Redcloak keeps getting awesomer

[Pronounceable]

Redcloak was already awesome from the start, but now he seems to have reached a new level.

We knew he was ultimetely dedicated to the betterment of goblinkind, but who knew he'd rather risk total destruction of everything including goblins themselves than see goblins keep living inferior to "good races"?

...Maybe those who read SoD...

Anyway, here's a thread for the awesomeness that's called Redcloak. Show your support!

[Remirach]

Redcloak was already awesome from the start, but now he seems to have reached a new level.

We knew he was ultimetely dedicated to the betterment of goblinkind, but who knew he'd rather risk total destruction of everything including goblins themselves than see goblins keep living inferior to "good races"?

...Maybe those who read SoD...

Anyway, here's a thread for the awesomeness that's called Redcloak. Show your support!

FANGIRL REPRESENT! I <3 THE DARK ONE'S TOP CLERIC!!

He's so dedicated to his cause that he's lost his own name. He's utterly devoted to those devoted to him, but he'll let them be sacrificed all the same. He's given up all that is sacred and much that isn't for the sake of the Plan. He's dryly sardonic, intelligent but never boastful, "reluctantly evil" and righteously pissed-off at his races' station in life.

My favorite point in the comic was when I realized I was rooting for him at least as much as the good guys.

[SPoD]

My favorite point in the comic was when I realized I was rooting for him at least as much as the good guys.

I agree. I'd like to see the end of the comic feature a sound defeat for Xykon, but Redcloak negotiating a truce to actually get that better chance for his people. I'd like to see him get the chance to build up the goblin nation WITHOUT crazy world-ending schemes, like his brother would wanted, but I don't think it will happen until the good guys take away all his current toys and he is forced to reassess his priorities.

[Helanna]

:redcloak: It's you good guys who keep setting the Armageddon Clock ahead to Daylight's Savings Time, not us.


That is my new favorite quote. Along with, "Wow, it is so refreshing for us to finally be all on the same page here!" In context, that's awesome.

I like Redcloak. He is definitely awesome.

[Spiky]

Hmm. Other than the Armageddon clock comment, I thought his soliloquy was a step back for RC. It almost seems like the character has outgrown the story template and G is trying to make up for that all in one comic. In another thread someone mentioned that RC seems to be hypocritical, he's not acting like the Dark One's chief minion, or even like he himself claimed in earlier comics. He is playing on the edge of his race and alignment info. RC is becoming too complex to fit. To compare: Roy is similarly complex, but has more room to grow in his LG, human, fighter mold.

Don't get me wrong, he's a great character. But he seems to be slipping out of the D&D mold that ought to exist in OOTS. Very similar to many threads on this forum that intermix reality with the game or the comic.

I think Rich should try some novels on the side. His writing is excellent and this comic is too limited to support it.

[Player_Zero]

Redcloak was already awesome from the start, but now he seems to have reached a new level.

We knew he was ultimetely dedicated to the betterment of goblinkind, but who knew he'd rather risk total destruction of everything including goblins themselves than see goblins keep living inferior to "good races"?

...Maybe those who read SoD...

Anyway, here's a thread for the awesomeness that's called Redcloak. Show your support!

I don't know from your post whether you have or haven't read SoD, but if not then I highly endorse getting it as soon as possible. It may be a bit of a plug, but if you like Red Cloak then you'll love him after that book. He is pretty much pure class.

[Skeletoff]

is honor of a paladin breakable by possibility of having his soul destroyed?

[Devils_Advocate]

Hmm. Other than the Armageddon clock comment, I thought his soliloquy was a step back for RC. It almost seems like the character has outgrown the story template and G is trying to make up for that all in one comic. In another thread someone mentioned that RC seems to be hypocritical, he's not acting like the Dark One's chief minion, or even like he himself claimed in earlier comics. He is playing on the edge of his race and alignment info. RC is becoming too complex to fit. To compare: Roy is similarly complex, but has more room to grow in his LG, human, fighter mold.

Don't get me wrong, he's a great character. But he seems to be slipping out of the D&D mold that ought to exist in OOTS. Very similar to many threads on this forum that intermix reality with the game or the comic.

I think Rich should try some novels on the side. His writing is excellent and this comic is too limited to support it.
Is all of that your way of saying "Oh noes, Cerebus Syndrome (http://www.websnark.com/archives/2004/09/faq_lexicon.html)"?

[Calinero]

Redcloak is possibly the most complex character in the comic. He's a villain, but he's sympathetic--much more so than Xykon, or Nale. There are times when you agree with him, and then times like now, where you don't. I am a little disappointed in Redcloak at the moment. He's being hypocritical, slaughtering humans for no good reason, just like they do to goblins.

[The Wanderer]

Redcloak is possibly the most complex character in the comic. He's a villain, but he's sympathetic--much more so than Xykon, or Nale. There are times when you agree with him, and then times like now, where you don't. I am a little disappointed in Redcloak at the moment. He's being hypocritical, slaughtering humans for no good reason, just like they do to goblins.

A big ditto here. As has been said earlier I would consider the best ending one where Redcloak gets a chance to make peace, both with other races and himself, chucks the speciesism, etc. However he certainly has his flaws, and being too sure of his own beliefs/logic, too stubborn and too willing to throw away lives are among them.

He's gotten some great lines in the last few comics, but he's also doing some really dumb and horrifying things.

[Mewtarthio]

Yes, but that's what makes him a great character. This is Dominic Deegan, where everyone with a sob story in their past is really good and heart and totally redeemable. Redcloak is a complex villain. He's got understandable motives. He's even a little sympathetic. However, he's fallen to the dark side in the pursuit of his goals, and he's so far in that I think it'd be impossible for him to turn back.

[EBass]

Redcloak has always been my favorite character.

To be honest I was hoping for some shred of redemption possibility in the last two comics. I was hoping he'd tolerate the torture and exploitation of Slaves. I knew he would torture O'Chul, but I was hoping he woulden't take uneccesary pleasure in it.

I still don't think Redcloak is truly "evil" in any definition of the word I can accept.

But I think in the last few comics he's crossed the line, time will tell.

[Pronounceable]

What's all this talk with crossing the line? Xykon slaughtered a whole lot of paladins in the coolest way imaginable. People said he crossed the line. Belkar randomly killed a gnome, people said he crossed the line. Redcloak is destroying souls of a group of humans, people say he's crossing the line.

No, there's no crossing. They were already far other side of the line. They just recently got the chance to show it. There was one line crossing shown in the comic, and it was Miko.


Moral outlook has nothing to do with awesomeness. Keep showing support for the most awesomest goblin cleric ever!

[Silkenfist]

And to the readers who base their affection for a character solely on his or her moral grounds for their actions...I suggest Family Circus as more enjoyable literature.

[someonenonotyou]

the Family Circus is great literature! more enjoyable i don't know but close

redcloack is my favriote evil villan but recantly not so much exectp for his lines are good

[Devils_Advocate]

He's being hypocritical, slaughtering humans for no good reason, just like they do to goblins.
But, see, that's in no way out of character for him, nor inconsistent with what we've seen of him so far.

I don't think that Redcloak himself would say that he's objectively any better than his enemies. Redcloak isn't sympathetic because he's better than a lot of the humans he opposes, but because he isn't any worse, and yet life has pretty thoroughly crapped all over him and his people. That's just plain unfair, and thus offends one's sense of justice and evokes pity. Goblinoids are not the good guys in the grand scheme of things, but they are the underdogs.

Of course, right now, currently and locally, Redcloak and the hobgoblins are not the underdogs. The Resistance is the underdogs, a bunch of poorly-equipped, struggling rebels trying to free their people from horrible, cruel oppression. Redcloak is in a position of power, and is using that position of power to be an utter bastard to the now-underdogs he doesn't like. In that context, he becomes a lot less sympathetic.

[Renegade Paladin]

He's made more awesome by getting schooled by O-Chul in the ways of logic? How do you figure? :smalltongue:

[Pronounceable]

So long as he gets awesomer, how does not matter.

[Spiky]

Is all of that your way of saying "Oh noes, Cerebus Syndrome (http://www.websnark.com/archives/2004/09/faq_lexicon.html)"?

Not exactly. Redcloak is breaking out of the D&D mold, not our assumption of where the comic or character is or should be. I'm very happy to see complexity in character development. But he is already far too complex for a simple goblin, from my (admittedly poor) understanding of the species in this context.

[Sludge-o-matic]

Well, probably this growing complexity is associated with the fact that Reddie started as a mere sidekick of Xykon, but now he is playing badass. Heck, he even looks like the main villain right now!

[Devils_Advocate]

Not exactly. Redcloak is breaking out of the D&D mold, not our assumption of where the comic or character is or should be.
But from your comments, it seems very much like you assume that the character and the comic should remain in the D&D mold. You even mentioned "the D&D mold that ought to exist in OOTS."


I'm very happy to see complexity in character development. But he is already far too complex for a simple goblin, from my (admittedly poor) understanding of the species in this context.
So, wait, is Redcloak's complexity good or bad? You say that you're happy to see it, but that he's "too complex to fit." Meaning what, exactly? That because the comic employs a lot of stereotypical Dungeons & Dragons thingies, it ought to be constructed entirely of traditional D&D tropes, or at least ought not to stray too far from them?

Who ever said that Redcloak in particular was a simple goblin, or was meant to be?

"These guys are monsters. They are bad and mean." That's roughly the level of characterization that D&D has given to goblins and the "savage races." (http://www.goblindefensefund.org/history.html) But if you're talking about a race of intelligent beings with an actual culture and society, there has to be more to them than that. Any serious look at such creatures will necessarily involve some amount of deconstruction (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Deconstruction) of Always Chaotic Evil (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AlwaysChaoticEvil). It doesn't have to end with the conclusion "These dudes aren't any worse than you are, just different." It can instead take the track "These guys aren't just evil, because nothing is ever just anything, and evil isn't generic. They're evil in these particular ways for these specific reasons."

Even then, though, there's an implicit moral that while these guys may be bad people, they're still people. They have hopes and dreams and feelings and families and actual lives beyond the sense of mere animateness, lives that you're snuffing out when you barge into their village and exterminate them all because they've been raiding your village and killing "your people". Even learning how and why they're bad makes them more sympathetic to us, because it forces us to conceptualize them as people and not just faceless monsters, which moves them closer to our personal monkeyspheres (http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/monkeysphere.html). Just revealing personal things about bad guys -- giving them any meaningful detail at all -- practically forces us to care about them more... unless they're genuinely so inhuman that we don't recognize them as people, even bad ones.

[Kish]

Yes, this is the place to post this.

I might not have realized this if it weren't for a trilogy of books I read recently by one Jim C. Hines.

Redcloak interprets everything O'chul does in a negative way, and expects the human slaves to care only about their own lives...because to him, they're monsters. He views them the same way a stereotypical adventurer views goblins. If he was being tortured and his hobgoblins were being forced to watch, he'd expect them to be inspired by his resistance...but humans? He assumes they're petty, selfish, venal, and above all, simplistic.

[Callista]

is honor of a paladin breakable by possibility of having his soul destroyed?Nope. At least, not usually. Lots of paladins have willingly traded their souls for various things--usually the protection of innocents. I once played in a campaign in which we were trying to recover the souls of a couple of heroes (one of whom was a paladin); they had been killed and their souls captured by the BBEG, who happened to be a powerful devil. We eventually found out they'd gone into it knowingly, as part of a plan to recover about a 100-square-mile patch of the Prime Material that had somehow been drawn into the Nine Hells by the BBEG. Long story, but a cool one. Oh, and the other guy was a bard--CG, natch, which was kind of interesting because you can just imagine how an odd couple like that might work together!

Anyway, you wouldn't be a paladin if you're only the type to get into it because you'll get a good afterlife. If you were, you'd never be called in the first place.

[Pronounceable]

Redcloak interprets everything O'chul does in a negative way, and expects the human slaves to care only about their own lives...because to him, they're monsters. He views them the same way a stereotypical adventurer views goblins. If he was being tortured and his hobgoblins were being forced to watch, he'd expect them to be inspired by his resistance...but humans? He assumes they're petty, selfish, venal, and above all, simplistic.

This is something I hadn't noticed. It makes a lot of sense. Ironically, it makes Redcloak "more human". (you didn't think "being human" is made entirely of sugar, spice and everything nice, did you?)

Another +1 to awesome for Redcloak. What's it now, 352?

[Roderick_BR]

This is something I hadn't noticed. It makes a lot of sense. Ironically, it makes Redcloak "more human". (you didn't think "being human" is made entirely of sugar, spice and everything nice, did you?)

Another +1 to awesome for Redcloak. What's it now, 352?
Shouldn't underestimating human's capacity for actual good actually give him a -1?
Or yet, saying he's more human, and seeing as humans in general are nasty, etc, etc, shouldn't give him another -1? :smallbiggrin:

[Spiky]

So, wait, is Redcloak's complexity good or bad? You say that you're happy to see it, but that he's "too complex to fit." Meaning what, exactly? That because the comic employs a lot of stereotypical Dungeons & Dragons thingies, it ought to be constructed entirely of traditional D&D tropes, or at least ought not to stray too far from them?


Maybe I can't decide. Maybe I'm playing devil's advocate. I like complex stories and characters, but I'm not sure what is happening to OOTS.

I'm certainly not asking for frequent trope. But any story becomes difficult when it leaves its universe. If Star Trek suddenly has guys with light sabers in Movie #42 in a few years, that is stupid. Yet in Star Wars it is perfectly fine. See Highlander 2 for my (least) favorite example.

I am definitely starting to see a turn towards the characterization and other elements being too big for the platform that OOTS is standing on. And while that seems excellent for the story, I wonder what it means for the comic. Perhaps a little local prophecy can help explain? Maybe no one saw this as prophecy, but I think it has become so:
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0339.html

Oh, BTW, to say that the comic merely "employs...D&D thingies" is kinda not true, I'd say. It is 100% built in a D&D world, although obviously Rich takes liberties with specifics of magic, races and so forth that don't match to known gaming rules. But it clearly is in such a world, head to toe.

[Falconer]

He's made more awesome by getting schooled by O-Chul in the ways of logic? How do you figure? :smalltongue:

You see, in the process getting logic-schooled by O-Chul, O-Chul's inherent awesomeness rubbed off on Redcloak, adding to his already significant pile of badass. Do the math. :smallwink:

[Jawajoey]

I'm a big fan of Redcloak, have been for a long time. But these past few comics have been the first time when I felt disappointed in him.

His major foul up in triple-misunderstanding humans, as well as his revealed close-mindedness have really taken him down a few pegs, in my book. He's still awesome, and he's still a fantastic character, but my respect for his intellect has diminished slightly over the last few comics.

His big rookie mistakes:
-Being boggled by humans willfully ignoring important knowledge
-Characterizing human empathy for their own species as absent.
-Completely missing the target on the effect of bravery and martyrdom on human morale.
-Being completely 100% sure of himself (that alone is bad) especially after it was concisely and undeniably proven to him that his notion was at the very least worthy of some doubt.

He REALLY doesn't understand humans, yet makes very large judgments about them, and he's not quite the rational clear headed thinker I used to think he was.

[Remirach]

He REALLY doesn't understand humans, yet makes very large judgments about them, and he's not quite the rational clear headed thinker I used to think he was.
I actually kind of like seeing this blind spot of his... I liked the fact that O-Chul stunned him speechless. It didn't make him "more awesome," but it was a side of him I hadn't really seen before. And I think his behavior towards humans makes sense... Kish makes a very good point that he sees them just as humans see stereotypical monsters. Which makes sense: he doesn't have CONTACT with humans, generally. Either they're trying to kill him (or he them), and then there's Xykon -- his ally of 31 years (i.e. almost his entire adult life) and the one human he's had the most continual interaction with. Of COURSE his views are warped and incomplete when he's using XYKON as a base model for human behavior.

[pjackson]

Recloak is extremely LE, and always has been.
His recent actions have been in keeping with his character as revealed in SoD and elsewhere.

He had a chance of redemption in SoD but Xykon spoiled it.
He cares about other goblinoids to a certain extent, but not to the point of being unwilling to kill them should they get in the way of his god's plan.
As proved when he murdered his own brother.

He views life as a competition between species (as he told his brother).
He wants the goblinoids to be given a fair chance as he believes that then they would succeed and if they did not they would deserve to fail.
He is willing to destroy all mortal live in necessary to achieve that.

[Pronounceable]

Treating humans exactly as humans traditionally treat "monstrous" races is +1 to Redcloak's awesome. This is a rare attitude in fiction and should be noticed.


You see, in the process getting logic-schooled by O-Chul, O-Chul's inherent awesomeness rubbed off on Redcloak, adding to his already significant pile of badass.

And there's also that.