So, what is the pont of the battle with Calder?

[DaOldeWolf]

Wait! This isnt about complaining about the new battle. I am just wondering what its purpose in the bigger narrative is if any. My main guesses are:

-Calder will end up as an undead servant for Xykon.

-Calder´s soul will end up being spliced in whatever creature the IFCC ends up sending for their goal.

-Someone (or more) will end up dying to Calder. Or at the very least injured in a plot relevant way.

-Calder will change his mind and join the party in stopping XYkon.

-Calder will become victim to the snarl to show its effects in action.

-Calder ill flee and become one more side in this battle for the last gate.

--The Order will obtain something from defeating Calder. (maybe armor, shield or something)

-Nothing.

So, what do you think about it? Any other theories?

[Errorname]

My default assumption would be that it's this book's Frost Giant fight, a thing to occupy the heroes, show character growth for our mains and develop our new secondary characters, while also giving the real villains time to get into position.

[danielxcutter]

I think it’s also for Serini to have faith in the Order’s combat capabilities.

[Precure]

He will reveal some crucial backstory on what really happened between Soon and his team.

[Ruck]

My default assumption would be that it's this book's Frost Giant fight, a thing to occupy the heroes, show character growth for our mains and develop our new secondary characters, while also giving the real villains time to get into position.


I think it’s also for Serini to have faith in the Order’s combat capabilities.


He will reveal some crucial backstory on what really happened between Soon and his team.

I think all of these fit the bill in some way. (I might amend the last one to "or prod Serini to reveal," but either way I think that the unrevealed backstory is going to be part of this.)

[ZhonLord]

I think it's to convey the severity of the power gap. Calder is probably going to be quite a challenge for the group, which means they're in turn not necessarily ready for Team Evil. If they can't readily crush an old red dragon with lots of power and domination magic at his disposal, how are they going to take on an Epic sorcerer, a cleric with 9th tier spells, and an unknown creature with enough raw power to make earthquakes at will?

I think fighting Calder is going to give Serini reason to doubt the ability of the Order's success, even if she has no choice but to stick with them now that the threat of the gods' annihilation is on the table and she can't just let any team win without conflict any more.

[Gift Jeraff]

He drops one of the heroes' ultimate weapons.

[Tubercular Ox]

I think an immediate effect is that it's going to end up splitting the party, which will be a relief for me because I can stop wondering what the off panel characters are doing. Well, wonder less.

I agree Calder would be great at delivering perspective altering information about the Scribbles.

[Kvess]

Calder is a wrench in gears of the Order's plans that were so very clearly laid out at the beginning of the chapter. Think like a bard: Whenever the protagonists describe a plan in detail, the narrative purpose is so we can later understand how and why the circumstances have gone horribly, horribly wrong.

The party was planning on ambushing Xykon at full strength after Xykon's crew gets weakened by a number of traps and obstacles, presumably including Calder. This fight potentially takes that option off the table. It makes the outcome of their future encounter with Xykon more uncertain. The point of the battle doesn't have to be any more complicated than that.

[KorvinStarmast]

... show character growth for our mains and develop our new secondary characters, while also giving the real villains time to get into position. Yes, that's part of it.

I think it’s also for Serini to have faith in the Order’s combat capabilities. That's another part of it.

He will reveal some crucial backstory on what really happened between Soon and his team. Another part of it.

Calder is a wrench in gears of the Order's plans Another part of it.

It's also a drain on party resources.

And lastly: the story is built on a Dungeons and Dragons shell.
Fighting a dragon is a thing. It's a good thing in and of itself.

I am still puzzling out what Eugene's return (convo with Roy) folds into at this stage of the game.

[Metastachydium]

He will reveal some crucial backstory on what really happened between Soon and his team.

I'd phrase it more like "between the Scribblers", honestly, but yeah.


I think it's to convey the severity of the power gap. Calder is probably going to be quite a challenge for the group, which means they're in turn not necessarily ready for Team Evil. If they can't readily crush an old red dragon with lots of power and domination magic at his disposal, how are they going to take on an Epic sorcerer, a cleric with 9th tier spells


It's also a drain on party resources.

I'd argue that goes both ways. A crucial thing that bears mentioning is that, at the end of the day, Calder is really just a line of defense in that dungeon who happens to be hostile towards the Good Guys… In a dungeon with many lines of defense equally hostile towards the Bad Guys.

In that way, it might also help demonstrate how tough this place is while leaving the camera focused on the heroes doing the cool thing that is soldiering through it anyhow.


And lastly: the story is built on a Dungeons and Dragons shell.
Fighting a dragon is a thing. It's a good thing in and of itself.

And fighting a dragon in a dungeon… Yeah. Hells, yeah, in fact.


I am still puzzling out what Eugene's return (convo with Roy) folds into at this stage of the game.

All the Dwarves in the world will suddenly appear and throw themselves at Clader dying in droves, probably?


an unknown creature with enough raw power to make earthquakes at will?

How do you know it's at-will?

[Ionathus]

I agree with most of the ideas posited here. OotS is very good at juggling multiple storytelling goals in a single scene.

Ultimately, I think it's just really fun to do a dragon fight. It's iconic and exciting.

The Order has never fought and won a straight-up fight with a mature dragon. The YBD fight was a short struggle followed by a Disintegration curb-stomp; the ABD fight was an even more flashy curb-stomp. It'll be really fun to see the Order take down a dragon, on even footing, based purely on skill.

Assuming nothing goes horribly off the rails, of course :smallamused:

[DaOldeWolf]

Wow! This is why I love this community. So many possibilities that could entail the batte that I hadnt though about. Thanks to everyone for sharing their thoughts!

[Aidan]

As others have mentioned I think delaying the heroes plus giving Serini a front row seat to how the Order deals with a very strong foe. It seems like this could eat heavily into final dungeon trap setting time, and the Order dealing with Calder weakens the gates defenses. Additionally how the Order manages to deal with or not deal with this threat could heavily affect Serini's view of the Order. If it is a hard battle and they just barely defeat Calder, or fail to beat him, she could second guess their abilities for a battle against Team Evil. On the other hand if they are able to defeat him and demonstrate their ability to work together she could end up buying into believing the Order can win against Team Evil.

My current guess is that the battle is going to be very hard but seeing how the Order works as a team to ultimately overcome Calder will make her more confident in them.

[SlashDash]

A poster above mentioned that when protagonists lay plans, they are obviously going to fail.
I think this applies not just to the protagonists - but to Serini as well.
It's pretty obvious that there's no way team evil are actually going through all of Serini's traps in The Final Dungeon.

Also let's face it, it's far too early in the book for the actual final conflict with team evil to happen. Too many open plot threads. So there's no way team evil goes into conflict with the heroes yet.

At some point something is going to happen to allow team evil to get past the defenses and put the heroes on the run again.

I think the fight with Calder will be the instigation of it.
Too early to guess how, but maybe he'll chose to runaway (he clearly won't surrender again) and smash through the walls? Trigger some other defense? Blow stuff up?
Do something near the threads of creation that would put a serious dent in the place?


Either way, something will happen to shift the entire situation of who is in control and the path to the gate.

[Synesthesy]

It just came to my mind that if they kill Calder and leave him dead there, Xykon will ride zombie Calder :O

[Metastachydium]

It just came to my mind that if they kill Calder and leave him dead there, Xykon will ride zombie Calder :O

Well, there's a symmetry to appreciate about that theory for sure (in that his previous dead dragon mount had the other horn damaged)!

[danielxcutter]

I suspect that the Order are going to destroy the corpse specifically because they remember Xykon riding a dragon zombie, tbh.

[Metastachydium]

I suspect that the Order are going to destroy the corpse specifically because they remember Xykon riding a dragon zombie, tbh.

That might bring back memories for V!

[Kamunami]

-Calder will become victim to the snarl to show its effects in action.

I actually really like this specific possibility, in addition to what everyone's saying. Though I'm guessing by the Snarl you meant the "Threads of Creation" we saw earlier? No one's going to go touching them willingly, but this fight makes the perfect opportunity for someone on either side to end up accidentally grazing one and show us how dangerous they really are.

[Sermil]

At some point something is going to happen to allow team evil to get past the defenses and put the heroes on the run again.

I think the fight with Calder will be the instigation of it.
Too early to guess how, but maybe he'll chose to runaway (he clearly won't surrender again) and smash through the walls? Trigger some other defense? Blow stuff up?
Do something near the threads of creation that would put a serious dent in the place?




Or just escape, run into Redcloak, and tell him he's falling for a shell game, and tell him how to bypass it.

[Peelee]

Or just escape, run into Redcloak, and tell him he's falling for a shell game, and tell him how to bypass it.

A.) It's not a shell game.
2.) Regardless of that, Calder doesn't know the setup, or how to bypass the setup.

[yes]

I agree that it's probably about showing Serini what it's like to coordinate as a team.

Her experience with team work is a bunch of in-fighting and distrust. She may have fought along with the Scribbles for who knows how long, but I get the impression their team style was less "coordinated tactical assault" and more "competition to see who's more effective". In 1296 she even says "It took all six of us working together to take [Calder's] operation down", implying that working together wasn't the normal.

So it's no surprise she doesn't think the order could beat Xykon. I don't think she's imagining them cooperating as a unit where the sum is greater than the whole, but rather that she's thinking of them as a bunch individual characters who all happen to be facing off with an epic level lich at the same time. Even when she fought them they weren't working much as a team; Roy and V were poisoned, Durkon petrified, Haley without her bow, Belkar charmed/calmed, etc. She was them as a bunch of incapable disorganized goofs entirely outside of their element.

After seeing them fight Calder as a united and functional team, she might get a new respect for the team, and for having the paladins along, etc. Instead of just tolerating them and hoping for the best, she may become a cooperative team member in the type of team she wish she was part of decades ago.

[Tzardok]

In 1296 she even says "It took all six of us working together to take [Calder's] operation down", implying that working together wasn't the normal.

I don't see how that sentence implies that they don't usually work together. It's simply a statement in Calder's power that it required six high level, near epic characters to defeat him and his cult.

[Precure]

She was coordinating with them when she built this dungeon and was counting on their help, that's why Soon's rejection hurt her so.

[yes]

I don't see how that sentence implies that they don't usually work together. It's simply a statement in Calder's power that it required six high level, near epic characters to defeat him and his cult.

There's plenty of example of how much strife and tension they had on that team. Gerard and Soon for example. The lack of trust and cooperation. It's part of why they fell apart.

And I'm not sure why she would specify that it required all six of them working together to defeat Calder if that behavior was a fair default expectation.

[gbaji]

There's plenty of example of how much strife and tension they had on that team. Gerard and Soon for example. The lack of trust and cooperation. It's part of why they fell apart.

And I'm not sure why she would specify that it required all six of them working together to defeat Calder if that behavior was a fair default expectation.

Because it emphasizes the fact that it takes a high level group, working together, to defeat him. I didn't get any specific implication about whether this was a common on uncommon thing for the Scribblers back when they fought Calder (and clearly they were able to work together to defeat him back then, so it's kinda moot anyway), but more a statement to showcase how far the Order has come in this regard. The Order is a group that would routinely step on each others toes, disagree about how to proceed, and fail to follow the most basic of plans.

I kinda agree with the poster who said this is more or less like the Frost Giant fight. It's about showcasing the Order's capabilities in a fight, against a really tough opponent, but not in a "final boss" situation. Also, this kinda goes to V's whole "we will have one and only one encounter on the way" observation. The party has to fight *something* while traveling through the dungeon to the area they're going to lie in wait for TE at. That's just narrative pacing at work IMO. It would be kinda boring if they just walked on through with no difficulties. Someone at some point had to trip something for them to have to deal with. And odds were good it would be either Elan, Belkar, or Sunny.

And yeah, it also showcases that... yup... this is a really dangerous dungeon, full of really dangerous things. There might be some other stuff as well. Showing what the threads will do if touched is a possiblity, but seems like that's some distance away, so I'm not sure. I suppose there could also be some opportunity for reveals as well. Calder is "something of a mindbender", so might use mental tricks to his advantage, or may have used them against the Scribblers back in the day, and try to use information gleaned then to his advantage now. Not sure what he could know that would be of great interest though. But it's possible. We do still have unanswered questions about exactly what happened with the Scribblers, so this could be where that comes out. But it's unclear if those thing happened before or after Calder was imprisoned.

[KorvinStarmast]

She was coordinating with them when she built this dungeon and was counting on their help, that's why Soon's rejection hurt her so. That makes some sense. She did the old "How about I take a level in paladin?" thing and got the smart alec response from Girard about the stick up the butt ... so at one point, she at least had appreciation for her paladin party member.
Or she was just being a smart alec herself.

[Grendelkin]

Maybe the 'point' is that this world does still run on the rules of D&D to some extent. You can't expect to breeze through a high-level dungeon without having to fight something close to or exceeding your own level.
And maybe Calder is just here to show how strong the heroes have grown and to allow them to grow mightier still - by providing them with XP.

[Riarra]

This latest strip confirmed that no, Calder was not supposed to be conscious while in stasis. The Scribblers intended to show him mercy and instead trapped him in an endless waking nightmare. But it's no less wrong for being from neglect than malice. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1233.html) I think Calder's going to reinforce the ideas that came up with the gods, the goblinoids, and intention vs. impact.

[Unoriginal]

This latest strip confirmed that no, Calder was not supposed to be conscious while in stasis. The Scribblers intended to show him mercy and instead trapped him in an endless waking nightmare. But it's no less wrong for being from neglect than malice. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1233.html) I think Calder's going to reinforce the ideas that came up with the gods, the goblinoids, and intention vs. impact.

It's important to note that Serini blames Calder's Spell Resistance for the unconsciousness-inducer part of the spell circles not working, and Calder doesn't object to her point.

The thing is, a being with Spell Resistance can lower it at will.

Furthermore, it is shown Calder could telepathically communicate with quite a bit of range, or at least mentally attack them.

So the only way for Calder to end up in this situation is if he a) intentionally resisted the magic and b) chose to *not* communicate with any of the adventurers once they finished setting up the magic (or at least attack them telepathically to show something was wrong, if he could't use words).

Calder had surrendered to the Order of the Scribble, and they had decided on a non-abusive imprisonment method for him. Resisting the spell network supposed to imprison him and then not informing the Order of the Scribble indicates, to me, that the Red Dragon was trying to fool them into leaving him unattended, then escape as soon as possible.

And then he discovered he couldn't escape, and that his surrender-then-betray gambit had backfired.


It's possible the Order of the Scribble was negligent and didn't check, but Calder had to actively bamboozle them into believing everything was working at 100% for his I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream fate to happen.

[Peelee]

So the only way for Calder to end up in this situation is if he a) intentionally resisted the magic and b) chose to *not* communicate with any of the adventurers once they finished setting up the magic (or at least attack them telepathically to show something was wrong, if he could't use words).

Or if the magic on Calder's contianment failed partially.

"the only way" isn't the only way, is the point here.

[danielxcutter]

I think it’s still fair to say that what happened to him was nasty even considering what kind of a being he was and why he was imprisoned like that, tbh.

[Unoriginal]

Or if the magic on Calder's contianment failed partially.

"the only way" isn't the only way, is the point here.

It did fail partially, because Calder resisted the effect and then didn't inform the persons who could have fixed it one way or the other.

Unless you meant "failed X ammount of time after the initial set up", which is possible but doesn't fit what Calder or Serini are saying. Of course Serini isn't an archmage, Calder is very angry and probably confused due to how long he was stuck in body but not in mind, and neither have any reason to be objective about the situation.

And yeah, Calder's circumatances were indeed horrible, I'm just saying it's not fair to blame the Order of the Scribble for neglect if they took the necessary precautions and Calder disabled them in an escape attempt.

[KorvinStarmast]

Calder had surrendered to the Order of the Scribble, and they had decided on a non-abusive imprisonment method for him. Resisting the spell network supposed to imprison him and then not informing the Order of the Scribble indicates, to me, that the Red Dragon was trying to fool them into leaving him unattended, then escape as soon as possible. That conforms to how AD&D 1e dragon subdual works, roughly.

And then he discovered he couldn't escape, and that his surrender-then-betray gambit had backfired. Many a story is told about a villain or a hero who outsmarts themselves. Standard fare in fantasy/SF/S&S works (example, The Dark Eidolon; see also Gandalf's "wise fool" remark as regards Sauron).

It's possible the Order of the Scribble was negligent and didn't check, but Calder had to actively bamboozle them into believing everything was working at 100% for his I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream fate to happen. Yeah, and I love the reference to Ellison's story. +1. :smallsmile:

[gbaji]

This latest strip confirmed that no, Calder was not supposed to be conscious while in stasis. The Scribblers intended to show him mercy and instead trapped him in an endless waking nightmare. But it's no less wrong for being from neglect than malice. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1233.html) I think Calder's going to reinforce the ideas that came up with the gods, the goblinoids, and intention vs. impact.

Except he's specifically referring to the condition being "wrong", and not the actions which caused the condition. it's quite possible for someone to have suffered, and have legitimate reason to be upset about it, even if no one specifically took any action with the intent to cause that suffering. In the case of Calder, we can absolutely say that the Scribbler's are at fault for what happened to Calder, but that doesn't mean we should condemn them for their actions, or say it was evil to do what they did. Intent does not always matter for determination of fault and responsibility, but it does matter (a lot!) when assessing the morality of the action itself.

[Riarra]

The thing is, a being with Spell Resistance can lower it at will.

I thought maybe the Scribblers didn't fully consider the implications of putting a creature with Spell Resistance in stasis, but I didn't realize it could be voluntarily suppressed.


I'm just saying it's not fair to blame the Order of the Scribble for neglect if they took the necessary precautions and Calder disabled them in an escape attempt.


Except he's specifically referring to the condition being "wrong", and not the actions which caused the condition. it's quite possible for someone to have suffered, and have legitimate reason to be upset about it, even if no one specifically took any action with the intent to cause that suffering. In the case of Calder, we can absolutely say that the Scribbler's are at fault for what happened to Calder, but that doesn't mean we should condemn them for their actions, or say it was evil to do what they did. Intent does not always matter for determination of fault and responsibility, but it does matter (a lot!) when assessing the morality of the action itself.

Quoting Durkon like I did may have come off as harsher towards the Scribblers than I (heh) intended. gbaji said what I was trying to get at better than I did.

[Ionathus]

I actually really like this specific possibility, in addition to what everyone's saying. Though I'm guessing by the Snarl you meant the "Threads of Creation" we saw earlier? No one's going to go touching them willingly, but this fight makes the perfect opportunity for someone on either side to end up accidentally grazing one and show us how dangerous they really are.

That would be really interesting! I can't recall and don't have the time to check the archives: are the Threads of Creation in Calder's path right now? If he took off flying across the bridge, would he hit them?

I agree that Calder might be the best candidate for the Worf Effect on showing what the Threads can do: he's extremely powerful and intelligent, but also very unapologetically evil and dangerous, so my sympathy for his death is less likely.


I think it’s still fair to say that what happened to him was nasty even considering what kind of a being he was and why he was imprisoned like that, tbh.

Yeah. I think it'd be interesting to unpack the Spell Resistance mechanics and "did he play along with intention to betray, only to realize he couldn't?" hypotheticals, but at the end of the day it definitely sucks. No living mind should be tortured like that, intentionally or accidentally, and I guess I'm a little surprised that Epic-level adventurers didn't realize resistance could interfere with stasis like that.

Still, he definitely seems like a real turd and I'll admit that's limiting my sympathy.

[DaOldeWolf]

Though I'm guessing by the Snarl you meant the "Threads of Creation" we saw earlier? No one's going to go touching them willingly, but this fight makes the perfect opportunity for someone on either side to end up accidentally grazing one and show us how dangerous they really are.

Yep, especially with them being introduced not that long ago. It makes sense, at least in my head.

[Unoriginal]

I agree that Calder might be the best candidate for the Worf Effect on showing what the Threads can do: he's extremely powerful and intelligent, but also very unapologetically evil and dangerous, so my sympathy for his death is less likely.

Mmmh, it's true that Calder could be a great candidate for that role.

The other option that comes to mind would be the Quinton summoned by Redcloak. To show that even an extremely intelligent, logical who's powerful and efficient enough to let Team Evil breeze through the decoy dungeons is utterly out of their depth concerning the nearly-freed Snarl.

[Psyren]

Has there been a story beat in this comic that didn't go anywhere? I certainly can't think of one.

And in this instance, +1 to its draining their resources, will change Serini's outlook/relationship to the Order in some way, will likely power up the weaker characters like Minrah etc.

[gbaji]

Has there been a story beat in this comic that didn't go anywhere? I certainly can't think of one.

And in this instance, +1 to its draining their resources, will change Serini's outlook/relationship to the Order in some way, will likely power up the weaker characters like Minrah etc.

Except that unless something seriously changes with the timing of TE finishing exploring all of the dungeons in the Hollow, the Order and Friends should have plenty of time to rest and recover after this fight. The only likely effect from a resource perspective is that some of our heroes may actually go up a level as a result, which would make them a bit tougher going into the final fight.

I'm still leaning towards a more storytelling/pacing purpose here. I do think that the pacing requires that "something happen" to the Order while traveling through the Final Dungeon, so this is it. And if, over the course of this fight, there are some story/character reveals, and info drops, then that's good too. Could be stuff about Serini and the Scribblers. Could be learning something about the Threads. Could be both.

I do think, however, that the Threads (at least the ones we saw previously) are not on some kind of direct path out of the dungeon. It's hard to tell from the panels, but it looked to me like they had to double back from where they encountered them and got here via following another path through the dungeon. Which would suggest that if Calder were making a beeline "out", that he would not run into them.

But that also raises the question: Which direction/path is "out"? The only entrance to the Final Dungeon is via a portal that opens when you trigger a trap inside one of the standard dungeons and have the marks from all of the other dungeons as well. It's unclear how long that portal stays open once activated, much less whether it's two way. There must be an exit out of the Final Dungeon, but so far we haven't been shown what/where that actually is. If I were Serini I would not have not wanted folks to be able to take out this dungeon in bite sized pieces, so putting the exit in the same room with the entrance would be kinda dumb (once someone has the marks, they can just pop in, clear a room, pop out, rinse and repeat). In fact, I'd have the exit well concealed, and waaaay on the other side of the dungeon requiring someone to survive all the traps and stasis held monsters to get there.

But regardless, it's a very good bet that Calder does not know where the exit is. So it's completely up in the air where he might go if he chooses to leave the room. I would kinda assume he isn't going to actually try to kill everyone, but to put them under his control somehow and use them to escape the dungeon. Which, ironically, would mean that killing Serini is the last thing he actually should be doing.

[Gift Jeraff]

I do think, however, that the Threads (at least the ones we saw previously) are not on some kind of direct path out of the dungeon. It's hard to tell from the panels, but it looked to me like they had to double back from where they encountered them and got here via following another path through the dungeon. Which would suggest that if Calder were making a beeline "out", that he would not run into them.

They can be seen clipping through the above floor by the intersection leading to Calder's walkway. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1292.html)

[Kamunami]

I agree that Calder might be the best candidate for the Worf Effect on showing what the Threads can do: he's extremely powerful and intelligent, but also very unapologetically evil and dangerous, so my sympathy for his death is less likely.

Not to mention, he almost certainly wouldn't have the slightest clue what they are.

[Gift Jeraff]

Not to mention, he almost certainly wouldn't have the slightest clue what they are.

Not necessarily. We know "they went to each rift and defeated those that would use them for their own purposes." (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html) Calder could be one of those villains.

I have a wild theory that he might have played some sort of role in helping Lirian and Dorukan develop the rift-sealing and Gate-creating spells since they (as well as the Crimson Mantle's Gate-manipulating ritual) all involve the conjunction of divine + arcane magic, and as a red dragon he could have unique insight into combining the two because he can naturally cast cleric spells as arcane magic. Perhaps he was hoping to enthrall a divine caster for some scheme involving one of the rifts. Or he just had some obscure knowledge and they tracked him down to obtain it.

The only problem with this theory is then Serini would be very dumb to leave him in a dungeon with a Gate if he has shown ill intent with a rift in the past...unless he was actually trying to seal the rift to protect the world, so Serini knows that for all his faults he can be trusted not to put the world at risk.

[Kamunami]

The only problem with this theory is then Serini would be very dumb to leave him in a dungeon with a Gate if he has shown ill intent with a rift in the past...unless he was actually trying to seal the rift to protect the world, so Serini knows that for all his faults he can be trusted not to put the world at risk.

You know, this does actually raise a question I haven't seen asked yet. This whole place is supposed to be a challenge for anyone looking to access the Gate, and the enemies are ones she's picked to stand in the way. Does it really make sense that rather than having Calder sealed away semi-permanently, she had such an evil and dangerous creature set up to be deliberately released as a mere encounter? I know someone getting this far is super unlikely, but that doesn't change that the trap is set up to release Calder on some unsuspecting schmuck. She'd have to have seen him getting free as an eventuality.

[Unoriginal]

You know, this does actually raise a question I haven't seen asked yet. This whole place is supposed to be a challenge for anyone looking to access the Gate, and the enemies are ones she's picked to stand in the way. Does it really make sense that rather than having Calder sealed away semi-permanently, she had such an evil and dangerous creature set up to be deliberately released as a mere encounter? I know someone getting this far is super unlikely, but that doesn't change that the trap is set up to release Calder on some unsuspecting schmuck. She'd have to have seen him getting free as an eventuality.

Given that Serini's plan in the worst-case-scenario was entirely relying on her being able to seek her old adventuring partners and to Get The Band Back Together, I still think that "oh, and Calder has been freed/risks to be freed" would have been one of the arguments she'd put forth.

It's also worth noting that Calder being so dangerous and evil is one of the reason why having him as an obstacle works in the first place.

Also, I think that if Soon objected to killing the dragon after his surrender, it's unlikely he would have approved of permanent stasis with no way to ever be released. So Calder eventually being allowed out was almost certainly always part of the plan.

[KorvinStarmast]

...unless he was actually trying to seal the rift to protect the world, so Serini knows that for all his faults he can be trusted not to put the world at risk. It's where his food is. The world. :smallsmile:

[Psyren]

Except that unless something seriously changes with the timing of TE finishing exploring all of the dungeons in the Hollow, the Order and Friends should have plenty of time to rest and recover after this fight. The only likely effect from a resource perspective is that some of our heroes may actually go up a level as a result, which would make them a bit tougher going into the final fight.

Time to do it and space to do it safely are two different things. Though I'm inclined to agree with you, the estimate probably wouldn't have been 2 days if there weren't going to be time for a long rest in between.

[brian 333]

I am wondering where, in the examination of Calder's cruel fate, is the argument for poetic justice?

We are discussing a being who treats other living beings as tools. He is currently trapping Sunny inside her own mind while forcing her body to obey his will. His former minions were trapped inside their own heads unable to even complain as Calder hurled them onto the blades of the Scribblers to save his own scales!

Calder is clearly too dangerous to set free. He is equally too dangerous to imprison with others. That leaves three choices:
Execute a prisoner who surrendered,
Solitary confinement for life,
Or stasis until a greater threat to the world comes along and releases him.

The Scribblers appear to have chosen #3 which for some reason converted to #2.

But is solitary confinement nearly as bad as the fate he inflicted on his victims? At least he got to remain himself rather than be a mind trapped in a sock puppet controlled by someone who holds you in contempt..

[Precure]

As far as we know Scribblers didn't choose anything, because this dungeon is built after they dissolve themselves.

[Chronos]

Any or all of the previous explanations could be it, but I prefer to keep it simple: They're in a dungeon that's explicitly full of the most dangerous monsters around. Of course they're going to have to have a fight with one of those monsters. And a big nasty red dragon, being so iconic, is an excellent choice for that fight.

[Liquor Box]

Given that Serini's plan in the worst-case-scenario was entirely relying on her being able to seek her old adventuring partners and to Get The Band Back Together, I still think that "oh, and Calder has been freed/risks to be freed" would have been one of the arguments she'd put forth.

It's also worth noting that Calder being so dangerous and evil is one of the reason why having him as an obstacle works in the first place.

Also, I think that if Soon objected to killing the dragon after his surrender, it's unlikely he would have approved of permanent stasis with no way to ever be released. So Calder eventually being allowed out was almost certainly always part of the plan.

That doesn't follow for me. The plan was he would be held in stasis, to be released if a invader fails to avoid the stasis trigger, hopefully to fight the invaders.

If that happened he'd most likely either fail (and be of little value), or defeat the invaders. If he loses, that doesn't help. But if he wins, does that help. Calder is then in a position to damage the rest of the defences, or at worst take the gate himself (he is smart enough to seek to control it). In all the most likely scenarios, he does no good for the defence, and perhaps does harm.

Your answer to this has been that Serini's plan, if Calder got free (after beating the invaders) is to round up her old team to recapture him.

But, would there be time for that? Unless I'm misunderstanding the comic, they are currently pretty close to the gate. The Scribblers might have a very small amount of time to respond (like an hour?, less?) from around the world at any time of day or night. We know from the previous comic that last time it took all six of them to take him down.

Putting aside the morality of keeping him in that state to use for Serini's own purposes, it seems to me to be likely to cause more harm to the defence than good.

[Unoriginal]

That doesn't follow for me. The plan was he would be held in stasis, to be released if a invader fails to avoid the stasis trigger, hopefully to fight the invaders.

If that happened he'd most likely either fail (and be of little value), or defeat the invaders. If he loses, that doesn't help. But if he wins, does that help. Calder is then in a position to damage the rest of the defences, or at worst take the gate himself (he is smart enough to seek to control it). In all the most likely scenarios, he does no good for the defence, and perhaps does harm.

Your answer to this has been that Serini's plan, if Calder got free (after beating the invaders) is to round up her old team to recapture him.

But, would there be time for that? Unless I'm misunderstanding the comic, they are currently pretty close to the gate. The Scribblers might have a very small amount of time to respond (like an hour?, less?) from around the world at any time of day or night. We know from the previous comic that last time it took all six of them to take him down.

Putting aside the morality of keeping him in that state to use for Serini's own purposes, it seems to me to be likely to cause more harm to the defence than good.

Calder fights the intruders and loses: one powerful evil entity who knows about the Gates ceases to be a problem, and the intruders have lost HPs, spells, and other ressources, meaning their dungeon exploration will be made harder or slowed down.

Calder fights the intruders and wins: a group of powerful evil (or at least potentially world-destroying) entities ceases to be a problem, and Calder is stuck in a dungeon he doesn't know with less HPs, spells and other ressources that he'd otherwise have, meaning he'd likely have to take time to recover or face whichever parts of the Final Dungeon the intruders hadn't cleared while weakened.

In either case, it gives Serini more time to gather the Order of the Scribble and sell them how dangerous the threat is.

Keep in mind that Serini would have called on her friends as soon as intruders made a serious go at the mini-dungeons, and even an outsiders whose powerset let them breeze through said mini-dungeons estimated the task would take two days.

Now of course, the worst case scenario would that either Calder or the intruders could trivialize the other and enslave them without éosing anything in the process... but that is less than likely when you take into account the rest of the dungeon. Anyone able to reach Calder would be a significant adversary to the dragon, and there is likely no non-divine being in the OotS world who can trivialize Calder.

[KorvinStarmast]

Calder is then in a position to damage the rest of the defences, or at worst take the gate himself (he is smart enough to seek to control it). But he doesn't have the ritual - that needs a divine and arcane caster of very high levels - so controlling the gate isn't something he can do. He can choose to destroy it, or not destroy it. Is that what you mean by "control" the gate, or, are you referring to controlling access to the gate? (Heh, recruit bugbears into his new cult: fun!)

[Kamunami]

but that is less than likely when you take into account the rest of the dungeon

Like for instance, a room not long prior where they're intended to have all magic items and metal equipment turned to scraps?

[Unoriginal]

But he doesn't have the ritual - that needs a divine and arcane caster of very high levels - so controlling the gate isn't something he can do. He can choose to destroy it, or not destroy it. Is that what you mean by "control" the gate, or, are you referring to controlling access to the gate? (Heh, recruit bugbears into his new cult: fun!)

I mean, Redcloak's ritual doesn't control the Gate either, it just transport it to a different Plane.

Also, it is probably not the only thing one could do with the Gates. Since they kind of hold creation together, it's not outlandish to think a different ritual could allow the performer to produce different effects.

If Calder is presently capable of something like that is a different question, but I'm sure someome with enough time, power and ressources would come up with *something* nasty sooner or later, if it was their goal.

EDIT:

In fact, part of the reason Redcloak is operating under the sunk cost fallacy is that he seems to think the ritual requiring both a powerful divine caster, a powerful arcane caster and a functioning Gate as built by Lirian and Dorukan is the *only* way to get something out of the Snarl business. It doesn't seem he ever attempted to do anything with the Gobbotopia rift, not even study it, aside from threatening to throw people in one time.

[Precure]

Calder can't escape, the path is too narrow for him.

[brian 333]

Calder can't escape, the path is too narrow for him.

And we know he cannot polymorph into another form, say, a behold eye-tyr crazy eye monster, and float out.

[Precure]

And we know he cannot polymorph into another form, say, a behold eye-tyr crazy eye monster, and float out.

OK, you got me there.

[brian 333]

My apologies, I was not trying to 'get you.' I was trying for a chuckle. Let me fix that.

[Precure]

It's too late now...

[brian 333]

It's too late now...

I'm famous for cramming genies back into bottles. I'll show you; here, hold my beer...

[Peelee]

I'm famous for cramming genies back into bottles. I'll show you; here, hold my beer...

I'm fairly certain Christina Aguilera has a restraining order against you.

[ti'esar]

Any or all of the previous explanations could be it, but I prefer to keep it simple: They're in a dungeon that's explicitly full of the most dangerous monsters around. Of course they're going to have to have a fight with one of those monsters. And a big nasty red dragon, being so iconic, is an excellent choice for that fight.

As somebody who explicitly commented on 1295 how appropriate it was that the Final Dungeon would have a fight with the first really badass dragon to appear in a couple of books, I still very much doubt that's all of it, just because it's rarely the Giant's style to do just one thing at once. I fully expect the commentary for this scene to have a "besides, dragons are just cool" bit in it, but I do think there'll be a 'besides'.

[Liquor Box]

Calder fights the intruders and loses: one powerful evil entity who knows about the Gates ceases to be a problem, and the intruders have lost HPs, spells, and other ressources, meaning their dungeon exploration will be made harder or slowed down.

Calder fights the intruders and wins: a group of powerful evil (or at least potentially world-destroying) entities ceases to be a problem, and Calder is stuck in a dungeon he doesn't know with less HPs, spells and other ressources that he'd otherwise have, meaning he'd likely have to take time to recover or face whichever parts of the Final Dungeon the intruders hadn't cleared while weakened.

In either case, it gives Serini more time to gather the Order of the Scribble and sell them how dangerous the threat is.

Keep in mind that Serini would have called on her friends as soon as intruders made a serious go at the mini-dungeons, and even an outsiders whose powerset let them breeze through said mini-dungeons estimated the task would take two days.

Now of course, the worst case scenario would that either Calder or the intruders could trivialize the other and enslave them without éosing anything in the process... but that is less than likely when you take into account the rest of the dungeon. Anyone able to reach Calder would be a significant adversary to the dragon, and there is likely no non-divine being in the OotS world who can trivialize Calder.

Your premise is that Calder and the invaders are both threats to the dungeon now, so whichever wins, the other is eliminated. But Calder is only a threat because Serini placed him there - if she hadn't he most likely wouldn't be a threat to the gates at all. Now he is a potential threat if his stasis gets taken away.

You mention that that the winning party might lose resources in the fight - which is possible. But more likely they would gain resources. It's been suggested in this very thread that the Order might be fighting Calder to gain a level or two, and the victor (out of Calder and the invader) may gain magic items. Or indeed, as you say, the worst case scenario could happen with one of the two groups enslaving the other (either through Calder's mindbending, or Xykon's zombiefication).

Indeed, in one of the other threads someone (I can't remember if it were you or not) suggested Calder might be able to avoid a fight - he might ally with the invaders, or simply avoid them - so now there are two threats, or the two threats have combined.

If Calder wasn't in the dungeon, the worst case scenario would be that there is one threat there. With Calder in the dungeon that is the best case scenario.


But he doesn't have the ritual - that needs a divine and arcane caster of very high levels - so controlling the gate isn't something he can do. He can choose to destroy it, or not destroy it. Is that what you mean by "control" the gate, or, are you referring to controlling access to the gate? (Heh, recruit bugbears into his new cult: fun!)

Does Serini even know about the ritual? I don;t think she is trying to defend the gate from that specifically, but rather anyone at all who might be a threat to it.

[Tzardok]

The best case scenario is a mutual kill.

[Liquor Box]

The best case scenario is a mutual kill.

True, that is a possible, but unlikely outcome.

[Unoriginal]

Your premise is that Calder and the invaders are both threats to the dungeon now, so whichever wins, the other is eliminated. But Calder is only a threat because Serini placed him there - if she hadn't he most likely wouldn't be a threat to the gates at all. Now he is a potential threat if his stasis gets taken away.

Indeed, and that is a good Get The Band Back Together argument.



You mention that that the winning party might lose resources in the fight - which is possible. But more likely they would gain resources.

Simply put, not, it is not likely at all. The nature of D&D combat is that you're going to lose ressources unless you can trivialize the encounter with your at-will capacities only without taking any damage.



It's been suggested in this very thread that the Order might be fighting Calder to gain a level or two, and the victor (out of Calder and the invader) may gain magic items.

Calder doesn't seem to have any magic items, so at worst he could gain the items of the intruders. In any case, removing the intruders who wield them is still a net benefit.

As for gaining levels, from what we saw in the rest ogéf the comic, gaining levels in the OotS-verse doesn't heal you or give you back spent powers immediately. Maybe the survivors of the clash would be a level higher, but they'd still be hurt and out of juice.



Or indeed, as you say, the worst case scenario could happen with one of the two groups enslaving the other (either through Calder's mindbending, or Xykon's zombiefication).

Note that the worst case scenario is "one side enslaves the other after trivializing the encounter".

If potential intruders enslave Calder but have burned through all their 9th level spells and lost 1/4th of their total HPs, that's still a net benefit.



Indeed, in one of the other threads someone (I can't remember if it were you or not) suggested Calder might be able to avoid a fight - he might ally with the invaders, or simply avoid them - so now there are two threats, or the two threats have combined.

Calder escaping without slowing down tge intruders is a "problem for later". Serini probably thought he could be tracked down and killed this time if he was up to his old tricks, and it'd be a greap trip down nostalgia lane for her team. Maybe she even thought that if they had to work together long enough, they'll remember they were friends once.

Calder joining forces with the intruders without a fight has no chance to happen, based on what we know of his personality.



If Calder wasn't in the dungeon, the worst case scenario would be that there is one threat there. With Calder in the dungeon that is the best case scenario.

As said above, best case scenario is they take each other out.

[Liquor Box]

Indeed, and that is a good Get The Band Back Together argument.

I think Serini's plan was to watch any invaders, and judge whether they were a 'serious threat' while they attacked the first 100 dungeons. If they were she would call in her friends (if still alive). But she would do that long before the final dungeon. Who knows how fast or slow an invader might do the final dungeon - letting them begin that dungeon before summoning her reinforcments would be a huge risk. She kind of says that as well, but saying the gauntlet gives her time to summon her companions, which suggests she would summon them while still in the gauntlet.

So I think by the time the invaders reached Calder they will have already got past Serini's companions, one way or another.


Simply put, not, it is not likely at all. The nature of D&D combat is that you're going to lose ressources unless you can trivialize the encounter with your at-will capacities only without taking any damage.

That's not right, it is the opposite. On average you gain resources from encounters, otherwise adventurers get poorer and poorer, instead they get richer and richer. You use resources like spells in encounters, but they could rest afterward if you are too depleted.


Calder doesn't seem to have any magic items, so at worst he could gain the items of the intruders. In any case, removing the intruders who wield them is still a net benefit.

As for gaining levels, from what we saw in the rest ogéf the comic, gaining levels in the OotS-verse doesn't heal you or give you back spent powers immediately. Maybe the survivors of the clash would be a level higher, but they'd still be hurt and out of juice.

You are probably right about Calder not having any items (Serini probably took them), but someone in the thread did suggest the purpose of the fight was to get someone in the party magic items. As for a level, they might possibly rest.


Note that the worst case scenario is "one side enslaves the other after trivializing the encounter".

If potential intruders enslave Calder but have burned through all their 9th level spells and lost 1/4th of their total HPs, that's still a net benefit.

Unless they rest afterward, or as you say, unless one side easily beats the other.

Personally, I suspect that Xykon and party could beat Calder pretty easily.


Calder escaping without slowing down tge intruders is a "problem for later". Serini probably thought he could be tracked down and killed this time if he was up to his old tricks, and it'd be a greap trip down nostalgia lane for her team. Maybe she even thought that if they had to work together long enough, they'll remember they were friends once.

If she thinks it's a problem for later, it's really silly of her. By having him there, she has created that problem for later, possibly in addition to whatever problem already existed.

You suggest she's counting on her friends, but by the time Calder escapes she would have already called them and they either wouldn't have come, or would have come and been defeated, or been bypassed in some way. If they hadn't, she would be cutting it fine to deal with either the invaders or Calder. Calling her firends was a decent enough plan (had they still been alive) while invaders were attacking the gauntlet, but not when they are on the cusp of the gate.


Calder joining forces with the intruders without a fight has no chance to happen, based on what we know of his personality.

I thin it's unlikely as well, I think that the circumstances of their confrontation mean a fight is very liekly (whether Calder wants one or not). But in the 1295 thread some people were theorising that it would happen. We can't know if it would happen, and I agree it is unlikely - but still more likely than a mutual kill.


As said above, best case scenario is they take each other out.

Fair enough, I will revise my comment. If the worst case If Calder wasn't in the dungeon, the worst case scenario would be that there is one threat there. With Calder in the dungeon that is the best case scenario, outside edge scenarios like mutual kills.

[danielxcutter]

For what it’s worth, “did not think this through” is basically Serini’s character theme in a nutshell, especially back when she was making the dungeon.

[Grendelkin]

The point of the Calder fight, from my perspective, appears to be offering Bloodfeast the opportunity to show he's the Order's heaviest hitter once again. :D

[SlashDash]

Or just escape, run into Redcloak, and tell him he's falling for a shell game, and tell him how to bypass it.
Not going to work.

First, the "shell game" is meaningless. Serini said that Redcloak's speedrun is going to bypass things and the Quint essentially makes her defenses a non issue.

Second, the issue is the actual Final Dungeon. The defenses there are much harder - for start the first encounter destroys all your magic items.

Calder has no idea how to bypass these issues and I don't see the Quint managing to restrain all the monsters here with such ease either.

[KorvinStarmast]

The point of the Calder fight, from my perspective, appears to be offering Bloodfeast the opportunity to show he's the Order's heaviest hitter once again. :D Not gonna disagree with that. :smallsmile:


Second, the issue is the actual Final Dungeon. The defenses there are much harder - for start the first encounter destroys all your magic items. I am pretty sure that the Red Cloak won't be de magicked, since IIRC it is an Artifact.
...and I don't see the Quint managing to restrain all the monsters here with such ease either. Quint also will have a resource drain should Quint enter the Final Dungeon ... but I get the feeling that Quint will get them to the Final Dungeon and then, having completed his end of the deal, return to his native plane.

[Grendelkin]

I wonder, though: how will the Quinton react when confronted with the fact that it's been contracted to do enable the release of a force of ultimate chaos and destruction onto the Outer Planes? It 'lives' there itself, and it is all about restraining and binding chaos.

[Peelee]

I wonder, though: how will the Quinton react when confronted with the fact that it's been contracted to do enable the release of a force of ultimate chaos and destruction onto the Outer Planes? It 'lives' there itself, and it is all about restraining and binding chaos.

Who, exactly, would inform the Quinton? Only Redcloak and Durkon know, and Durkon doesn't know why the Quinton is helping Redcloak.

[Jurai]

It's because the comic is about Dungeons & DRAGONS, and so we finally have a Dragon IN a DUNGEON.

[Peelee]

It's because the comic is about Dungeons & DRAGONS, and so we finally have a Dragon IN a DUNGEON.
Only clever, intelligent, beautiful people think of stuff like that.

I'm still not sold on this whole idea of having both dungeons and dragons.

:amused:

[SlashDash]

I am pretty sure that the Red Cloak won't be de magicked, since IIRC it is an Artifact. Quint also will have a resource drain should Quint enter the Final Dungeon ... but I get the feeling that Quint will get them to the Final Dungeon and then, having completed his end of the deal, return to his native plane.

The Crimson Mantle is likely to survive sure, otherwise that would have been the solution to the story in the first place.

But evil party still requires the rest of their magic items.
That alone is already too much of a threat that it's impossible for team evil to just randomly face.

Heck, their magic items are destroyed - that includes the magical darkness umbrella the Monster in the Dark is carrying. There's no way this is how the author will expose what it is.


As for the Quint, Redcloak's request was that they'll search all the doors until they find what they are looking for or search through all of them. Since the portal would open on the last room in the last door, then technically the Quint hasn't finished his task cause searching through the portal that is behind the door is part of the request.

On the other hand, if Redcloak sees Serini's floating head message and say something like "this is it" then the Quint might consider it under the clause of "find what you are looking for" since Redcloak never actually said it's the gate specifically and then leave.

I could rule lawyer it either way.

[KorvinStarmast]

As for the Quint, Redcloak's request was that they'll search all the doors until they find what they are looking for or search through all of them. Since the portal would open on the last room in the last door, then technically the Quint hasn't finished his task cause searching through the portal that is behind the door is part of the request.

On the other hand, if Redcloak sees Serini's floating head message and say something like "this is it" then the Quint might consider it under the clause of "find what you are looking for" since Redcloak never actually said it's the gate specifically and then leave.

I could rule lawyer it either way. Yep, I was looking at it the second way, but I see your point.

[Liquor Box]

For what it’s worth, “did not think this through” is basically Serini’s character theme in a nutshell, especially back when she was making the dungeon.

Yeah, that is probably the best explanation.

[KorvinStarmast]

For what it’s worth, “did not think this through” is basically Serini’s character theme in a nutshell, especially back when she was making the dungeon. True for all of the gates other than (perhaps) Soon's.

[Liquor Box]

True for all of the gates other than (perhaps) Soon's.

Dorukan's gate was pretty wel thought through. Even after its primary defence (Dorukan himself) went down, the secondary defences held Xykon off for months. He even thought to put a self destruct button in it.

Also, for Girard, I don't think what occurred was that foreseeable.

[Grendelkin]

Considering what Girard convinced his family to do to keep up its numbers, I think there was a race on between him dying of old age ... or discovering that the world's mechanics had designated him the end boss / cult leader of a pyramid-shaped dungeon.

[Sermil]

Maybe, in small part, to hammer home how much more effective the Order is when they work together.

V, by themself, got curb-stomped by a dragon, because once the anti-magic comes out "you cease to be a mighty wizard ... while I am still a dragon".
But put the Order together, pull out the anti-magic, and that becomes "you cease to be a mighty wizard while I am GLRKT!" :amused:

[SlashDash]

True for all of the gates other than (perhaps) Soon's.

I'll give you Girard and Lirian defenses since they seem a bit off considering both of them were based on stuff that undead are immune - disease and illusions. It does seem a bit weird since you'd expect undead big bads as one of the most common evil tropes.


Howver -

Soon was about to do the one thing nobody has managed - killing Xykon and Redcloak for good (pun intended). Remember that this is the only time in the strip that we've seen Xykon actually scared from an opponent and wanting to run away.
So yeah, that was a pretty good defense until Myko messed things up. That was not a reasonably expected issue.


Dorkun's defense stomped Xykon entirely. Preventing anyone evil from reaching the gate was spot on.
The only reason it went down was because Elan was too stupid to think it would be cool to press the self destruct button. And before anyone asks - the trial had V exactly asking what the point of a self destruction button was in the first place and they got a decent explanation.

[Tzardok]

*sigh* Undead are not immune to illusions. Undead are immune to Mind-affecting abilities, which includes some illusions, but they don't have a categorical immunity to illusion.

[KorvinStarmast]

Dorkun's defense stomped Xykon entirely. Preventing anyone evil from reaching the gate was spot on.
The only reason it went down was because Elan was too stupid to think it would be cool to press the self destruct button. Fair point.

*sigh* Undead are not immune to illusions. Undead are immune to Mind-affecting abilities, which includes some illusions, but they don't have a categorical immunity to illusion. Thanks for the 3.5x update, I am still shaking my head at undead being unaffected by sneak attack. :smalltongue:

[The MunchKING]

Thanks for the 3.5x update, I am still shaking my head at undead being unaffected by sneak attack. :smalltongue:

I'm still surprised they AREN'T in other editions.

[Peelee]

I'm still surprised they AREN'T in other editions.

Seconded. 3.5 explained the fluff on why sneak attack works, and thus why it would not work on undead, constructs, and others.

[KorvinStarmast]

Seconded. 3.5 explained the fluff on why sneak attack works, and thus why it would not work on undead, constructs, and others. That the fluff is {censored} doesn't make that any better. I am now even more pleased that I took my 3.5 books to the used book store .. the original thief ability (back stab) was simpler to implement.

[Peelee]

That the fluff is {censored} doesn't make that any better.

Nor does it make your opinion fact. That explanation made sense. 5e's, for example does not - a rogue "strikes subtly and exploit a foe's distraction." This would made sense to grant distraction or to give a bonus to hit. There's no reason i can fathom this would do extra damage. A 3.5 rogue his a particularly vulnerable spot. This does make sense to deal extra damage. Hell, this also exists elsewhere in the form of called shots (3rd ed, removed from 3.5), except the rogue feature wss superior because it had no drawbacks. But in current D&D, it's "you deal extra damage because you have advantage". That's the start and the end of the reasoning. Which, hey, if you don't care about reasoning, is great! 5e streamlined a lot like that. If you di care about the reasoning, then even if you dislike 3.5's given reason, at least it had a reason. And just for myself, it made sense and also made sense as to not have it apply to all monsters across the board ever.

From what i can find on Backstab, it looks like it's pretty much restricted to not being in combat at the time? The enemy needs to not be expecting an attack, is my understanding. So sure simpler to implement because it cab only be used in surprise rounds or as a way to initiate combat?

[gbaji]

*sigh* Undead are not immune to illusions. Undead are immune to Mind-affecting abilities, which includes some illusions, but they don't have a categorical immunity to illusion.

Sadly, this point seems to require being remade every single time Girard's gate defenses and Xykon come in range of each other, conversation wise.

And that's before even pointing out that "illusions" is merely a school within the much broader "magic user" class anyway. There is absolutely nothing preventing an "illusionist" in 3.5e from having a wide array of non illusion spells at their disposal.

And... also forgetting that there's no requirement for us to assume that every single one of Girard's descendents all choose to be arcane spellcasters in the first place (much less focus on illusions as their chosen school). There may certainly also have been fighters, and rogues, and even clerics among the family.


Nor does it make your opinion fact. That explanation made sense. 5e's, for example does not - a rogue "strikes subtly and exploit a foe's distraction." This would made sense to grant distraction or to give a bonus to hit. There's no reason i can fathom this would do extra damage. A 3.5 rogue his a particularly vulnerable spot. This does make sense to deal extra damage. Hell, this also exists elsewhere in the form of called shots (3rd ed, removed from 3.5), except the rogue feature wss superior because it had no drawbacks. But in current D&D, it's "you deal extra damage because you have advantage". That's the start and the end of the reasoning. Which, hey, if you don't care about reasoning, is great! 5e streamlined a lot like that. If you di care about the reasoning, then even if you dislike 3.5's given reason, at least it had a reason. And just for myself, it made sense and also made sense as to not have it apply to all monsters across the board ever.

Yup. We can agree or disagree on the 3.5e reasoning, but it at least made some sense and was consistent. You got the bonus damage because you were able to strike a vulnerable spot on the target. It also ties thematically to the older concept that gaining HPs as you leveled was not purely about becoming physically tougher, but better able to avoid damage as you became more capable. This is also why coup de grace exists in the game. Someone who is helpless is going to take fatal or nearly fatal damage when hit by someone able to take their time and focus on make that killing blow. Sneak attack bonus damage was about tying into that concept.

So yeah, having that not work on beings that don't have things like arteries or tendons that can be cut, makes a heck of a lot of sense. And yup. That also includes the concept that some creatures really do just have more HPs because they really are just that much tougher (like constructs). It's not perfect, but it does at least mostly work. And unfortunately, until or unless D&D editions actually move away entirely from scaling HPs with levels, and fully embrace things like damage reduction/resistance as the "this is how you avoid damage as you get more powerful" game mechanic, I suspect there will always be these sorts of problems and conflicts with the game rules.

[KorvinStarmast]

There's no reason i can fathom this would do extra damage.
It allows them to make a better aimed strike at the target. (Kind of like good pass protection often leaves a QB better able to throw an accurate pass).

From what i can find on Backstab, it looks like it's pretty much restricted to not being in combat at the time? The enemy needs to not be expecting an attack, is my understanding. Nope.
But we are wandering off topic.

[Peelee]

It allows them to make a better aimed strike at the target. (Kind of like good pass protection often leaves a QB better able to throw an accurate pass).

So that mechanic already exists in 5e, and is called Advantage. Or just situational pluses ro attack. Regardless, what you described is a bonus to attack, and still doesn't explain why it does more damage.

[Kardwill]

So that mechanic already exists in 5e, and is called Advantage. Or just situational pluses ro attack. Regardless, what you described is a bonus to attack, and still doesn't explain why it does more damage.

Getting a better hit means doing more damage, because you struck some place that was more important to that creature's function. Thematically, that explains critical hits : It does not means that you just hit like a truck, but that you were lucky/good enough to hit them where it hurts, or cut/crush through something important.

Were golems/undead immune to crits in D&D3? It's been a long time since I've played that edition.

[Tzardok]

Yes, they were. In fact, I'm pretty sure that the description of Sneak Attack specifies that anything not affected by crits is also unaffected by Sneak Attack.

[WindStruck]

If anything, it's an unnecessary fight they could have avoided. Now they have taken damage and will expend resources.

Freeing/killing Calder can also have several consequences:
Team Evil, if they come this way, will no longer have to deal with Calder themselves.
Team Evil will know the OOTS has been here, and a battle took place recently.
If they are present and can determine this much, then it is highly likely that their tracker can continue following them to bypass the rest of the Gate's security.

TLDR: only bad things happen for the OOTS (aside from exp and leveling up) and only good things will come about for Team Evil

[Kardwill]

Yes, they were. In fact, I'm pretty sure that the description of Sneak Attack specifies that anything not affected by crits is also unaffected by Sneak Attack.

Oh. Well, at least, it's consistent. (But I might have overlooked a few crits from my players when I was DMing a 3e campaign 10 years ago. ^^)

I have no problem justifying sneak attacks and crits on golems/undead in 5e, though. You shoot the head of the zombie, you break a knee or the spine of a skeleton, you open the Frankenstein Monster's needlework or rip its big neck bolt, you hit a crack in the living stone monster, you aim for the magical gemstone or you scratch the magical runes of the golem... "If I could choose where to stike this animated hunk of unliving matter, what would I aim to quickly finish the fight?"

That's supported by the fact that many weapons use dex as a damage modifier in 5e : Some strikes are destructive not because of how hard you swing your sword, but because of what you're aiming at.

[brian 333]

If anything, it's an unnecessary fight they could have avoided. Now they have taken damage and will expend resources.

Freeing/killing Calder can also have several consequences:
Team Evil, if they come this way, will no longer have to deal with Calder themselves.
Team Evil will know the OOTS has been here, and a battle took place recently.
If they are present and can determine this much, then it is highly likely that their tracker can continue following them to bypass the rest of the Gate's security.

TLDR: only bad things happen for the OOTS (aside from exp and leveling up) and only good things will come about for Team Evil

Disintegrate Calder and leave his prison setup as a trap. TE would be unable to resist, especially if there is an illusionary puppy in it as bait.

Because Xykon couldn't resist kicking it, you see.

It's a Evil thing.

[Grendelkin]

*snip*
Team Evil will know the OOTS has been here, and a battle took place recently.
*snip*


And Xykon will reanimate Calder as his next zombie dragon mount, giving Roy flashbacks to when he died when they face off again.

[Peelee]

Getting a better hit means doing more damage, because you struck some place that was more important to that creature's function. Thematically, that explains critical hits : It does not means that you just hit like a truck, but that you were lucky/good enough to hit them where it hurts, or cut/crush through something important.

Were golems/undead immune to crits in D&D3? It's been a long time since I've played that edition.

As you say, that explains critical hits. So we're taking the same idea and splitting it into two different mechanics, with two different effects, which can stack? Imean, I can at least see how that can be argued, but I strenuously disagree with it as well. Not the least of which because if I hit on a 12 and hit on a 16, i still do the same damage despite getting a better hit. And if I hit with Advantage, I still hit with the same damage despite getting a better hit.

Also, IIRC no creature type was immune to crits in 3.5. I always saw crits as particularly hard/brutal hits, myself.

[Tzardok]

Also, IIRC no creature type was immune to crits in 3.5. I always saw crits as particularly hard/brutal hits, myself.

Excuse me, what? Constructs, elementals, oozes, plants and undead all have a rider that they aren't subject to crits (as do Incorporeal creatures). For example:


Construct Type

Not subject to critical hits, nonlethal damage, ability damage, ability drain, fatigue, exhaustion, or energy drain.

Elemental Type

Not subject to critical hits or flanking.

[Peelee]

Excuse me, what? Constructs, elementals, oozes, plants and undead all have a rider that they aren't subject to crits (as do Incorporeal creatures). For example:

IIRC was clearly not C. Thanks!

[snowblizz]

The point of this fight is clearly T-REX to the FACE!

Nuff said.

[Fish]

I am just wondering what its purpose in the bigger narrative is if any.

My guesses:
Serini might be killed. This would force the Order to find their own way through the dungeon using their wits.
It might given an opportunity for the Order to show how they've changed as a group from murder hobos who killed every goblin on sight to thoughtful heroes who don't automatically discriminate against monster races. This is, after all, part of the Giant's thesis for the story. It is less about Calder switching sides than about how Calder is convinced to do so. They are, after all, fighting for something larger than even the dragon understands. Someone (or multiple someones) convince Calder to assist them, just this once. I could justify almost any of the Order, or all of them at once, making this pitch to Calder. Haley, because she has overcome trust issues; Elan, because he is good at heart and wants his happy ending; Durkon, because of his newfound respect for the monsters' POV; V, because they erred by destroying so many black dragons; Roy, for being a good leader who has learned a lot; or Serini, who obviously has changed her viewpoint since the time of Calder's capture.
It might show off a heretofore unknown ability of Roy's sword.
It gives us a chance to contrast the Scribble with the Order, and how they handle the same encounter. We don't often get to see the two groups compared directly. This also might demonstrate Belkar's change of alignment, if he argues not to kill the subdued dragon.


It could also be a lot of the things on your list, too.

[DaOldeWolf]

The point of this fight is clearly T-REX to the FACE!

Nuff said.

You might be on the right track here! :smallbiggrin:


My guesses:
Serini might be killed. This would force the Order to find their own way through the dungeon using their wits.
It might given an opportunity for the Order to show how they've changed as a group from murder hobos who killed every goblin on sight to thoughtful heroes who don't automatically discriminate against monster races. This is, after all, part of the Giant's thesis for the story. It is less about Calder switching sides than about how Calder is convinced to do so. They are, after all, fighting for something larger than even the dragon understands. Someone (or multiple someones) convince Calder to assist them, just this once. I could justify almost any of the Order, or all of them at once, making this pitch to Calder. Haley, because she has overcome trust issues; Elan, because he is good at heart and wants his happy ending; Durkon, because of his newfound respect for the monsters' POV; V, because they erred by destroying so many black dragons; Roy, for being a good leader who has learned a lot; or Serini, who obviously has changed her viewpoint since the time of Calder's capture.
It might show off a heretofore unknown ability of Roy's sword.
It gives us a chance to contrast the Scribble with the Order, and how they handle the same encounter. We don't often get to see the two groups compared directly. This also might demonstrate Belkar's change of alignment, if he argues not to kill the subdued dragon.


It could also be a lot of the things on your list, too.

That could be really interesting to see. A contrast of parties could be an interesting way to use this fight. All of those suggestons could be the deveopment, we have been waiting to se. And it could help to avoid cramming to many things for the final battle.

[gbaji]

It might show off a heretofore unknown ability of Roy's sword.

This. There's been a lot of talk about Calder holding on to Roy's sword, mostly involving whether and how he might use it as a weapon (or just deny it to Roy).

IIRC, there was some discussion back when the Order was fighting Serini and Sunny as to which magic/effects/abilities would work in the AMF, and which would not. For example, we know that Durkon's hammer's magical effects don't seem to work in the AMF. Roy's weapon, on the other hand, is still an unknown. I'm not super conversant as to how different levels of magic effects and different types of antimagic may work in D&D, but usually there are levels of such things, and different interactions based on those levels (usually, but may not be the case, so... who knows?).

It would be an interesting thing to have Roy's returning ability (or others) still work in the AMF, for example. And learning that may provide some significant benefit to them in the still to come battle with TE. Or... not. But we weren't able to learn this in the first fight, since Roy was poisoned and out of it the entire time. So it's still an unknown and therefore will (presumably) be answered here. And... er... knowing is half the battle?

[KorvinStarmast]

This. There's been a lot of talk about Calder holding on to Roy's sword, mostly involving whether and how he might use it as a weapon (or just deny it to Roy). Given Roy's fighting skills, denial is helpful to Calder.
I'm not super conversant as to how different levels of magic effects and different types of antimagic may work in D&D In some editions, artifacts are not influenced by AMF, but that should not exempt the sword from AMF since it is a weapon of legacy (per the book Roy received after the godsmoot).
My best recollection of that discussion is that a weapon of legacy does not approach an artifact in power.
I thus think that Roy's sword is muted until out of AMF.

[gbaji]

In some editions, artifacts are not influenced by AMF, but that should not exempt the sword from AMF since it is a weapon of legacy (per the book Roy received after the godsmoot).
My best recollection of that discussion is that a weapon of legacy does not approach an artifact in power.
I thus think that Roy's sword is muted until out of AMF.

My knowledge of D&D does not include anything specific about Weapons of Legacy, so I can't comment in terms of where they fall in some sort of heirarchy of magic. Wasn't sure if they operated at the same level or lower than artifacts do (and also not sure where AMF falls in that scale either).

In my game, I wrote some fairly extensive rules for various magic effects, including artifacts. One of the bits I included was a distinction between different types of effects (alteration vs evocation, not related to the D&D schools of magic). The idea that evocation effects basically duplicate spells and have some kind of point value associated with them (base system is RuneQuest, so that's a whole thing). Alteration effects are absolute in nature (so like "immune to fire damage"). This affects how they interact with other spell effects, especially with regard to penetrating magical defenses (point based effects can and do compare themselves to the point value of magic defensess, and can be blocked despite being "artifact effects", while those without cannot and can only be resisted by some other opposed effect). Additionally, I came up with the concept of "internal vs external" effects. Internal meaning "effects that affect the item and/or weilder", with external obviously being "affects other people". This also has an effect on magic interaction, specifically in terms of dispelling effects. The idea being that stuff that only affects the wielder or the item should be far more resistant (if not immune) to being dispelled or anti-magicked, than effects that the item puts on others (also has the practical effect that folks hit with offensive effects that linger can actually get rid of them, which is kinda important from a survivability and balance pov).


Relevant here, because, if I were running this via my system, the extra damage might be consdiered an external effect (it affects the target of the weapon) and thus would not work in an AMF, but the returning would be considered internal (only affects the item and weilder), and thus would work.

But yeah. D&D has its own rules. Vague though they may be to me.

[Kish]

Never mind D&D rules*, I'm pretty sure the sword's inability to return to Roy from inside the antimagic ray is indicated by the sword...not returning.

*Also, Rich said that he heard there was such a thing as Weapons of Legacy, decided that Roy's sword was going to be one, and came up with his own system for it, entirely ignoring everything about the D&D system for Weapons of Legacy beyond the name.

[gbaji]

Never mind D&D rules*, I'm pretty sure the sword's inability to return to Roy from inside the antimagic ray is indicated by the sword...not returning.

What are you going to believe? Wild internet speculation, or your own lying eyes!? /harumph!

Though, would be funny if the sword could return, but Roy just didn't think to try since it was in an AMF.

[KorvinStarmast]

*Also, Rich said that he heard there was such a thing as Weapons of Legacy, decided that Roy's sword was going to be one, and came up with his own system for it, entirely ignoring everything about the D&D system for Weapons of Legacy beyond the name. I had forgotten that, but you jogged my memory. Thanks.

Though, would be funny if the sword could return, but Roy just didn't think to try since it was in an AMF. Funny it would be.

[drazen]

A pont is a South African river ferry, usually guided by a cable. It's also French for bridge. So there is either no pont, or the pont is the walkway. 😁

[DaOldeWolf]

A pont is a South African river ferry, usually guided by a cable. It's also French for bridge. So there is either no pont, or the pont is the walkway. 😁

My computer sometimes eats the letters but good to know what a pont.

Like they say: The more you know.

[MReav]

Soon was about to do the one thing nobody has managed - killing Xykon and Redcloak for good (pun intended). Remember that this is the only time in the strip that we've seen Xykon actually scared from an opponent and wanting to run away.


Lirian was quite successful. She had captured Redcloak and Xykon. She could have executed them and saved everyone a lot of trouble. And while I can respect her not executing her prisoners, I can't say the same about her decision not to have any form of supervision on her prisoners.

[Timy]

It's also French for bridge.

Every time I saw this title, I had to restrain myself to say something along this line (being french).

This time, I could'nt restrain me anymore and here I am finding it is already here.

[KorvinStarmast]

Every time I saw this title, I had to restrain myself to say something along this line (being french).

This time, I could'nt restrain me anymore and here I am finding it is already here.
When I was very young, we learned a song from my father. I repeated what I heard, but wasn't sure what it meant.
Sur le Pont d'Avignon
L'on y danse, l'on y danse
Sur le Pont d'Avignon
L'on y danse tous en rond.

I just learned the sounds.
I didn't know what they meant until some years later when we took rudimentary French classes in 4th grade.
Dancing around a bridge ...

[Kardwill]

When I was very young, we learned a song from my father. I repeated what I heard, but wasn't sure what it meant.
Sur le Pont d'Avignon
L'on y danse, l'on y danse
Sur le Pont d'Avignon
L'on y danse tous en rond.

I just learned the sounds.
I didn't know what they meant until some years later when we took rudimentary French classes in 4th grade.
Dancing around a bridge ...

Dancing round on a bridge. In this context, "sur" means "on top of". :)

Weird and kinda cute that this children song somehow became international ^^

[drazen]

Every time I saw this title, I had to restrain myself to say something along this line (being french).

This time, I could'nt restrain me anymore and here I am finding it is already here.

Oops, sorry. Would it make you feel better or worse to know I have a significant chunk of French ancestry? (Probably #1 because I can trace 3 of my 4 grandparents' lines back to Quebec, with English #2, Portuguese #3, and Irish #4).

Probably won't help that my bilingual bonus is Spanish, not French. Pont looked really familiar but I still had to Google it. I should have known, too -- I walked across the Pont de Louis about 4 months ago!

[gbaji]

Dancing round on a bridge. In this context, "sur" means "on top of". :)


Probably won't help that my bilingual bonus is Spanish, not French. Pont looked really familiar but I still had to Google it. I should have known, too -- I walked across the Pont de Louis about 4 months ago!

Which is amusing, since "sur" in Spanish means "south, southern, southwards" (context dependent of course). I would not be surprised if the two words do share some common etymology somewhere. My French is pretty much nonexistent, but assuming that "sur" is in reverence to the thing that one is on top of (gathered from the lyrics), there's an implied directionality there which could kinda fit.

Or not. Always find it interesting to encounter similar or even identical words in different languages that sometimes mean things absolutely different, but sometimes seem tantilizingly similar in some ways. Heck. Pont and Point are interesting as well.

[hroþila]

Which is amusing, since "sur" in Spanish means "south, southern, southwards" (context dependent of course). I would not be surprised if the two words do share some common etymology somewhere. My French is pretty much nonexistent, but assuming that "sur" is in reverence to the thing that one is on top of (gathered from the lyrics), there's an implied directionality there which could kinda fit.

Or not. Always find it interesting to encounter similar or even identical words in different languages that sometimes mean things absolutely different, but sometimes seem tantilizingly similar in some ways. Heck. Pont and Point are interesting as well.
Nah there's no connection. French sur comes from Latin super (which is distantly related to English over), while Spanish sur comes from French sud which in turn comes from Old English suþ (>Modern English south), a Germanic word that's distantly related to English sun

[gbaji]

Nah there's no connection. French sur comes from Latin super (which is distantly related to English over), while Spanish sur comes from French sud which in turn comes from Old English suþ (>Modern English south), a Germanic word that's distantly related to English sun

Huh. See. So close... yet so far...

For our next exercise, we'll examine the tangled and somewhat arbitrarily strange historical intersection of "lite" and "light".

[Tarkin]

That's a fascinating observation about the words "sur" and "sur"! It's definitely intriguing to encounter seemingly similar words across languages that hold different meanings. While their etymological paths may diverge, it's still a cool example of how languages evolve and sometimes retain echoes of their shared history.

[Fish]

I’ve got it. I know what the point is.

Belkar.

Calder will dominate Belkar; Belkar will have his protection from evil clasp, which shows his alignment has changed. Belkar will then have to ride the dinosaur back into the stasis circle, dragging Calder, whereupon the magic will be restored.

Belkar draws his last breath. No more birthday cake.

[Barlion]

I can't remember, does the order knows what V did to that dragon back in the Don't Split the Party book? In details, I mean.

Maybe V will confess now. Or Calder somehow knows and will reveal.

[Precure]

I can't remember, does the order knows what V did to that dragon back in the Don't Split the Party book? In details, I mean.

As far as we know only Roy know about it.

[Naysmith]

I can't remember, does the order knows what V did to that dragon back in the Don't Split the Party book? In details, I mean.

Maybe V will confess now. Or Calder somehow knows and will reveal.

I doubt that Calder could know, but I like the direction of this. In the lines of a reveal, I'm thinking: what if V tries to get the order to spare Calder and only Roy knows why?

[Space Sorceress]

I doubt that Calder could know, but I like the direction of this. In the lines of a reveal, I'm thinking: what if V tries to get the order to spare Calder and only Roy knows why?

Oooo, I didn't think of that! That'd be cool! I think! Probably!

As for other narrative purposes, I'd imagine the Order is likely to level up from this (Minrah perhaps twice?), and that might give them some cool new abilities to show off against Xykon and Redcloak - it'd be a perfectly reasonable form of "final arc power creep" like you see in anime and whatnot, lol.

[Zarhan]

The point of the battle is to demonstrate the Ama-Zing Feat of Head Injury Side Swapping. That way when Redcloak suddenly changes his eyepatch to other side in the final battle, it's been demonstrated earlier and the Order is prepared for it.

[Doug Lampert]

Oooo, I didn't think of that! That'd be cool! I think! Probably!

As for other narrative purposes, I'd imagine the Order is likely to level up from this (Minrah perhaps twice?), and that might give them some cool new abilities to show off against Xykon and Redcloak - it'd be a perfectly reasonable form of "final arc power creep" like you see in anime and whatnot, lol.

You can't gain empough XP to go up more than one level at a time. If you are level 10, you need 55,000 XP for 11, you would need 66,000 XP fo 12, but you can't go above 65,999 XP till you have reached level 11.

Doesn't matter how epic the challenge, by RAW, you only go up one level at most from any single encounter.

Note that XP and leveling up aren't covered fully in the SRD, you'll need to dig out your books to find this one.

[Peelee]

Bolding mine:
You can't gain empough XP to go up more than one level at a time. If you are level 10, you need 55,000 XP for 11, you would need 66,000 XP fo 12, but you can't go above 65,999 XP till you have reached level 11.

Doesn't matter how epic the challenge, by RAW, you only go up one level at most from any single encounter.

Note that XP and leveling up aren't covered fully in the SRD, you'll need to dig out your books to find this one.
I maintain, as I've said before, that Shelby heavily implies this is not the case in Stickworld.

[Doug Lampert]

Bolding mine:
I maintain, as I've said before, that Shelby heavily implies this is not the case in Stickworld.

I maintain that Shelby got a NAME when he killed that dragon, Shelby the Dragon Slayer, and that it was the awesum powerup from having a name like that that made him too dangerous to live. Level is almost irrelevant by comparison. And we do know that having a name powers up characters in tOotS.

[KorvinStarmast]

. And we do know that having a name powers up characters in tOotS. What about the MaYtalLs?

[Peelee]

I maintain that Shelby got a NAME when he killed that dragon, Shelby the Dragon Slayer, and that it was the awesum powerup from having a name like that that made him too dangerous to live. Level is almost irrelevant by comparison. And we do know that having a name powers up characters in tOotS.

Source of names being powerups? I know names can save one from a mortal wound, but that's hardly a threat to Xykon and Redcloak.

[Witty Username]

Do we need more than, jokes, that are also funny?

[Doug Lampert]

Source of names being powerups? I know names can save one from a mortal wound, but that's hardly a threat to Xykon and Redcloak.

472 doesn't only show Daigo being saved by having a name, Elan also points out that not having names is why they can't defeat the hobgoblins if he leaves them behind. Yet, they both have names and so they defeat the hobgoblins and live. Clearly someone with a name can defeat overwhelming odds.

Consider that tOotS is overwhelmingly likely to win by defeating overwhelming odds, and EVERY ONE OF THEM has a name (albeit Elan and Minrah seem to lack a last name, but then they're the least capable members of the order, coincidence, I think NOT).

Meanwhile nameless goblin warriors die like flies, while Redcloak keeps going and going.

It's all in having a name, I'll bet you can't name a single powerful character in all of fiction who doesn't have a name. Come on, give me the name of even one character of real power who has no name. (Clint Eastwood's man with no name is of course named "Clint Eastwood's man with no name". Alternately, and more boringly, "Joe," "Manco," and "Blondie" depending on the movie.)

[Naysmith]

Consider that tOotS is overwhelmingly likely to win by defeating overwhelming odds, and EVERY ONE OF THEM has a name (albeit Elan and Minrah seem to lack a last name, but then they're the least capable members of the order, coincidence, I think NOT).

Minrah's last name is Shaleshoe. Vaarsuvius and Elan are the ones lacking a surname.

[Peelee]

472 doesn't only show Daigo being saved by having a name, Elan also points out that not having names is why they can't defeat the hobgoblins if he leaves them behind. Yet, they both have names and so they defeat the hobgoblins and live. Clearly someone with a name can defeat overwhelming odds.

Consider that tOotS is overwhelmingly likely to win by defeating overwhelming odds, and EVERY ONE OF THEM has a name (albeit Elan and Minrah seem to lack a last name, but then they're the least capable members of the order, coincidence, I think NOT).

Meanwhile nameless goblin warriors die like flies, while Redcloak keeps going and going.

It's all in having a name, I'll bet you can't name a single powerful character in all of fiction who doesn't have a name. Come on, give me the name of even one character of real power who has no name. (Clint Eastwood's man with no name is of course named "Clint Eastwood's man with no name". Alternately, and more boringly, "Joe," "Manco," and "Blondie" depending on the movie.)

X-Files' cigarette smoking man. Everyone on the island in The Island. As you said, Eastwood's man with no name is, simply, a man with no name. Claiming "well that's his name" is like saying "Goblin warrior #373 is that goblin's name so he was clearly more powerful". Also, we have seen named characters be completely sidelined in the comic, despite your claims.

Also, by your logic of "OotS will win because they have names", then Xykon will win because he has a name. Now we have a paradox. Also, Shelby should have defeated Xykon and Redcloak by virtue of having a name and it being overwhelming odds.

[Ruck]

Also, Shelby should have defeated Xykon and Redcloak by virtue of having a name and it being overwhelming odds.

A name and a title! Plus, it's his real, given name, as far as we know. "Xykon" was a self-styled appellation and "Redcloak" is what he told Xykon to call him to keep things simple.

Shelby the Dragonslayer vs. two guys with nicknames, in the face of overwhelming odds? It's a no-brainer; Xykon and Redcloak should surrender in advance.

[Kardwill]

Meanwhile nameless goblin warriors die like flies, while Redcloak keeps going and going.


Well yes, obviously, having a name in most fictions means you'll at least get your own death scene. Maybe the heroes will even angst about wether they have the right to murder you.
If you're a no-name extra? The Good Guys will gut you like a fish, and let your corpse fall offscreen.

[hroþila]

Me, I'm just happy whenever Shelby is mentioned. Forever in our hearts o7

Anyway, Xykon's actual words:

It's just that with all that XP you just earned there, you'll soon be overqualified for the position of Random Mook
XP earned. Nothing about names

[Kish]

Xykon's explanation for why he's killing one of his minions, unless said explanation is literally, "I'm a sadistic row of asterisks, LOL!" should always be taken with a keg of salt.

[hroþila]

I would say he's usually pretty upfront about his reasons for killing minions. But regardless, I'm taking his words with a shipload of salt and they still ring true in this particular case due to the context, Redcloak's reaction and/or lack thereof, the absence of the slightest hint that Shelby's name was the problem, and the fact that the strip would be much less funny otherwise

[Kish]

I would say he's usually pretty upfront about his reasons for killing minions. But regardless, I'm taking his words with a shipload of salt and they still ring true in this particular case due to the context, Redcloak's reaction and/or lack thereof, the absence of the slightest hint that Shelby's name was the problem, and the fact that the strip would be much less funny otherwise
I'm not saying "Xykon was lying: Shelby's name was the problem."

I'm saying "Xykon was lying: Shelby had no expectation of gaining any significant power there at all, but had just committed the fatal error of drawing Xykon's attention in any way, and even upstaged him by killing something he couldn't."

Redcloak, at that time, also casually and gratuitously killed hobgoblins; what reaction would he have had?

[Naysmith]

In light of how the Paladins seem to be about to get involved, and with how Serini said they weren't there to get Calder spared this time, I'm posting to push my theory that V is going to be a proponent for letting Calder run, and dealing with him later if he goes back to the cult thing.

[brian 333]

In light of how the Paladins seem to be about to get involved, and with how Serini said they weren't there to get Calder spared this time, I'm posting to push my theory that V is going to be a proponent for letting Calder run, and dealing with him later if he goes back to the cult thing.

I think if anything, the dragon episode taught V to be specific when targeting.

The reasons matter.
Innocent bystanders matter.
Unintended consequences matter.

"Calder is a dragon," does not equate to, "I murdered uncounted innocents." This is a false equivalency, especially to a logical mind.

Calder is a criminal who mind-controls people then uses them like gymnasium towels, not an innocent dragon-spawn going about his daily life.

V will act rationally. Calder cannot be allowed to be free because he is an unrepentant mind-thief. Letting him free will endanger others, many of whom have no defense against him, and all of whom he will use up and discard like theater popcorn buckets. Letting Calder go free will put uncounted elves and other people in physical and mental danger.

Is imprisonment better than a clean death? Is there a third choice? I don't know, but letting Calder go free is a more dangerous choice than either of the first two for everyone.

[Rynjin]

I'm going to make the bold, likely inaccurate prediction that this...might be it for Belkar. He jumps into save Bloodfeast and gets roasted for his trouble.

It would kinda be the ultimate culmination of his character, even more so than sacrificing himself to save one of the sapient members of the party. Belkar started out as a Ranger for purely mechanical reasons, and has always sucked at it. But along with his character growth from textbook, comical CE he's also started to do more and more Ranger-like things over time.

What would be a more fitting end to the character arc than dying selflessly to save an Animal Companion he put into danger? It even fits the recent reiteration we've had that the main character trait he never lost from the early days is his tendency to leap before he looks. He's probably gonna jump in out of pure reflex and impulse.

Maybe a last bit of snark ("Damn...rolled a 1.") and burnt to ashes; notably a form of death that is VERY hard to remedy in 3.5, as it prevents you from using normal Raise Dead.

[Naysmith]

I think if anything, the dragon episode taught V to be specific when targeting.
That was the battle with Xykon, to be precise with magic. Power = Power and all that.


The reasons matter.
Innocent bystanders matter.
Unintended consequences matter.
The entire point is what the reasons are. The point is that it would be merciful... while V used to be wrathful. (And prideful, but that's been broken.)


"Calder is a dragon," does not equate to, "I murdered uncounted innocents." This is a false equivalency, especially to a logical mind.
I'm not sure where that came from. Letting Calder run would just be letting anyone run. Calder being a Dragon is just thematic. It's like how V tried to make Laurin Shattersmith run by intimidating her via spells remaining. Considering that Laurin had caused so much pain and suffering with Tarquin's plan, did she deserve that chance either?


Calder is a criminal who mind-controls people then uses them like gymnasium towels, not an innocent dragon-spawn going about his daily life.
First, a nitpick: much like the bandits in Wooden Forest, there's probably more places where there aren't laws in the first place. Re: Mind Control... he spent how long in a torturous prison? But stopping further mind control would be the point of making sure to say that they'll keep an eye on him after.


V will act rationally. Calder cannot be allowed to be free because he is an unrepentant mind-thief. Letting him free will endanger others, many of whom have no defense against him, and all of whom he will use up and discard like theater popcorn buckets. Letting Calder go free will put uncounted elves and other people in physical and mental danger.
Per the metaphysics shown in Roy's judgment, that's on Calder's soul and no one else's. There's no Paladin associating with him, no commanding officer. If he chooses the mind control again, then he can be stopped again. And my general drift was meant to include a "we'll keep an eye on him" rider so they can stomp down hard if he goes back to his old ways... and make sure he knows they're watching.


Is imprisonment better than a clean death? Is there a third choice? I don't know, but letting Calder go free is a more dangerous choice than either of the first two for everyone.
Dangerous, but it's the one that gives him a chance at changing his ways at all. The golden ending, which will probably NOT happen, but has that tiny chance.

________________

Ultimately, I think it comes down to being part of V's redemption arc:
V was prideful (against the Black Dragons, not considering they could be peaceful), and begging (for Calder to be spared) would be a sign of humility.
V was wrathful (against the Ancient Black Dragon, not accepting a surrender), and sparing an enemy (Calder) would be a sign of changing to mercy.
Calder will likely go out and cause trouble again, but in the here and now, he's merely a threat to V and allies. Once neutralized there... well, he did spend ~50 years in a tailor-made hell for a prison.
And if V can't be merciful to someone for evils committed... then how can V hope for mercy themself?

[brian 333]

That was the battle with Xykon, to be precise with magic. Power = Power and all that.

Not what I was referencing. I was referencing V's freakout in the pyramid when he realized the magnitude of his crime.


The entire point is what the reasons are. The point is that it would be merciful... while V used to be wrathful. (And prideful, but that's been broken.)

Why would V be merciful to Calder? So he can make the exact opposite mistake he made with YABD? To give undeserved mercy in the hope that it lessens the crime of withholding it when it was deserved?


I'm not sure where that came from. Letting Calder run would just be letting anyone run. Calder being a Dragon is just thematic. It's like how V tried to make Laurin Shattersmith run by intimidating her via spells remaining. Considering that Laurin had caused so much pain and suffering with Tarquin's plan, did she deserve that chance either?

This came from the idea that Calder would in any way or to any degree abide by any surrender agreement. Even if V "kept an eye on him," what could V do about it when he started a new mind controlled cult?


Ultimately, I think it comes down to being part of V's redemption arc:
V was prideful (against the Black Dragons, not considering they could be peaceful), and begging (for Calder to be spared) would be a sign of humility.
V was wrathful (against the Ancient Black Dragon, not accepting a surrender), and sparing an enemy (Calder) would be a sign of changing to mercy.
Calder will likely go out and cause trouble again, but in the here and now, he's merely a threat to V and allies. Once neutralized there... well, he did spend ~50 years in a tailor-made hell for a prison.
And if V can't be merciful to someone for evils committed... then how can V hope for mercy themself?

ABD and Calder have no equivalency save their shared dragon ancestry. V cannot find redemption by granting undeserved mercy to pay for previously not granting it where it was deserved.

[KorvinStarmast]

I’ve got it. I know what the point is.

Belkar.

Calder will dominate Belkar; Belkar will have his protection from evil clasp, which shows his alignment has changed. Belkar will then have to ride the dinosaur back into the stasis circle, dragging Calder, whereupon the magic will be restored.

Belkar draws his last breath. No more birthday cake. As of strip 1300, not seeing it work out like that. Great idea, though.

Minrah's last name is Shaleshoe. Vaarsuvius and Elan are the ones lacking a surname. V's last name probably has a half dozen apostrophes in it, if D&D / Elf Game naming conventions are adhered to. :smallfurious:

[Naysmith]

Not what I was referencing. I was referencing V's freakout in the pyramid when he realized the magnitude of his crime.

I know you were referencing that. I was saying you were wrong. What V learned in the pyramid was not to be so wrathful.


Why would V be merciful to Calder? So he can make the exact opposite mistake he made with YABD? To give undeserved mercy in the hope that it lessens the crime of withholding it when it was deserved?
The point of mercy is it's not deserved, but given anyway. It wouldn't lessen the crime; it would be a showing of having learned and trying to be better.


This came from the idea that Calder would in any way or to any degree abide by any surrender agreement. Even if V "kept an eye on him," what could V do about it when he started a new mind controlled cult?
If the threat of being trounced again isn't enough, then by story's end, V will almost certainly have the allies, power, and resources to make good on that threat and stop the cult. And again, per Roy's judgment by the Deva, that will not only be on Calder's soul and not V's, but the attempt to curb and evil-doer in a way to push them towards not being evil helps.


ABD and Calder have no equivalency save their shared dragon ancestry. V cannot find redemption by granting undeserved mercy to pay for previously not granting it where it was deserved.
See: Roy's judgment, and the Deva saying saving Elan weeks after abandoning him showed he'd learned and that it was enough to let that slide. It's not a full equivalent, but it shows the metaphysics of the setting are more on my side here.

I wasn't claiming the dragon ancestry mattered. What matters is that they are both enemies who could be shown mercy. The ABD wasn't. Calder might yet be nearly defeated and/or beg for mercy, like I anticipate his personality might (I regard his personality as bully-like or at least might-makes-right given how he's been operating and talking).

[Gay Poro]

I'm so scared Bloodfeast is going to die! I had no idea I'd grown so fond of the little fella. I can't believe it's been over 10 years since we met them

[Kish]

Naysmith, I agree with the moral principles behind what you're saying strongly enough that I hate to say this...

...but Calder seems so completely and consistently evil that I could (theoretically) have believed the ancient black dragon agreeing to drop the vendetta if Vaarsuvius offered her mercy far more easily than I could believe Calder surrendering and not meaning something like "I'll wait, yet again, for another chance to reestablish my cult!"

[KorvinStarmast]

Naysmith, I agree with the moral principles behind what you're saying strongly enough that I hate to say this...

...but Calder seems so completely and consistently evil that I could (theoretically) have believed the ancient black dragon agreeing to drop the vendetta if Vaarsuvius offered her mercy far more easily than I could believe Calder surrendering and not meaning something like "I'll wait, yet again, for another chance to reestablish my cult!" ABD and Calder both establish that dragons have a good INT score.

[gbaji]

If the threat of being trounced again isn't enough, then by story's end, V will almost certainly have the allies, power, and resources to make good on that threat and stop the cult.

And then what? What if Calder again says "I promise not to do it again. Really!". At what point do you conclude that he's an unrepentant evil creature and you just have to kill him? Your solution doesn't prevent him from harming other people, it only 'stops him" once he done it (after the harm has been done).

Threat of "being trounced again" or "stop(ing) the cult" are meaningless if you have no means to prevent him from doing those things in the first place.

Sure. If this were the real world, and we were talking about real world criminals, I'd be all for saying "arrest them, and sentence them according to the laws". But... there is no law here. There is no jurisdiction. There are no jails for putting dragons in (and Serini already tried that, and it didn't work well). At the end of the day, this is a dragon, not a person. He's a magical monsterous creature, with an alignment (and in a "non-real" world in which such a thing exists and is detectable and has measurable effects), and who is a massive walking threat to everything and everyone around him every single second he's around.

The lesson V learned from the ABD and the soul splice bit wasn't "don't assume that evil dragons should be killed". It was "don't get so caught up in pursuing personal power that you lose sight of how using that power affects other people (and yourself)". Recall that V didn't just kill the ABD, but decided to "show off" by using the familicide spell. V replaced justice with vengeance, and didn't consider the full impact those actions would have.

The correllary would be to be so arrogant in one's own power and capabilities to "make good on my threat and stop the cult", that you don't consider the costs to the people who's lives would be ended/ruined by following that course of action.

What you are proposing would actually represent V *not* learning the lesson. Learning it would be taking the impact on other's people's lives into account when deciding what to do. Saying "I'll let this evil mind controlling dragon go because I'm certain I'm powerful enough to defeat him again in the future if need be" is the opposite of learning that lesson. It's putting your own confidence in your personal power and abilities ahead of the cost and impact to other people. Which is exactly the kind of mindset that got V into trouble in the first place.

[Naysmith]

(First, regarding the point of the battle: A reminder that showing how powerful the Order is and getting Serini's trust in their power were both mentioned, I think there's more than one point, and I think it's some hybrid of "all of the above." Or below, in this case.)


Naysmith, I agree with the moral principles behind what you're saying strongly enough that I hate to say this...

...but Calder seems so completely and consistently evil that I could (theoretically) have believed the ancient black dragon agreeing to drop the vendetta if Vaarsuvius offered her mercy far more easily than I could believe Calder surrendering and not meaning something like "I'll wait, yet again, for another chance to reestablish my cult!"
I'm sorry; I did not mean to imply that Calder WILL be spared, or even that the Order will decide to spare him, or that V won't agree with others in the Order that he needs to be slain. Sometimes a combination of fatigue and other factors makes it nigh-impossible for me properly convey my exact sentiments (and often, the devil is in the details for both my thoughts and how my state of mind renders them). But between Serini taunting Calder about no paladins to spare him and the paladins likely being due to arrive soon, I think talk about sparing will happen. Yeah, Calder's an evil that needs to be stopped. But I feel that a good point of this battle would be V attempting to find a peaceful solution. Do I expect it to happen? Insert uproarious laughter. But seeking the possibility is important.

And for waiting for a chance to re-establish... after Calder surrendered to the Scribblers, he was willing to stay in one spot long enough to be put in that stasis. I did a quick google search on life expectancies of elves vs dragons... they're comparable. Dragons for longer, but Calder is already a good chunk through his. That would make the "we'll keep an eye on you" threat plausible enough that I believe it would be important to seriously consider it, making a point of the battle to be showing V trying to do better.


And then what? What if Calder again says "I promise not to do it again. Really!". At what point do you conclude that he's an unrepentant evil creature and you just have to kill him? Your solution doesn't prevent him from harming other people, it only 'stops him" once he done it (after the harm has been done).


Threat of "being trounced again" or "stop(ing) the cult" are meaningless if you have no means to prevent him from doing those things in the first place.
When he surrendered to the Scribblers, he stayed put for at least a little while. He's smart and wise enough to know when to fold.


Sure. If this were the real world, and we were talking about real world criminals, I'd be all for saying "arrest them, and sentence them according to the laws". But... there is no law here. There is no jurisdiction. There are no jails for putting dragons in (and Serini already tried that, and it didn't work well). At the end of the day, this is a dragon, not a person. He's a magical monsterous creature, with an alignment (and in a "non-real" world in which such a thing exists and is detectable and has measurable effects), and who is a massive walking threat to everything and everyone around him every single second he's around.
"a dragon, not a person." I'll just point you at Comic 866, panel 7. I deny nothing about him being a threat, though. If Calder tries to negotiate, then seeing V's stance in the negotiations will be a good view of their development.


The lesson V learned from the ABD and the soul splice bit wasn't "don't assume that evil dragons should be killed". It was "don't get so caught up in pursuing personal power that you lose sight of how using that power affects other people (and yourself)". Recall that V didn't just kill the ABD, but decided to "show off" by using the familicide spell. V replaced justice with vengeance, and didn't consider the full impact those actions would have.
I disagree; the personal power thing was the entire arc breaking V's pride. But regardless of accounting, there can be multiple lessons.
1) The book arc: not to obsess (such as over power)
2) The splice arc: power needs to be wielded correctly
3) Familicide -> pyramid: The justice with vengeance thing in your quote does apply, but also per comic 866, both panels 6 and 7... the implication is that a big lesson is, in fact, "don't assume that evil dragons should be killed". Or that same sentence minus "dragons".
Again, I don't expect Calder to survive. I think a very good point for this battle, outside of showing the Order's power (inc. to Serini) is centered on V because of some foreshadowing and the symbolic theme of ABD and Calder both being CE dragon. Emphasis on symbolic theme.


The correllary would be to be so arrogant in one's own power and capabilities to "make good on my threat and stop the cult", that you don't consider the costs to the people who's lives would be ended/ruined by following that course of action.
Well, if the party can take him once without significant preparation and then gains in power (which they do faster than a dragon does), that's not really being arrogant in their power.

Again, Calder needs to be stopped. I agree with that. But per the metaphysics of the setting, what Calder does is solely on him. That Soon didn't fall for making Serini et al. spare him indicates that accepting surrender is at the very least not evil enough for a paladin to fall.


What you are proposing would actually represent V *not* learning the lesson. Learning it would be taking the impact on other's people's lives into account when deciding what to do. Saying "I'll let this evil mind controlling dragon go because I'm certain I'm powerful enough to defeat him again in the future if need be" is the opposite of learning that lesson. It's putting your own confidence in your personal power and abilities ahead of the cost and impact to other people. Which is exactly the kind of mindset that got V into trouble in the first place.
You're arguing V's pride. That arc hit accepting Ultimate Arcane Power.
Wrath and vengefulness is why V cast Familicide and got into the need for serious redemption.
And it's not just "certain I'm powerful enough", it includes Calder knowing it, too, and knowing he'll be watched. Repeating from above, I don't expect that solution to happen; I just think it'll be seriously discussed as an option.

So, what I believe is that an important point of this battle is seeing how willing V is to try for a peaceful solution (unless I'm completely wrong and someone crits Calder before he can try and talk things out). Initiate trying to talk, be willing to talk, reluctant to talk, or not at all. The reasoning behind it will be an important point as well.

[Corian]

Really random thought about Calder's narrative significance. Many spoke of him as potentially joining TE if he survives this fight. But I also realize he's one of a rare enough kind: a high-level arcane spell caster, who RedCloak could try to coopt into casting the ritual in case either he and Xykon part ways, or Xykon is destroyed as per the order's plan. I would not bet on either scenario, but it could happen.
Now, I'm not 100% sure that Calder has high enough spell slots; and we're not even sure what spell slots the ritual requires. (Welding the rifts requires 9th level, but I don't remember the Dark One's ritual requirements being specified.)

[Ruck]

"a dragon, not a person." I'll just point you at Comic 866, panel 7.

I don't think the point of that comment is "a dragon's life does not have the same value as a human's even as a sapient being," but "Calder has capabilities far beyond anyone in the real world does, and thus there is no realistic means of containing him or ensuring he keeps the peace."

(And, as far as #866 goes, Calder has certainly fit the "ravenous killer" description so far. Nothing we've seen indicates someone who would reform given the opportunity.)

[Kish]

I think the point of that comment was exactly "a dragon's life does not have the same value as a human's." An unfortunate result of Rich having used "look it also killed a lot of mostly-humans" to trigger Vaarsuvius' moral epiphany is posters who think "don't kill a lot of mostly-humans" is that epiphany.

[gbaji]

I think the point of that comment was exactly "a dragon's life does not have the same value as a human's." An unfortunate result of Rich having used "look it also killed a lot of mostly-humans" to trigger Vaarsuvius' moral epiphany is posters who think "don't kill a lot of mostly-humans" is that epiphany.

Right. Hence my point was that the lesson was not "don't kill dragons". It's not about either one, but that does not mean that you can't make the decision to kill the being right in front of you based on an assessment of that specific being. The problem with V's use of familicide is twofold:

1. V was only tihnking in terms of immediate family. Those who would seek revenge for the death of the ABD (since that was relevant to the situation at hand). And really lettting the purpose of the moment (I"m going to kill you and everyone who might care to avenge you) cloud the larger implications of the spell.

2. V was assuming that just because this one dragon was evil and a threat, that all dragons (and dragonkind and onwards) related by blood to that dragon, must also be.


My comment about "this is a dragon, not a person" was not meant to be an absolute statement but a relative one. Everything else being equal, we are talking about a D&D setting, where there are different creatures in the monster manual, and while all (most?) of them *can* be any alignment they want, that fact is rarer among some creatures than others. "person" was referring to "sentient beings who have no speciic alignment trait based on their species" (and not the broader "person; a sentient being").

Dragons are literally color coded according to type, and their types are very very strongly tied to alignment(s). That was the distinction I was trying (perhaps unsuccesfully) to get across. A human (or hafling!) could be of one alignment, and then over time, change. It's not easy, but it does happen, presumably with some decent regularity. Dragons are vastly less likely to change over time.

And yes, in the case of Calder, I really don't think that's even on the table. He's evil. He's not going to stop being evil. Anything short of killing him, or imprisoning him somehow will come with the cost of him "doing evil" to others. The option to "kill him, then cast familicide to kill everyone/thing related to him" also isn't on the table either, so I'm not sure how V's previous experience really applies.

I suppose to address the OP, his purpose is to be a threat that must be overcome. There could certainly be some narrative aspect in terms of "what do we do with him?". And there also could certainly be some informational aspects to his presence as well. I also think it may be a last "big encounter" hurrah, which serves the narrative purpose of showing that there are threats in the dungeon, and we're not just going to have the main characters perfectly bypass them all. Also, it provides an opportunty for some last minute dingage to happen, which may help push the Order over the top in terms of being able to go toe to toe with TE.

[Precure]

ABD broke two little kids' legs and tortured their parent in front of them to get a revenge on their other parent. I wouldn't put her any less at evil from Calder the Red Dragon.

[KorvinStarmast]

ABD broke two little kids' legs and tortured their parent in front of them to get a revenge on their other parent. I wouldn't put her any less at evil from Calder the Red Dragon. But she was mad is the excuse that will be offered, I suspect.

[Kardwill]

ABD broke two little kids' legs and tortured their parent in front of them to get a revenge on their other parent. I wouldn't put her any less at evil from Calder the Red Dragon.

Oh yeah, she may have had a legitimate beef against V, but motivated by grief or not, she crossed the "yep, totally evil" line when she decided to torture innocent kids for her vengeance. I think nobody would have objected to V simply killing her. Had they stopped at #638, some people would have commented on their callousness and obvious enjoyment of the process (and the entire "deal with the devil" of course), but not objected to the dragonslaying itself.

The problem is that V didn't stop there at #638. They killed her entire family line, including quite a lot of children, because "they're black dragons, so they're totally Ok to kill even if I don't know them, amarite?" That's the moment V crossed the line too.

[danielxcutter]

Yeah, as V said themselves, it was wrong to slaughter all those dragons indiscriminately just because they were related to the ABD, irrelevant of the fallout due to the Draketooth clan. Even if somehow every single one of them deserved to die, V didn’t know and didn’t care about that.

[No good @ names]

ABD and Calder both establish that dragons have a good INT score.

Empress of Blood establishes that dragons CAN have a good INT score?

[Ionathus]

All this talk about "what do they do with Calder if he surrenders a second time" is making me think of the D&D session I just ran last month.

The party was fighting a super-powerful and devious Green Dragon. She had already lied and manipulated many people, and had bamboozled the party several times by playing on their emotions and empathy. When they finally came to blows, the party won.

She tried to surrender to the LG Oath of Devotion Paladin who always tries to redeem or capture enemies. As far as he could tell, she was being truly genuine in her surrender, and even asking him to show her a path to potential redemption. Instead he said some version of "sorry, you had your chance multiple times over" and killed her.

I actually wasn't expecting him to choose execution, but it made sense given everything she'd put them through, and how often she had preyed on peoples' empathy. It was sort of a "boy who cried wolf" situation in regards to the social contract.

All this to say -- I think if Calder tries to surrender a second time, either Roy or (more likely) Serini will put him down for good. Serini has seen what he's capable of, and Roy has learned his lesson from Durkula about pulling punches just because a clearly-dangerous combatant is saying the things you want to hear.

[KorvinStarmast]

Empress of Blood establishes that dragons CAN have a good INT score? EoB establishes that dragons can also make INT their dump stat.
(When I check the source material like the Monster Manual or the SRD, EoB is a bit of an outlier).

[MartianInvader]

Oh no.

Given this latest development (V's Greater Dispel Magic), I don't have high hopes for Bloodfeast surviving this one. Narrativey speaking, I don't really see them walking around with a full-sized allosaurus for the rest of the comic, nor do I see them going through the awkward motions of re-hexing him.

Of course, this could kick off a big development in the Belkar arc.

[KorvinStarmast]

Oh no.

Given this latest development (V's Greater Dispel Magic), I don't have high hopes for Bloodfeast surviving this one. Narrativey speaking, I don't really see them walking around with a full-sized allosaurus for the rest of the comic, nor do I see them going through the awkward motions of re-hexing him.

Of course, this could kick off a big development in the Belkar arc.
Oddball Prediction follows:
MitD and Bloodfeast bond and become fast friends.
Not sure how, but that thought appeals to me.

[Synesthesy]

Oh no.

Given this latest development (V's Greater Dispel Magic), I don't have high hopes for Bloodfeast surviving this one. Narrativey speaking, I don't really see them walking around with a full-sized allosaurus for the rest of the comic, nor do I see them going through the awkward motions of re-hexing him.

Of course, this could kick off a big development in the Belkar arc.

But the face of Belkar imaging to walk around with a full-sized allosaurus for the rest of the comic, just for Bloodfeast to be polymorphed again, would be so hilarious.

[SlashDash]

Oh no.

Given this latest development (V's Greater Dispel Magic), I don't have high hopes for Bloodfeast surviving this one. Narrativey speaking, I don't really see them walking around with a full-sized allosaurus for the rest of the comic, nor do I see them going through the awkward motions of re-hexing him.

Of course, this could kick off a big development in the Belkar arc.

I don't know why people are so focused on Bloodfeast dying. This is not some r-rated story where characters are constantly dying off for shock factor.

I agree entirely that the author isn't going to keep drawing him, but there are far easier ways to handle that do not involve death.
Far more likely that if V doesn't have a spell for that already memorized that Serini has an item for it. After all, she had to get those giant monsters go through the doors, right?

[Peelee]

I don't know why people are so focused on Bloodfeast dying. This is not some r-rated story where characters are constantly dying off for shock factor.

Devil's Advocate: it's also not a g-rated story where characters are generally safe. Characters can and have died, and Bloodfeast dying would not really move the story in the direction of a blood-bath.

[SlashDash]

Devil's Advocate: it's also not a g-rated story where characters are generally safe. Characters can and have died, and Bloodfeast dying would not really move the story in the direction of a blood-bath.

In general, I see so many people assume that so many characters are going to die

Regardless, I don't see how your comment applies. How many named characters that are non-villain actually died? Very few and those are mostly characters that were outside the party like Shojo.

Dead meaning "out of the story" in this context, I'm not talking about Durkon or Roy dying with the audience being fully aware that they are going back to the story.

[KorvinStarmast]

Miko and Shojo died (One good guy and one trying-to-be-good-but-can't-get-out-of-her-own-way gal).
Belkar will die. (Party member).
Kubota died (good riddance; evil jerk).
Nale died (a jerk, but Elan cared for him in his own special way)
Therkla died (someone who Elan cared for)

Hmm, Haley better watch her back. Elan cares deeply for her.

[Peelee]

In general, I see so many people assume that so many characters are going to die

Regardless, I don't see how your comment applies. How many named characters that are non-villain actually died? Very few and those are mostly characters that were outside the party like Shojo.

Dead meaning "out of the story" in this context, I'm not talking about Durkon or Roy dying with the audience being fully aware that they are going back to the story.


Miko and Shojo died (One good guy and one trying-to-be-good-but-can't-get-out-of-her-own-way gal).
Belkar will die. (Party member).
Therkla died (someone who Elan cared for)

Hmm, Haley better watch her back. Elan cares deeply for her.

And Dorukan, Girard, Lirian, Thahn, Right-Eye....

And despite the assertion of only characters that we know can come back, the characters in the story treat every death as real and potentially permanent - Roy and Durkon's deaths were both heavily lamented and it took Roy an entire book to come back. Also, Eric, somewhere between a toddler and kindergartener, died.

Slashdash, i agree that i dont think Bloodfeast will die. That's why i said DA - i was pointing out that despite my agreement, the opposing viewpoint isn't bad for the reason you claimed. My comment applies because your assertion that OotS isn't a gritty dark corpse-ridden story doesn't mean that characters aligned with the heroes can't die. Yes, it's not an R-rated gorefest, but it's also not all puppies and sunshine either.

[KorvinStarmast]

but it's also not all puppies and sunshine either. :thog: Thog likes puppies.
I believe that Thog's demise is permanent.
(I realize that he was quite popular, but from Rich's commentaries I get the idea that he's done about all he wants to with that character).

And Dorukan, Girard, Lirian, Thahn, Right-Eye.... Three of those happened in SoD (off screen for web only comic) and Dorukan's was in evidence on screen. Yes, Thahn, overlooked him.

[Peelee]

Three of those happened in SoD

Yes, but "in the free version" wasn't a condition. :smalltongue:

[No good @ names]

I don't know why people are so focused on Bloodfeast dying. This is not some r-rated story where characters are constantly dying off for shock factor.

I agree entirely that the author isn't going to keep drawing him, but there are far easier ways to handle that do not involve death.

I would have thought having a character die in a combat scene against a dangerous opponent would be very easy.


Even over and above the “OOTS is not a game, it’s just set in the world of one”, argument, it’s not like Bloodfeast is a Player Character whose death would exclude a player, and the PC-analogues are pretty safe. If any of the original 6 other than Belkar dies I’d be very surprised.

But then it’s perfectly good writing for 3rd act (“Final Dungeon”) encounters to have casualties. It adds gravitas and emphasises the stakes. I imagine in particular that if Bloodfeast were to die then Belkar’s character growth will progress. That’s not WANTING Bloodfeast to die, but just seeing a potential avenue the story may go down that while following some well hashed storytelling tropes (tropes are not necessarily bad).

[Ruck]

It's certainly possible Bloodfeast could die, but I struggle to see how it could add anything to the story. Even on the topic of Belkar's personal growth, I don't think it would do anything that the trajectory he's currently on isn't already.

[brian 333]

I acknowledge the possibility, but I don't want it to be so!

[WanderingMist]

This is the singular random encounter they have before getting to the story relevant battle as dictated by the laws of drama and probability.

[KorvinStarmast]

This is the singular random encounter they have before getting to the story relevant battle as dictated by the laws of drama and probability. Random? I don't think so. Calder is placed in a particular zone of the dungeon deliberately by Serini, or by Serini and other Scribblers. Calder is kept in that place via some powerful magic. The Order intended to bypass it, but based on an error made, either by Sunny or by Serini insofar as prison design or prison maintenance goes, an encounter was triggered.

The trigger was an error by the party. If we look at dungeon design and encounter design, this is a location-based encounter rather than a random encounter.

[Psyren]

Random? I don't think so. Calder is placed in a particular zone of the dungeon deliberately by Serini, or by Serini and other Scribblers. Calder is kept in that place via some powerful magic. The Order intended to bypass it, but based on an error made, either by Sunny or by Serini insofar as prison design or prison maintenance goes, an encounter was triggered.

The trigger was an error by the party. If we look at dungeon design and encounter design, this is a location-based encounter rather than a random encounter.

Less error and more unfortunate circumstance; I'm guessing the route Serini (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1291.html) intended to take (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1292.html) would have given Calder's chamber a wider berth - which also explains how he never got his eyes/talons on Sunny until now despite Sunny accompanying her on her inspections previously.

[KorvinStarmast]

So, what is the pont of the battle with Calder?

Not sure how familiar the OP is with corporate America, but the battle with Calder is the ultimate team building exercise for the Order of the Stick. :smallcool:

It's like an Off Site, except it's an On Site. :smallbiggrin:

[DaOldeWolf]

So, what is the pont of the battle with Calder?

Not sure how familiar the OP is with corporate America, but the battle with Calder is the ultimate team building exercise for the Order of the Stick. :smallcool:

It's like an Off Site, except it's an On Site. :smallbiggrin:

I suppose there is no better way to create trust between members of a team than by thrusting into the jugular of whatever issue the exercise is about. :smallbiggrin:

[dxm2000]

So, several people have mentioned two of the main points that I considered(those being Calder becomes no longer an obstacle to Team Evil, and Calder wastes party resources/potentially gives levels-- which is worth remembering --), and some have brushed a sub-point(the Scribble's history-- Sunny knew enough about Calder, to draw him (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1257.html)).

But three other thoughts occur to me, one touched upon in many ways, but not quite the one I'm thinking of, the others, unless I missed something(plausible), sort of missed:

One of them is a specific resource being used: Time. OotS assume they have days, plural before TE gets to the final dungeon, and therefore them. The entity Redcloak summoned assumes half that(possibly lessened if they already finished the last few dungeons they'd need to hit. OotS' plan (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1280.html) involves beating TE to their destination and setting up an ambush. Last time they wanted to do so(not to Xykon, because Planar Allies wouldn't work on him, but still), they needed time to set up. If they again need time to set up, then that might take a day or more. A little problem if they have two days, not a problem if they have more, except now the current one might be burnt on recovery(and some may end out entirely out of the fight, Sunny was hit pretty hard), and the second might be too little, too late.

The second is the Paladins. Right now, they are in the water below. The party is burning spell slots. Mimi could easily die. Walls could crumble. Essentially, a situation could resolve such that the paladins(who have the most unused resources) are again split from the group, forced to take the passage the team opened(actually, the open passage could also be an issue), temporarily removing them from the narrative, because means for easily recovering them are lost. It could also create a schism, because Serini intentionally abandoned them.

The third, well, as I said, has been touched on in many ways/by many:


The point of the Calder fight, from my perspective, appears to be offering Bloodfeast the opportunity to show he's the Order's heaviest hitter once again. :D


I’ve got it. I know what the point is.

Belkar.

Calder will dominate Belkar; Belkar will have his protection from evil clasp, which shows his alignment has changed. Belkar will then have to ride the dinosaur back into the stasis circle, dragging Calder, whereupon the magic will be restored.

Belkar draws his last breath. No more birthday cake.



I'm going to make the bold, likely inaccurate prediction that this...might be it for Belkar. He jumps into save Bloodfeast and gets roasted for his trouble.

It would kinda be the ultimate culmination of his character, even more so than sacrificing himself to save one of the sapient members of the party. Belkar started out as a Ranger for purely mechanical reasons, and has always sucked at it. But along with his character growth from textbook, comical CE he's also started to do more and more Ranger-like things over time.

What would be a more fitting end to the character arc than dying selflessly to save an Animal Companion he put into danger? It even fits the recent reiteration we've had that the main character trait he never lost from the early days is his tendency to leap before he looks. He's probably gonna jump in out of pure reflex and impulse.

Maybe a last bit of snark ("Damn...rolled a 1.") and burnt to ashes; notably a form of death that is VERY hard to remedy in 3.5, as it prevents you from using normal Raise Dead.


I'm so scared Bloodfeast is going to die! I had no idea I'd grown so fond of the little fella. I can't believe it's been over 10 years since we met them

I don't think either Bloodfeast or Belkar are going to die yet.

However, Bloodfeast living creates issues of its own. Getting Bloodfeast around will be difficult at this size and liable to set off all kinds of traps. However, unringing the "Baleful Polymorph removal" bell likely isn't an option. V probably cannot afford to waste the spell slot, and that's assuming V can even cast the spell. So unless someone has an item to cast that or a similar spell, Bloodfeast is likely making any last stand being made here. This puts Belkar in the unfortunate position of having to pick his charge or his party. Considering his development, I could see a few ways that the events that follow might kill him, tying things up in a "narratively satifying" way, without introducing a one-off villain just to kill him or his pet.

[No good @ names]

Random? I don't think so. Calder is placed in a particular zone of the dungeon deliberately by Serini, or by Serini and other Scribblers. Calder is kept in that place via some powerful magic. The Order intended to bypass it, but based on an error made, either by Sunny or by Serini insofar as prison design or prison maintenance goes, an encounter was triggered.

The trigger was an error by the party. If we look at dungeon design and encounter design, this is a location-based encounter rather than a random encounter.

:elan: I thought we only ever had one random encounter per trip! There was a chalkboard and everything!


So, several people have mentioned two of the main points that I considered(those being Calder becomes no longer an obstacle to Team Evil, and Calder wastes party resources/potentially gives levels-- which is worth remembering --), and some have brushed a sub-point(the Scribble's history-- Sunny knew enough about Calder, to draw him (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1257.html)).

But three other thoughts occur to me, one touched upon in many ways, but not quite the one I'm thinking of, the others, unless I missed something(plausible), sort of missed:

One of them is a specific resource being used: Time. OotS assume they have days, plural before TE gets to the final dungeon, and therefore them. The entity Redcloak summoned assumes half that(possibly lessened if they already finished the last few dungeons they'd need to hit. OotS' plan (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1280.html) involves beating TE to their destination and setting up an ambush. Last time they wanted to do so(not to Xykon, because Planar Allies wouldn't work on him, but still), they needed time to set up. If they again need time to set up, then that might take a day or more. A little problem if they have two days, not a problem if they have more, except now the current one might be burnt on recovery(and some may end out entirely out of the fight, Sunny was hit pretty hard), and the second might be too little, too late.

The second is the Paladins. Right now, they are in the water below. The party is burning spell slots. Mimi could easily die. Walls could crumble. Essentially, a situation could resolve such that the paladins(who have the most unused resources) are again split from the group, forced to take the passage the team opened(actually, the open passage could also be an issue), temporarily removing them from the narrative, because means for easily recovering them are lost. It could also create a schism, because Serini intentionally abandoned them.

The third, well, as I said, has been touched on in many ways/by many:










I don't think either Bloodfeast or Belkar are going to die yet.

However, Bloodfeast living creates issues of its own. Getting Bloodfeast around will be difficult at this size and liable to set off all kinds of traps. However, unringing the "Baleful Polymorph removal" bell likely isn't an option. V probably cannot afford to waste the spell slot, and that's assuming V can even cast the spell. So unless someone has an item to cast that or a similar spell, Bloodfeast is likely making any last stand being made here. This puts Belkar in the unfortunate position of having to pick his charge or his party. Considering his development, I could see a few ways that the events that follow might kill him, tying things up in a "narratively satifying" way, without introducing a one-off villain just to kill him or his pet.

Bloodfeast is probably the most difficult resource to bring to bear against Team Evil. So it’s the smart move for the rest of the party to preserve themselves for the big fight by letting Bloodfeast take the brunt, even if it’s the death of him.

[Riftwolf]

The two main story reasons for Calder I could think of were a) someone who could spill the beans on Serini and b) an encounter which could show us the effects of touching the threads rather than just telling us.

[Kish]

Bloodfeast is probably the most difficult resource to bring to bear against Team Evil. So it’s the smart move for the rest of the party to preserve themselves for the big fight by letting Bloodfeast take the brunt, even if it’s the death of him.
"Unfortunately," the two members of the party most likely to endorse that kind of "smart move" are the ones who have done the most actively for Bloodfeast in the fight so far.

[Precure]

I doubt Roy and Haley care much about the dino.

[Kardwill]

There is "caring about someone", and there is "letting someone get killed because it's convenient". Those are different.

Roy shows concern about Blackwing's safety. Even though the bird shows a level of sentience above the dino's, I think it indicates the days of Roy pushing an "team member" under the bus are past us.

As for Haley, I don't remember "sacrificing an ally" being one of her (many) flaws. She cares about friendly individuals. I could forget something, though.


It doesn't mean they would sacrifice the mission to save the dino. But "let's have the dino facetank the dragon and get killed, he's useless after that anyway!" feels out of character for most of the party. Except maybe V, but he's actually helping Bloodfeast right now.

[Precure]

They played this exact scenario before. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0932.html)

[Kardwill]

That was really not the same exact scenario, though.

Escaping a desperate situation, trusting the ally who volunteered to stay behind will be able to get out once you're safe, is not the same as deliberately using another ally as an damage sponge just to secure a better victory.

[dxm2000]

They played this exact scenario before. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0932.html)

Trusting a high level, experienced adventurer, who has foiled Tarquin repeatedly, who is at full health, who willingly "sacrificed" himself to delay a foe, to allow them, the injured lower level members to recuperate before escaping together(because no, they weren't acting under the assumption he would die), is not the same as throwing a pet with no class levels to the wolves(the wolves being people who likely could kill both Julio and Tarquin together).

Roy had a whole thing about abandoning a teammate in need(Elan, who he was a lot less chill with than Bloodfeast(he talks pretty nicely to Bloodfeast for "not caring much")) and then growing as a person from it, as well as the thing about feeling responsible for the death of an innocent(his brother, Durkon), regardless of his ability to do anything about it.

Haley... Eh. Old Haley might have been okay with that. Might. Current Haley though? Well, she may not be super attached to Bloodfeast, but she does care about her whole team. I doubt she'd be so callous as to do so. Jokingly suggest? Yes. Actually go through with it? Not willingly.

[Ruck]

They played this exact scenario before. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0932.html)

I'm curious what you think "exact" means, because it doesn't mean "vaguely similar."

[Kish]

I'm curious what you think "exact" means, because it doesn't mean "vaguely similar."
Indeed. If anything indicates that they were preserving themselves for a big fight by letting Julio take the brunt even if it meant the death of him because he was a resource they couldn't use against Xykon, it must be in a secret bonus strip I haven't seen.

[woweedd]

They played this exact scenario before. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0932.html)

Putting aside all the other problems with this comparison, can I point out the irony of claiming the party don't care about Bloodfeast by showing a comic where one of the party goes out of their way to rescue him?

[Precure]

I'm curious what you think "exact" means, because it doesn't mean "vaguely similar."

They abandoned Bloodfeast.

[woweedd]

They abandoned Bloodfeast.

He said, linking to a comic that shows them ultimately not doing that?

[dxm2000]

They abandoned Bloodfeast.

Who did? Haley, who has her hands full with her boyfriend? Elan, who has his hands full buffing busy buffing the ally who's stalling their enemy? Durkon, who's too small(and also secretly their vampire enemy, so doesn't count). V who's got their hands full With Belkar and magic hands full with Roy? Belkar who's unconscious, but immediately reminds them to grab Bloodfeast upon waking?

'Bout the only one who could reasonably be claimed to have the hands to carry Bloodfeast, and therefore "abandoned him" is Roy, who only had one hand full with the cat, but had ordered his flight capable party members to pick up those who can't fly, and may've missed Bloodfeast, or assumed someone else had it handled (or forgotten, because at that point Bloodfeast had been around for 10 pages, during half of which Roy was dazed or distracted/fighting for his life) and the bird, who ultimately picked him up.

...Also, this still isn't "They played this exact scenario before."

If the dino had been left behind as a lizard there, odds of if immediately(or even in the near-immediate future) dying were infinitesimal compared to being abandoned to Calder or Xykon. Odds are Tarquin would not have cared about it, or at worse tried to have it un-polymorphed and put back in the army. Most likely, if anything killed it, it'd be wildlife, or regular desert dangers. If abandoned to, say Calder, in his current form, odds are Bloodfeast's getting mind-whammied or straight up killed(most likely).

Additionally, there's over 300 pages of party association difference now. Additionally, additionally, Roy has recently made a mission statement about "not sending someone's kid to die on purpose (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1274.html)", in reference to Sunny, but I cannot imagine that that is limited to "family of party members". Roy's been shown, if belatedly sometimes, to worry about V's familiar, to not want him to risk dying. Why would V's familiar get that care, but not Belkar's pet?

[Ruck]

They abandoned Bloodfeast.

The strip you linked shows the Order rescuing Bloodfeast, not abandoning him.

I'm confused how you interpreted that strip as being the exact opposite of what happened.


...Also, this still isn't "They played this exact scenario before."

Also this.

[Peelee]

The strip you linked shows the Order rescuing Bloodfeast, not abandoning him.

I'm confused how you interpreted that strip as being the exact opposite of what happened.

My best guess is that before Belkar said anything, nobody else thought to grab him.

Of course, that requires one to ignore that the dino was only friendly to the Order for a minute or two by that point, and had tried to eat them immediately prior to that. So, ya know, context regarding the relationship between Bloodfeast and the Order at that time and now.

[Precure]

Point of discussion was whether Roy and Haley care or don't care about the dino, and I bring a comic that shows their lack of care about it. Someone claimed that they wouldn't abandon it to save themselves, and I bring a comic that exact scenario happened. Unless someone bring a proof of Roy and/or Haley shows care about the wellbeing of the dino, I see this as case closed.

[dxm2000]

Point of discussion was whether Roy and Haley care or don't care about the dino, and I bring a comic that shows their lack of care about it. Someone claimed that they wouldn't abandon it to save themselves, and I bring a comic that exact scenario happened. Unless someone bring a proof of Roy and/or Haley shows care about the wellbeing of the dino, I see this as case closed.

False. You brought up a comic, 10 pages after they could be said to first have gotten to even know Bloodfeast, where they don't personally save him.

You claim they are abandoning him to save themselves, but what they are really doing is saving someone else(Haley is, again, saving Elan, her boyfriend, who she deeply loves-- what, should she have abandoned Elan to run over and personally pick up Bloodfeast? --and Roy is saving Mr. Scruffy, while being picked up by a magic hand(depending on the order of events he might've barely had time to grab Mr. Scruffy, after instructing-- again, you're ignoring this --his party's flying members to help anyone who can't fly). By your logic, Roy also abandoned Elan and Belkar because he didn't personally pick them up, someone else did, or Durkon, who he had no reason to assume could fly(but clearly that resolved between panels). You are attributing motives to characters that are neither explicit or implicit.

The worse you could actually logically accuse them of is being forgetful(which you might have a decent argument for), or assuming one of the half dozen flight capable members had it in hand.

As for caring about the wellbeing of Bloodfeast? How about this (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1272.html)? Roy treats the creature with respect. Explicitly does not engage with him in a way he believes will make him uncomfortable/unhappy and speaks to him about Belkar, who Bloodfeast cares about. Roy recognises Bloodfeast's priorities and cares to address them. And again, Roy desires not to sacrifice others because it's convenient to him. That may've been a flaw of his once, but he got better(and it was never shown to be a flaw of Haley(who feels bad when people are hurt because of her)'s).

[Precure]

Eh, I don't think so. Roy is just playing mind games with his "little sister" there.

[dxm2000]

By... telling Bloodfeast that he won't pet him and that Belkar's inside? That's a reach. A very big reach. He could've just ignored him, and said "Hello, sister.", if that was all he wanted to do.

Also, fun how you seem to think so ill of a lawful good person who is trying to be both lawful and good(in spirit, not name). Like you think people like him only pretend to be decent.

I mean, I don't know about you, but, to create a real-world equivalent, if someone was being chased by a killer wearing plate, waving around a sword and threw the dog of the neighbour they don't like at the killer to distract them so they can flee, whether or not that dog lives and/or hurts the killer, the person throwing it is neither good, nor lawful, by any measure I want to consider. Yet you seem to think Roy(or Haley, also Good) capable of that.

It doesn't matter if you "care" about the owner or not, those are not the actions of a good person(In fact, those are the actions of someone like the old Belkar. Hmmm.)

[Kish]

Well, we can agree that the case is closed, anyway.

[Precure]

I mean, I don't know about you, but, to create a real-world equivalent, if someone was being chased by a killer wearing plate, waving around a sword and threw the dog of the neighbour they don't like at the killer to distract them so they can flee, whether or not that dog lives and/or hurts the killer, the person throwing it is neither good, nor lawful, by any measure I want to consider. Yet you seem to think Roy(or Haley, also Good) capable of that..)

Roy didn't have a problem with throwing animals to dangerous targets before. Remember how he treated the animals from his bag of tricks? Miko surely do. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0174.html)

[Riftwolf]

Roy didn't have a problem with throwing animals to dangerous targets before. Remember how he treated the animals from his bag of tricks? Miko surely do. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0174.html)

I mean, a better example might've been when they sent the Anarchic giraffes and BoT critters into the Symbol of Death. The exact details about summoned creatures and whether they're real beings or magical constructs varies, though, so I don't know what the critters count as. I think the answer depends on whether it's a joke or not.

[brian 333]

Roy didn't have a problem with throwing animals to dangerous targets before. Remember how he treated the animals from his bag of tricks? Miko surely do. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0174.html)

Milo was, herself, insufferably cruel to said creatures. After having laid bare his suffering for her, Miko repaid Weasel with cruel rejection and cold dismissal. In doing so she set in motion the chain of events leading to her fall brcause when she really needed a true friend to talk to Weasel was reduced to eating raw rodent and sleeping alone in a ditch

[Precure]

I mean, a better example might've been when they sent the Anarchic giraffes and BoT critters into the Symbol of Death.

The weasel's case is more similar to dxm2000's example, since Roy literally threw them into the trolls.


Milo was, herself, insufferably cruel to said creatures.

Milo is probably the most animal friendly character in this comic, maybe sans Celia.

[dxm2000]

Roy didn't have a problem with throwing animals to dangerous targets before. Remember how he treated the animals from his bag of tricks? Miko surely do. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0174.html)

Note: I specified "dog of the neighbour they don't like", "throwing a pet" "Belkar's pet". You're missing half the problem here.

But as for "throwing animals to dangerous targets"... Fun fact!: Those aren't animals! No, really! What they are is actually "small, fuzzy ball"s, which turn, temporarily, into animals. They are, in essence a spell imitating an animal. They last 10 minutes and disappear after that or if they die. That is the actual 3.5e item function. "But dxm2000", I hear say(theoretically), "what about the weasel (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0174.html)?" To that I say, "merely a throwaway joke/callback". Not like any of the others stuck around.

So, to answer the question, yes I do remember, but I also remember that they aren't actual animals. If they were actual animals (beyond the joke), then Roy would definitely not be good. Though also, the wizards (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0130.html) who shoved hundreds of animals into the bag would be terribly evil.

Edit:


I mean, a better example might've been when they sent the Anarchic giraffes and BoT critters into the Symbol of Death. The exact details about summoned creatures and whether they're real beings or magical constructs varies, though, so I don't know what the critters count as. I think the answer depends on whether it's a joke or not.

Hmm... Fair point on the Chaos Giraffes, actually. Summon Monster VI(and its predecessors) mention actual summoning, not creating a fake creature, and there no mention of returning to its plane after the spell limit/death(though you'd assume, since it also doesn't mention the summon doing anything after the spell ends, such as turning against you). So that'd run afoul of "not good", but, unless Durkon, V or Elan know the spell, that knowledge may be unknown to them(also, per Hilgya (whether true or not-- she is an Evil cleric, after all), they don't die). Edit 2: Never mind, I forgot the difference between calling and summoning. Haven't touched 3.5e in well over a decade. Summons are only "dead" for 24 hours-- Wait. Summon Monster uses "call" in the short form description though. Gah. I guess it's up to interpretation?

[KorvinStarmast]

Roy didn't have a problem with throwing animals to dangerous targets before. Remember how he treated the animals from his bag of tricks? Miko surely do. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0174.html) They obviously retain affection for him, and care for him, (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1188.html) so perhaps they are magical by nature and your characterization of them is well off the mark.

[Peelee]

They obviously retain affection for him, and care for him, (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1188.html) so perhaps they are magical by nature and your characterization of them is well off the mark.
I'd agree with that.

If the ball is removed and tossed up to 20 feet away, it turns into an animal. The animal serves the character who drew it from the bag for 10 minutes (or until slain or ordered back into the bag), at which point it disappears.

[Riftwolf]

Note: I specified "dog of the neighbour they don't like", "throwing a pet" "Belkar's pet". You're missing half the problem here.

But as for "throwing animals to dangerous targets"... Fun fact!: Those aren't animals! No, really! What they are is actually "small, fuzzy ball"s, which turn, temporarily, into animals. They are, in essence a spell imitating an animal. They last 10 minutes and disappear after that or if they die. That is the actual 3.5e item function. "But dxm2000", I hear say(theoretically), "what about the weasel (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0174.html)?" To that I say, "merely a throwaway joke/callback". Not like any of the others stuck around.

So, to answer the question, yes I do remember, but I also remember that they aren't actual animals. If they were actual animals (beyond the joke), then Roy would definitely not be good. Though also, the wizards (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0130.html) who shoved hundreds of animals into the bag would be terribly evil.

Edit:



Hmm... Fair point on the Chaos Giraffes, actually. Summon Monster VI(and its predecessors) mention actual summoning, not creating a fake creature, and there no mention of returning to its plane after the spell limit/death(though you'd assume, since it also doesn't mention the summon doing anything after the spell ends, such as turning against you). So that'd run afoul of "not good", but, unless Durkon, V or Elan know the spell, that knowledge may be unknown to them(also, per Hilgya (whether true or not-- she is an Evil cleric, after all), they don't die). Edit 2: Never mind, I forgot the difference between calling and summoning. Haven't touched 3.5e in well over a decade. Summons are only "dead" for 24 hours-- Wait. Summon Monster uses "call" in the short form description though. Gah. I guess it's up to interpretation?

In the next comic Hilgya says something about the giraffes going back to Limbo. It gets kinda confusing because dying means different things for different creatures and outsiders keep nudging the rules. The best case scenario for the Bag of Tricks is they're creatures with no soul, like the philosophical zombie thought experiment, who imitate behaviour of an animal unless instructed to otherwise or If It's Funny. In this case the critters were simulacra to trick the Symbol of Death, whereas the Chaos Giraffes were killed but only mostly dead, alive enough to be returned back to Limbo (and to blaaaaaith)

[brian 333]

My head canon to describe the difference:

A spirit from the outer or elemental plane is summoned to animate a mortal body created in the spirit's image by the spell. That magically constructed body is temporary and will eventually fall apart, releasing the spirit to return to its place of origin. This is different from portalling from the plane because the extra-planar body crosses over in that case.

Summon fire elemental allows the spirit to go back to the plane of fire. Calling or portalling transfers the physical body from the fire to the material plane. When the summoned one dies it still has a body to travel back to on its native plane. When the extraplanar body is destroyed on the material plane, where does the released spirit go? Detroit?

[Precure]

"Those animals are not animals because I say so"

:amused:

[brian 333]

"Those animals are not animals because they are magical constructs designed to imitate animals but obey the summoner's commands."

:amused:

Fixed it for you.

[dxm2000]

"Those animals are not animals because I say so"

:amused:

Those animals are not animals because of the rules, which I, and subsequently Peelee, quoted from the PHB, but you ignored that(just as you ignore other things inconvenient to your arguments, rather than addressing them) in favour of making something up.