we don't yet have the ability to say with certainty that he isn't Evil, even if he has the potential not to be.

[bunsen_h]

Minrah is the exception because Belkar hasn't really been evil since before she met him.

It would be more accurate to say that she hasn't seen or heard him say anything overtly evil. She hasn't done a Detect Evil on him, nor had any other way of evaluating his alignment. All that she's got to go on, in this regard, is that he's a long-time member of the party which she knows to be primarily Good-aligned. The only contra-indicators might be something Elan said in his recounting of their story (and Elan tends to evaluate things in a heroes-vs.-villains framework, and Belkar is on the side of the heroes) or stuff that happened off-screen.

EDIT:

and scraps live children into the trash (panel 8 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0549.html)).

Now I see his story as more a story about him maturing rather then him being redeemed (though he perhaps should have done more to help those children).

I see that more as him doing what he can, or at least what he thinks he can get away with. (He doesn't know the range of his abilities yet.) And being somewhat oblivious to the needs and limitations of the youngsters.

[Jason]

Belkar still qualified as "evil enough for a protection against evil amulet to burn him," a few days ago in-comic, but the vector of his alignment is certainly away from evil. That is, he does fewer evil actions than he used to, and more good or neutral actions. If he keeps going in this direction on the alignment graph he will eventually no longer qualify as evil.

[Peelee]

Belkar still qualified as "evil enough for a protection against evil amulet to burn him," a few days ago in-comic, but the vector of his alignment is certainly away from evil. That is, he does fewer evil actions than he used to, and more good or neutral actions. If he keeps going in this direction on the alignment graph he will eventually no longer qualify as evil.

What Good actions?

[Dame_Mechanus]

What Good actions?

Oh, loads! I mean, just in the time since Belkar last wore his amulet and got painfully burned by it, he has:

Apologized to Durkon for one action.
Threatened to murder a mother of a baby.
Made fun of Roy.
Made fun of Durkon.
Made fun of Elan.
Made fun of Roy again.
Made fun of Vampire Gontor.
Helped kill a giant worm.
Got drunk.
Made fun of Roy yet again.
Made fun of Roy once more.
Made fun of Roy still yet again.
Made fun of Roy even once more again.
Got caught up on the plot he wasn't paying attention to.
Got annoyed at Mr. Scruffy.
Made fun of Elan again.
Consulted with Roy about strategy.
Talked with Minrah about personal growth.
Made fun of people who are taller than him.
Asked Vaarsuvius for a favor.
Complained about Xykon and Redcloak.
Got annoyed at Bloodfeast.
Made fun of Elan and Haley.
Did some tracking.
Advocated for standing and fighting Xykon and Redcloak.
Tried to erase some tracks.
Made fun of Roy another time even more again than before.
Made fun of Elan yet again.
Piggy-backed on Roy apologizing to Elan to sort of peripherally do something like apologizing.
Made fun of Elan once more.
Got annoyed about Sunny's anti-magic eye.
Got annoyed at Elan.
Got hit with a fear attack and ran away from a housecat.
Gave his clasp to Elan while having his emotions calmed.
Made fun of Serini.
Got disabled by a potpourri sachet.
Made fun of Vaarsuvius.
Stabbed a floor monster.
Argued with Vaarsuvius.
Considered taking Serini's offer to betray his party.
Soothed Mr. Scruffy.
Called Serini stupid for missing the reality of the situation with the gods.

A couple of those are kind of like good actions! LG Belkar on the way!

[Peelee]

Oh, loads! I mean, just in the time since Belkar last wore his amulet and got painfully burned by it, he has:

Apologized to Durkon for one action.
Threatened to murder a mother of a baby.
Made fun of Roy.
Made fun of Durkon.
Made fun of Elan.
Made fun of Roy again.
Made fun of Vampire Gontor.
Helped kill a giant worm.
Got drunk.
Made fun of Roy yet again.
Made fun of Roy once more.
Made fun of Roy still yet again.
Made fun of Roy even once more again.
Got caught up on the plot he wasn't paying attention to.
Got annoyed at Mr. Scruffy.
Made fun of Elan again.
Consulted with Roy about strategy.
Talked with Minrah about personal growth.
Made fun of people who are taller than him.
Asked Vaarsuvius for a favor.
Complained about Xykon and Redcloak.
Got annoyed at Bloodfeast.
Made fun of Elan and Haley.
Did some tracking.
Advocated for standing and fighting Xykon and Redcloak.
Tried to erase some tracks.
Made fun of Roy another time even more again than before.
Made fun of Elan yet again.
Piggy-backed on Roy apologizing to Elan to sort of peripherally do something like apologizing.
Made fun of Elan once more.
Got annoyed about Sunny's anti-magic eye.
Got annoyed at Elan.
Got hit with a fear attack and ran away from a housecat.
Gave his clasp to Elan while having his emotions calmed.
Made fun of Serini.
Got disabled by a potpourri sachet.
Made fun of Vaarsuvius.
Stabbed a floor monster.
Argued with Vaarsuvius.
Considered taking Serini's offer to betray his party.
Soothed Mr. Scruffy.
Called Serini stupid for missing the reality of the situation with the gods.

A couple of those are kind of like good actions! LG Belkar on the way!

..........


You're my favorite.

[Fyraltari]

Oh, loads! I mean, just in the time since Belkar last wore his amulet and got painfully burned by it, he has:

Apologized to Durkon for one action.
Threatened to murder a mother of a baby.
Made fun of Roy.
Made fun of Durkon.
Made fun of Elan.
Made fun of Roy again.
Made fun of Vampire Gontor.
Helped kill a giant worm.
Got drunk.
Made fun of Roy yet again.
Made fun of Roy once more.
Made fun of Roy still yet again.
Made fun of Roy even once more again.
Got caught up on the plot he wasn't paying attention to.
Got annoyed at Mr. Scruffy.
Made fun of Elan again.
Consulted with Roy about strategy.
Talked with Minrah about personal growth.
Made fun of people who are taller than him.
Asked Vaarsuvius for a favor.
Complained about Xykon and Redcloak.
Got annoyed at Bloodfeast.
Made fun of Elan and Haley.
Did some tracking.
Advocated for standing and fighting Xykon and Redcloak.
Tried to erase some tracks.
Made fun of Roy another time even more again than before.
Made fun of Elan yet again.
Piggy-backed on Roy apologizing to Elan to sort of peripherally do something like apologizing.
Made fun of Elan once more.
Got annoyed about Sunny's anti-magic eye.
Got annoyed at Elan.
Got hit with a fear attack and ran away from a housecat.
Gave his clasp to Elan while having his emotions calmed.
Made fun of Serini.
Got disabled by a potpourri sachet.
Made fun of Vaarsuvius.
Stabbed a floor monster.
Argued with Vaarsuvius.
Considered taking Serini's offer to betray his party.
Soothed Mr. Scruffy.
Called Serini stupid for missing the reality of the situation with the gods.

A couple of those are kind of like good actions! LG Belkar on the way!

You know, I tend to think of Belkar as the one receiving restraining orders.

[Dame_Mechanus]

You know, I tend to think of Belkar as the one receiving restraining orders.

I maintain that going through over a hundred strips just to make sure that I was taking note of every action for the purposes of a gag qualifies as a perfectly Lawful action.

It was all worth it to be favorite for a day.

[KorvinStarmast]

It was all worth it to be favorite for a day. Twice over. :smallbiggrin: One of the better posts in this whole thread.

[Jason]

Like I said "fewer evil actions, and more good or neutral actions." It was a pretty low bar to clear.

[Dame_Mechanus]

Like I said "fewer evil actions, and more good or neutral actions." It was a pretty low bar to clear.

I'm not going to go through the entire archives for the joke like I just did. I'm sorry.

Having said that, it doesn't seem like Belkar's being any less evil. He's being less of a lodestone to his party and being less stupid evil (as defined by following some kind of Kantian imperative to just do awful things for no reason other than doing awful things), but he's still verbally abusive, violent, short-tempered, and takes unmistakable glee in inflicting suffering. The fact that he no longer seems to be the sort of person who would set fire to a bandit camp just because he could has nothing to do with a shift in values; now he'd just recognize that okay, that's not tactically beneficial right now.

But creeping into their tents, slitting their throats one by one, rescuing their target, and then setting fire to things? That'd be peachy!

[Jason]

Having said that, it doesn't seem like Belkar's being any less evil. He's being less of a lodestone to his party and being less stupid evil...
Actively cooperating with his party and being less stupid evil is "less evil", considering that Belkar was before his "character development".

[Doug Lampert]

I maintain that going through over a hundred strips just to make sure that I was taking note of every action for the purposes of a gag qualifies as a perfectly Lawful action.

It was all worth it to be favorite for a day.


Twice over. :smallbiggrin: One of the better posts in this whole thread.

Thrice over, it was magnificent.

Mind you, my CDO is so bad that I'd have put in links to every strip referenced.

For those who don't know, CDO is a lot like OCD, except that the letters are in alphabetical order AS THEY SHOULD BE!

[Dame_Mechanus]

Mind you, my CDO is so bad that I'd have put in links to every strip referenced.

That very nearly happened, but I decided that was just over the line of what I wanted to do.


Actively cooperating with his party and being less stupid evil is "less evil", considering that Belkar was before his "character development".

Even if you're going on the standard of "he's committing fewer outright evil acts on a daily basis," that doesn't actually even make the first step toward redemption. As Soon said outright, redemption requires (among other things) admitting that you might have been wrong in the past. The closest Belkar has come is apologizing to Durkon for hitting him in the head with a palm tree. Once. Maybe if Belkar had a lot more time, he might eventually start bending toward Good... but he doesn't have enough time. He has weeks at most. (I know other people have figured out pretty well how much time is probably left in the year, but I think it's agreed that it's not very long.)

And sure, it might have been snarky, but I don't see much in that list that points toward Good. Or even Neutral. I see the same little sociopath just not being an active millstone.

[dancrilis]

I'm not going to go through the entire archives for the joke like I just did. I'm sorry.

Having said that, it doesn't seem like Belkar's being any less evil. He's being less of a lodestone to his party and being less stupid evil (as defined by following some kind of Kantian imperative to just do awful things for no reason other than doing awful things), but he's still verbally abusive, violent, short-tempered, and takes unmistakable glee in inflicting suffering. The fact that he no longer seems to be the sort of person who would set fire to a bandit camp just because he could has nothing to do with a shift in values; now he'd just recognize that okay, that's not tactically beneficial right now.

But creeping into their tents, slitting their throats one by one, rescuing their target, and then setting fire to things? That'd be peachy!

So you think he is as evil just less chaotic?



For those who don't know, CDO is a lot like OCD, except that the letters are in alphabetical order AS THEY SHOULD BE!

I prefer COD, you can eat COD.


I see the same little sociopath just not being an active millstone.

All that is required for the triumph of neutral is for good and evil to do nothing.

[Peelee]

Actively cooperating with his party and being less stupid evil is "less evil", considering that Belkar was before his "character development".

That's not how evil works.

So you think he is as evil just less chaotic?
That's not how chaotic works.

[dancrilis]

That's not how chaotic works.

You consider that he might 'set fire to a bandit camp just because he could' and 'creeping into their tents, slitting their throats one by one, rescuing their target, and then setting fire to things' to be equally chaotic?

I agree they are both pretty chaotic but I would say one is more chaotic.

[brian 333]

That very nearly happened, but I decided that was just over the line of what I wanted to do.



Even if you're going on the standard of "he's committing fewer outright evil acts on a daily basis," that doesn't actually even make the first step toward redemption. As Soon said outright, redemption requires (among other things) admitting that you might have been wrong in the past. The closest Belkar has come is apologizing to Durkon for hitting him in the head with a palm tree. Once. Maybe if Belkar had a lot more time, he might eventually start bending toward Good... but he doesn't have enough time. He has weeks at most. (I know other people have figured out pretty well how much time is probably left in the year, but I think it's agreed that it's not very long.)

And sure, it might have been snarky, but I don't see much in that list that points toward Good. Or even Neutral. I see the same little sociopath just not being an active millstone.

So, he's becoming more of a team player and less of a solo player?

It is confirmed folks! Belkar is not less Evil, he's more Lawful!

[Dame_Mechanus]

You consider that he might 'set fire to a bandit camp just because he could' and 'creeping into their tents, slitting their throats one by one, rescuing their target, and then setting fire to things' to be equally chaotic?

I agree they are both pretty chaotic but I would say one is more chaotic.

That's not how alignment works. You do not cease being chaotic evil because it turns out there were things you could have done which caused more disorder and were more likely to inflict suffering.

Or to use an example who doesn't seem to have a "get out of CE free" card, let's look at Xykon. Is Xykon CE? Absolutely. But you know what would have been even more chaotic and evil? If instead of allying with the bugbears he'd come in spells blazing, razed the houses, murdered everyone, raised them as undead, had them fight each other, and then built a fortress out of the bones of their ancestors. Frankly, from Xykon's perspective that probably sounds hilarious. And yet that's not what he did. He'll still constantly insult Oona and Redcloak, he's perfectly willing to murder any of the bugbears if they bother him in the slightest (we saw that one strip ago), but he could be more chaotic and evil!

Haley doesn't suddenly become Neutral Good if she follows a law, Roy doesn't become Lawful Neutral because he disagrees with a paladin, and Belkar doesn't become less Chaotic Evil because we can theoretically conceive of him being even more uncontrolled and harmful. Which was the whole point; he's still verbally abusive to his allies and enemies, he's still happy to rely on violence first and foremost, he's still fundamentally looking out for himself. He's just realized that not making an enemy of the party he's traveling with is conducive to that.

[dancrilis]

That's not how alignment works. You do not cease being chaotic evil because it turns out there were things you could have done which caused more disorder and were more likely to inflict suffering.


I am not saying anything about his alignment - I am asking if you think he is less chaotic, are do you believe that all chaotic people are equally chaotic?

[Peelee]

I am not saying anything about his alignment - I am asking if you think he is less chaotic, are do you believe that all chaotic people are equally chaotic?

Do you mean chaotic in regards to the metaphysical concept of chaos, or do you mean chaotic in regards to alignment? Because the first is irrelevant to Belkar and the second is, actually saying anything about alignment.

[dancrilis]

Do you mean chaotic in regards to the metaphysical concept of chaos, or do you mean chaotic in regards to alignment? Because the first is irrelevant to Belkar and the second is, actually saying anything about alignment.

What I mean by chaotic is largely irrelevant - my question was does Dame_Mechanus 'think Belkar is as evil just less chaotic?' how they define evil and chaotic matters to that question, my definations really don't.

They can answer that question any way they like, yes, no, maybe, I don't know, etc, they can ignore the question entirely I am not owed an answer to questions raised on the internet - but I thought the question itself was fairly clear.


Edit:
On the alignment topic Dame_Mechanus did seem to mention that Xykon is Chaotic and Evil, but that he could be more Chaotic and Evil - which implies he could be less Chaotic and Evil, as such presumedly Belkar could also be less Chaotic and/or Evil then he previously was.

[Peelee]

What I mean by chaotic is largely irrelevant - my question was does Dame_Mechanus 'think Belkar is as evil just less chaotic?' how they define evil and chaotic matters to that question, my definations really don't.

In a comic heavily based on D&D, you are unclear as to what someone means when they define as character as evil and chaotic?

I don't believe I would be able to provide any elucidation if that could not.

[KorvinStarmast]

For those who don't know, CDO is a lot like OCD, except that the letters are in alphabetical order AS THEY SHOULD BE! :smallbiggrin: Bravo. (But I thought that the CDO was the Command Duty Officer)

[Jason]

Even if you're going on the standard of "he's committing fewer outright evil acts on a daily basis," that doesn't actually even make the first step toward redemption. As Soon said outright, redemption requires (among other things) admitting that you might have been wrong in the past.
I wasn't really talking about redemption, just alignment. Belkar is objectively less evil and chaotic than he once was. He was pretty close to the lower right corner of the alignment graph to begin with. Roy began the process of moving him away from that corner by restraining some of his more evil and choatic acts (as the deva pointed out to him).
Then Belkar formed a connection with an animal.
Then he went through his epiphany and pretended to be a team player.
Then Durkon sacrificed himself for Belkar, and Belkar dimly perceives that this is worthwhile behavior, as shown by his apology.
Eventually he turned into actually being a team player, where he is now. He has been retreating from the lower right corner of the alignment graph for some time now. He is by no means out of the Chaotic Evil zone, but he's much closer to shifting to Chaotic Neutral than he used to be.

Doing fewer acts of any strong alignment eventually shift you more towards Neutral, the middle of the graph. Doing actual good acts, like helping the good guys to try to stop the world from ending and learning to work better with your team shift you towards Neutral or even Good or Lawful even faster.

[bunsen_h]

Doing actual good acts, like helping the good guys to try to stop the world from ending and learning to work better with your team shift you towards Neutral or even Good or Lawful even faster.

Working to save the world isn't likely to be Evil (though I'm sure that circumstances could be found that would make it so), but it can be Neutral rather than Good. Who are you doing it for, and why? If it's just because you and the people you're close to emotionally need a place to live, that's Neutral. If it's partially so that people you don't have that connection with can benefit, that's Good.

[Vikenlugaid]

I think Belkar is still evil, but clearly trying to be less evil, and trying counts a lot in this world.

[dancrilis]

In a comic heavily based on D&D, you are unclear as to what someone means when they define as character as evil and chaotic?


The question was asked and the question was also answered - the answer didn't make sense to me but that is somewhat beside the point.

'That's not how alignment works' combined with 'Is Xykon CE? Absolutely. But you know what would have been even more chaotic and evil? If instead of allying with the bugbears he'd come in spells blazing, razed the houses, murdered everyone, raised them as undead, had them fight each other, and then built a fortress out of the bones of their ancestors'.

If Xykon is capable of being Chaotic Evil and also capable of being more chaotic and evil then surely it is possible for Belkar to be Chaotic Evil and also be less chaotic and evil then he used to be, however Dame_Mechanus mentioned 'it doesn't seem like Belkar's being any less evil'.

So that their take might be 'as evil and less chaotic' seemed (and frankly still seems) reasonable based on their statements.

The statement 'that's not how alignment works' seems at odds with their own take on alignment as per their reference to Xykon.

[Vikenlugaid]

It,s even more simple. Roy and Durkon are both lawfull but Durkon is more lawfull than Roy.
Xykon and Redcloak are both evil but Xykon is far more Evil.

Old Belkar was more Evil than new Belkar.