OOTS #545 - The Discussion Thread

[The Giant]

New comic is up.

Yesterday went pretty smoothly, but all warnings about the boards possibly getting taken down in the event of lag still remain in effect. On the plus side, it's Saturday.

[nimby]

At least now we know the Snarl isn't responsible for making the rifts bigger.


Poor nameless NPCs, though :(

[Emperor Ing]

He *cough cough cough* hehe. Those NPCs have a slightly diminished chance of possibly escaping from this alive.

[Shadowcaller]

Well this explains a lot.
Wonder what is going to happen to the first group?

[Max_Sinister]

*g* So Redcloak now knows the truth but doesn't believe it? Yes, that's him. Reminds me of an occasion in SoD where he thinks too complicated too.

[Yendor]

So... does O-chul actually know or did he make up by chance something that was really true?

[SPoD]

O-Chul absolutely does NOT know how Girard's Gate is defended; doing so would break Soon's Oath. I believe he made something up on the spot, based on what little he knew about Girard, and blew his Bluff check. He says as much in the last panel, when he admits that he's a bad liar because he made Charisma his dump stat.

[Bernemer]

So... does O-chul actually know or did he make up by chance something that was really true?

I guess it's similar to that paradoxon where "An Azurite says that every Azurite is a liar."

[Shadowcaller]

O-Chul absolutely does NOT know how Girard's Gate is defended; doing so would break Soon's Oath. I believe he made something up on the spot, based on what little he knew about Girard, and blew his Bluff check. He says as much in the last panel, when he admits that he's a bad liar because he made Charisma his dump stat.

Yeah thats what I think too, but his lie was suspiciously close to the truth...

[Bernemer]

O-Chul absolutely does NOT know how Girard's Gate is defended; doing so would break Soon's Oath. I believe he made something up on the spot, based on what little he knew about Girard, and blew his Bluff check. He says as much in the last panel, when he admits that he's a bad liar because he made Charisma his dump stat.

Actually, that might be a lie, to protect the made-up story, which by chance did happen to be true...

[SPoD]

Yeah thats what I think too, but his lie was suspiciously close to the truth...

How? We don't KNOW the truth. All we know are that illusions are involved. Every other detail is unknown, both to us, O-Chul, and Redcloak.

The fact that illusions were used is given by Shojo during his story, so it's probably common knowledge within the Sapphire Guard. The details--how to defeat it, what sort of illusion, etc.--this is what Redcloak needs, and O-Chul tried to make something up for it.

Remember, everyone knew that the Azure City gate was guarded by paladins; no one but Shojo and Hinjo knew it was guarded by the disembodied spirit of an epic level paladin. That is the sort of detail Redcloak is after, and O-Chul did not give it to him.

[Wyvern_55]

I'm starting to like this whole 'being awake at unreasonable hours thing' another fantastic comic Giant, good show!

[Duric]

I guess sacrificing captives is just as good as minions. But I do not think i solves this problem

[Kaelaroth]

Wonder what is going to happen to the control group?

Squish? :smalleek:

But, yaay Giant! Another great comic. :smallwink:

[Miklus]

I like Redcloak's take on the scientific method, especially the control group.

[Bag_of_Holding]

Fighter for 12 years?! Man, Fighter class is really popular in Ootsverse!

[Shadowcaller]

Originally Posted by Shadowcaller
Wonder what is going to happen to the first group?

Squish? :smalleek:

Yes but what kind of Squish?:smallwink:
The second group might still have a chance thought if Redclock realize that O-Chul dint know anything...or he just throw them in too for fun.

Edit:for the fact that they are now completely useless to him and he don't like humans that much? (hmm that sounded a bit too aggressive..)

[SoD]

I doubt Redcloak would throw them for fun...Xykon, yes, but not Redcloak. He'd have some other reason.

Congrats for getting two up in such rapid sucession Giant.

[Scutatus]

Ochul, being a Paladin of the city, does not know, because the paladins weren't privy to information about the other gates.

He is indeed being the worst lier in the world and just trying to save his city (and those people).

Also, he's making clear references to Indiana Jones (Especially the Last Crusade). So is that likely to be the truth? Very Funny. :D ;)

[Felixaar]

Wow. I believed O-Chul until I saw his expression there. Clearly I didnt put enough ranks in sense motive. Though he may be telling the truth, it seems unlikely giving his later comments. First Page

[dish]

So O-Chul is guessing, and Redcloak won't get any information from him, no matter how many scientific experiments he carries out.

This is getting even sadder.

(Though Redcloak would look great in safety goggles.)

[Catskin]

"The second group is the control group. We'll push them off the other side."

That's madness!

[Shadowcaller]

That's madness!

Madness? THIS IS AZURE CITY!

(sorry could not resist:smalltongue:)

[Rheb]

Great comic :smallsmile:

[Emperor Demonking]

I was shocked. First I thougfht we found out, then that joke. Brilliant.

[Lycar]

"The second group is the control group. We'll push them off the other side."

That's madness!

Ah but it is much worse then that. It is madness with a method!

Madness is just random but throw in a method and you have a guaranteed disaster.

Also, that is another reason why torture is totally useless as an interrogation method (if your goal is finding the truth at least). Your prisoner will tell you what you want to hear to make the pain stop. Whether this happens to be truth or fiction however, you can't reliably tell. Ever.

Hell, you could make the pope admit being satan in disguise with torture.

But another thing: If there are now only two more gates left and destroying the last one might cause the snarl to awaken and undo the Oots-verse, maybe that is what the overarching story ark is reaching for? The last gate gets destroyed, for whatever reason, and the world ends. End of story?

Lycar

[banjo1985]

Nice...I honestly believed O'Chuul there for a second.

I guess that says more for my Sense Motive check than it does for his Bluff Skill :smalleek:

[battleburn]

"I wonder if the remaining Gates somehow prevent it from noticing the unsealed rifts now?"

More proof that the MitD is part of the Snarl.

[Surfing HalfOrc]

Hurray for the Scientific Method!

"What, am I running a catch and release program here?"

Hmmm... Charisma as a dump stat... Was O-Chul once a PC?

[SPoD]

"I wonder if the remaining Gates somehow prevent it from noticing the unsealed rifts now?"

More proof that the MitD is part of the Snarl.

Wouldn't Redcloak then KNOW about it? He and Xykon have both seen the MitD without its darkness, I would think he wouldn't be so speculative if he had a piece of it next to him...nor would he be so dismissive of the MitD's abilities.

[Demonicbunny]

"The second group is the control group. We'll push them off the other side."

That's madness!

Madness? THIS IS SCIENCE!


He really does follow the basics for a scientific experiment, as expected of a highly intelligent character that summons Titanium Elementals.

Which makes me wonder, what is Redcloaks dumpstat? From what we've seen his intelligence is sky-high, and since he's a cleric the same goes for his Wisdom. Considering he was able to turn the unliving paladins his charisma probably isn't too shabby either, and given his ability to endure the Hobgoblin initiation trials his Con is probably not too shabby either.
That leaves dexterity and strength. Considering that some of the most powerful cleric spells rely on touch attacks I don't think it's his strength.
So Dexterity?
Anyone want to give a try at determining the original stats for Redcloak?

[Tundar]

Hahahaha, oh that was brilliant.
Especially the last 3-4 frames :smallbiggrin:

[aapje]

Hehe go control group! :smalltongue:

[raekuul]

Well, we haven't actually seen Redcloak in melee combat yet, but for a caster of his caliber I'd bet on Dexterity as the dump stat.

Or maybe he rolled 4d6 six times, and got a buncha 17's and 18's?

[Remirach]

Nice info on the Snarl -- I wonder if Redcloak's hypothesis is correct that the Snarl doesn't "realize" that it's no longer sealed up by all five gates as long as any single one is still standing?

Could Redcloak's little "experiment" make the Snarl "wake up" and start acting out and grabbing people at random in the city now? I'd say that sounds really risky, but compared to Redcloak's overall plan...

Could O-Chul's captivity have something to do with why the Resistance hasn't been crushed? They WANT O-Chul to have some hope that Azure City could be free again, if only the likes of Xykon and his most powerful minions were gone? Haley seemed to think it was weird (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0527.html) they hadn't been destroyed...

How can there BE a "next time" Redcloak speaks of -- if there are no players to re-roll a new PC?

[Aquillion]

Fighter for 12 years?! Man, Fighter class is really popular in Ootsverse!Yes, but it was probably before the game started, so he only has two levels.

[Blaznak]

Blah blah blah. Lets see someone eaten by an acid-templated shark. I mean, when's that ever going to happen in this strip! :)

[Tempest Fennac]

In regards to RC (you may want to check the thread which speculates what the character's stats are): it's assumed he has at least 20 for Wis from the 12 God's High priest battle, his Cha is at least 12 from his turnings, Int is probably high but we have no concrete evidence, and his Str is probably rubbish (he doesn't even carry a melee weapon, and I'm tempted to assume his a Cloistered Cleric due to his lack of heavy armour and the fact that he seems to have a lot of Knowledge ranks.

[Roc Ness]

Fighter for 12 years?! Man, Fighter class is really popular in Ootsverse!

Yeah it is isn't it? :smallconfused:

But I suppose that is just common sense, where you do what you're good at. When I played a pen and pencil RPG a friend made up (good times), I always appeared the strongest in a group of mages, even though some had higher stats.

Why? Because I used spells! :smallbiggrin:

[dogmac]

O'Chul, O'Chul, you'll always have charisma for me..

However, I am a lousy liar too.

I'm also very worried that the snarl will suddenly expand leaving a very quick retreat by our evil friends. They might even lose their army.

MITD, don't leave Mr Stiffly behind

[Tal9922]

I'm not sure i understand what a Control Group is.

[SPoD]

I'm not sure i understand what a Control Group is.

Scientific controls (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_control), from Wikipedia.

Redcloak is going to push one group into the rift, and push the other into the pavement, to make sure that any information he gets from the rift group isn't just something that always happens when you push a group of humans off a tower.

[factotum]

Hmmm... Charisma as a dump stat... Was O-Chul once a PC?

Don't see why the two are linked. The Linear Guild aren't PCs and yet we know that Thog took Intelligence as a dump stat, so having a dump stat does not make you a PC--in fact, given how badly optimised the PCs are in OotS, the opposite seems to be true!

Anyway, Redcloak may not derive amusement from the death of all those humans in the same way that Xykon would, but I doubt he's going to shed any tears for them either. Not only will his "experiment" possibly yield some useful information about the Snarl, but it'll mean there are sixteen less humans in the world...literally kills two birds with one stone as far as Redcloak is concerned.

[Estelindis]

Thanks for the quick update, Giant!

This continues to get more and more depressing. Not that the jokes aren't amusing - they remain good - but it's just so horrible to contemplate the fates of those poor NPCs. :smallfrown:

I wonder if O-Chul will try to convince Redcloak that he doesn't know anything in the instants before the people get thrown off? I mean, if his bluff score is terrible, Redcloak will know he isn't lying... Yet it may be that the Giant wants us to see people being consumed by the Snarl for narrative purposes, so maybe there's no saving them from being sacrificed to that darkest god, Plot... :smallfrown: After all, Redcloak probably isn't doing this solely to get at O-Chul. Maybe he wants to glean the information for himself in its own right. Maybe he would have thrown them off even if O-Chul had known something useful and told him! Gah, this is so depressing...

[Remirach]

Not only will his "experiment" possibly yield some useful information about the Snarl, but it'll mean there are sixteen less humans in the world...literally kills two birds with one stone as far as Redcloak is concerned.
14 less fewer humans. Group 2 has 6 humans, Group 1 has 8.

[Mojique]

New comic is up.
What a nice surprise... without warning :smallbiggrin:

[Tawkis]

I think O-Chul may be telling the truth, but he knew that RedCloak wouldn't believe him.
Being a paladin wouldn't make O-Chul forget things he may have learned while being a fighter. It's entirely possible that he learned about the gates on his own and then joined the sapphire guard later. :smallsmile:

[Proteus]

Oh, Redcloak. Torture + Science = best villain ever.

[BURNhollywoodBURN]

:mad:
Nice try, though.
Also, I'm starting to like Redcloak a lot more. At first he seemed kinda, sorta, funny as Xykon's sidekick, I started to love him as the leader of the Hobgoblins, I began to hate him during the Azure City war plotline, but now he's getting kinda better. I guess he's a bit iffy in my book.

[otakuryoga]

YAY!!!

Get ready boys and girls......its time for another EXCITING episode of.......
The Amazing Murderous Science Guy!!!!!

[Stallogarro]

Hmmm... Charisma as a dump stat... Was O-Chul once a PC?

Hmm, ex-fighter, Charisma as dump stat... cough coughMUNCHKINcough... :smallwink:

[DeadmanXI]

O-Chul absolutely does NOT know how Girard's Gate is defended; doing so would break Soon's Oath. I believe he made something up on the spot, based on what little he knew about Girard, and blew his Bluff check. He says as much in the last panel, when he admits that he's a bad liar because he made Charisma his dump stat.

Wait...what? I haven't read the archives in a little while so I might be mistaken, but I remember nothing forbidding the Sapphire Guard from knowing about the other gates, only actually interfering with them in any way.

And he might be ling about being a bad liar. A Paladin with Charisma as his dump stat? He makes it sound likely, but it is a bit odd, isn't it?

[Moriarty]

Wait...what? I haven't read the archives in a little while so I might be mistaken, but I remember nothing forbidding the Sapphire Guard from knowing about the other gates, only actually interfering with them in any way.



how are they supposed to learn anything besides the stuff Soon told them, if they aren't allowed to search for the gates?

everything Hinjo/Shojo knew/knows he learned from Soon, and everything xykon knows he read in the halflings diary, so O-chul probably even knows less about the gates than RC :/

[DeadmanXI]

how are they supposed to learn anything besides the stuff Soon told them, if they aren't allowed to search for the gates?

everything Hinjo/Shojo knew/knows he learned from Soon, and everything xykon knows he read in the halflings diary, so O-chul probably even knows less about the gates than RC :/

Everything O-chul just said is almost verbatim from Shojo's speech on the Gates, with just a little expansion. So he knows however Shojo did (likely from Soon, he picked paladins as guardians knowing what the others were doing).

[SPoD]

Wait...what? I haven't read the archives in a little while so I might be mistaken, but I remember nothing forbidding the Sapphire Guard from knowing about the other gates, only actually interfering with them in any way.

I guess technically you may be correct, but Soon's Oath extends back to the point from before the Sapphire Guard was founded. All of Girard's defenses were developed AFTER the Oath existed. Therefore, how could he possibly have learned about its defenses if everyone was forbidden to seek them out? If they didn't keep in touch, what way would there have been for O-Chul to learn? Also, the Sapphire Guard didn't know why Dorukan would put a self-destruct rune on his Gate, further implying that they had no idea what was going on in the Redmountain Hills.

So yes, I guess it wouldn't break the oath to KNOW something, but it would have broken the oath to go out and LEARN something, which is practically the same thing.


Everything O-chul just said is almost verbatim from Shojo's speech on the Gates, with just a little expansion. So he knows however Shojo did (likely from Soon, he picked paladins as guardians knowing what the others were doing).

Soon knew the broad strokes, sure, but there's no evidence that he knew anything other than "illusions". Which is not hard to puzzle out if one of your party members is an illusionist. Redcloak is looking for details and secret answers, which O-Chul certainly does not have considering that Girard started guarding his gate 60 years ago and had all of that time to refine his defenses.

[DeadmanXI]

I guess technically you may be correct, but Soon's Oath extends back to the point from before the Sapphire Guard was founded. All of Girard's defenses were developed AFTER the Oath existed. Therefore, how could he possibly have learned about its defenses if everyone was forbidden to seek them out? If they didn't keep in touch, what way would there have been for O-Chul to learn? Also, the Sapphire Guard didn't know why Dorukan would put a self-destruct rune on his Gate, further implying that they had no idea what was going on in the Redmountain Hills.

So yes, I guess it wouldn't break the oath to KNOW something, but it would have broken the oath to go out and LEARN something, which is practically the same thing.

I repeat: Shojo made a speech, as part of a show trial for the Paladins benefit, and thus presumably in front of them, imparting "the Secret Lore of the Sapphire Guard" to the OotS. This information was included.

See this comic: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0277.html


Soon knew the broad strokes, sure, but there's no evidence that he knew anything other than "illusions". Which is not hard to puzzle out if one of your party members is an illusionist. Redcloak is looking for details and secret answers, which O-Chul certainly does not have considering that Girard started guarding his gate 60 years ago and had all of that time to refine his defenses.

Oh, I'm not arguing he has any more information than he just gave, just that he had that much. O-chul really doesn't have most of what Redcloak's looking for, and just delivered what he did have in a way that will not be believed.

[BobTheFerret]

I read this as a critical Sense Motive fail on Redcloak's part. As has been mentioned, Shojo knew this much about Girard's gate; hence O-Chul is as close to the truth as he possibly can, as surely he'd heard the story as well. Of course, having just told the truth, he's going to bluff Redcloak into thinking that he's lying.

[HOLEkevin]

LOL! I managed to completely not see that coming! Redcloak is my hero.

[SPoD]

I repeat: Shojo made a speech, as part of a show trial for the Paladins benefit, and thus presumably in front of them, imparting "the Secret Lore of the Sapphire Guard" to the OotS. This information was included.

See this comic: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0277.html

Only the fact that illusions were used is mentioned by Shojo. The existence of riddles, and the fact that those riddles are answered in the diary is NOT. That is the part that is a lie, that Redcloak saw through.


Oh, I'm not arguing he has any more information than he just gave, just that he had that much. O-chul really doesn't have most of what Redcloak's looking for, and just delivered what he did have in a way that will not be believed.

And I'm arguing that the fact that there were illusions involved is essentially common knowledge, and Redcloak is looking for more details. And O-Chul just made them up, and Redcloak knew it.

Specifically: I am saying that there are no riddles. It is not O-Chul delivering the truth and not being believed, or tricking Redcloak into thinking that the truth is a lie, it is a fabrication that he essentially admits to in the last panel.

[Fitzclowningham]

O'Chul spent 12 years as a fighter, not bound by Soon's Oath. He may have done a fair bit of adventuring, and learned all sorts of things. Maybe Shojo even recruited him to keep him quiet. In any case, we have no idea what he knows and what he doesn't.

Re: Redcloak's stats, I'd say he has exellent IN and CHR, on top of maxxed Wis. He's smarter than Xykon (arguable, but very reasonable, imho), and he has the undying loyalty of the hobbos in his Supreme Leader role. The latter is particularly impressive, given the natural disdain they have for goblins.

[Holammer]

How did O-chul know about the diary tho? Him and Redcloak must be really chummy between torture sessions. But evil villains are always blabbermouths I guess.

[Sir_Elderberry]

Wouldn't Redcloak then KNOW about it? He and Xykon have both seen the MitD without its darkness, I would think he wouldn't be so speculative if he had a piece of it next to him...nor would he be so dismissive of the MitD's abilities.

Maybe the snarl can disguise itself? Maybe it's using Redcloak and Xykon for its own gain, and so is deceiving them?

[Thufir]

I think we can be pretty sure the Sapphire Guard didn't know there was information about the Gates in Serini's diary, so the part about it containing the answers to the riddles (Which O-Cul probably made up as well) is clearly a lie, created to make Redcloak believe he had all the information he needed so he would immediately leave with no further torture or questions.

[Tempest Fennac]

That is a possibility, Sir_Elderberry. Admittedly, the concensus seems to be that The Snarl is pure chaos rather then a sentinant being, so it isn't likely to be intelligent enough to plot against Xykon and RC (especially when you consider how it got trapped in the first place).

[Faltenin]

Really nice comic - the control group really was a cool idea :smallsmile:

I find most of the comments above slightly contradictory. Nearly everyone agrees Redcloak is extremely intelligent and wise, but then nearly everyone presumes that it's "obvious" that O'Chul knows nothing of the other gate protection. If Redcloak is so clever, why is he wasting time torturing the paladin?

A few answers include: because he's looking for something to do while he waits for Xykon, he likes to expose his experiments to named NPCs, O'Chul has given him reason to believe he knew something...

Of course there's another possible reason, that torturing him so obviously (in plain sight, while throwing around experiment groups) might attract a rescuer PC who would definitely know more info...:smallwink:

[Eldariel]

If Cha was O-Chul's dump stat, his Smite Evils aren't very scary.

[Tempest Fennac]

That's an interesting point. I assumed he was torturing O'Chul due to being convinced that he would know something about the gates and that he was in denial when O'Chul (presumably) said he didn't initially.

[Fighteer]

Maybe the snarl can disguise itself? Maybe it's using Redcloak and Xykon for its own gain, and so is deceiving them?
Nah, the Snarl is a being of primal chaos. It has no understanding of things like deception. It is incapable of interacting with intelligent beings in any meaningful sense.

[SteveMB]

How did O-chul know about the diary tho? Him and Redcloak must be really chummy between torture sessions. But evil villains are always blabbermouths I guess.

Maybe Redcloak showed him the diary (figuring that he was never going to have a chance to reveal it to anyone else) and tried to make him explain some passage.

[Sir_Elderberry]

While it's probably true that our current knowledge of snarl doesn't lend to him crafting great plots, this comic certainly very strongly hints at the possibility. Meta-comic-ing perhaps tells us that Rich is playing with us and it's a red herring, but is there not also a possibility that Snarl has somehow become intelligent? The fact is, dealing with cosmic beings in a universe that runs on magic and comedy is probably not the most predictable thing in the world, so judgment might just have to wait until he becomes the monster out of the dark, if ever.

[fractal]

If Cha was O-Chul's dump stat, his Smite Evils aren't very scary.
Charisma only determines the bonus to hit. The bonus damage from Smite Evil depends upon Paladin level. Not, mind you, that +10 damage or so (the most O-Chul is likely to have, given his Fighter levels) is terribly scary to someone like Xykon or Redcloak.

[curtis]

Note that in the big panel, there is a tower with a bunch of figures on it on the other side of the rift. My money says that next strip, Redcloak threatens to throw a human into the rift for every time O-Chul lies to him.

This was pretty close.

This could go very bad, very fast. I would get off that roof if I were RC.

[Darakonis]

It is against the Paladin code of conduct to lie. So either O'Chul just lost his Paladin powers (unlikely) or he believed he was telling the truth.

Some may argue that under extreme circumstances, a Paladin can lie, if he has no other choice, and if it is for the greater good.

However, this is not the case, here. O'Chul could have easily played the Paladin card: "I do not know how the Gate is protected - you must believe me, for I am a Paladin, and would not lie to you, especially if this lie would mean you would kill all those innocents."

In truth, the very fact that O'Chul knows his Bluff is terrible would imply that trying to bluff is tantamount to killing those innocents himself.

[Alsadius]

What happened seemed pretty obvious to me. Shojo explained the Snarl, Girard's Gate, and all that stuff to the OOTS alone, with nobody else present. O-Chul doesn't know crap, he's just coming up with stuff to try to save those people. By coincidence, he happened to come up with the right answer, but because he believes himself to be fabricating it all, then a Sense Motive claims he's lying, and because Cha is his dump stat, Redcloak can tell.

And Redcloak never ceases to impress me. I've liked him a lot as a character ever since I read Start of Darkness(which, incidentally, was one of the best books I've ever read), but this is one of the better implementations of a controlled experiment I've seen.

[Szilard]

This is the kind of villain I like to see, truly evil and absorbed in his cause.

[hamishspence]

Vile Darkness says lying can be non-evil, in rare cases, but still against code of conduct: Act with Honor: do not lie, cheat, steal.

Big question is, will there be a rumbling and a beige-ifying of O-chul? or does paladin class in OOTS use slightly modified code, especially for Sapphire Guard, as a lot of us surmise?

[pjackson]

Lying to try to save the lives of others is a chaotic act, but not an evil one.
So though it is against the code, it would not cause a paladin to fall on its own.
No modification of the code is needed.

[Pyro]

I just love the effects for the Snarl tear. The washed out effect looks absolutely amazing. Did you put a large sheet of semitransparent geometry over the comic to achieve that affect?

[Porthos]

It is against the Paladin code of conduct to lie. So either O'Chul just lost his Paladin powers (unlikely) or he believed he was telling the truth.

Some may argue that under extreme circumstances, a Paladin can lie, if he has no other choice, and if it is for the greater good.

However, this is not the case, here. O'Chul could have easily played the Paladin card: "I do not know how the Gate is protected - you must believe me, for I am a Paladin, and would not lie to you, especially if this lie would mean you would kill all those innocents."

In truth, the very fact that O'Chul knows his Bluff is terrible would imply that trying to bluff is tantamount to killing those innocents himself.

I was wondering how long it would take someone to bring this up.

How do you know that the "It's OK to lie to protect the Gates" isn't part of the Sapphire Guard Oath? I mean, Rule Zero and all that. :smallamused:

[hamishspence]

committing an act aginst the code: you say it would not cause a paladin to fall.

In some supplements, would only cause a minor, temporary penalty to to paladin.

However in 3.5 PHB, any gross violation of the Code causes a fall, whether act was evil or not.

That is what DMs have to determine: whether act is a minor violation or a gross violation, which tends to cause a lot of arguing. Some DMs define any violation as gross, causing a fall. Some people say only evil acts can cause a fall. Stealing from a villain to aid forces of good (hide in shadows, pick pocket to get jail key, rescue wrongly imprisoned characters) might count as a gross violation of code, even if intentions were good.

Changing alignment counts as a Fall. Theoretically, a paladin who acts chaotic enough, without actually breaking the code, by constantly being whimsical and relying on luck to guide his way, would fall despite never breaking the code or committing an evil act.

I do agree that really minor violations, non-evil ones, carried out for unselfish reasons, directed at extremely evil adversaries, should never count as gross enough to cause a Fall. However by game rules it could go either way: one DM's pecadillo is anothers Gross Violation.

For example people might roll cheating and stealing into the list, and say Qui-Gons tiny cheat on dice roll with Watto, because it was for unselfish reasons, would be a non-evil act, and a non-gross violation: only a minor one.

[Porthos]

About "Gross Violations":

We've already seen that The Twelve Gods directly take away the power of Sapphire Guardsmen. And we've already seen the SG committ.... questionable acts.... in Start of Darkness and skate unharmed.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the Twelve Gods have decided that it's a-ok to tell a minor fib now and again when the entire multiverse is at stake. :smalltongue:

[Darakonis]

Lying to try to save the lives of others is a chaotic act, but not an evil one.
So though it is against the code, it would not cause a paladin to fall on its own.
No modification of the code is needed.

How do you know that the "It's OK to lie to protect the Gates" isn't part of the Sapphire Guard Oath? I mean, Rule Zero and all that.
As I said previously,

Some may argue that under extreme circumstances, a Paladin can lie, if he has no other choice, and if it is for the greater good.

However, this is not the case, here. O'Chul could have easily played the Paladin card: "I do not know how the Gate is protected - you must believe me, for I am a Paladin, and would not lie to you, especially if this lie would mean you would kill all those innocents."

In truth, the very fact that O'Chul knows his Bluff is terrible would imply that trying to bluff is tantamount to killing those innocents himself.
O-Chul lying to Redcloak would be not only ridiculously stupid on his part, knowing how bad he is at lying, but it would further suggest that O-Chul is so shortsighted that he would not realize that his lie would cause the deaths of those innocents.

It is not the lie that would cause him to fall, but rather the intentions and beliefs behind it. If O-Chul was fairly confident he could bluff RC, then fine, I could let that pass. But he clearly stated that Cha was his dump stat.

[Porthos]

As I said previously,

O-Chul lying to Redcloak would be not only ridiculously stupid on his part, knowing how bad he is at lying, but it would further suggest that O-Chul is so shortsighted that he would not realize that his lie would cause the deaths of those innocents.

It is not the lie that would cause him to fall, but rather the intentions and beliefs behind it. If O-Chul was fairly confident he could bluff RC, then fine, I could let that pass. But he clearly stated that Cha was his dump stat.

Oh O-Chul knew it was risky. But there's always the chance of rolling a Nat 20. :smallwink:

Besides, the quote you attempted to put in his mouth probably wouldn't have worked either. Redcloak would have simply said, "Well I really can't take that chance. Let's see if you're right or not," and hurl them in. So O-Chul decided to go for broke. It just didn't work.

Mind you, if the next strip shows O-Chul in beige underwear, I'll concede your point. But if it doesn't then we has readers have two options:

Option A) Moan and complain that Rich is ignoring the rules of DnD (like he's never done that before).

or

Option B) Try to figure out why O-Chul didn't Fall.

I know which one I'd rather do. :smallamused:

[Darakonis]

I haven't ruled out the possibility of O-Chul believing he was telling RC the truth (or at least some of the truth).

[Timberboar]

Nah, the Snarl is a being of primal chaos. It has no understanding of things like deception. It is incapable of interacting with intelligent beings in any meaningful sense.

Well, sure, YESTERDAY. But that's the thing about a being of primal chaos, isn't it?

*cough*/forrestgump
"Momma always said a being of primal chaos is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're gonna get."

"I'm not a smart man, Jenny, but I know what chaos is."

:D

[shylocxs]

Wow! Who would have thought that the scientific method would be such a great source for humor!

[Moriarty]

However, this is not the case, here. O'Chul could have easily played the Paladin card: "I do not know how the Gate is protected - you must believe me, for I am a Paladin, and would not lie to you, especially if this lie would mean you would kill all those innocents."

RC tortured O-chul for months, if he would believe O-chul doesn't know how the gate is protected, he would have killed him already






Mind you, if the next strip shows O-Chul in beige underwear, I'll concede your point. But if it doesn't then we has readers have two options:

Option A) Moan and complain that Rich is ignoring the rules of DnD (like he's never done that before).

or

Option B) Try to figure out why O-Chul didn't Fall.

I know which one I'd rather do. :smallamused:


why should O-chul fall?

even if he's lying, a paladin doesn't fall if he was forced to act the way he did.
O-chul tried to safe the lives of those humans, and trying to lie to RC was the best plan he could think of.

[walkerhound]

Also, that is another reason why torture is totally useless as an interrogation method (if your goal is finding the truth at least). Your prisoner will tell you what you want to hear to make the pain stop. Whether this happens to be truth or fiction however, you can't reliably tell. Ever.
Lycar


. hummm not really. Historically speaking coercion is how you get people to tell ya what they don't want to (torture basically being a word used to mean "form of coercion deemed unacceptable from a moral or legal stand point"). Red clock’s real problem here is that he's really starting behind the eight ball in terms of info (well as far as we know any way) to be successfully integrating O-chel.

1. Dose he have any questions that he already knows the answer to? A good way to gage how well the 'em softening up is going.

2. What secondary sources of info dose he have to compare with what he get's out of O-chel? Dose he even have any other high lvl paladins to question?

3.and off course his subject is a baaaaddddasss paladin that will be vary difficult to brake:smallbiggrin:


.

[hamishspence]

triple post above, scale it down please.

A paladin SHOULDN'T fall for lying to bad guys for unselfish reasons. But by RAW lying is enough to endanger his abilities.

A logical call would be that only lying for selfish reasons is a gross violation, even if lie is a very small one causing minimal harm.

By contrast, in this case, lie is for unselfish reasons, in order to prevent harm.

Simplest would be to say that DM fiat defines violation as too minor to worry about. It is within the purview of a DM to say it is not serious enough to be a gross violation.

[Darakonis]

O-chul tried to safe the lives of those humans, and trying to lie to RC was the best plan he could think of.
I think O-Chul is smart enough to come up with a better plan than that. That's why I believe he was telling some truth.

Maybe he doesn't really know the answer, but he has a general idea. Who knows. It is quite easy to spin something in such a way that you are not lying, but not telling the entire truth.

ie:

"Hey, I thought you said you graduated from college?"

"Well, I did... clown college."

[Solara]

So if Redcloak now knows that O'chul is the world's worst liar, I wonder if he's ever going to click to the fact that all those times before when he presumably claimed he didn't know anything about the other gates, he must have been telling the truth...

[the_tick_rules]

boy the paladin was lying, i did not see that one coming as i read the strip, good job giant.

[Midnight Lurker]

Redcloak has officially dropped off the "sympathetic villains" list for me. :smallfurious:

As far as I'm concerned, there can be no act more evil than the deliberate destruction of even a single immortal soul. The destruction of the physical universe would run second to that, as long as everyone in it got to their duly designated afterlives.

[Scribble]

Well.. that answers my question from last update about what all those guys were doing on the other side.

[ChaoticEvilGuy]

oh gods...
but anyway, I thought Girards gate was guarded by powerful illusions. Shojo explained that in strip #277. However I think O-Chul lied about the dungeon and the magical word.

[Solara]

Redcloak has officially dropped off the "sympathetic villains" list for me. :smallfurious:

As far as I'm concerned, there can be no act more evil than the deliberate destruction of even a single immortal soul. The destruction of the physical universe would run second to that, as long as everyone in it got to their duly designated afterlives.

Yeah, I know what you mean. I know it's a long shot but I'm really praying here that something happens to change his mind or it turns out he was just bluffing or whatever. Redcloak has always been one of my favorite characters and I've been especially sympathetic of him after reading SoD...watching him do this would break my heart and make him a thousand times more evil than Xykon in my eyes, and that is NOT the direction I want to see his character take. (though either way I know the Giant knows what he's doing and whatever happens will be awesome...)

[HUMVEE Driver]

Quite simply, I believe O-chul was telling the truth. Every single thing he has ever said is the truth, including admitting he thought CHA would be a good dump stat. He knew Redcloak wouldn't believe him, because he knows that is the way evil bad guys think. I say, well done, O-chul. No way is he lying, or fallen. Its not O-chul's fault Redcloak doesn't believe him.

O-chul misled Redcloak by telling him the truth.

[Porthos]

Redcloak has officially dropped off the "sympathetic villains" list for me. :smallfurious:

As far as I'm concerned, there can be no act more evil than the deliberate destruction of even a single immortal soul. The destruction of the physical universe would run second to that, as long as everyone in it got to their duly designated afterlives.


Yeah, I know what you mean. I know it's a long shot but I'm really praying here that something happens to change his mind or it turns out he was just bluffing or whatever. Redcloak has always been one of my favorite characters and I've been especially sympathetic of him after reading SoD...watching him do this would break my heart and make him a thousand times more evil than Xykon in my eyes, and that is NOT the direction I want to see his character take. (though either way I know the Giant knows what he's doing and whatever happens will be awesome...)

I'm sightly confused why both of you are surprised and disheartened at this development. We already know from SoD that Redcloak is well aware that his plan has a high likelyhood of destroying the soul of every single person in the world. Yet he views that as an acceptable risk, and has said as much.

This is, to use the scientific analogoy, just him deciding to take theory and turn it to application.

In other words why is it surprising to see someone who is willing to risk the immortal souls of millions of sentients actually destroy a few? Now maybe Redcloak will turn back from the brink in the next comic. But, given everything that happened in SoD and the main comic, I would actually find that a tad surprising. All things considered.

[Forealms]

O-Chul absolutely does NOT know how Girard's Gate is defended; doing so would break Soon's Oath. I believe he made something up on the spot, based on what little he knew about Girard, and blew his Bluff check. He says as much in the last panel, when he admits that he's a bad liar because he made Charisma his dump stat.

He didn't say he was a bad liar, per se. He said he had a low Charisma. And Soon's Oath would probably not apply in the situation that tens of thousands of lives are at stake if O-Chul says nothing. I think O-chul truly was trying to convince Redcloak, but his low Charisma stopped him from being believed.

[Darakonis]

Quite simply, I believe O-chul was telling the truth. Every single thing he has ever said is the truth, including admitting he thought CHA would be a good dump stat. He knew Redcloak wouldn't believe him, because he knows that is the way evil bad guys think. I say, well done, O-chul. No way is he lying, or fallen. Its not O-chul's fault Redcloak doesn't believe him.

O-chul misled Redcloak by telling him the truth.
I like this theory.
+1

[factotum]

I like this theory.
+1

I don't. Why would Redcloak say O-Chul was lying when he isn't? Furthermore, why would O-Chul then just more-or-less agree by saying Charisma is his dump stat, rather than protesting that he's telling the truth? That would be tantamount to just standing there and letting Redcloak kill the guys on the tower, which is not really Paladin-ish behaviour.

[Midnight Lurker]

I'm sightly confused why both of you are surprised and disheartened at this development. We already know from SoD that Redcloak is well aware that his plan has a high likelyhood of destroying the soul of every single person in the world. Yet he views that as an acceptable risk, and has said as much.You know that from SoD. I haven't read it yet. :smallamused:

[Morgan Wick]

Don't see why the two are linked. The Linear Guild aren't PCs and yet we know that Thog took Intelligence as a dump stat, so having a dump stat does not make you a PC--in fact, given how badly optimised the PCs are in OotS, the opposite seems to be true!

I interpreted the post you responded to as referring specifically to Charisma as a dump stat. And it's entirely possible that what O'Chul tells Redcloak here has only the illusions in common with the truth...


I repeat: Shojo made a speech, as part of a show trial for the Paladins benefit, and thus presumably in front of them, imparting "the Secret Lore of the Sapphire Guard" to the OotS. This information was included.

See this comic: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0277.html

You know, if the person you're responding to responds to this very point right after the part you quote now, it's kinda pointless to repeat it... you woulda been better off responding to the whole post at once.


Of course there's another possible reason, that torturing him so obviously (in plain sight, while throwing around experiment groups) might attract a rescuer PC who would definitely know more info...:smallwink:

Are you suggesting we might see the newly unified resistance in the next couple of strips...?


I don't. Why would Redcloak say O-Chul was lying when he isn't?

For Rich to mislead us?


Furthermore, why would O-Chul then just more-or-less agree by saying Charisma is his dump stat, rather than protesting that he's telling the truth? That would be tantamount to just standing there and letting Redcloak kill the guys on the tower, which is not really Paladin-ish behaviour.

Well, it's not the threat of the innocents getting killed that seems to get O'Chul to... say what he says, it's the idea that once he did, Azure City would be free. Of course, the threat of the innocents getting killed DOES serve to push him closer to the edge...

[Darakonis]

I don't. Why would Redcloak say O-Chul was lying when he isn't? Furthermore, why would O-Chul then just more-or-less agree by saying Charisma is his dump stat, rather than protesting that he's telling the truth? That would be tantamount to just standing there and letting Redcloak kill the guys on the tower, which is not really Paladin-ish behaviour.
RC may simply believe O-Chul was lying, for whatever reason. What's so hard to believe there?
O-Chul saw that RC didn't believe him, and decided not to disprove him. O-Chul did not lie by saying Cha was his dump stat.
RC has not killed anyone yet; mere seconds have elapsed. We don't know what O-Chul will do or say in the next comic page in which he will appear.

[The Wanderer]

It is against the Paladin code of conduct to lie. So either O'Chul just lost his Paladin powers (unlikely) or he believed he was telling the truth.

Some may argue that under extreme circumstances, a Paladin can lie, if he has no other choice, and if it is for the greater good.

However, this is not the case, here. O'Chul could have easily played the Paladin card: "I do not know how the Gate is protected - you must believe me, for I am a Paladin, and would not lie to you, especially if this lie would mean you would kill all those innocents."

In truth, the very fact that O'Chul knows his Bluff is terrible would imply that trying to bluff is tantamount to killing those innocents himself.

Or, y'know, Rich's paladins could be different from standard paladins. The same way his mechanics have differed from standard D&D mechanics hundreds of times and the same way (SOD spoiler)

Azure City paladins could get away with the slaughter of children and the elderly who are not attacking them in the course of a mission without falling

If Redcloak is still torturing O-Chul after four months, then logically speaking if O-Chul had that card to play he would have done it at some point. Furthermore, if paladins can lie or keep back the truth, O-Chul has every right to make the utilitarian argument that committing one small misdeed in order to safeguard the rest of the world, possibly the universe is justified and the right thing to do.

Short breakdown: if O-Chul can't lie, then Redcloak must be entirely ignorant of this fact or not believe this to be true. Furthermore, O-Chul must violated the oath of the Sapphire Guard and somehow obtained secret knowledge of the other Gates that they were sworn not to obtain or interfere with. So he's not a liar now, but he did violate an honor bound vow that is central to his order and practiced deception to do so without falling or being penalized in any way.

OR

O-Chul can lie when it serves the greater good. Which he just tried to do. And he got caught.

To me, there isn't even a sliver of doubt that it's the latter. And anyone who would make someone fall for telling a lie that is an attempt to save the lives of dozens of people immediately and perhaps the entire universe in the long term doesn't know a single thing about what real good is, or about moral dilemmas.

[Fitzclowningham]

Ninja'ed by HUMVEE Driver. If O-Chul convinces Redcloak that Girard's Gate isn't in a maze, isn't protected by illusions, and that access to it isn't via riddle answers from the diary, then Team Evil will arrive there unprepared for the challenge, and their chances of succeeding drop. If he can do it by telling the truth (unconvincingly, it appears), then double bonus.

IMO, Redcloak was bullsh*tting when he said he'd be leaving the city in the hands of common hobgoblins. Basically, that would amount to hanging them out to dry, and the high priest of all goblinkind is just not in that business. I'm guessing he'll treat AC the same way he's planning to treat O-Chul: once he gets what he needs from it, he kills it, that is, burns it to the ground, and takes the hobbos with him on his way out.

I think O-Chul knows what the score is, and his main goal at this point is to save the universe and all the souls in it. The humans on the tower are a red herring.

[silvadel]

Here is my take on it:

Ochul KNEW about Girards Gate from the years he was a fighter not because of being an azure guard -- and actually that he KNEW that info was probably tantamount in the decision of him being chosen.

What he told was the complete truth -- hoping that Redcloak wouldnt believe him. Now Redcloak probably thinks even more so that he KNOWS SOMETHING -- something he isnt telling RC.

Why would he do this?

Well he was paralyzed not out of it -- he knows that the OOTS and Hinjo are still out there trying to gather support etc. By delaying redcloak here, he may be saving the world. The longer redcloak sits in azure city -- the more time the good guys have to prepare a defense for Girard's Gate and/or counterattack azure city.

Wasting Redcloaks time is a good thing for the good guys.

[The Wanderer]

A question to everyone saying that O-Chul is intentionally telling the truth in a manner that will be taken as a lie:

So you honestly believe that O-Chul is callously and without any concern condemning a dozen people not just to death but complete non-existence as well? The same O-Chul who once spent almost an entire comic chewing out Haley for not really thinking about how people were going to die in battle (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0417.html)? And that he's willing to do it with all the other dozens Redcloak will bring up in his attempts to get O-Chul to talk or just experiment with the Snarl?

If so, do you think that this is better than telling a lie?

:smallconfused:

[Tuwr]

Also note that O-Chul never actually says that he took charisma as a dump stat. He just mentions that it seemed safe at the time.

[warmachine]

Now Redcloak understands why torture is pointless: you get a set of plausible lies. Unless, like Xykon, you obtain cheap entertainment out of it.

[David Argall]

O'Chul was lying, badly.

If we believe he was telling the truth, we also have to believe all of the following.
Girard's illusions are designed, for no apparent good reason, to be undone by the answers to riddles.
Girard not only told this fact to the halfling, he told her the answers to the riddles.
She went to the trouble of not just writing them down for no apparent reason, but put them in a code so devious that despite Redcloak and Xykon spending years reading the book, they didn't even suspect there was a code.
Having done so, she tells Soon or another member of the Guard of this and despite their major campaign to destroy all mention of the gates and the rifts, they do not destroy the diary.
They do, however, pass the full information on to later paladins, despite that all they need to know is that the book contains information that needs suppressing. For some reason, this is not considered a violation of the oath on the subject.

As a lie, we need merely assume that O'Chul, at some time during months of extensive, and often painful, contact with the big boys would have heard some mention of the diary. From there, he gets the idea that as long as they are busy looking for a code that isn't there, they are pretty harmless. So he tells the general truth and adds in his lie.

Further, this is not a double lie of telling the truth in the hopes of having it believed as a lie. O'Chul just doesn't gain anything from that. Now if he were being asked whether to turn left or right, this sort of trick can be useful. But here "lying" produces much the same result as just not answering. And since this reverse lie is governed by the same rules as a direct lie, there is a serious chance of exposing a truth he wants to hide. But if he "successfully" convinces them he is lying, they merely dismiss his remarks as rubbish, and are no closer to falling into any trap.

As has been noted, Paladins fall for a Gross violation of the code of conduct. A single lie, under difficult circumstances, simply does not meet this standard.

Now we should note that Redcloak is playing with fire. If somehow the Snarl has not noticed this rift has expanded, he risks it learning that by giving it this wake up call. And on given evidence, the Snarl can reach into the world and we would assume it can reach further as the rift expands, which means here the Snarl can reach quite a distance. You could end up with the city becoming destroyed. More likely just the area of the castle, but still too much to risk for a rather trivial gain in knowledge.

[Guancyto]

And anyone who would make someone fall for telling a lie that is an attempt to save the lives of dozens of people immediately and perhaps the entire universe in the long term is Immanuel Kant, or someone who so wholeheartedly ascribes to his philosophies that the distinction is pointless.

Fixed that for ya. :smallwink:

But yes, I do agree. O'Chul took a risk, and got bitten for it. If it had worked, Redcloak would have killed him anyway, so he's still trying to sacrifice himself. Just giving Good a better fighting chance in doing so. Rock on, O'Chul.

[The Wanderer]

Fixed that for ya. :smallwink:

Having studied philosophy a bit, and also having a few friends who are Kantians, I just want to say... bwhahahahahahaha! *High fives Geesi* That was awesome. :smallbiggrin:


Rock on, O'Chul.

Indeed. It seems O-Chul is becoming cooler and cooler and more an example of the good paladin, (albeit with low charisma) with his every appearance.

[Querzis]

This comic explain a few things for me.

First off, I never understood why Hinjo was considered the second most powerfull paladin in AC when O-chul was so much tougher and stronger then him. Hell, O-chul even survived an explosion Miko didnt survive. But now I understand, O-chul IS more powerfull then Hinjo, but most of those levels are fighters levels therefore hes not a stronger paladin then Hinjo, hes just overall stronger.

Secondly, of course O-chul was lying. I never understood why lying was so often associated with evil. Its chaotic of course but can be used for good just as easely as for evil. When someone take the blame for someone else or when some German helped Jew in Worldwar 2, it was lying. But personnally those are some of the most good act someone can do. O-chul just lied to try to save dozens of people souls and, in the long run, save the world. I'm gonna punch the first DM who make a paladin fall for that (what? I never said I was good, but it really annoy me when people demean good like that.) A paladin is a champion of good, not of law.

Thirdly, since Redcloak just said himself O-chul is the worst liar ever, it seems quite obvious to me that, by now, he actually realize that O-chul know nothing. He just cant accept it. He almost died because of Soon so he just cant go to the next gate until he has more information. After all, thanks to the Crimson mantle, even if it take him dozens of years it wont really bother him or the Dark One. And dont fool yourself, Redcloak enjoy torturing O-chul and sending human to oblivion like that.

[Paragon Badger]

So O-Chul is guessing, and Redcloak won't get any information from him, no matter how many scientific experiments he carries out.

This is getting even sadder.

(Though Redcloak would look great in safety goggles.)

I DEMAND GOGGLES! :smalltongue:

It would be cute. :P And hey, there might be alot of splattering going on in the next few moments. :smallwink:

[†Seer†]

"I wonder if the remaining Gates somehow prevent it from noticing the unsealed rifts now?"

More proof that the MitD is part of the Snarl.

Only if it's true. ATM it's still a hypothesis :) And even if it is proven true, it doesn't mean MiTD is a part of the Snarl. Could just slept through it's parents telling it to put its skills in Spot :P

[Darakonis]

This comic explain a few things for me.

First off, I never understood why Hinjo was considered the second most powerfull paladin in AC when O-chul was so much tougher and stronger then him. Hell, O-chul even survived an explosion Miko didnt survive. But now I understand, O-chul IS more powerfull then Hinjo, but most of those levels are fighters levels therefore hes not a stronger paladin then Hinjo, hes just overall stronger.
How do Fighter levels make him tougher and stronger? Paladins and fighters have the same hit dice, can wear the same armor, and paladins have higher saving throws.
A fighter may be more likely to have better Con and Str, only because a Paladin needs to consider Cha and Wis, but if that's the case, then a single fighter level would suffice, so if most of those levels are fighter levels, then I don't see how that increases his survivability much...

[†Seer†]

O'Chul was lying, badly.
If we believe he was telling the truth, we also have to believe all of the following.

No we don't... later in your post you say he slipped one lie in, so it's possible that some is false, some is true.



She went to the trouble of not just writing them down for no apparent reason, but put them in a code so devious that despite Redcloak and Xykon spending years reading the book, they didn't even suspect there was a code.

If you had a book you thought was a journal, and if you didn't expect a code to originate from counting 3 letters forward for the first letter, 4 for the second, 5 for the third, etc, of course you're not going to find it. In short, they weren't looking for it. Granted it's doubtful that she Would write one down, but if she did it doesn't mean Xykon and RC would find it.



Having done so, she tells Soon or another member of the Guard of this and despite their major campaign to destroy all mention of the gates and the rifts, they do not destroy the diary.

Wasn't the diary way far away, near Dorukan's Dungeon? After Roy knocked Xykon into the gate, RC, the MiTD and Xyk went to Xykons other lair, where the diary was in the library. It's possible those that knew couldn't pass on the information as it would disobey their oath (or maybe there are other reasons they didn't/ couldn't), or they didn't know where the diary was. It's much more portable than a Rift.

[Querzis]

How do Fighter levels make him tougher and stronger? Paladins and fighters have the same hit dice, can wear the same armor, and paladins have higher saving throws.
A fighter may be more likely to have better Con and Str, only because a Paladin needs to consider Cha and Wis, but if that's the case, then a single fighter level would suffice, so if most of those levels are fighter levels, then I don't see how that increases his survivability much...

:smallconfused: Dude I meant that he got more levels then Hinjo overall but that most of those levels were fighters levels not that fighters were stronger then paladin. 'reread my post a few times' I think I was being pretty clear too. I'm confused by the fact that it confused you.

[The Extinguisher]

Whether or not O-Chul thought he was telling the truth is unimportant. There's a rule here that demands O-Chul is correct. Mainly, the Rule of Funny.

[John Campbell]

A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act.

Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.


A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who grossly violates the code of conduct loses all paladin spells and abilities...
(emphasis mine)

Lying is not an intrinsically Evil act. It's probably intrinsically Chaotic, but paladins have more freedom on the Law-Chaos axis than on the Good-Evil axis... they can't be habitually Chaotic enough that they drift into Neutral Good, but a single Chaotic act will not cause them to fall, unless it's major enough to be an alignment-changing action in and of itself. (Most aren't, the "What toppings does my alignment dictate I get on my pizza?" crowd notwithstanding.)

Lying is against the paladin's code of conduct. However, paladins do not fall for simple violations of the code of conduct. They fall only for gross violations, and lying to the BBEG in an attempt to save the lives and prevent the utter destruction of the souls of a number of innocents and possibly prevent the destruction of the entire universe and every being in it, body and soul, is not a gross violation of the code of conduct. In fact, not doing so, in absence of any other means of resisting, would seem to be a clear violation of two other clauses of that code of conduct, and possibly even an evil act itself... or evil willful inaction, at least.

So, not a willful commission of an evil act, not an alignment-changing offense, and, while a violation of the code of conduct, not a gross one, and a lesser violation than not attempting to help those in need and punish Redcloak for threatening innocents would be... O-Chul should not fall for telling a lie in that circumstance.

And I'd have to conclude that any DM that made a paladin fall for the decision O-Chul made was simply out to get the paladin, and didn't care about the reasonableness (or lack thereof) of their methods. And, as much as I dislike paladins, I would not appreciate playing with a DM who was out to get another player by any means necessary.

[Sedgewood]

Whether or not O-Chul thought he was telling the truth is unimportant. There's a rule here that demands O-Chul is correct. Mainly, the Rule of Funny.

I have to agree. Personally, I think O'Chul was lying, and just happened to be correct. If Dorukan guarded his gate in a "dreadfully cliched manner", why wouldn't Girard?

I don't think any of the paladins know much about the other gates, aside from Hinjo. Consider that during the entire trial arc, not a single paladin is shown until Miko crashes the party. And the OotS spent quite a bit of time adventuring in Dorukan's dungeon without having a clue about the gates.

[Callista]

Yeah, but why would the clue be in another party member's diary? That's just stupid. You don't want anyone to get in--so you don't leave clues.

[The Extinguisher]

Your right. I suppose you also wouldn't leave coded messages about the gates and thier locations as well. That would be silly.

...oh wait.

[Krenn]

Also, that is another reason why torture is totally useless as an interrogation method (if your goal is finding the truth at least). Your prisoner will tell you what you want to hear to make the pain stop. Whether this happens to be truth or fiction however, you can't reliably tell. Ever.

Lycar

The trick is to start out with questions you already know the answer to. then you move on to questions asked of several different people who all know the truth, and torture them until their answers match. eventually, you can drop in a few questions you don't have the slightest idea of the answers to, but can verify later if you know where to start looking.



the only reason this fails is because third world torturers either don't understand the scientific method, or are trying to get more information than they can realistically hope for.

or they're just cruel SOB who don't really care about the quality of the answers in the first place.

[warmachine]

O'Chul must be lying about Charisma being his dump stat. A fighter with poor Charisma would simply not multiclass to Paladin. So many of the class abilities depend on CHA that you're better off continuing with Fighter and taking an oath of loyalty. If he needs some divine abilities, he's better off taking levels of Cleric as, presumably, WIS hasn't been dumped.

O'Chul simply has no ranks in Bluff.

[LtNOWIS]

O'Chul must be lying about Charisma being his dump stat. A fighter with poor Charisma would simply not multiclass to Paladin. So many of the class abilities depend on CHA that you're better off continuing with Fighter and taking an oath of loyalty. If he needs some divine abilities, he's better off taking levels of Cleric as, presumably, WIS hasn't been dumped.

Unless, you know, he was motivated not by what class abilities were best, but decided he wanted to live a life of honor and goodness and whatnot.

Lots of people take levels and skills that are sub-optimal.

[The Wanderer]

O'Chul must be lying about Charisma being his dump stat. A fighter with poor Charisma would simply not multiclass to Paladin. So many of the class abilities depend on CHA that you're better off continuing with Fighter and taking an oath of loyalty. If he needs some divine abilities, he's better off taking levels of Cleric as, presumably, WIS hasn't been dumped.

O'Chul simply has no ranks in Bluff.

Maybe a player with a good grasp of the rules wouldn't, but a strongly lawful good character who would view such an invitation as an honor and could get by on inhuman toughness and good strength certainly would.

[David Argall]

No we don't... later in your post you say he slipped one lie in, so it's possible that some is false, some is true.
Some false, all false. O'Chul's statement is still a lie.
But these "facts" are things that must all be true for O'Chul's statement to be true. If Girard didn't put in some riddles, the statement is false. If he did not tell the halfling, the statement is false. If she didn't write the answers into her diary, the statement is false. If she didn't... Any of these proposition is false, then the final statement is false. Given we have magic and conceivably plot intention, we can maybe work around that, but our default remains that the statement is just false.


If you had a book you thought was a journal, and if you didn't expect a code to originate from counting 3 letters forward for the first letter, 4 for the second, 5 for the third, etc, of course you're not going to find it. In short, they weren't looking for it. Granted it's doubtful that she Would write one down, but if she did it doesn't mean Xykon and RC would find it.
It also doesn't mean they would miss it. The writer says something odd. Why does she use this odd word? And then that one? Is there a reason? People tend to fiddle with such until they get a solution. Of course the solution is often nonsense, but Team Evil has spent pouring over that book. There is a definite chance that they would have found any code.


After Roy knocked Xykon into the gate, RC, the MiTD and Xyk went to Xykons other lair, where the diary was in the library. It's possible those that knew couldn't pass on the information as it would disobey their oath (or maybe there are other reasons they didn't/ couldn't), or they didn't know where the diary was. It's much more portable than a Rift.
Well..., it's possible... But we are rather obviously reaching. They somehow had to both know the secrets of the book and be unable to find it. Either is thinkable, but both? The more one learns about the book, the better the chance one can put a hand on it.



How do Fighter levels make him tougher and stronger? Paladins and fighters have the same hit dice, can wear the same armor, and paladins have higher saving throws.
Fighters get extra feats. If we assume 10 levels of fighter and 2 of paladin, O'Chul would have 6 additional feats, and by putting these in toughness and improved toughness, he would get 27 extra hp [or 72 if you get a generous DM who lets you take improved toughness several times.] There are a couple of other toughness feats that could also increase his total, but our fighter/paladin can have way more hp than our pure paladin.

[Callista]

He has at least 3 levels of paladin--without fear immunity, we'd be seeing very little left of him at this point. Y'wanna know the average time it takes a decent torturer to break the average victim? About thirty seconds.


O'Chul must be lying about Charisma being his dump stat. A fighter with poor Charisma would simply not multiclass to Paladin. So many of the class abilities depend on CHA that you're better off continuing with Fighter and taking an oath of loyalty. If he needs some divine abilities, he's better off taking levels of Cleric as, presumably, WIS hasn't been dumped.

O'Chul simply has no ranks in Bluff.Having a bad build is the rule, not the exception, in OotS. Case in point: Belkar.

[Estelindis]

O'Chul must be lying about Charisma being his dump stat. A fighter with poor Charisma would simply not multiclass to Paladin. So many of the class abilities depend on CHA that you're better off continuing with Fighter and taking an oath of loyalty. If he needs some divine abilities, he's better off taking levels of Cleric as, presumably, WIS hasn't been dumped.

O'Chul simply has no ranks in Bluff.
You know, he could have multiclassed to paladin for non-metagaming, non-powergaming reasons. One might even say, for "roleplaying" reasons. :smallbiggrin: You know, like wanting to serve his land and his lord in whatever way they asked?


Unless, you know, he was motivated not by what class abilities were best, but decided he wanted to live a life of honor and goodness and whatnot.

Lots of people take levels and skills that are sub-optimal.
QFT!

[see]

O-Chul can't save those people from whatever Redcloak chooses to do with them; Redcloak could very well order them hurled into the Snarl anyway after O-Chul revealed the secret of Girard's Gate. O-Chul has no means to stop Redcloak from hurling them in. Maybe Redcloak would immediately rush off the the Gate, but maybe Redcloak would take the moment to test the Snarl anyway, so he had more data for the effort to harness the Snarl. O-Chul cannot know what Redcloak would do. Even if Redcloak explicitly promised the safety of the hostages, O-Chul has no way of enforcing that promise or any reason to believe that it would be adhered to.

So the threat to the hostages is irrelevant to O-Chul's moral status. Their survival is entirely a matter of Redcloak's whim, and nothing O-Chul can do can save them. It may be emotionally wrenching to see them hurled into the rift, but it is not his responsibility; he cannot do anything to stop it.

(For a famous film example, remember the destruction of Alderaan? Imagine Leia had revealed that the base was at Yavin IV. Would that have saved the people of Alderaan? Of course not; Tarkin was going to obliterate it anyway; the decision was always in his hands, whether Leia cooperated or not. Non-cooperation with evil actors does not in the slightest make one responsible for their actions, even if the actors claim to only be taking their action because of the non-cooperation.)

On the other hand, if O-Chul gives Redcloak the key to the power of Girard's Gate, he is actively assisting the triumph of evil over the whole world. That makes him in part responsible for that evil.

(Again, if Leia had revealed Yavin IV, she would have reduced the effort and expense the Empire had to go to to attack the Rebels. The probes would have discovered she didn't lie, and the Death Star would have hyperspaced to Yavin IV [before the Millenium Falcon reached the Alderaan system, as it happens]. Even if the Rebellion managed to stop the attack though some other set of circumstances not involving the plans or Luke Skywalker, her cooperation would still have assisted the Empire's evil, and she would be morally responsible for that assistance.)

Therefore, the only moral actions O-Chul can take are to remain silent or deceive Redcloak. If he thinks a lie is more likely to disrupt Redcloak than silence, he might well consider the overall good to be done by a lie to outweigh the dishonorable nature of lying (even) to an enemy. Even if he is wrong, his action would not be a gross violation of his code of honor, but a minor one.

[Ridureyu]

I hope the Snarl destroys Redcloak.

Slowly and painfully, and in such a way as to cause him the most physical and emotional anguish possible.

[Jothki]

I have no difficulty believing that O-Chul is lying, merely because of how counterproductive building a maze of illusions would be. It's like covering something you don't want people to notice with a tarp. A high (epic?) level illusionist can do far better than that.

[factotum]

Your right. I suppose you also wouldn't leave coded messages about the gates and thier locations as well. That would be silly.

...oh wait.

There's a crucial difference there. Serini Toormuck was part of the party while it was adventuring to FIND the gates, so recording their locations in her diary is an entirely reasonable thing for her to do. However, the defences set up around each gate were set up after the party had sworn their oath to never have contact with each other, so it's much less likely Serini would have information about what the defences of the other gates consisted of. In fact, it's quite difficult to understand how Shojo knew as much about their defences as he revealed during the scribble strips...

[Tom90deg]

Ohh, I just had an idea...What if Soon told his palidans something along these lines...

"I can't tell you what the gates are, but some of you may get captured and forced to reveal what you know. And as I know these evil guys, they won't buy that you know nothing. So tell them this lie" And he proceeds to tell them the real story. That way, they can bluff, and if they're low enough to be fooled, they'll go and die, and if they're high enough NOT to be fooled, they'll disregard it

[brionl]

"We're gonna need a new Timmy!"
(yin, tan, tetra...)
Make that 14 new Timmys.

[Midnight Lurker]

I hope the Snarl destroys Redcloak.

Slowly and painfully, and in such a way as to cause him the most physical and emotional anguish possible.

I don't, actually.

Nothing can possibly justify the destruction of a single soul, no matter how evil. Even if that person was responsible for the destruction of others' souls.

Just throw him in Hell for eternity -- he'll have committed the only infinite sin possible in an otherwise finite lifetime, and thus will aactually deserve infinite punishment.

[Kd7sov]

Whether or not O-Chul thought he was telling the truth is unimportant. There's a rule here that demands O-Chul is correct. Mainly, the Rule of Funny.


There is some truth in that.

It's even got some precedent (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0246.html).

Unrelated (to FMAxel, not to the strip), it's really too bad that Hinjo's convoy is probably way far away from Azure City. It seems to me that Elan's dramatic instincts (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0392.html) ought to be tingling like mad. In particular, Redcloak's signal to toss the slaves ought to be aborted by "Thor's Lightning!"

Unfortunately, I can't come up with a way for V to rescue the humans on the other tower without also "rescuing" the hobs.

Oh, and:
Ohh, I just had an idea...What if Soon told his palidans something along these lines...

"I can't tell you what the gates are, but some of you may get captured and forced to reveal what you know. And as I know these evil guys, they won't buy that you know nothing. So tell them this lie" And he proceeds to tell them the real story. That way, they can bluff, and if they're low enough to be fooled, they'll go and die, and if they're high enough NOT to be fooled, they'll disregard it

...I don't see how that makes sense. First, how would Soon know with as much specificity as O-Chul used? Unlike Shojo, he was a paladin, which means he would have honored the oath he took. Second, why would Soon suspect that they'd get captured, or that the capturers wouldn't believe ignorance?

[Callista]

You might not be responsible for someone else's evil, but you are responsible for your own evil of not trying to stop theirs...

[Groundhog]

I have no difficulty believing that O-Chul is lying, merely because of how counterproductive building a maze of illusions would be. It's like covering something you don't want people to notice with a tarp. A high (epic?) level illusionist can do far better than that.

Yes he could, but the point of a maze of illusions could be a cover for an even bigger illusion. Or the maze could be something which is impossible to pass through without dying, thus automatically getting rid of anyone who wants to access the gate.

[HUMVEE Driver]

I don't. Why would Redcloak say O-Chul was lying when he isn't?

Because Redcloak thinks O-Chul was lying. Doesn't mean he was.


Furthermore, why would O-Chul then just more-or-less agree by saying Charisma is his dump stat, rather than protesting that he's telling the truth?

Because, just say O-Chul protests that he is telling the truth, and Redcloak now believes him. Doesn't that just defeat the purpose of O-Chul deceiving Redcloak in the first place? By the Paladin code, O-Chul only has to tell the truth. He doesn't have to try to convince anyone that is it in fact the truth. O-Chul agreeing by saying Charisma is his dump stat just reinforces the truth he just said, and in effect reinforces the deception to Redcloak.

[Ezbez]

This and the last comic remind me of Half Life 2 with the Portal opening and everything. Very dramatic.

Cheers.

[Pandabear]

Control group.. *snicker* :smallbiggrin:

[Remirach]

What surprises me about this situation is that O-Chul himself seems more concerned about the possible emancipation of his city than the souls of the captive peasants, or at least that's what his particular phrasing suggests.

As terrible as Redcloak is -- and he's becoming worse than Xykon, here -- I like how he's brutally honest about O-Chul's eventual fate even if he DOES talk. "You'll be killed as soon as I have what I need from you." It also seems like a clever move to make it look like he isn't falsely sugar-coating the rest of his proposition.

[Krenn]

(emphasis mine)

Lying is not an intrinsically Evil act. It's probably intrinsically Chaotic, but paladins have more freedom on the Law-Chaos axis than on the Good-Evil axis... they can't be habitually Chaotic enough that they drift into Neutral Good, but a single Chaotic act will not cause them to fall, unless it's major enough to be an alignment-changing action in and of itself. (Most aren't, the "What toppings does my alignment dictate I get on my pizza?" crowd notwithstanding.)

Lying is against the paladin's code of conduct. However, paladins do not fall for simple violations of the code of conduct. They fall only for gross violations, and lying to the BBEG in an attempt to save the lives and prevent the utter destruction of the souls of a number of innocents and possibly prevent the destruction of the entire universe and every being in it, body and soul, is not a gross violation of the code of conduct. In fact, not doing so, in absence of any other means of resisting, would seem to be a clear violation of two other clauses of that code of conduct, and possibly even an evil act itself... or evil willful inaction, at least.

So, not a willful commission of an evil act, not an alignment-changing offense, and, while a violation of the code of conduct, not a gross one, and a lesser violation than not attempting to help those in need and punish Redcloak for threatening innocents would be... O-Chul should not fall for telling a lie in that circumstance.

And I'd have to conclude that any DM that made a paladin fall for the decision O-Chul made was simply out to get the paladin, and didn't care about the reasonableness (or lack thereof) of their methods. And, as much as I dislike paladins, I would not appreciate playing with a DM who was out to get another player by any means necessary.



My game system of preference is Hackmaster, a variant/parody of 1 & 2 edition D&D. The alignment system is bit more detailed about when alignment shifts occur, but it's basically the same.

Other Hackmaster players might disagree, but I wouldn't see a lie as being neccessary evil OR chaotic.

Ignoring the paladin issue for a moment, I think a LG fighter would need to follow the following code, in order to lie without violating his alignment.

Rules for NOT Lying:

1. He cannot lie to his lawfull superiors.
2. He cannot lie to any other lawfull authority, especially on matters that fall within the authorities realm of responsibility.
3. He cannot lie under oath, or when he has pledged on his honor that he is speaking the truth.
4. He cannot lie to someone about something they have a right to now about.
5. he cannot lie in such a way that a trusting innocent is harmed by believing the lie to be truth.

Rules FOR Lying:

1. He can lie in order to decieve an evil enemy, provided he does not swear an oath on the matter, and is not obligated by honor to tell the truth.

(I'm going to attack you from the EAST. Yep. Eastward attack. no need to defend the west... ah nope, nope. no need...)

2. He can lie if given a legitimate order from lawful authority to do so, in order to protect a secret.

(I have no knowledge of secret weapons research. Nope, no research here... move along....)

3. He can lie to spies in order to feed false information to their masters, or to suspected spies, to see who acts on the information.

4. He can lie to children in order to protect them, or possibly to entertain them, as long as he does so with good intent, and in the best interests of the children, not himself.


5. He can lie to complete strangers, provided that he has a good reason, and the lie will not harm the stranger. For example, if he is trying to conceal his identity.

6. he can lie in order to infiltrate an enemy area, or otherwise gain intelligence on the enemy.

7. He can lie to friends and allies for purposes of a specific exercise, where it is understood that lying is fair play. However, he must make certain that they are aware of the truth, afterwards.

So, basically, a lawfull good character cannot lie TO THE LAW, and he cannot lie when acting UNDER A LAW THAT REQUIRES TRUTH.

he CAN lie when acting UNDER A LAW THAT REQUIRES OR PERMITS FALSEHOOD, or when acting towards the good in areas THAT THE LAW DOES NOT COVER.

Obviously, Paladins are going to be a LITTLE more strict about that sort of thing, But i see no reason why a paladin can't lie to an evil torturer acting on behalf of an evil lord.

The torturer's mission is to compel the truth. The paladin's mission is to defeat evil. lying to evil is a perfectly legimitate tactic under the circumstances.

What paladin code are the rest of you reffering to? presumably this is something from 3e?

[Krenn]

edit: double post, sorry.

[see]

You might not be responsible for someone else's evil, but you are responsible for your own evil of not trying to stop theirs...

Here's the deal. If you do not wire me five dollars, I will leave open bowls of antifreeze out around my yard, to tempt the neighborhood pets to drink them and poison themselves.

Imagine the suffering of the pets as the antifreeze wrecks their kidneys, causing them to slowly and painfully die. Imagine the suffering of their owners as they see their beloved pets die.

But, how is your $5 going to actually stop me from going ahead and doing it? If I'm someone willing to poison neighborhood pets, certainly I'm someone willing to lie, aren't I? I might even use your five dollars to go out and buy antifreeze, in which case your actions have actually assisted in the act.

You sending me $5 would not constitute an attempt to stop me from committing an act, because it can't stop my act. Only I can stop me from doing it. You refusing to send me $5 does not constitute failing to try to stop me; it merely constitutes refusing to cooperate with blackmail.

Obviously, in the real world, you could play along to get my contact information to send the proper authorities after me, or the like. O-Chul does not have that option with Redcloak; he's tied up to a pole. There is nothing he can do to stop Redcloak from doing whatever depravities Redcloak decides to do.

[David Argall]

Ohh, I just had an idea...

All these real clever ideas about how to avoid the obvious. Our comic and our game are just not written that way. We are built around "You see an Orc....Kill". We have enough trouble dealing with a situation where there is the rare non-evil orc. When you start talking about lie, counter-lie and counter-counter-lie, you are just overthinking the situation.


What if Soon told his palidans something along these lines...

"I can't tell you what the gates are, but some of you may get captured and forced to reveal what you know. And as I know these evil guys, they won't buy that you know nothing. So tell them this lie" And he proceeds to tell them the real story. That way, they can bluff, and if they're low enough to be fooled, they'll go and die, and if they're high enough NOT to be fooled, they'll disregard it
He would not be Soon from all we can tell.
Soon is big on the honor of paladins, and that honor is stained by lies. He would expect his paladins to spit in their face and tell them nothing.
Soon is also neither that clever nor that stupid. If they don't know, they can't tell. Much superior. And if somebody does roll a 20 and convinces the evil guy the "lie" is the truth, he has fooled him into doing precisely what the paladins don't want him doing. Your double success becomes a disaster.



Serini Toormuck was part of the party while it was adventuring to FIND the gates, so recording their locations in her diary is an entirely reasonable thing for her to do.
SOD "It took me forever to translate, because I first had to translate the location of Lirian's Gate and work backwards."
"Translate" is likely the wrong word here because Comprehend Languages is a mere 1st level spell and even if Xykon [as he likely did] decided that since it didn't hurt anybody, it wasn't worth knowing, even a bushel basket of scrolls is small change, especially since Xykon probably pays by the "I don't kill you" system. It seems he meant that there was no clear set of directions and he had to work them out from small clues.
However, the point of interest for us is that it took him a decade to work out the path. That means that Serini did a terrible job of recording the locations of the gates. From what little we see of the diary, it seems Serini was more interested in people than geography and instead of saying "After we left Cliffport", she likely said "After we left the city". Note this is not due to any desire for secrecy. She was writing this years before it was decided that the locations needed to be kept secret.
This in turn tends to argue she would not be interested in recording some secret passwords, nor in taking care to record them correctly.

[Yendor]

The defenses O-chul describes could easily have been put in place by Girard when the gate was first built, before the group decided to split up. This would be a temporary measure while they decided how to guard the gates permanently. Serini would have noted how each gate was defended in her diary, and it would be known to the rest of the party. Now, Girard would have strengthened the defenses of his Gate since, but the mazes and riddles would still be in place.

[Killer Munchkin]

Using Charisma as a dump stat....

Haven't we all been there? Bloody brilliant!:smallbiggrin:

[Shatteredtower]

Yeah, but why would the clue be in another party member's diary? That's just stupid. You don't want anyone to get in--so you don't leave clues.You do if the diary is meant to be a plot hook in a fantasy-based adventure game -- or a plot device in an adventure story. Either way, this sort of thing is old hat for the genre. These sort of things are created all the time, made difficult enough so that only the most worthy of individuals will be able to decipher it when the need is great enough.

Okay, admittedly, the sort of villains that could oppose such heroes could also decipher such clues, but a) the party already destroyed most of those in their adventures, b) Soon's forces swept away most of the remaining threats, and c) the odds that anyone would read of such a world-ending threat would immediately go to carry it out would seem rather low from its author's point of view, even though she'd had a hand in destroying more than a few such individuals.

Consider this also: Xykon acquired the diary, but not its author. I know Serini remained prone to wandering all her (longer than human) life and she'd obviously carried that diary with her throughout her early adventures, but what was powerful enough to separate her from it while still leaving it available for Xykon to find? Furthermore, the lich is not exactly big on figuring out the significance of things on his own, so how did he pick up on the worth of this book in relation to his grand quest?

One last question: how binding would an oath be on an epic-level halfling rogue who felt she had justification for side-stepping it? More binding than it was on Shojo, who also swore the same oath (strip 290)?


Nothing can possibly justify the destruction of a single soul, no matter how evil. Even if that person was responsible for the destruction of others' souls.

Just throw him in Hell for eternity -- he'll have committed the only infinite sin possible in an otherwise finite lifetime, and thus will aactually deserve infinite punishment.You know, some of us consider infinite punishment far more reprehensible and terrible than oblivon. Some of us don't even consider oblivion that big a threat at all, in fact.

What does make us edgy is seeing the stupid, cruel, and egoistic things people are willing to do to (hopefully -- misplaced or not) avoid oblivion (or infinite punishment, for that matter).

Oblivion is nowhere near as terrible as the fear of oblivion. Sure beats eternal damnation, no matter how many still see that as the lesser of two evils. It might be a different argument if there was still a chance of change and redemption, even if that was never taken. Without such choice, however, the only reason that justifies denying the damned the option of oblivion is if no such option exists.

Within this comic, we know it does. We also know Redcloak is evil because he'd rather sacrifice all of existence in an attempt to force the gods to treat his people better -- regardless of what they might feel about the matter, if they were aware of the stakes. Not liking what it says of the gods, though, so I can certainly see why Redcloak (and other goblins, who've been pretty much damned in life and afterlife anyway) might find oblivion preferable.

[Estelindis]

You know, some of us consider infinite punishment far more reprehensible and terrible than oblivon. Some of us don't even consider oblivion that big a threat at all, in fact.
Not me. I reckon that total annihilation is the worst thing you can do to someone, point blank. Anything else always leaves a chance, however small, for an improvement in circumstances. Destruction of a soul is utterly final.

I accept your point about what fear of oblivion may lead someone to do... But, for me, that's in a different category. From a moral perspective, I think it's better to have something *done* to you than for you to be doing the, erm, doing. (Wow. Best English ever...) I don't mean that we should just let people do whatever they want to us - I meant that, if it's a choice between murdering and being killed (with no other complications), then it's better to die than to take an innocent life. So, from that point of view, it's better for you or me to be annihilated than for us to, say, slaughter a village full of people. But it's not better for the person doing the annihilating to destroy a soul than to murder, I would reckon.

All this is a very roundabout way of saying that people may, indeed, do terrible things for fear of oblivion. But, of all the terrible things they might do, I think none could be worse than condemning someone else to utter annihilation.

That's why Redcloak just became a much darker figure for me, with this last comic. It's not like he was exactly sunshine and daisies before - consider some of the things he's done! - but this, I feel, is in another league. I think he knows that. But he seems willing to do it anyway. Scary stuff. That is what a man goblin on the edge, who truly feels that he has nothing to lose, is capable of. :smalleek:

[Kish]

One last question: how binding would an oath be on an epic-level halfling rogue who felt she had justification for side-stepping it? More binding than it was on Shojo, who also swore the same oath (strip 290)?
We know Serini considered taking a level of paladin, and that class has an alignment requirement. Annoying stereotypes about rogues aside, it's quite possible she was/is Lawful Good.

[Shatteredtower]

Not me. I reckon that total annihilation is the worst thing you can do to someone, point blank.I disagree, but would rather leave it at that. Instead, please allow me to state that on this:


But it's not better for the person doing the annihilating to destroy a soul than to murder, I would reckon.-- and this:


That is what a man goblin on the edge, who truly feels that he has nothing to lose, is capable of. :smalleek:--you'll find me in full agreement.


We know Serini considered taking a level of paladin, and that class has an alignment requirement.Elan considered taking levels in wizard, though it's possible his Intelligence score is too low even to be casting cantrips. He also seemed more sincere in his interest than the halfling did.


Annoying stereotypes about rogues aside, it's quite possible she was/is Lawful Good.Since we're on the subject of annoying stereotypes, why assume that a lawful character is straitjacketed into honouring every oath she's sworn, even if she was the one to suggest it?

We already know she's got a good mind for getting out of bad situations because she was the one to suggest the oath to keep the others from killing each other. Since she wasn't the problem, why would she let that keep her from acting in everyone's best interests?

We know that neither Lirian nor Dorukan let the oath keep them apart, though neither had rogue levels. We also know that Serini remained a wandering spirit even after the adventure ended, and that she chose to honour a non-lawful (barbarian) and deceased comrade by building a gate guarded by powerful monsters. None of that prohibits her from having a lawful good alignment, but none of it suggests it either.

[Kish]

We know that neither Lirian nor Dorukan let the oath keep them apart, though neither had rogue levels.
Why do you keep bringing up rogue levels? We know very little about Serini, her personal sense of honor, or her pragmatism. We know she was smart enough to propose the compromise, charismatic enough by her own word to be a paladin, talkative enough to annoy Dorukan, and something enough to build a tomb to honor Kraagor. We don't know whether she would have broken the oath or not. We would not know any more about whether she would have broken the oath or not if she were a fighter, a wizard, a sorcerer, a druid or a cleric (barring cleric of the god of either truth or deception).