OOTS #844 - The Discussion Thread

[R. Shackleford]

Reminds me of the hypocrisy of the phrase, "you're so judgmental!"

I noticed on the gate monitor that the Girard's and Kraagor's gates were "flaming" whatever that indicates. I assumed the flames meant they had been damaged but if that were the case than it would be Soon's and Dorukan's gates that were flaming. It also might be the opposite, and the black means they've been broken. What's the status of Lirian's Gate?

Spoiler

Show

Liran's should be in the same condition as Soon's and Dorukan's. I think the better question is whether or not they reach the same state as Soon's automatically or not. If so, then the Gobbotopia skylight has two larger versions elsewhere, likely unguarded.

[Smolder]

For some reason, that's what I would expect my DM to say if our party encountered this same scenario.

"Can I tell the red-haired jerk that I''m going to desecrate his corpse? If so, I do that."

"Roll for it, buddy."

"So, I hope you guys have enough diamond dust to resurrect the other 23 people in my famil--" *splfft* *thud*
Okay, who did that?

[Fargazer]

Ah, that answer I was prepared for! I believe that they would simply have been so deluded/stubborn/paranoid, that they wouldn't assume that the remaining 2/3s hadn't died, and were actually in the process of avenging/reviving them all. The CG segment would have assumed that they were all CG, and so on.

It seems like we're dealing with a group that wouldn't accept the most logical explanation offered if one they liked was still plausible. As long as it's possible that one of them might be alive on the other end, then that person is obviously going to take it to the man then rez his family.

Just my two gp.

Hm, I had assumed the exact opposite, that the family members would be at least superficially aware of what people were slightly different alignments around the family.

Which, if it were true, would make it even more obvious, since if you were in the afterlife with literally everyone you knew as the same alignment as you, you would either have to assume that the vast majority had been killed, or one specific alignment had been targeted.

Of course, its impossible to say if they knew the other's alignments or not, and your idea seems more likely, but even then, I still feel like they would notice if so many had been killed in one moment, at the lunchtable.

[DBear]

I can't help being reminded of a Trivial Pursuit game piece when I see that monitoring device. And with everyone racing to the gates, it's like the world is their big game board. Except the outcome of this game won't be quite so trivial.

Made me think of Magic the Gathering, with orange swapped for black. Before I saw the initials in each piece, I had match Lirian with green (nature), Girard with blue (illusion, mind), Soon with white (order), Kraagor tho he doesn't use magic with red (chaos, destruction) and obviously we can't have black.

[Mantine]

Reminds me of the hypocrisy of the phrase, "you're so judgmental!"

I noticed on the gate monitor that the Girard's and Kraagor's gates were "flaming" whatever that indicates. I assumed the flames meant they had been damaged but if that were the case than it would be Soon's and Dorukan's gates that were flaming. It also might be the opposite, and the black means they've been broken. What's the status of Lirian's Gate?

...Huh, what? "flaming" ones still exist, dark ones are those broken.
Simple as that.

[Anne Calie]

V is alive, what a relief!

And Elan didn't lost a finger, it just doesn't fit in the comic.

[Valyrian]

Thanks Giant!

It's official, V is for villian.

Why? Even though hir actions certainly moved hir a whole lot closer to the "deep end of the alignment pool", being Evil doesn't automatically make one a villain (see Belkar). V's reaction to the whole revelation makes a turn for villainy unlikely, even if V's not to be redeemed.

[LadyEowyn]

Given that Vaarsuvius is trapped and unconscious, what odds would you put on someone else telling the Order about Familicide before V gets the chance?

Currently I'd put chance of it at around 95%. Narratively, it produces conflict and complicates the plot, and enables a much greater variety of potential outcomes than V just explaining everything his/herself.

[eilandesq]

If V. isn't actually in negative HP right now, getting out shouldn't be a problem when he/she wakes up--his/her favorite spell is "Disintegrate," and that will blow a nice big hole in the stone above unless it's protected by antimagic or the like.

[homeosapiens]

Just saying, this sounds a bit too much like an excuse to prevent the "well, they can still resurrect them and fight the bad guys together" thing.
One would expect that at this point a Gate's safety would go beyond a grudge, expecially when you suddenly died for no apparent reason and everyone else may have fell the same. Expecially when they're all likely to have met in the afterlife all at the same time, given their same time of death and probably same alignment.

It's believable, but still smells a bit too much like plot excuse.

Totally agree.

[JSSheridan]

Why? Even though hir actions certainly moved hir a whole lot closer to the "deep end of the alignment pool", being Evil doesn't automatically make one a villain (see Belkar). V's reaction to the whole revelation makes a turn for villainy unlikely, even if V's not to be redeemed.

: ...whatever new villain killed these people.

: ...

If the shoe fits. Just because she's a villain though doesn't mean she must be evil.

[Valyrian]

Just saying, this sounds a bit too much like an excuse to prevent the "well, they can still resurrect them and fight the bad guys together" thing.
One would expect that at this point a Gate's safety would go beyond a grudge, expecially when you suddenly died for no apparent reason and everyone else may have fell the same. Expecially when they're all likely to have met in the afterlife all at the same time, given their same time of death and probably same alignment.

It's believable, but still smells a bit too much like plot excuse.

We shouldn't trust too much in Roy being right here. I suspect it has more to do with the specifics of Familicide than a collective Draketooth grudge (my main reasoning behind that is currently that the Giant would do better than make the whole clan Girard-level Chaotic stupid).

[StClair]

Is "Lawfulsplaining" a word now?

[Alex Warlorn]

I'm pretty sure that is not a word now.

And IMHO Harley is being prejudice.

[Jay R]

That's assuming [Malack] can cast Resurrection. We haven't seen him cast a spell above sixth level yet.

And also assuming that a cleric of a god of death will cast Resurrection for total strangers.

[Girl Wonder]

Poor lawful types, they get so little respect ;) Both Hinjo and Shojo were/are good rulers, but Shojo is 'the cool one' and Hinjo is 'the stuffy one'. I've noticed this in lots of campaigns and forums ... Lawful is stuffy and inflexible, Chaotic is free and easy.

And that certainly, to some extent, is true and how it should be if everyone's playing their alignment relatively well, though certainly it needn't be the dominant trait of anyone's personality.

What I don't see often enough is the idiosyncratic parts of chaotic personalities getting a lot of direct digs, and certainly, they deserve them. A lawful person might tend to evangelize a bit more, trying to get you to 'think like they do' and bring you into the fold of true believers (whatever the cause or argument), but a chaotic person would, I imagine, be much less inclined to care what others think. The positive of this is that they have a more 'live and let live' attitude about others' opinions. The negative of this is that they tend to disregard what others think and feel and act primarily akin to their own internal compass, acting on what they want and what they think is right with less consideration for others.

To put it in a less-wordy fashion, Lawfuls have a weakness for being pig-headed and Chaotics have a weakness for being self-centered.

Lord Shojo (or Belkar's fevered imagining of him) once gave an eloquent dissertation on how to 'work the system' and outfox the rule-makers in society. I'd love to hear a similarly adroit presentation of the lawful point of view that doesn't come off as some sort of stuffy diatribe that causes all of the chaotic sorts to snicker about behind the lawfuls' backs later.

[sacman701]

It's possible that not all of the Draketooth clan would be averse to being resurrected by a lawful good character. In particular, the small girl shown at the bottom right corner of the last panel in strip 841 is probably too young to have developed any deep-seated ideological convictions yet. However, if they can communicate with each other in the afterlife as Roy could with his dead relatives, the group may well be able to persuade any particular one of them to refuse the resurrection. The small girl may be especially susceptible to this.

Of course, if they have no more diamond dust or if Familicide is resurrection-proof this is moot anyway.

[JSSheridan]

I'm pretty sure that is not a word now.

And IMHO Harley is being prejudice.

Yeah, but she has experiences to justify it, especially with the fresh memories of her stay with Tarquin.

Durkon and Roy can't exactly be objective about it either though seeing as they're being talked about.

My way of playing a lawful character would be, "I wouldn't do that for X, Y, and Z reasons. But since it doesn't affect me or hurt anyone, then what do I care? I have no right to interfere, so have fun with that."

[Jay R]

If V. isn't actually in negative HP right now, getting out shouldn't be a problem when he/she wakes up--his/her favorite spell is "Disintegrate," and that will blow a nice big hole in the stone above unless it's protected by antimagic or the like.

The stone above is the only thing between V and the giant piston that knocked him/her out. I don't think V will be that quick to eliminate it.

[ti'esar]

Re: Draketooths in the afterlife...

Even if they did realize that they all died simultaneously, what would be the significance of it?

[Girl Wonder]

I started to think that O-Chul's very life might be our best testament to Lawfulness, but then I realized that while he is very lawful, it is his -goodness- that defines him even more (case-in-point, he's the poster child for the 'Good' shirt).

I suppose Tarquin could make an eloquent case for lawfulness, except that he's Lawful Evil, and I think the Evil would weigh more heavily in his statements than the Lawful. I suppose I want a Lawful Good sort to expound on the good points of Lawfulness (or Chaos' weaknesses) in the same way our Chaotic Good Shojo did the same for Chaos/Law.

Maybe it's just harder to encapsulate Lawfulness in such a fashion, I don't know, though perhaps it is telling that we now have shirts and soundbites for Good, Evil, Chaos, and even Neutrality. Maybe this year I will get my Lawful shirt. And I look good in yellow, gold, and/or green (hint hint).

Edit: Oooo... Purple is good, too

[term3186]

V is alive, what a relief!

And Elan didn't lost a finger, it just doesn't fit in the comic.

8th panel, not the last panel. Elan's middle finger is missing.

[LadyEowyn]

I agree that O-Chul is the best example of Lawful Good. He does seek to bring the MitD around to his way of thinking (or at least, he tries to get the MitD to think, in hopes that it will come around to good), but he does it by teaching and encouraging, not by hectoring.

[phantomreader42]

And also assuming that a cleric of a god of death will cast Resurrection for total strangers.

I'd expect a cleric of a god of death would be rather curious what killed so many people so suddenly.

[phantomreader42]

Re: Draketooths in the afterlife...

Even if they did realize that they all died simultaneously, what would be the significance of it?

Something, or someone, killed the entire family all at once. How could that not have SOME significance?

[Doug Lampert]

As you mention though, they were probably mostly around the chaotic good range, possibly chaotic neutral. If thats the case, lets just assume that about 1/3 of the family were each of those alignments. If you suddenly were in the afterlife, along with about a third of your family, it still seems like it would send up a red flag that makes you realize all, or at least the signifigant majority, of your family had been killed.

Good? Several people have said this, on what evidence?

The evidence of lethal boobytraps going untended?

The evidence of kidnapping, fraud, and theft? That's how they perpetuate themselves? What had Penelopy done to justify robbing her of both her wealth and her son and leaving her with nothing? Orin was MARRIED to her!

If I did that sort of thing to my wife, as a deliberate plan, and our entire relationship had been a setup so I could do that, I'd be a sociopath, not a hero! Why is Girard's family different? Because they're "defending a gate", they're defending it from a Paladin who lived his entire life without attacking it because HE meant what he said and wasn't a serial liar who assumes the same of others!

What has this clan done to justify an assumption of Chaotic Good?

The ONLY thing providing evidence that it isn't Evil is that Soon associated with Girard. And alignments can change.

[LadyEowyn]

I don't think that Girard's family were Evil, as we've seen nothing to indicate that they're deliberately malicious (and the traps laying around are supposed to be there, to defend the gate - this isn't the kind of place that some random innocent would just stumble upon), but Chaotic Neutral seems like a much better fit for them than Chaotic Good.

But I can't understand their attitudes here. They know that Soon's gate was destroyed, as were two others. They must be able to guess that theirs could be in jeopardy. If they actually care about their mission of defending the Gate, they'd choose to come back regardless of who was raising them, to find out what was going on and do their best to preserve the remaining gates. And if they think it's a paladin raising them, all the more reason to come back, so they can learn what happened to Soon's gate and thus understand the danger better.

In short, they're being irrational and petty.

[Mantine]

Re: Draketooths in the afterlife...

Even if they did realize that they all died simultaneously, what would be the significance of it?

Three gates destroyed, two left, they all suddenly die.
If that doesn't yell "something's fishy", I don't know what should.

Screwing up a 60 year old plan of world defense out of a grudge sounds pretty stupid to me.
Expecially when the so called "fascist paladins" already had theirs destroyed.

[Quild]

Just saying, this sounds a bit too much like an excuse to prevent the "well, they can still resurrect them and fight the bad guys together" thing.
One would expect that at this point a Gate's safety would go beyond a grudge, expecially when you suddenly died for no apparent reason and everyone else may have fell the same. Expecially when they're all likely to have met in the afterlife all at the same time, given their same time of death and probably same alignment.

It's believable, but still smells a bit too much like plot excuse.

Agree. Being resurrected by someone LG is hardly a bad thing, even if it's one of Soon's paladins.

[LadyFoxfire]

What's the status of Lirian's Gate?

Lirian's gate is broken. Redcloak insists it was an accident.