OOTS #1209 - The Discussion Thread

[Squire Doodad]

Sure.

Magnificent.

Somehow, though, I doubt that Redcloak will immediately bring Durkon back. "What, I've got lots of diamonds..."

: "Did you know I now know both True Resurrection and Implosion? I knew that I now know both True Resurrection and Implosion..."

[mashlagoo1982]

Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but I only got through page 12 of this thread.

I suspect that RC wants to take Durkon up on his offer. However he won't, but not because of some irrational necessity to justify his plan.
RC plan was just justified. He could abandon it now and still tell himself everything was worth the sacrifices he made.

One easier reason is that RC can't or won't trust anyone except his god.

Another reason could deal with a slight inconsistency I have noticed for sometime now.
Why would TDO, a god of revenge (to the best of my knowledge), be satisfied with goblin equality?
I believe TDO wants more and RC knows it.

I wonder if we will see the split of RC from TDO.

[pendell]

Er, let's just say that the "modern people don't appreciate this" part is wrong, because people reclaiming land after thousands of years (or at least the perception of such) is very much a contemporary issue. To say nothing of "reclaiming the land that was lost" ideologies more generally, which are perhaps the most common form of territorial dispute now that "I want your land, Imma take it" has fallen out of fashion in some quarters.

Yeaah. Exactly. The real-world precedents are both extremely contemporary and extremely sensitive so I'll say no more about it on this forum.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[KorvinStarmast]

Somehow, though, I doubt that Redcloak will immediately bring Durkon back. "What, I've got lots of diamonds..."

Given the ample CR of the monsters in Monster Hollow (heck, Xykon got those cool boots and some XP) I'll guess that a few diamonds were harvested during the various forays into those caves in search of the gate.

[Dion]

Bad news? He's slaying fiendish invaders in personal combat. Obviously he's a paladin, and they are definitively Good.

I bet Jirix is reforming the sapphire guard, but with multiracial paladins.

Hobgoblin paladins. Cave troll paladins. Beholder paladins. Vampire paladins. Very inclusive!

[KorvinStarmast]

Hobgoblin paladins. Cave troll paladins. Beholder paladins. Vampire paladins. Very inclusive!

Beholder paladins? Can't work. They are unable to lay on hands since they have no hands. (Plus, Beholders are protected by copyright/trademark just as mind flayers are).

Which pantheon/deity blesses Jirix' paladins with their powers? TDO? Hmm, that could work out ... but don't paladins in 3.5e have to be LG? (I am happy to be shown that they are not so required ... but I think they need to be, right? The SRD says Paladin alignment is LG, and I am pretty sure TDO is not LG ... but maybe he is and that's a surprise that Rich will spring on us in due course ... )

[bunsen_h]

: "Did you know I now know both True Resurrection and Implosion? I knew that I now know both True Resurrection and Implosion..."

Would it be productive for Redcloak to cast True Resurrection on Xykon to weaken him? It appears that Xykon wouldn't need to be present for it, so he might not be aware that it was being cast until it was too late. I suppose that the same constraint of "the soul must be willing" applies as for Raise Dead.

That is, if the spell were available in Stickworld, which we've been told is not the case.

EDIT:

I bet Jirix is reforming the sapphire guard, but with multiracial paladins.

Hobgoblin paladins. Cave troll paladins. Beholder paladins. Vampire paladins. Very inclusive!

Like the Watch in Ankh-Morpork, under Commander (etc.) Vimes?

[Rogar Demonblud]

There are different types of paladin for the four corner alignments (paladin of freedom, paladin of tyranny, I forget the third). Which I guess also means there are four types of blackguard as well.

And don't think so mundane. We can now have slaad and erinyes paladins!

[Rogar Demonblud]

Would it be productive for Redcloak to cast True Resurrection on Xykon? It appears that Xykon wouldn't need to be present for it, so he might not be aware that it was being cast until it was too late. I suppose that the same constraint of "the soul must be willing" applies as for Raise Dead.

That is, if the spell were available in Stickworld, which we've been told is not the case.

You have to destroy the undead first, same as with Durkula. And with Xykon being a lich, that means not just his current shell but also the phylactery to prevent resleeving. And at that point, why?

[Peelee]

I again feel compelled to note that there isnt really any indication that True Resurrection would be required when bog-standard Resurrection would work just fine.

[The MunchKING]

Would it be productive for Redcloak to cast True Resurrection on Xykon?

This isn't Final Fantasy. It's a waste of a big ol' pile of diamonds unless he kills the lich first. If he killed off the lich (presumably including all the Phylacteries so his soul could go to the afterlife), THEN cast it, it could bring back old-man Xykon from SoD. I'm not sure whether he'd keep his lich gained levels or not.

[KorvinStarmast]

There are different types of paladin for the four corner alignments (paladin of freedom, paladin of tyranny, I forget the third). Which I guess also means there are four types of blackguard as well.

And don't think so mundane. We can now have slaad and erinyes paladins!

I only have access to the SRD, got rid of my 3.x books ages ago, so I would not have any of the splats either. Thank you for the update/correction.

[The MunchKING]

And at that point, why?

I assumed Final Fantasy-esque Revive Kills Zombie.

[Dion]

Which pantheon/deity blesses Jirix' paladins with their powers?

Obviously Banjo?

[KorvinStarmast]

1204 is titled 'Not Again', which I assume is referring to all the times evil clerics have killed Durkon.

I think it's a reach back to the dungeon of Durokan and the time Durkon was left behind and Hilgya happened upon him. Back when the strips numbered in double digits.

Additionally, how suicide is presented is important -- Netflix's '13 Reasons Why' caused a measurable increase in suicide rates (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31141094/) and I don't think Rich would do something so tasteless as depicting suicide as a good idea.

From your link:

Conclusions and relevance: Caution must be taken in interpreting these findings;

However, Rich's stance on suicide was well made and I agree with your take on that.

Obviously Banjo?

Obviously not. Banjo's a puppet, as Roy so kindly reminded us while on board the Mechane.

[Jasdoif]

There are different types of paladin for the four corner alignments (paladin of freedom, paladin of tyranny, I forget the third).

Slaughter.

And don't think so mundane. We can now have slaad and erinyes paladins!

Tojanida paladins!

[Squire Doodad]

There are different types of paladin for the four corner alignments (paladin of freedom, paladin of tyranny, I forget the third). Which I guess also means there are four types of blackguard as well.

And don't think so mundane. We can now have slaad and erinyes paladins!

But can we have a Monster in the Darkness paladin

[Ruck]

Assuming that the only possible outcome is some grim Malthusian march to global ecological collapse and that the goblinoids will effectively become the Zerg and devour or enslave every other sentient species on stickworld if left unchecked is... certainly a conclusion one might leap to. Really feels like the kind of nihilistic Great Replacement nonsense that's peddled by contemporary racists, just given a green-skinned and fangy coat of paint.

Hence my "ugly implications" comment.

Jirix's...what? Just how much did people read into Jirix getting rid of Xykon's comedy relief roaches?

There is no element of this comic that cannot or will not be dissected and read fifteen different ways.

[Dion]

Wasn’t there a comic where one of the gods said something like “oh! I’d like to try a world with this new fangled ‘natural selection’ I keep hearing about?”

[Peelee]

Wasn’t there a comic where one of the gods said something like “oh! I’d like to try a world with this new fangled ‘natural selection’ I keep hearing about?”

There was indeed!:

Evolution/natural selection does not exist in Stickworld.

...yet.

[Iskar Jarak]

I think it's a reach back to the dungeon of Durokan and the time Durkon was left behind and Hilgya happened upon him. Back when the strips numbered in double digits.

Good spot; that's a far better guess.

About 13 Reasons Why and the portrayal of suicide: That study's findings don't exist in a vaccuum. Statistical odditites are to be expected, and it's extremely difficult to accurately measure how much influence a particular piece of media has. Any or all of the excess suicides might have been caused by any number of other things.

However, '13 Reasons Why' differs from a generic hypothetical TV series released on Netflix at the same time. It recieved widespread media coverage, and it did not follow the guidelines of suicide prevention organisations, such as Samaritans: https://www.samaritans.org/ireland/a...lf-harm-drama/

So, when the release of '13 Reasons Why' correlates with an increase in suicide rates, it is plausible that it's partly responsible.

[Onkeldata]

If we take it as a given, that Redcloak unterstands and believes Durkon's reasoning, there is nothing to be gained by killing the dwarf. If Redcloak isn't {scrubbed} insane, that is.
Also, he seemed very pensive, so his action is not a spontaneous irrational act.
We see, a very deadly spell is cast, and we see Durkon is surprised, and a warping effect.
We don't see Redcloak actually attacking Durkon. Matter of fact, he didn't even look to Durkon.

I think, Redcloak may attack a third person, or an item, even. Maybe he destroys the comfy, if a bit unpolstered dwarven camping set to show the talk is over. Or he kills an invisible witness, to go on conspiring with a dwarf? Just who could this be? This thought made me break my quiet lurker persona, so I'd love some ideas from you, could that be the case?

[Dion]

There was indeed!:

Oh! That’s what I get for not reading all 28 pages closely!

[Rogar Demonblud]

If we take it as a given, that Redcloak unterstands and believes Durkon's reasoning, there is nothing to be gained by killing the dwarf. If Redcloak isn't {scrub the post, scrub the quote} insane, that is.
Also, he seemed very pensive, so his action is not a spontaneous irrational act.
We see, a very deadly spell is cast, and we see Durkon is surprised, and a warping effect.
We don't see Redcloak actually attacking Durkon. Matter of fact, he didn't even look to Durkon.

I think, Redcloak may attack a third person, or an item, even. Maybe he destroys the comfy, if a bit unpolstered dwarven camping set to show the talk is over. Or he kills an invisible witness, to go on conspiring with a dwarf? Just who could this be? This thought made me break my quiet lurker persona, so I'd love some ideas from you, could that be the case?

Implosion does not affect objects, so it cannot be used on the table.

You need a visible target, so Redcloak cannot be targeting somebody invisible.

Implosion is not an area effect spell. It only affects the target. Durkon is being affected, therefore Durkon is the target.

[Juno Delphox]

Implosion does not affect objects, so it cannot be used on the table.

You need a visible target, so Redcloak cannot be targeting somebody invisible.

Implosion is not an area effect spell. It only affects the target. Durkon is being affected, therefore Durkon is the target.

It also has to be concentrated on for 4 rounds (approximately 16 seconds). I think Redcloak's plan is simply put, to tell Durkon what he wants with a "captive" audience. No arguing, no insisting it's unreasonable, nothing of the sort.

He wants approximately 15 seconds to make his case, and not listen to Durkon argue the same. And by casting Implosion, he guarantees that Durkon can't (or won't), or he'll be killed, and his friends will be in grave danger.

[RatElemental]

I only have access to the SRD, got rid of my 3.x books ages ago, so I would not have any of the splats either. Thank you for the update/correction.

The variant paladins are SRD actually. And the forgotten one is Paladin of Slaughter.

ETA:

It also has to be concentrated on for 4 rounds (approximately 16 seconds). I think Redcloak's plan is simply put, to tell Durkon what he wants with a "captive" audience. No arguing, no insisting it's unreasonable, nothing of the sort.

He wants approximately 15 seconds to make his case, and not listen to Durkon argue the same. And by casting Implosion, he guarantees that Durkon can't (or won't), or he'll be killed, and his friends will be in grave danger.

Not how Implosion works. It doesn't take four rounds to kill one target (seriously, for a 9th level spell that would be so bad you'd be better off using certain 5th level spells). You get to kill one creature per round for four rounds.

[Geech]

Implosion is used because we already saw it used to brutal effect against the Resistance in Azure City, so when we see it used here, it's far more intimidating than the alternatives, regardless of how useful it actually is.

I do think Durkon will survive. First, we haven't seen him die yet. I think if Durkon was about die, we would have seen him die at the end of this page. I strongly suspect that Redcloak will lose his concentration or the spell will otherwise be disrupted. Minrah, the rest of the Order or the Voices could all intervene.

Rich has also done a really good job balancing characters' future benefits to the story with the impact of their deaths. (See: The Linear Guild.) Durkon's death would up the stakes, but I think it's too early to discard all of Durkon's storytelling potential.

1204 is titled 'Not Again', which I assume is referring to all the times evil clerics have killed Durkon. It'd be cruel to lampshade Durkon dying, then kill him again so soon.

I'm pretty sure the situation is exactly as it appears. This is a character moment for Redcloak where we see that helping the goblins matters less to Redcloak than being right, and fiddling with it undermines that moment. Additionally, how suicide is presented is important -- Netflix's '13 Reasons Why' caused a measurable increase in suicide rates (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31141094/) and I don't think Rich would do something so tasteless as depicting suicide as a good idea.

Your analysis of the dramatic elements surrounding this moment seems really solid to me. Thanks for cutting through the back-and-forth arguments about minutia of whether using implosion is a good idea or whether Minrah would "backfill" Durkon in OOTS.

I find your suicide analysis a lot less compelling. This is a comic strip in which violence and murder are throw-away jokes, sometimes perpetrated by Redcloak himself. In addition, this is a fantasy world where killing yourself to talk to otherwise unreachable god with an expectation or even a plan that you might be raised from the dead is actually not outrageous. Like the murder and violence depicted in the comic, suicide for that type of purpose is far less dramatic and tragic than its real life counterpart. Finally, I think your specific comparison to 13 Reasons Why really misses the mark, partially for the reasons of drama and tragedy just mentioned and also for reasons you yourself hint at in a later post. This comic has vastly smaller reach or coverage than the show, and couldn't possibly have a similar impact. I don't understand why this one topic would suddenly be Serious Business compared to the rest of what is depicted in this comic, even at times for humor.

That said, multiple people have mentioned that Rich has strong views about suicide, so maybe that's just his thing.

[Squire Doodad]

It also has to be concentrated on for 4 rounds (approximately 16 seconds). I think Redcloak's plan is simply put, to tell Durkon what he wants with a "captive" audience. No arguing, no insisting it's unreasonable, nothing of the sort.

He wants approximately 15 seconds to make his case, and not listen to Durkon argue the same. And by casting Implosion, he guarantees that Durkon can't (or won't), or he'll be killed, and his friends will be in grave danger.

Ooh, that's a good take.

That said, Implosion seems to start triggering implosions once the person has started concentrating, can you point to me something that says it's 4 rounds? ...also a round is 6 seconds, not 4, so it would be a somewhat friendlier 24 seconds.

[Ariko]

Ooh, that's a good take.

That said, Implosion seems to start triggering implosions once the person has started concentrating, can you point to me something that says it's 4 rounds? ...also a round is 6 seconds, not 4, so it would be a somewhat friendlier 24 seconds.

He is likely referring to: "Duration: Concentration (up to 4 rounds)". With the concentration aspect explained: " For each round you concentrate, you cause one creature to collapse in on itself, killing it." Thus, it would only need one round for targeting Durkon.

[Peelee]

Your analysis of the dramatic elements surrounding this moment seems really solid to me. Thanks for cutting through the back-and-forth arguments about minutia of whether using implosion is a good idea or whether Minrah would "backfill" Durkon in OOTS.

I find your suicide analysis a lot less compelling. This is a comic strip in which violence and murder are throw-away jokes, sometimes perpetrated by Redcloak himself. In addition, this is a fantasy world where killing yourself to talk to otherwise unreachable god with an expectation or even a plan that you might be raised from the dead is actually not outrageous. Like the murder and violence depicted in the comic, suicide for that type of purpose is far less dramatic and tragic than its real life counterpart. Finally, I think your specific comparison to 13 Reasons Why really misses the mark, partially for the reasons of drama and tragedy just mentioned and also for reasons you yourself hint at in a later post. This comic has vastly smaller reach or coverage than the show, and couldn't possibly have a similar impact. I don't understand why this one topic would suddenly be Serious Business compared to the rest of what is depicted in this comic, even at times for humor.

That said, multiple people have mentioned that Rich has strong views about suicide, so maybe that's just his thing.

For context:

I am not going to draw a comic where committing suicide is portrayed as a reasonable and effective solution to a problem.