OOTS #856 - The Discussion Thread

[Forikroder]

Belkar's explanation was good enough to convince the Paladins. Belkar of all people would be very interested in what exactly happens after death, specially if that mens he'll be tortured for all eternity. If he says the old guy is already enjoying fine whiskey or other appropriate rewards, I see no reason to doubt him.

i do, hes belkar

if that alone is not enough to convince you i remind you that Belkar is so dumb V is convinced he doesnt even have a brain

Belkar is so dumb, you cant even joke about how dumb belkar is because no matter how outrageous a thing you say people will jsut say "well thats pretty reasonable"

Belkar has no reason at all to know what Shojo is getting in his afterlife, what really convinced the paladins was him pointing out that Shojo would be getting his final reward in some form in the afterlife, he was already so old he only had a couple years left and if he did accept the Rez theyd be tossing him in a prison cell upon his return

And the Oracle, unlike most people, knows precisely what is in store for him. He can arrange things so he can have almost as pleasant an existance here as in his heaven. He has solid reasons to stay, unlike most people who are choosing between uncertain future of pain and suffering versus a certain future of eternal rewards.

hes stuck in a house giving fortunes to adventurers and having to die several more times in (at least one case) extremely painful ways if anyone has a reason to not come back to the mortal plane its him who already knows hes going to die several more times

im pretty sure thats less awesome then literally having everything you could ever want without having to lift a finger, for some reason people of the OoTS verse prefer to be alive then dead hence Xykons speech about the second rate casters shackled to V since they died so they msut be second rate

the only 2 times ever that anyone has refused ressurection was Shojo who had very good reason to (about to be thrown in jail for whatever small time he has left plus hed already accomplished all he could hope for) and the Draketooth (who probably assumed (with good reason) that accepting the ressurection would lead to all existance getting removed)

all evidence points to it takes alot to convince someone to remain dead

[Ron Miel]

thats really weak evidence since Penelope had good reason to WANT to come back since she was still trying to find her kid

Or maybe she met her daughter in the afterlife. They would have arrived at the same moment, of course.

also Jirix got ressed

Good point. I'll give you that one.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

i do, hes belkar [snip]

I'm sorry, but I will not continue to discuss this matter with you. It took me five minutes to figure out your last post with only two sentences. I am not willing to take the time to figure out several paragraphs worth of no punctuation.

I will only say this: just because Belkar is stupid it doesn't mean he is automatically wrong about everything.

Grey Wolf

[Gusion]

{{scrubbed}}

Could V use Limited Wish to cast Cure Critical Wounds?

I guess. I think it is strange that V didn't have a contingency spell really.

If V doesn't have a couple healing potions at this point he/she probably deserves to die. He should be over that type of hubris by now.

[Forikroder]

Or maybe she met her daughter in the afterlife. They would have arrived at the same moment, of course.

true, but they hadnt met for 10 years at least (probably more like 13 or 14) so she wouldnt have known it was even her kid

though it is conceivable the gods showed her which one was hers since never knowing her kid might ruin the afterlife for her but then Tarquin never mentioning failing at ressurecting her (definently would have brought it up to Nale something like "and you were resourceful enough to prevent me from ressurecting penelope")

plus its likely with her being the wife of an evil dictator and the kid being raised as a guardian of the universe they wouldnt wind up in the same afterlife

[jonathan_sicari]

Lol. That was hilarious. OMG, this video game set in a generic fantasy world bares resemblances to this webcomic set in a generic fantasy world! Because clearly, the idea to put runes on an axe must have originated from one of these two worlds!

Not to reignite that contraversy, but c'mon! All fantasy is a rip--, err, a homage to Tolkien. Even D&D itself can trace it's roots there. At this point the fantasy world itself is the cliche. And while said videogame slavishly obeys fantasy tropes, OOTS is all about skewering them.

While not strictly true (REH was at least at the same time as if not predates Tolkien) but yeah.

[Ghosty]

...Please understand that English is not my first language...


Edit: and I will add: my position is that a plenty of people have very good reasons why they wouldn't want to be rezzed. Not that no-one will want to be rezzed, ever, if that is what you are implying.

Grey Wolf

I am impressed. Your English is excellent---you parse arguments in the MITD threads very well; I would never have guessed that you were not a native speaker. FWIW, I agree with your position on rezzing and why it fails so often in Stick-Verse, revolving door aside. I find forikroder to have excellent points often, but the punctuation is a high barrier to entry...

...I guess. I think it is strange that V didn't have a contingency spell really.

If V doesn't have a couple healing potions at this point he/she probably deserves to die. He should be over that type of hubris by now.

Agreed. Though what would you place in the Contingency? I always had a Dispel Magic in there, figuring that whatever triggered my Contingency would be susceptible to DM, and unable to think of anything else more helpful. That wouldn't help V, obviously. Just trying to think of some way a Conjuration-barred Wizard could heal themselves, and drawing a blank. Maybe a cheese-meister can do better?

Whenever playing a 2.0 Wizard, I never left the house without, e.g., Stoneskin active, and multiple castings of it (and Invisibility, Teleport, etc...) in reserve. It's just too hard otherwise, being squishy. Not having a, e.g. Potion of Cure Serious Wounds (+) (never mind a Ring of Regen) in my robes, I would find frankly suicidal, as a mage in a D&D world. I mean, as the lowest HD character class, wouldn't you squirrel away as much healing as you could?

[Subzero008]

I haven't played DnD at ALL, so can someone explain why the mummies are so dangerous? I mean, can't Roy just smash them with his green-glowing-sword-of doom?

Also, what do the words in white above the mummies mean?The undead can't talk, after all...?

[ti'esar]

To a level fifteen or so party, mummies are actually not that dangerous. The biggest threat they pose is forcing the Order to waste resources; for instance, the spell Durkon mentioned last time might get blown on the mummies if they're sent in first.

As for the white text, the mummies are apparently echoing what the Linear Guild members can say. I'm not sure why you think undead in OOTS can't talk - even mindless undead like zombies at least mutter "brains" from time to time.

[Lynn]

thats really weak evidence since Penelope had good reason to WANT to come back since she was still trying to find her kid

They all died at the same time, she may have met her kid in the afterlife. Then she'd want to stay dead.
Also, in the flashbacks, Penelopes doesn't look like she's forced to stay there, or like her mind is broken. Besides, she had enough power to ban evil cosmetic products, so I assume that Tarquin trusted her with some minor responsibilities to keep her busy. It suggests that they were not in bad terms. That's on wife that he din't need to kill, and there's no reason she wasthe only one.
I think Tarquin is a sociopath (hence the lack of mourning)and he probably would not mind certainly would kill his wife if he needed to, but it doesn't mean he did. As of now, there is no evidence that he killed any of his wives n°2 to 4, let alone all of them.

[jere7my]

Also, what do the words in white above the mummies mean?The undead can't talk, after all...?

Tell that to Xykon.

[kickassfrog]

It seems that in OOTS world, most souls refuse to be rezzed. (See Shojo, Eric, Draketooths). Roy is the only successful Rez we've seen, compared to several failures.

Shoji and the draketeeth both had reasons to refuse being rezzed. It's possible Penelope would refuse to come back now that she's finally reunited with her child though.

Who's Eric?

[t209]

Shoji and the draketeeth both had reasons to refuse being rezzed. It's possible Penelope would refuse to come back now that she's finally reunited with her child though.

Who's Eric?

He's Roy's baby brother who died in a lab accident.

[Ron Miel]

And who refused to be rezzed.
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0496.html

[ti'esar]

I think Tarquin is a sociopath (hence the lack of mourning)and he probably would not mind certainly would kill his wife if he needed to, but it doesn't mean he did. As of now, there is no evidence that he killed any of his wives n°2 to 4, let alone all of them.

In fact, it's worth noting that the entire reason people initially assumed Tarquin had murdered any of his wives was because of his saying that Penelope died of "mysterious circumstances". Now that we know that wasn't an euphemism, the entire initial basis for the Tarquin-as-bluebeard theory is gone. His marriage practices might charitably be called "unhealthy", but there's no indication that any ended in murder.

[Subzero008]

I haven't played DnD at ALL, so can someone explain why the mummies are so dangerous? I mean, can't Roy just smash them with his green-glowing-sword-of doom?

Also, what do the words in white above the mummies mean? The undead can't talk, after all...?

[ThePhantasm]

Close. Remove "probably", change "prove it" to "support my statements"... and "dishonesty" is not the right word. Nothing has transpired that reflects on how honest (or not) of a person you are, so I have no opinion on that subject.

So will you answer my question: what were you insinuating / implying? You say "dishonesty" isn't the right word, but it fits what you posted perfectly. What is the right word?

Also, your assumption that all of the people reading Kish's posts disagree with him on this is incorrect. Your "we" is unfounded.

[eilandesq]

(some later date)

*Qarr hears five draconic throats being cleared behind his back, and turns to see Tiamat--Goddess of Evil Dragonkind and Full Member of the Western Pantheon--standing there with five equally irritated expressions*

Tiamat: So, peon--I hear you were substantially responsible for tempting some fool elf mage into accepting a bargain that led to dozens of my black dragons being slaughtered like helpless children. Care to explain why I shouldn't torture you into a quivering heap before consigning your diabolical essence to eternal slavery in the lowest pits of My Hell?

Qarr: [soils himself and tries to flee]

Tiamat: Quickened Dimensional Anchor. Power Word Stun. [after a moment] Symbol of Pain. Quickened Summon Popcorn.

Oh, and the great thing about mummies? They burn prettily, and Durkon is quite capable of cutting loose with a Flame Strike. Unless plot demands it, I suspect they won't be more than a nuisance.

[Icedaemon]

In the first place, ouch, what horrible spelling & punctuation.

In the second place, from what we've seen there certainly seems to be genuine love between them. See panel 11. This is not someone who was forced into marriage against her will. And see how Tarquin reacts when he thought Nale was her killer. (Panel 3)

Amazing how Rich gets such complex body language in a stick figure drawing, but it works.

There are plenty of degrees between 'genuine love' and 'forced marriage'. It is unreasonable to assume that the majority of Tarquin's marriages were based on one or the other. She was probably fond of him and likely one of the more liked ones of the nine, though he was not fond enough of her to be enraged at Nale.

[t209]

So will you answer my question: what were you insinuating / implying? You say "dishonesty" isn't the right word, but it fits what you posted perfectly. What is the right word?

Also, your assumption that all of the people reading Kish's posts disagree with him on this is incorrect. Your "we" is unfounded.

I think Plot will demand it since they know about the gates. They are saying about "gates" too.
How do you interogate a dead person other than speak to dead?
P.S- Dang it, V!
P.P.S- How will Draketooths greet OOTS if they hadn't die? Good (Well, if it doesn't involves attack, it's good) or bad one (One of the Draketooths: Light Em up").

[Icedaemon]

I fail to see how anyone who condemns V for mass murder would find the sight of said mass murder hilarious.

Not the sight of the mass murder, but rather the fact that the mass murder has led to what could have been potential allies being used as undead fodder by an enemy.

[Mike Havran]

Oh, and the great thing about mummies? They burn prettily, and Durkon is quite capable of cutting loose with a Flame Strike. Unless plot demands it, I suspect they won't be more than a nuisance.

I'm not sure if Durkon has Flame Strike. He prefers lightning.

[Kish]

Also, what do the words in white above the mummies mean? The undead can't talk, after all...?

They can't? I thought Xykon talked quite a lot.

...Also the ghasts, and wights.

Zombies only say "brains," but that's because they're unintelligent undead, and even they talk.

Where do you get that the undead can't talk?

[Killer Angel]

Gusion is insinuating that I have argued that Malack is probably Lawful Evil,

If I had to bet, that would be my guess, too.

[Grail]

I haven't played DnD at ALL, so can someone explain why the mummies are so dangerous? I mean, can't Roy just smash them with his green-glowing-sword-of doom?

Also, what do the words in white above the mummies mean?The undead can't talk, after all...?

Mummies are dangerous because they are hard to kill. Even with green glowing swords of doom. They are also strong, and their attacks carry with them a deadly rotting disease that kills quickly and is hard to remove.

And there are mindless undead and then there are intelligent undead. Whilst mummies suffer a big penalty to their intelligence they are still intelligent and they can still talk.

[Gusion]

So will you answer my question: what were you insinuating / implying? You say "dishonesty" isn't the right word, but it fits what you posted perfectly. What is the right word?

Also, your assumption that all of the people reading Kish's posts disagree with him on this is incorrect. Your "we" is unfounded.

Hypocritical is probably the closest word. He appears to be very smart and does an excellent job at challenging others to support their statements.

The "we" wasn't assuming that people disagree or agree with him. The "we" was that people know his view, regardless of their opinion on it.

If you said, "Gusion, we all know you think Malack is LN." - that's a fair statement regardless if your view on his alignment.

Agreed. Though what would you place in the Contingency?

Well, since V can't use any conjuration or necromancy spells... stoneskin is probably a good choice. I've seen people put an extended bear's endurance there before too. I guess they figured that the extra Con is useful no matter what the danger (improved hp and fort saves)

[Forikroder]

And who refused to be rezzed.
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0496.html

ya but hes also like 5 so i dont think he can be used this particular argument since he doesnt even realise he was alive much less that hes dead and what that actual means, nor would he comprehend that he was being ressurected and what that would mean

(some later date)

*Qarr hears five draconic throats being cleared behind his back, and turns to see Tiamat--Goddess of Evil Dragonkind and Full Member of the Western Pantheon--standing there with five equally irritated expressions*

Tiamat: So, peon--I hear you were substantially responsible for tempting some fool elf mage into accepting a bargain that led to dozens of my black dragons being slaughtered like helpless children. Care to explain why I shouldn't torture you into a quivering heap before consigning your diabolical essence to eternal slavery in the lowest pits of My Hell?

Qarr: [soils himself and tries to flee]

Tiamat: Quickened Dimensional Anchor. Power Word Stun. [after a moment] Symbol of Pain. Quickened Summon Popcorn.

Tiamat already took her anger out on the Directer who went to talk to him so hes not going to waste her time coming to the mortal plane to kill an imp

[ThePhantasm]

Hypocritical is probably the closest word.

Sorry, try again. You suggested that Kish was disagreeing just for the sake of disagreeing, to the extent that even if the Giant himself commented and proved Kish wrong, he'd still stubbornly be contrarian. That isn't a charge of hypocrisy, no matter how you cut it. That's a charge of either dishonesty, stubbornness, or stupidity.

If you said, "Gusion, we all know you think Malack is LN." - that's a fair statement regardless if your view on his alignment.

Compare with:

But yes, yes, we all know Kish - you'll never believe he is anything but evil. I think Giant could come out and tell us and you'd still disagree.

So no, a more accurate analogue would be "Gusion, we all know that you'll never believe he is anything but LN, even if the Giant tells you otherwise." Still sound like a fair statement?

[Gusion]

Sorry, try again. You suggested that Kish was disagreeing just for the sake of disagreeing, to the extent that even if the Giant himself commented and proved Kish wrong, he'd still stubbornly be contrarian. That isn't a charge of hypocrisy, no matter how you cut it. That's a charge of either dishonesty, stubbornness, or stupidity.

You're ignoring half of what even Kish said I was implying - and that half is directly applicable to the hypocrisy. If you want to add "stubborn" then I suppose it would technically be accurate, but eh, it is the Internets and lots of people are stubborn.

"I have argued that Malack is ... Lawful Evil, that I have refused to engage with challenges from him that I [support my statements]" - the hypocrisy comes from while at the same time he refuses to support his own statements, he has asked others to support theirs (and typically they can't, as Kish is often right.)

Compare with:

So no, a more accurate analogue would be "Gusion, we all know that you'll never believe he is anything but LN, even if the Giant tells you otherwise." Still sound like a fair statement?

Hyperbolic, but sure. Obviously if Giant directly said it than I would say okay, as I expect Kish would too. If you want to imply I'm stubborn about Malack being LN I'm willing to accept that charge.

I am uncertain why you're so interested in this topic and want to drag it out publicly. You appear to care about it far more than Kish does. Are you trying to get me charged with posting a flame?

[ThePhantasm]

Are you trying to get me charged with posting a flame?

I'd rather no one ever need to get charged with flaming. All I'm trying to do is point out that the statement that you call "hyperbolic" was unfair, and at the very least seems like a "poisoning the well" logical fallacy.

Now you've admitted the statement was hyperbolic, i.e. you really didn't mean it that way, so there we go. You've been able to clarify so that no one can take your comment the wrong way. In that sense I did you a favor.