Solution to Redcloak's problem

[JonahFalcon]

I'd been thinking about this the past year plus.

Here is the solution -- allow goblins to have player characters, and of any alignment. The ramifications will be large, but it gives the equality they want.

[factotum]

Player characters can already be goblins--in SoD one of the other gods says to the newly-ascended TDO that the rules to allow for that already exist, and TDO responds something along the lines of "Those rules are horse**** and you know it!". So even in-universe it's possible for PCs to be goblins.

[dspeyer]

Not sure how PC/NPC works in the OOTS universe...

But I've been thinking for ages that what goblins really need is free will regarding alignment. So long as they're Usually Evil, no one sincerely will want them around. Nor will they build a really strong civilization of their own. But give them Alignment: Any and they can stand as equals. Even Often Evil would probably be manageable.

[faustin]

The real problem is the xp/loot system.
Celia kinda adressed the problem; the whole "making a live off murdering people" and "is ok because they are evil" is wrong in many levels. Ask Redcloak, or the Black Dragon mommy.

Heck, one of the reasons Roy impressed Durkon enough to join him was that he solved a quest with a pacifist resolution (to the dismay of their former companions). O-Chul backstory is even better.

Adventurers should be rewarded for solving problems, not for killing them.

[dspeyer]

Humans are worth XP on the same system as goblins.

Society discourages taking advantage of this. But I daresay goblin society discourages the killing of goblins.

The assymetry is that the 'ordinary' humanoids have a giant discourage-xp-farming-together coalition that goblins aren't welcome in, and possibly that the 'good' gods are treating the matters differently.

[BaronOfHell]

In this strip https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0021.html Haley points out to Belkar they had already defeated the chimera.

No murdering required.

I don't know, but I suppose if they solved the problem of being attacked by a chimera in a non-violent way, they would also have received xp?

[Metastachydium]

In this strip https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0021.html Haley points out to Belkar they had already defeated the chimera.

No murdering required.

I don't know, but I suppose if they solved the problem of being attacked by a chimera in a non-violent way, they would also have received xp?

I don't know, Evan's Spiked Tentacles of Forced Intrusion are anything but non-violent, so much so that we have it on good authority that the Giant would really rather he had never included it in the comic.

[Peelee]

In this strip https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0021.html Haley points out to Belkar they had already defeated the chimera.

No murdering required.

I don't know, but I suppose if they solved the problem of being attacked by a chimera in a non-violent way, they would also have received xp?

Yes. XP is awarded for overcoming challenges, not for killing.

[Roland Itiative]

The PC/monster and XP fodder dillema is just a vehicle the comic has chosen for communicating a deeper issue with fantasy in general, the idea that some intelligent lives are treated as downright inferior and expendable in comparison to others.

Allowing goblins to become PCs does not really solve the issue, it just moves the goalpost from "all goblins are inferior" to "all non-PC goblins are inferior". As long as the gods enforce the basic tropes of fantasy races in the OotS world, the problem will persist.

That's also why Gobbotopia isn't a full solution either, just the start of one. In the current framework, the city is just a high-level challenge for adventurers, not a "real" nation on par with the ones run by demihumans.

Redcloak is Evil, and as such his way of dealing with the problem involves a lot of pain for those who he doesn't like (and that's why he ultimately won't get things done his way), but that doesn't mean the issue he's fighting for is invalid.

[The Pilgrim]

In this strip https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0021.html Haley points out to Belkar they had already defeated the chimera.

No murdering required.

I don't know, but I suppose if they solved the problem of being attacked by a chimera in a non-violent way, they would also have received xp?

Yes. But killing is faster, as the "paladin" in OtOoPCs complains to Roy.

[Synesthesy]

The main problem is about aligment and rules.

Killing enemies creatures gives you XP. This is the fundamental law of this world, ok.
But there is another rule that say that killing creatures labelled by "usually evil", not only warriors but also helpless ones like children, is not evil.

Spoiler

Show

and we now that for sure as in Start of Darkness the ruler of the raid that killed Reddie's family is still a paladin years after in O-Chul's story

So the solution is change this: killing goblins is as killing humans.

[factotum]

But there is another rule that say that killing creatures labelled by "usually evil", not only warriors but also helpless ones like children, is not evil.

There is no such rule, and the Giant is on record as saying that the idea of killing a baby just because it's from a Usually Evil species is absolutely abhorrent--even if said baby is a black dragon or similar. As for the note about the paladin still being a paladin in O-Chul's story, there is such a thing as atonement--even if a Paladin Falls for their actions it's possible for them to regain their class and abilities given time and the will to regain the favour of their gods. So, that person still being a paladin years later doesn't mean they didn't Fall for attacking Redcloak's village.

[Peelee]

Spoiler

Show

and we now that for sure as in Start of Darkness the ruler of the raid that killed Reddie's family is still a paladin years after in O-Chul's story

Spoiler: Start of Darkness/Good Deed Gone Unpunished

Show

We know nothing of the sort. Gin Jun was not in any way the ruler of the raid that killed Reddie's family; he was a participant, but porbbaly a low-ranking one at the time.

[Mastikator]

The real problem is the xp/loot system.
Celia kinda adressed the problem; the whole "making a live off murdering people" and "is ok because they are evil" is wrong in many levels. Ask Redcloak, or the Black Dragon mommy.

Heck, one of the reasons Roy impressed Durkon enough to join him was that he solved a quest with a pacifist resolution (to the dismay of their former companions). O-Chul backstory is even better.

Adventurers should be rewarded for solving problems, not for killing them.

Bingo, the whole system encourages evil. The DM either has to come up with continuously over the top evil NPCs for the PCs to murder, or the PCs have to just be evil. It's impossible to be good, surrounded by other good NPCs and still gain exp/loot.
The only way out is to remove exp as a reward for killing/defeating.

[woweedd]

The main problem is about aligment and rules.

Killing enemies creatures gives you XP. This is the fundamental law of this world, ok.
But there is another rule that say that killing creatures labelled by "usually evil", not only warriors but also helpless ones like children, is not evil.

Spoiler

Show

and we now that for sure as in Start of Darkness the ruler of the raid that killed Reddie's family is still a paladin years after in O-Chul's story

So the solution is change this: killing goblins is as killing humans.

I mean...
1. You gain XP from overcoming challenges, not killing things.
2. That rule doesn't exist.
3. No he isn't.

[Synesthesy]

Spoiler: Start of Darkness/Good Deed Gone Unpunished

Show

We know nothing of the sort. Gin Jun was not in any way the ruler of the raid that killed Reddie's family; he was a participant, but porbbaly a low-ranking one at the time.

Spoiler

Show

I need to say that I was almost sure he was. Can I ask you how do you know it?

My knowledge of English often leads me to mistakes sadly....

There is no such rule, and the Giant is on record as saying that the idea of killing a baby just because it's from a Usually Evil species is absolutely abhorrent--even if said baby is a black dragon or similar. As for the note about the paladin still being a paladin in O-Chul's story, there is such a thing as atonement--even if a Paladin Falls for their actions it's possible for them to regain their class and abilities given time and the will to regain the favour of their gods. So, that person still being a paladin years later doesn't mean they didn't Fall for attacking Redcloak's village.

Yes I know what the Giant posted, I agree with him on every word, still there is people (and Gods) in his world that think what I wrote. I try to explain myself better: the World sytem, the afterlife system, act in a way that makes you ok if you raid a goblin village for a good cause, because there is a faction that decided what is good and what is not (the Gods). Instead, in the end, the system should reward more the O-Chul's way (and Roy's way, and Durkon's way) over the way of other "good" characters like Gin Jun, Miko, the paladin in Roy's first team, etc. And that means giving goblins' more dignity, just as Redcloak said: there shouldn't be a world where someone who raids a goblins' village is an adventurer (and can take paladin levels) and a goblin who raids a human village is a monster (that cannot take paladin levels).

[woweedd]

Spoiler

Show

I need to say that I was almost sure he was. Can I ask you how do you know it?

My knowledge of English often leads me to mistakes sadly....

Yes I know what the Giant posted, I agree with him on every word, still there is people (and Gods) in his world that think what I wrote. I try to explain myself better: the World sytem, the afterlife system, act in a way that makes you ok if you raid a goblin village for a good cause, because there is a faction that decided what is good and what is not (the Gods). Instead, in the end, the system should reward more the O-Chul's way (and Roy's way, and Durkon's way) over the way of other "good" characters like Gin Jun, Miko, the paladin in Roy's first team, etc. And that means giving goblins' more dignity, just as Redcloak said: there shouldn't be a world where someone who raids a goblins' village is an adventurer (and can take paladin levels) and a goblin who raids a human village is a monster (that cannot take paladin levels).

The gods clearly didn't decide what is and isn't moral, because, well, there are Evil gods. If the gods were the arbiters of right and wrong, surely, they'd all be good. Also, both Gin Jun and Miko did end up falling precisely because they finally barreled over the line. They, and, presumably, the Paladin's in Roy's team, were managing to skirt the line of the Good alignment just enough to keep their powers their whole lives. But, well...Their luck ran out. Heck, we have it on authority from Rich himself that the paladins who murdered goblin children DID in fact fall for doing so. We didn't see it because A. Unnecessary B. Redcloak probably doesn't know or care ("Oh, wow, my family's killers can't summon their magic horsies anymore. Truly, my people are avenged.") and C. the gods don't really feel the need to make a big production out of it all the time. As for our Paladins, who didn't personally any kids or anyone who wasn't evil, but did watch it happen...Well, it's bad, but, uh, Durkon watched two of his party members torture a man without raising any noticeable objection. I disagree with it, but that seems to be the general morals of the comic.

[Psyren]

The gods clearly didn't decide what is and isn't moral, because, well, there are Evil gods. If the gods were the arbiters of right and wrong, surely, they'd all be good.

You're conflating good/evil with right/wrong here.

Loki wholeheartedly believes that "screw you, got mine" is the right way to act. Anyone who doesn't believe that are suckers. We know this because Hilgya has this attitude and embodies his teachings.

But that way of acting, in D&D alignment terms, is Evil (Chaotic Evil at that.) Loki merely wouldn't care that that label would be applied to him by the cosmos, he still believes he is right to behave the way he does.

TL;DR: The right/wrong way to act is subjective and comes down to each god's beliefs. But the D&D alignment labels of Good and Evil are objective. An evil god getting labeled Evil doesn't mean they don't believe they're right, it simply means that they are assigned that alignment by their actions and outlook.

[woweedd]

You're conflating good/evil with right/wrong here.

Loki wholeheartedly believes that "screw you, got mine" is the right way to act. Anyone who doesn't believe that are suckers. We know this because Hilgya has this attitude and embodies his teachings.

But that way of acting, in D&D alignment terms, is Evil (Chaotic Evil at that.) Loki merely wouldn't care that that label would be applied to him by the cosmos, he still believes he is right to behave the way he does.

TL;DR: The right/wrong way to act is subjective and comes down to each god's beliefs. But the D&D alignment labels of Good and Evil are objective. An evil god getting labeled Evil doesn't mean they don't believe they're right, it simply means that they are assigned that alignment by their actions and outlook.

No, i'm saying, if the gods determine that system, as syn seems to be proposing, why are any of them classed as Evil?

[KorvinStarmast]

No, i'm saying, if the gods determine that system, as syn seems to be proposing, why are any of them classed as Evil?

Inertia. It came baked into the system Rich used as the skeleton for the self aware parody stick figure world.

[Synesthesy]

No, i'm saying, if the gods determine that system, as syn seems to be proposing, why are any of them classed as Evil?

I can think at least of 2 reasons:

1) some of them think that Evil is cool and it's 'good' to be evil, while the other things that evil is a bad thing, and both here have an agreement
2) there is some negotiation, maybe hundreds of world old, that made it clear that yes, you can be evil, but at least you have the "evil" label on you. Maybe one of the rule that Gods decided eons ago was that every world they create must have both good and evil (and neutral), with some cosmic balance.


However, we can agree that most if not every "evil" creature in oots is either happy with is evil aligment or is trying to change it, and in both cases they say that they are evil with no problem at all.