Greenhilt afterlife conundrum.

[Goblin_Priest]

It says heirs, not descendants. Presumably, had nobody inherited his belongings it would have gone to the state, meaning that any Cliffport-mandated hero would have done.

That sounds like a great plot hook for D&D: That artifact you looted from the temple? The last dude has a blood oath of vengence. Now it's yours, since he had no heir and you took his stuff!

[Vinyadan]

That sounds like a great plot hook for D&D: That artifact you looted from the temple? The last dude has a blood oath of vengence. Now it's yours, since he had no heir and you took his stuff!

It could make sense as basis for a dungeon. Mr Puck got old with a blood oath still on his shoulders, and no heirs. Knowing he would not manage to fulfil it, he went to the notary and expressly wrote in his will that whoever looted his grave would become his legal heir. To make sure that the looter was someone strong enough to conceivably fulfil the oath, the tomb was to be built beneath a monster-filled dungeon, to serve as a test.

[LadyEowyn]

I predict that, if Eugene's afterlife is dealt with at all in-strip after Xykon is destroyed, it will begin with a review.

Either saying that his old review was never completed once the Blood Oath topic was raised (Regardless of how Roy's deva dealt with the Oath topic).

Or, saying he's done enough things as a ghost that those things need taking into account.

I absolutely agree. We’ve seen enough of Eugene’s actions and attitudes in the afterlife to establish that his fate will be more complicated than “okay, Xykon is destroyed, welcome to Celestia”.

[Darth Paul]

Conceivably (I guess Eugene conceives it) V, as Roy's subordinate, inherits the Blood Oath upon Roy's death. Or at least would be able to fulfill it in Roy's place.

Here's a thought: when Roy was alive, would one of his team killing Xykon count as fulfilling the Oath for him?

[LadyEowyn]

Since Roy is the leader of the team, I would think yes.

[Ruck]

Since Roy is the leader of the team, I would think yes.

Particularly since the team was originally organized with that express purpose in mind.

[understatement]

What if MiTD eats him and RC drops the phylactery into a lava? And why would anyone ever get a Blood Oath in the first place?

[Darth Paul]

What if MiTD eats him and RC drops the phylactery into a lava? And why would anyone ever get a Blood Oath in the first place?

1) In that case, Eugene's screwed, I guess, since neither of them are in any way related to him or the Oath. Roy is already good since he died in pursuit of vengeance; and Julia... is open to debate. I would argue that since Roy, as the immediate heir, fulfilled the oath in death, it stops there and doesn't pass to her. But I could be wrong.

2) Canonically, Eugene was drunk at the time. I mean really drunk.

[Rrmcklin]

What if MiTD eats him and RC drops the phylactery into a lava? And why would anyone ever get a Blood Oath in the first place?

Eugene, personally, was super drunk. Outside of that, I assume because some people in the moment might want vengeance but know it could take awhile, and thus would want to give themselves an extra push to never give up on it.

Eugene, somehow never looked into the actual details of the binding oath he took, for some inexplicable reason.

[HorizonWalker]

Eugene, somehow never looked into the actual details of the binding oath he took, for some inexplicable reason.

It's not inexplicable, you said it yourself: he was super drunk.

[Kish]

For a night, not for decades.

[Peelee]

I dunno. The blood oath itself seemed pretty clear and pretty short. It may be more analogous to a lifelong smoker - the health risks are common knowledge, but the do it anyway, and can still be surprised to hear they have health issues later. I think Eugene knew the deal, and was just stupidly human about it.

[Darth Paul]

For a night, not for decades.

I would guess, that as he found himself able to "rest" (as in sleep, sit down in a chair with his feet up, marry a smoking hot woman who inexplicably found him attractive, and so on) in this world, Eugene may have concluded that the Blood Oath was just a stupid tattoo and not as dire as it was billed. Then, after his first death (since I believe he had a few before the final one?), the Deva clued him in about its consequences in the afterlife.

[Rrmcklin]

I would guess, that as he found himself able to "rest" (as in sleep, sit down in a chair with his feet up, marry a smoking hot woman who inexplicably found him attractive, and so on) in this world, Eugene may have concluded that the Blood Oath was just a stupid tattoo and not as dire as it was billed. Then, after his first death (since I believe he had a few before the final one?), the Deva clued him in about its consequences in the afterlife.

That still leaves questions. He had to have figured there was something more to it than just a stupid tattoo, otherwise him telling Roy about it before he died makes no sense in the first place.

[Darth Paul]

That still leaves questions. He had to have figured there was something more to it than just a stupid tattoo, otherwise him telling Roy about it before he died makes no sense in the first place.

It's hard to get inside Eugene's head on this. He pursued the vengeance quest for a long while, even went after who he thought was going to be Xykon once, but then gave up and raised his family.

Spoiler: SOD

Show

He even passed the chance to go after Xykon again when Right-Eye tried to give him the information on his whereabouts.

Maybe he felt, deep down, that he wouldn't win against Xykon and wasn't willing to die in the attempt. He probably hadn't thought the afterlife implications through.

[AstralFire]

Spoiler: Miko and Lacuna Stuff

Show

I am no great fan of Miko, but I think Lacuna Caster's actually made a number of pretty good points in this thread. I started skimming around page 8 (at 50 posts per page) but I missed if someone directly addressed this:

What would it actually look like where Shojo has made an order to bring them alive and Miko misinterprets it as an order to kill them? Shojo is a very clever manipulator -- not flawless, he makes multiple mistakes of judgment, but he's pretty good at the job. He's been manipulating Miko for years and Miko earlier on in the storyline looks pretty rational -- not likable (although rereading as an older person, I find Roy's sexism to be incredibly unbearable in this section) -- what sort of order could he reasonably make that could be reasonably misinterpreted by Miko?

I dunno, I'm not sitting around with the urge to make new fanfics and right what once went wrong, so to speak, but I thought there was a pretty convincing argument that Miko before Azure City and Miko after Azure City are basically two different characters and not as the result of any natural character growth.

Spoiler: Eugene Stuff

Show

Looking back at OotS and its deliberations on Good, I feel it's worth pointing out just how weird it is to have a discussion where what's good and what's moral are supposed to be two different things. I understand if people will disagree, but I think this discussion pretty much underlines both why alignment is a useful shorthand to have for discussion and why it's frequently unhelpful mechanically.

I think GWG's made a good case that Roy did Good because it's just what felt natural to him rather than actively doing Good for the conscious purpose of furthering the ideals known as Good. He didn't set out to save the world, he just set out to do a job, but he more-or-less consistently (especially in the second half of the narrative) does that job in a Good manner and ever since Soon his job has expanded to *include* save the world.

I generally side with the people saying that the Deva wouldn't be chucking Roy's file into the true neutral bin for abandonment of Elan alone; when taken in combination with all of his other questionable acts, had he not repented and made things right, it's enough to throw him over there.

But what I really want to ask is: how in the hell does Eugene ever even nominally qualify for Lawful Good? I understand we're all in agreement that he'll get kicked over to TN on evaluation, but I don't recall seeing a single act he's done in the webcomic or the books I've bought (though I don't have all of them) that would qualify as either, nor an inclination for acts of those natures. He has no admiration for acts of law or good, he has no motivation towards law or good, what the hell happened here?

I dunno, I feel like Eugene only has been Lawful Good for the purpose of that one fake-out with Shojo and that's it. While I'm guessing it was just the transition from the old gag strips to the new ones, is there anywhere we see Eugene in the past that's consistent with even superficial Lawful Good?

[Wizard_Lizard]

I absolutely agree. We’ve seen enough of Eugene’s actions and attitudes in the afterlife to establish that his fate will be more complicated than “okay, Xykon is destroyed, welcome to Celestia”.

I could imgine the final image of oots being eugene's face saying; "WHAT!!!!"

[Fyraltari]

My preferred theory is that Eugene is LG in that it is what he thinks is theoretically the best alignment but he himself is incapable of meeting those standards. Basically Eugene thinks he ought to be LG (maybe Fyron was LG) and in life didn’t do anything blantantly chaotic or evil and so he never realized that what best describes and suits him is TN.

[AstralFire]

Fyron being LG -- and thus, Eugene should be LG, with no further examination ever warranted throughout the course of a long life -- would be sad but fitting.

[Wizard_Lizard]

Fyron being LG -- and thus, Eugene should be LG, with no further examination ever warranted throughout the course of a long life -- would be sad but fitting.

Blind ambition does not matter.

[Peelee]

Miko earlier on in the storyline looks pretty rational

Very early on, Miko kills Samantha, and responds to "you killed my daughter" with "so how about that helping me?" What Lacuna Caster handwaves away as "lack of tact" I call "extreme sociopathic behavior." At the very least, that is so far away from rational that I'd expect a lengthy plane ride just to visit rational.

Not a, psychologist, could have a wrong term there, but the point comes across.

[AstralFire]

It doesn't particularly strike me as irrational. She lets them go for their help, they turn on her, she kills one and reminds the other of the promise they just made. I feel like I see some version of this exchange in fiction very often without the intended reading being that the speaker is irrational.

It is very cold, yes. Sociopathic? Eh, super imprecise word I don't like using because it implies a precision it lacks due to a recent former life as a medical term, but maybe. Traits viewed as sociopathic are often cited as improving rational decision making, by the way.

Irrational? I don't think so.

I wouldn't call it a lack of tact either, mind, as that seems to be understating it. But cold and collected is not evil and also isn't really consistent with the later depiction that's under dispute.

[Peelee]

It doesn't particularly strike me as irrational. She lets them go for their help, they turn on her, she kills one and reminds the other of the promise they just made. I feel like I see some version of this exchange in fiction very often without the intended reading being that the speaker is irrational.

To be fair, this exchange in fiction typically comes off as the person asking the deal be honored after doing the killing is typically the villain, and is used to demonstrate how evil and cold-hearted they are. Not great examples to harken back to for Miko.

[Vinyadan]

It doesn't particularly strike me as irrational. She lets them go for their help, they turn on her, she kills one and reminds the other of the promise they just made. I feel like I see some version of this exchange in fiction very often without the intended reading being that the speaker is irrational.

It is very cold, yes. Sociopathic? Eh, super imprecise word I don't like using because it implies a precision it lacks due to recently being a medical term, but maybe. Irrational? I don't think so.

I wouldn't call it a lack of tact either, mind, as that seems to be understating it.

I would say "relentless" and "menacing". And something about showing a façade of giving a last chance without actually giving a frock about the other person's survival or feelings.

[AstralFire]

As suggested by my edits, I would absolutely agree with categorizing this as ruthless or other versions of words that suggest a lack of compassion.

However, I feel it is also fair to point out that lacking an empathetic reflex is not inherently evil, is not the same as an extremely emotional reflex, and is not necessarily to be condemned in the context of someone who just betrayed you and is trying to kill you. While we do generally recognize a lack of reflexive empathy as a villainous or negative trait in fiction, this is not a universal rule (and in an aside I think is a mistake for understanding how effective real world compassion should work.)

I don't like Miko, I'm not Lacuna. I just think there's merit to the argument that the character warps dramatically without good cause in story.

[Peelee]

As suggested by my edits, I would absolutely agree with categorizing this as ruthless or other versions of words that suggest a lack of compassion.

However, I feel it is also fair to point out that lacking an empathetic reflex is not inherently evil, is not the same as an extremely emotional reflex, and is not necessarily to be condemned in the context of someone who just betrayed you and is trying to kill you. While we do generally recognize a lack of reflexive empathy as a villainous or negative trait in fiction, this is not a universal rule (and in an aside I think is a mistake for understanding how effective real world compassion should work.)

I don't like Miko, I'm not Lacuna. I just think there's merit to the argument that the character warps dramatically without good cause in story.

I understand, but i maintain she starts right out the gate as somewhat unhinged.

[Mightymosy]

Spoiler: Miko and Lacuna Stuff

Show

I am no great fan of Miko, but I think Lacuna Caster's actually made a number of pretty good points in this thread. I started skimming around page 8 (at 50 posts per page) but I missed if someone directly addressed this:

What would it actually look like where Shojo has made an order to bring them alive and Miko misinterprets it as an order to kill them? Shojo is a very clever manipulator -- not flawless, he makes multiple mistakes of judgment, but he's pretty good at the job. He's been manipulating Miko for years and Miko earlier on in the storyline looks pretty rational -- not likable (although rereading as an older person, I find Roy's sexism to be incredibly unbearable in this section) -- what sort of order could he reasonably make that could be reasonably misinterpreted by Miko?

I dunno, I'm not sitting around with the urge to make new fanfics and right what once went wrong, so to speak, but I thought there was a pretty convincing argument that Miko before Azure City and Miko after Azure City are basically two different characters and not as the result of any natural character growth.

Spoiler: Eugene Stuff

Show

Looking back at OotS and its deliberations on Good, I feel it's worth pointing out just how weird it is to have a discussion where what's good and what's moral are supposed to be two different things. I understand if people will disagree, but I think this discussion pretty much underlines both why alignment is a useful shorthand to have for discussion and why it's frequently unhelpful mechanically.

I think GWG's made a good case that Roy did Good because it's just what felt natural to him rather than actively doing Good for the conscious purpose of furthering the ideals known as Good. He didn't set out to save the world, he just set out to do a job, but he more-or-less consistently (especially in the second half of the narrative) does that job in a Good manner and ever since Soon his job has expanded to *include* save the world.

I generally side with the people saying that the Deva wouldn't be chucking Roy's file into the true neutral bin for abandonment of Elan alone; when taken in combination with all of his other questionable acts, had he not repented and made things right, it's enough to throw him over there.

But what I really want to ask is: how in the hell does Eugene ever even nominally qualify for Lawful Good? I understand we're all in agreement that he'll get kicked over to TN on evaluation, but I don't recall seeing a single act he's done in the webcomic or the books I've bought (though I don't have all of them) that would qualify as either, nor an inclination for acts of those natures. He has no admiration for acts of law or good, he has no motivation towards law or good, what the hell happened here?

I dunno, I feel like Eugene only has been Lawful Good for the purpose of that one fake-out with Shojo and that's it. While I'm guessing it was just the transition from the old gag strips to the new ones, is there anywhere we see Eugene in the past that's consistent with even superficial Lawful Good?

I think on screen Eugene clearly doesn't fit with LG.
For me it's important to remember he is a side character, though. Thus we don't see everything of him.
I think the story could be interpreted in a way that he used to be much better in his years with Fyron, and slowly descented into the grumpy egocentric man he is we see in the comic.
This is what I thought, at least. Especially after what Sara, his wife, said about him.

Also, it's a matter of point of view, and thus subjective.
Remember, the author appearantly puts two evil* bounty hunters, Enor & Ganji, into the "neutral" box.
If being better than THOSE is a standard, I have no problem imagining Eugene as good.


*my opinion on how I view them

[Prinygod]

To be fair, this exchange in fiction typically comes off as the person asking the deal be honored after doing the killing is typically the villain, and is used to demonstrate how evil and cold-hearted they are. Not great examples to harken back to for Miko.

Isn't it usually how it works, the hero holds up their end, the villain breaks their word and dies in the confrontation with the hero. In fact trying to uphold a deal with a villain, until the villain actually betrays them, is a standard heroic archtype that miko appears to match. Also the villain in the stories usually has some coercion, miko is appealing to common cause.

[Peelee]

Isn't it usually how it works, the hero holds up their end, the villain breaks their word and dies in the confrontation with the hero. In fact trying to uphold a deal with a villain, until the villain actually betrays them, is a standard heroic archtype that miko appears to match. Also the villain in the stories usually has some coercion, miko is appealing to common cause.

I'm thinking more "villain allies with people, one of the allies has doubts, villain kills said person and asks if anyone else wishes to reconsider."

[Darth Paul]

I think on screen Eugene clearly doesn't fit with LG.
For me it's important to remember he is a side character, though. Thus we don't see everything of him.
I think the story could be interpreted in a way that he used to be much better in his years with Fyron, and slowly descented into the grumpy egocentric man he is we see in the comic.
This is what I thought, at least. Especially after what Sara, his wife, said about him.

Also, it's a matter of point of view, and thus subjective.
Remember, the author appearantly puts two evil* bounty hunters, Enor & Ganji, into the "neutral" box.
If being better than THOSE is a standard, I have no problem imagining Eugene as good.


*my opinion on how I view them

I think Eugene could easily be classed with Miko as far as "had been pushing the boundaries of Lawful Good for years", just in a different way.

Whereas Miko had been following her alignment to maintain her Paladin class requirements so she could slay evildoers, Eugene was very likely raised Lawful Good and didn't think about it that much, like going to church for most people. He obeyed the law and didn't do anything outright Evil, but also didn't do much affirmatively Good either; so his character could be summed up as "Lawful Self-Centered" when it comes down to it.

As far as Enor and Ganji, they're Evil only so far as Boba Fett would be Evil. They work for an Evil empire because that's where the money is; they don't care about justice because there's no money in it. By the end of BRitF they're perfectly willing to join the good guys because the bad guys double-crossed them. That screams Neutral to me.

Isn't it usually how it works, the hero holds up their end, the villain breaks their word and dies in the confrontation with the hero. In fact trying to uphold a deal with a villain, until the villain actually betrays them, is a standard heroic archtype that miko appears to match. Also the villain in the stories usually has some coercion, miko is appealing to common cause.

I'm thinking more "villain allies with people, one of the allies has doubts, villain kills said person and asks if anyone else wishes to reconsider."

I just read the whole meeting as proof that Miko had no people skills whatsoever. Expecting a father to work with the person who just chopped down his daughter, however justified they were... who really thinks that's happening? (And if he DID go along with her, it would only be for the chance to insert some cutlery between her ribs ASAP.)