OOTS #1209 - The Discussion Thread

[Etilworg]

We are all wrong. We let our emotions makes the judgement.

We see Durkon die and comclude: "Red Cloack is evil we can kill him!"

BUT

The plan is give TDO the control of snarl to negotiate with the gods TO REMAKE THE WORLD.

Durkon is not giving RC something the he wants, he is only confirm that the threat is real and the gods will negotiate.

Now RC can go an Comune with TDO : "Hey! the gods want to negotiate and thor send you this message, will continue taking control of the gate ? "

If TDO say yes, RC will wipe out OOTS and continue the search for the gate.
If TDO say no, RC can resurect Durkon and plan how to deal with Xykon.

He can not let Durkon alive because the town is in alert now: there is a strange dwarf an his companions are near. He need at least 10 minutes to cast Comune.

[The_Weirdo]

And I will bet you money right now that paladin fell for committing an evil act

The campaign was described as decades-long. It strains belief that this was the first time they murdered innocenr civilians. In all likelihood, they did it before and got zero retaliation from their gods in exchange.

Even if they had, it would have been the equivalent of confiscating their badge for mass murder.

[pendell]

Start of Darkness features goblins living in peace with humans. They might have not been exactly good goblins, but they were peaceful, and perfectly content to stay that way if Xykon hadn't come along and enslaved them all.

Exactly. I believe the appropriate phrase to describe these goblins is "neutral". There is one scene in Start of Darkness which features them. And in the "On the Origin of the PCs" prequel...

Spoiler

Show

In one of Roy and Durkon's first adventures together, they are called to clear out an orc encampment near town. They go out and attempt to TALK to the orcs first. This actually proves successful ; the orcs are here to attend a concert by a music group of which they are fans and have no interest in fighting. Roy and Durkon work out an accord, and the orcs are able to attend their concert in peace.

Other adventurers are not happy, however. THEY wanted an excuse to pick up some easy XP, and since the orcs detect evil (cause they're orcs, no other obvious reason) the party Paladin can kill them out of hand without Falling. It's these humans in the story who are the problem, not the orcs.

The other party has the attitude the Giant is fighting against.

Remember -- in SRD goblins are listed with alignment: usually neutral evil. "Usually" .

What does this mean? Behold

Often
Often suggests that at a minimum, the percentage of the population with the 'correct' alignment is greater than any of the other eight alignments. Mathematically, 100% / 9 = 11.1111%, so 'often chaotic evil' could mean as little as 11.1112% of the population is actually chaotic evil! Of course, it would be very unusual for any species to have a very nearly even distribution of all alignments, so probably the lower limit for 'often' is between 20 and 40%. The Warcraft RPG Monster Guide describes often as "Exceptions are uncommon, but not unknown." In the author's view, the upper limit should allow that in a typical village, there are at least a few beings of 'nonstandard' alignment, so probably no more than 80 - 90%.

Usually
Usually suggests that at a minimum, a majority (50.0001%) have the alignment, and at a maximum, exceptions are just common enough that they are a known phenomena. In reality, there might be many exceptions for each known individual defector, so 99% is probably an absolute maximum. The Warcraft RPG Monster Guide states "Exceptions are thus rare and may be ostracized by the race’s society."

Always
Always suggest that at a maximum, every last member (100%) has the alignment. But what about the minimum? The Warcraft RPG Monster Guide states that "Exceptions, if they exist, comprise less than 1% of the race's population and apply to isolated individuals." However, the Greyhawk Wiki suggests 'Alu-fiends' are 'always chaotic evil', but this site states that 20% of alu-fiends are of nonstandard alignment!

So, I'm going to take a wild guess and assume that the alignment graph represents a bell curve. For humans, the bell curve has its peak at 'neutral', with a pretty much even number of humans falling off to the evil and good side of the spectrum. For goblins , the peak hits smack in the middle of neutral evil. Since there's nothing to the left of neutral evil on the graph, I imagine half a bell curve trailing off towards the good end of the chart. If this is a correct model, this means that approximately 33% of goblins hit the neutral end of the scale, trailing off to the point where goblin paladins are probably one-offs who have existed only once or twice in the world's history.

You can't destroy a species if 33% of their members are not evil. By that logic, we would be entirely within our rights to wipe out D&D humans, given that some 40%+ of the species fall in the evil chart. 40% evil + neutral who go along with it = majority evil = evil species.

I think one of the major points of disagreement is the fact that other stories, such as Tolkien, used orcs and goblins also. But OOTS goblins are not the same as Tolkien's goblins! In Tolkien's stories, orcs and goblins are Always Evil, creatures bred from captive elves in a ruthless selection process, imbued with unholy magic, to bring about a ruthless predator incapable of any goodness. If I recall Tolkien's letters, if good and evil are a spectrum, then the absolute lowest end point a wicked human can reach is the STARTING point for his orcs.

Tolkien's orcs are utterly, irredeemably wicked. Which is why they are slain by everyone else, to ally with them is an indication of depravity, and why they disappear from the world when the Dark Lord disappears. They are not fully natural creatures; when a Dark Lord is in the world exerting their power, the orcs multiply and become strong. When there is no Dark Lord, they slay themselves in despair or hide in the mountains waiting for a better day. These are NOT creatures with whom any concord or agreement is possible for any but the most wicked.

D&D goblins aren't like that.

D&D goblins are part of the natural order of their world. Corrupted to some extent maybe, wicked because of circumstance, but nonetheless natural creatures who are capable of a degree of goodness. D&D goblins make a far, far better fit for the historically oppressed minority mold that Rich is going for than Tolkien's orcs ever were.

So if we're going to talk about the ethics of dealing with goblins, we have to deal with them as Rich's creations and D&D creatures, not as Tolkien's creatures. It's an apples to oranges comparison.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[KorvinStarmast]

Yes, even the children. This isn't some cultural difference issue we're talking about. The goblins were created to be evil - and they embrace their evilness. In fact, the only non-evil goblins we've ever encountered, or even heard of, were the teenagers rebelling waaaaaay back near the beginning of the story - and the one that was helping the OOTS betrayed them because his goodness was just a phase.

Whoa, wait, what about the guy who opened the hydraburger / hydrahead BBQ franchise? Near the kobold prophet's valley?

I'm astounded that anybody is surprised. OF COURSE Redcloak wasn't going to switch sides in five minutes at the beginning of the book.

That's a fair point: if his brother can't convince him, and if he killed his brother rather than be convinced to go a different way, a strange dwarf who he was in a deadly battle with will hardly be convincing without more time, effort, engagement, and incentive.

Well, smart or wise people can succumb to fixation on a single plan beyond good sense.

I am reminded of Plan XVII ... but we may be getting to close to 'real world history' for that.

In my opinion, letting loose a person like Miko Miyazaki is a war crime. They armed her, they trained her, they must answer for her. But they are not innocent bystanders. They made the monster, they equipped and clothed her.

We seem to be wading in the shallow end of the opinion pool again. (Miko really isn't on topic for this strip, eh?)

The plan is give TDO the control of snarl to negotiate with the gods TO REMAKE THE WORLD. Durkon is not giving RC something the he wants, he is only confirm that the threat is real and the gods will negotiate.

Now RC can go an Comune with TDO : "Hey! the gods want to negotiate and thor send you this message, will continue taking control of the gate ? "

If TDO say yes, RC will wipe out OOTS and continue the search for the gate.
If TDO say no, RC can resurect Durkon and plan how to deal with Xykon.

He can not let Durkon alive because the town is in alert now: there is a strange dwarf an his companions are near. He need at least 10 minutes to cast Comune.

Your post makes sense. Not sure if that's how it plays out but your pieces fit together well enough.

[Mandor]

I think one missing piece is is The Dark One is native to this instance of this world.

He may not even KNOW how long it will take create a new world, to build up new worshippers, so he can have enough sustenence to survive into the next world.

Redcloak and The Dark One might be willing to accept the deaths of every goblin on the entire planet if they believed it was they only way that they could MAKE the other gods give goblins a fair shake next go-round, and make sure their followers in the next world knew to trust goblins the same as dwarves or humans or elves.

But I doubt they'd continue with The Plan if they knew ending this world means deaths of all goblins AND death of the Dark One himself, meaning no divine heavy to fight for them next go-round.
Because then you either wouldn't have any goblins AT ALL in the next world "Screw them, they're too much hassle", OR, you'd have goblins and the next several worlds would be extra-supersized-goblin torment for payback.
Maybe Thor and Odin wouldn't go for payback, but as we've been told, the Neutral Gods + Evil Gods, put together, outnumber the Good Gods.

EIther way, it ends very very very badly for Goblinkind.
But TDO may not realize his personal continued existence is not guaranteed.

[ebarde]

That's a good point, Rich said the paladins fell but that seems to be an exception to the rule for whatever reason. If every paladin that massacred goblins lost their abilities, their campaign would have certainly not lasted decades and also the How the Paladin Got his Scar showed that the members of the Sapphire Guard can pull a whole lot of evil actions before being punished for it.

[TRH]

But TDO may not realize his personal continued existence is not guaranteed.

On the contrary, it's pretty much certain that he doesn't know this, and there's nothing Durkon has to convince him or Redcloak of this, so it's not a convincing argument by itself.

[Tvtyrant]

That's a good point, Rich said the paladins fell but that seems to be an exception to the rule for whatever reason. If every paladin that massacred goblins lost their abilities, their campaign would have certainly not lasted decades and also the How the Paladin Got his Scar showed that the members of the Sapphire Guard can pull a whole lot of evil actions before being punished for it.

The Goblins are also warlike raiders by design, it's not like there aren't ample excuses to kill them. "They recently attacked a human farm so we punished the tribe by slaughtering it" is hardly out of line with the God's plans for Goblins in the first place.

[flyinglemur]

I wonder if Jirix might be more willing to compromise as a crimson mantle bearer.

[WindStruck]

Looks like someone has been playing around with photoshop again.

[Angrith]

Ugh, that ending. It hits hard, so well done Giant. That panel where Redcloak shuts his eyes, I wonder what's going through his mind. It looks almost regretful. I think he wants to take Durkon's deal. I think he sees it as the goblins' best shot, but two things are stopping him. First, the Dark One told him to continue the plan, after Gobbotopia had been established and second, the ending from Start of Darkness. Sunk cost fallacy, thy name is Redcloak. He sees the better path, but he can't bring himself to take it.

[Lheticus]

Soooooooo where can I place my bets on if Durkon will survive the Implosion?

[understatement]

I wonder if Jirix might be more willing to compromise as a crimson mantle bearer.

He's nowhere capable of 9th level spells, he's thousands of miles away, and the Order doesn't know who he is.

***

Even if Durkon survives this, how is he able to escape?

[ebarde]

I mean, at the same time the gods if Rich's commentary is to go by do punish paladins for slaughtering them. Not really sure where the line is drawn here, I'd imagine it would have to be a somewhat specific set of circunstances that get's a majority of the pantheon to agree on making them fall. Not sure what specifically they did in Redcloak's village though, since those types of attacks seem to be at least common enough that a good chunk of the order would have fallen by now.

[KorvinStarmast]

I wonder if Jirix might be more willing to compromise as a crimson mantle bearer.

I am going to guess "no" and here is why: when Redcloak got bequeathed the Red Cloak

Spoiler: SOD spoiler

Show

he has a rather massive data download that taught him all of the stuff that TDO needed and expected of him

I expect that Jirix, were he to receive the same download, would behave similarly, albeit not necessarily identically. I mean, he's a hobgoblin to start with, and he's a bit further up the 'social scale' than goblins if we go with standard D&D tropes and such ... though I am not sure that matters much at this point is Rich's creation.

[Studoku]

I wonder if Jirix might be more willing to compromise as a crimson mantle bearer.

He and Durkon could talk about all the times they died.

[ebarde]

Hobgoblins are stated to be in a higher social position a few times, with goblins sorta near the bottom while Bugbears are like distantly related and often ignored. That being said, I don't really think that's really that much of a thing in Gobbotopia, being a city founded by a beloved goblin leader and an army of hobgoblins and goblins.

[hroþila]

In my opinion, letting loose a person like Miko Miyazaki is a war crime. They armed her, they trained her, they must answer for her.




But they are not innocent bystanders. They made the monster, they equipped and clothed her.

You're just stating this but you're not establishing why this is the case. Miko did not go around committing war crimes, she behaved like a proper paladin until the very last moments of her life. Regardless, the people who armed her, trained her and let her loose are all dead, and they were all dead before the hobgoblin invasion arrived.

[KorvinStarmast]

Hobgoblins are stated to be in a higher social position a few times, with goblins sorta near the bottom while Bugbears are like distantly related and often ignored. That being said, I don't really think that's really that much of a thing in Gobbotopia, being a city founded by a beloved goblin leader and an army of hobgoblins and goblins.

Jirix has his work cut out for him.
Let's say that it can work out, but he does have to swim up stream a bit ... and deal with an ... appealing but ultimately specious pan-goblinoid narrative that probably arose to elide historic sectarian divisions between goblins and hobgoblins.

(I think MiTD was using elide to mean .. 2a : to leave out of consideration : omit. )

[Alesso]

1. Durkon is prepared for this outcome of negotiations: Fortunate Fate, 7th level cleric spell, used by Redcloak in strip #1039.

2. Redcloak just accepted. He just doesn't need Durkon alive to sign the deal with Thor - quite the opposite actually, Speak With Dead will suffice.

[JSSheridan]

If Durkon dies here, does Hel get his soul?

It's a death during a negotiation, not a battle

[KorvinStarmast]

1. Durkon is prepared for this outcome of negotiations: Fortunate Fate, 7th level cleric spell, used by Redcloak in strip #1039.

As I read the text of that spell, I don't think that it will work, since Heal spell won't heal the "you are dead" feature of Implosion, but mostly heals damage and disease and dismemberment.

But, I am not very 3.5 clever, so I am happy to be shown otherwise.

2. Redcloak just accepted. He just doesn't need Durkon alive to sign the deal with Thor - quite the opposite actually, Speak With Dead will suffice.

And if Xykon happens by, it's a lot less trouble to be laying 'speak with dead' on a dead dwarf than to be talking with a live one.

[ebarde]

Rich said that things like dying for your beliefs and such are considered honorable, so this would definetly qualify.

[t209]

Wel rereading that comics that you posted realize that.
Maybe..Maybe,
either Durkon duped Redcloak into booming him anyway.
Or Redcloak seal the deal in messy manner.
If it was latter, part of me wonder if Order ruined the entire negotiation by murdering Redcloak without understanding Durkon's orders.

[understatement]

Theory: Redcloak put some kind of personal "un-lifealert" spell onto Xykon's fake phylactery, and as a result knows that at some point he started secretly watching. He wants to accept, but has to make X think he's still on his side.

If that's so, Redcloak wouldn't have sat down on the table in the first place.

In my opinion, letting loose a person like Miko Miyazaki is a war crime. They armed her, they trained her, they must answer for her.

But they are not innocent bystanders. They made the monster, they equipped and clothed her.

How is Miko a monster? She cares for civilian lives and her city, she cares for her horse deeply, and she truly believed she was doing good up until her final point in life.

I don't think anyone would bat an eye if Redcloak met up with Gin-Jun in the LE afterlife and the former tried to throttle the latter (actually, I really want to see that), but Miko is not responsible for the crusades.

...now I really want to see RC and Gin-Jun duke it out.

[hungrycrow]

2. Redcloak just accepted. He just doesn't need Durkon alive to sign the deal with Thor - quite the opposite actually, Speak With Dead will suffice.

Speak With Dead won't work on someone that's been imploded. And if he wanted to send a message to Thor other than a definitive 'no' i feel like he would be more clear.

[boro]

Don't roll a 1
Don't roll a 1
Don't roll a 1
Don't roll a 1
Don't roll a 1
Don't roll a 1
Don't roll a 1
Don't roll a 1
Don't roll a 1
....

doh

[Ironsmith]

Yes, even the children. This isn't some cultural difference issue we're talking about. The goblins were created to be evil - and they embrace their evilness. In fact, the only non-evil goblins we've ever encountered, or even heard of, were the teenagers rebelling waaaaaay back near the beginning of the story - and the one that was helping the OOTS betrayed them because his goodness was just a phase.

I have to take exception to that. Even if we somehow went with the assumption that all adult goblins are Evil, the same can't be said of the children; they simply aren't grown up enough to know better. I've little doubt in my mind that if those goblin children survived the attack (possibly being captured and brought back to Azure City), they'd still have a fair shot at growing up Good. Heck, the mere fact that the teen goblins were Good "as a phase" suggests it might occur naturally; I don't know about you, but there were a few things I gained as a teen that I didn't lose in adulthood.

All things considered, I'm pretty sure the only rational argument for the paladins not falling when committing literal genocide would be that they did so to protect a gate; since the gods ultimately decide which paladins fall and when, they might just make an exception for the guys who're preventing the actual destruction of the world (even if their way of doing it isn't Good).

[kiapet]

All things considered, I'm pretty sure the only rational argument for the paladins not falling when committing literal genocide would be that they did so to protect a gate; since the gods ultimately decide which paladins fall and when, they might just make an exception for the guys who're preventing the actual destruction of the world (even if their way of doing it isn't Good).

Yeah, the Giant has been very clear in the past that genocide is always evil, as is slaughtering children. Which I very much agree with- something this comic does very well is point out the flaws in devaluing the lives of entire races of sentient beings.

[The_Weirdo]

Yes, even the children. This isn't some cultural difference issue we're talking about. The goblins were created to be evil - and they embrace their evilness. In fact, the only non-evil goblins we've ever encountered, or even heard of, were the teenagers rebelling waaaaaay back near the beginning of the story - and the one that was helping the OOTS betrayed them because his goodness was just a phase.

So. Let me get this straight.

You are claiming that, by being around someone that had a (justifiable, at that point, but let's gloss over that) plan to force the hands of the gods into granting them basic rights by use of the snarl as a weapon of mass destruction... The goblin children deserved to die.

Does that apply to other children as well? Aarindarius is an extremely powerful mage. Surely that means V's kids deserved to have their legs broken? Tarquin is an insane idiot that elevated being a banana-republic strongman to a con and an art. Does that mean the children around him should die?

Or is it just when they are green? Or maybe because they are "usually evil", in a world where Paladins slaughter villages?

Belkar gets to live, it's ok, he's a PC. Tarquin gets to live, it's ok, he's a villain, so he's relevant. Therkla's death is a tragedy, even though she worked for a despicable nobleman. But perish the thought of letting goblin children live.

Why? Should they just know their place, maybe? Accept the natural order of things, perhaps?