OOTS #1212 - The Discussion Thread

[aldeayeah]

Are there any other clerics of the Dark One capable of casting 9th level spells?

Jirix might be, although he seems to be as bad as RC, if not worse.

Myself, I'm hoping for a former Supreme Leader comeback (not sure if he's a spellcaster, he's never entered combat AFAIK), now that's the (hob)goblin you'd want to bargain with.

[Fyraltari]

Jirix might be, although he seems to be as bad as RC, if not worse.

Myself, I'm hoping for a former Supreme Leader comeback (not sure if he's a spellcaster, he's never entered combat AFAIK), now that's the (hob)goblin you'd want to bargain with.

It’s a common theory that Jirix is the former supreme leader.

[danielxcutter]

I think Jirix and/or the former Supreme Leader might make better leaders of Gobbtopia, yes, but I don’t think that warrants writing out Redcloak either.

[Potatopeelerkin]

Jirix might be, although he seems to be as bad as RC, if not worse.

Wait, what's wrong with Jirix?

Myself, I'm hoping for a former Supreme Leader comeback (not sure if he's a spellcaster, he's never entered combat AFAIK), now that's the (hob)goblin you'd want to bargain with.

I'm fairly sure the Supreme Leader is a cleric.

Spoiler: GDGU spoilers

Show

If it's the same Supreme Leader as took over the hobgoblin settlement in GDGU, which seems likely (and is what was implied), then he definitely is.

Of course, the DM can make that decision if they choose, but there *are* stated guidelines in the books for how much XP to award for various things.

Yeah, but why have a guideline that says you don't get EXP for defeating an enemy who is a much higher level than you? Surely you could just state that the player needs to defeat the opponent on their own merits to prevent mooching.

[Fyraltari]

Yeah, but why have a guideline that says you don't get EXP for defeating an enemy who is a much higher level than you? Surely you could just state that the player needs to defeat the opponent on their own merits to prevent mooching.

If you need to defeat the ennemy yourself, then the guy who spent the whole fight healing and buffing their comrades shouldn’t get any XP. This feels wrong. If simply being in the team that beat the ennemy is enough, then the guy who is fifteen levels behind all other combattants and didn’t contribute anything notable to the fight should get as much XP as the rest which also feels wrong.

Ain’t no perfect recipe for every solution.

[aldeayeah]

Wait, what's wrong with Jirix?

It depends on how you read comic #833, his last appearance. Up to that point, Jirix was sucking up mightily to Team Evil, but a second after they leave, his face changes and he crushes an infernal roach.

You can read this in several ways, but my reading was that he would eschew Redcloak's (goblin-egalitarian) ways and become a standard issue (hobgoblin-supremacist) tyrant.

Spoiler: How the Paladin Got its Scar

Show

In my interpretation, Jirix and the Former Supreme Leader (FSL) are not the same. I think their demeanors are quite different - the FSL is always seen as cool and collected, almost like a goblin Vetinari, and tries to draw attention away from himself. On the other hand, Jirix puts himself in the middle of things, and randomly stomps on roaches, which to me is an indicator of mustache-twirling cruelty.

However, I think we can safely assume that the scheming FSL in "How the Paladin..." and the SL that abdicates to Redcloak in the main comic are one and the same, mainly because of the "Supreme Leader gear" visual gag, but also because they are similarly characterized as cunning individuals that were also good rulers.

The FSL is one of my favorite tertiary characters, and one can't deny that he brought unmatched prosperity to the hobgoblin settlements, which is the reason they were such a formidable force by the time Team Evil took over. Once you remove Team Evil and their sycophants out of the equation, one would think that he would make a bid for power again.

In many ways he's the polar opposite of Redcloak, in that he doesn't pretend to be a good person, but he consistenty does what he rationally considers to be the best for (hob)goblinkind.

tl;dr: jirix you better watch your gouda

[Metastachydium]

Absolutely. He keeps talking, but his arguments continue to represent things he wishes were true, rather than are true.

It's happened so often that the author is practically screaming this character flaw of Redcloak at us. And it's not only anvillicious, but it's a point that badly needs to be made about Redcloak, and I've been defending his POV as a character for several strips.

He's got a legitimate beef and he's got some good reasons to not trust Durkon here. At the same time, he's full of it and he knows it. He is trying to fill bigger shoes than he honestly can, and he's seriously lacking in being honest with himself, let alone the others around him.

He has a grievance, and his strategy seems to be working so it makes sense for his character to continue.

But he's also lying to everyone and himself about his own moral status or his representing the goblinoid point of view. He can't make that claim, but he keeps trying to.

(That is a very balanced and sympathetic take on the goblin and the problem at hand, and while I do not agree completely with each and every point you make, I like it.)

My assumption was that the Gods would never let it get that far: if TDO's High Priest got close to completing the ritual, I'd expect the gods would just unmake the world right then and there to stop him from getting that control.

(Most gods would evidently do anything and everything they can to prevent that. But here's the thing: safely creating a new world is always a collective effort based on a full consensus; I would not be surprised to learn that safely unmaking the world also requires such a consensus, so as long as the Godsmoot is not over (the result of which would force dissenters to cooperate as per the stupid god laws), even a small group of gods might be able to sabotage Armageddon Special for just long enough. And if Thor and his circles/allies would come to see giving Big Purple the Gate the only viable solution, they could perhaps do that.)

[Worldsong]

It depends on how you read comic #833, his last appearance. Up to that point, Jirix was sucking up mightily to Team Evil, but a second after they leave, his face changes and he crushes an infernal roach.

You can read this in several ways, but my reading was that he would eschew Redcloak's (goblin-egalitarian) ways and become a standard issue (hobgoblin-supremacist) tyrant.

Spoiler: How the Paladin Got its Scar

Show

In my interpretation, Jirix and the Former Supreme Leader (FSL) are not the same. I think their demeanors are quite different - the FSL is always seen as cool and collected, almost like a goblin Vetinari, and tries to draw attention away from himself. On the other hand, Jirix puts himself in the middle of things, and randomly stomps on roaches, which to me is an indicator of mustache-twirling cruelty.

On the other hand, the scheming FSL in "How the Paladin..." and the SL that abdicates to Redcloak are very heavily implied to be one and the same.

The FSL is one of my favorite tertiary characters, and one can't deny that he brought unmatched prosperity to the hobgoblin settlements, which is the reason they were such a formidable force by the time Team Evil took over. Once you remove Team Evil and their sycophants out of the equation, one would think that he would make a bid for power again.

In many ways he's the polar opposite of Redcloak, in that he doesn't pretend to be a good person, but he consistenty does what he rationally considers to be the best for (hob)goblinkind.

I don't really get how Jirix stomping on a demon roach somehow makes him a monster.

For one thing if a human stomped on a roach nobody would give a damn.

And yes this particular roach could talk but it was also a demon roach and I believe generally it's accepted that while goblinoids are sapient mortals who shouldn't be judged by their appearance demons, devils and daemons are literally made out of negative energy and evil intent and that kind of stuff. Which may sound like we're just shifting the discrimination but an important difference is that when you research a goblinoid you'll find blood and flesh and bones and no inherent ties to the Lower Planes, whereas if you researched demons you'd find that being hit by positive energy actively hurts them.

Arguably getting rid of a demon infestation when you're trying to establish a new nation which is meant to stand the test of time is a sign that you're taking your job seriously.

[Metastachydium]

If you need to defeat the ennemy yourself, then the guy who spent the whole fight healing and buffing their comrades shouldn’t get any XP. This feels wrong. If simply being in the team that beat the ennemy is enough, then the guy who is fifteen levels behind all other combattants and didn’t contribute anything notable to the fight should get as much XP as the rest which also feels wrong.

Ain’t no perfect recipe for every solution.

I'd say there could be recipes that are good enough. How about granting XP for succesfully performing the specific sort of actions you are supposed to perform in a given situation (be it fighting, healing, tanking attacks for the others &c.)?

I don't really get how Jirix stomping on a demon roach somehow makes him a monster.

For one thing if a human stomped on a roach nobody would give a damn.

And yes this particular roach could talk but it was also a demon roach and I believe generally it's accepted that while goblinoids are sapient mortals who shouldn't be judged by their appearance demons, devils and daemons are literally made out of negative energy and evil intent and that kind of stuff. Which may sound like we're just shifting the discrimination but an important difference is that when you research a goblinoid you'll find blood and flesh and bones and no inherent ties to the Lower Planes, whereas if you researched demons you'd find that being hit by positive energy actively hurts them.

Arguably getting rid of a demon infestation when you're trying to establish a new nation which is meant to stand the test of time is a sign that you're taking your job seriously.

Further, these roaches may or may not serve as spies for the IFCC, and Redcloak was trying to get rid of them before himself.

[Potatopeelerkin]

It depends on how you read comic #833, his last appearance. Up to that point, Jirix was sucking up mightily to Team Evil, but a second after they leave, his face changes and he crushes an infernal roach.

I mean, Redcloak did win them a war and earn them a city, of course he's going to be on their side. He's definitely ticked off by Tsukiko's lack of respect for goblin life.

If crushing a roach counts as morally damning, then we're all gonna end up in hell.

If you need to defeat the ennemy yourself, then the guy who spent the whole fight healing and buffing their comrades shouldn’t get any XP. This feels wrong. If simply being in the team that beat the ennemy is enough, then the guy who is fifteen levels behind all other combattants and didn’t contribute anything notable to the fight should get as much XP as the rest which also feels wrong.

Ain’t no perfect recipe for every solution.

But... defeating a much stronger enemy and getting nothing for it feels wrong too! If there's no perfect recipe, why make the game decide in the first place? That's what the DM's for, surely. You could just provide some general guidelines and considerations so the DM can make a decision that seems appropriate.

[Worldsong]

But... defeating a much stronger enemy and getting nothing for it feels wrong too! If there's no perfect recipe, why make the game decide in the first place? That's what the DM's for, surely. You could just provide some general guidelines and considerations so the DM can make a decision that seems appropriate.

With a group of reasonable people the DM could make the call and it'd all be fine and dandy. When it's said that there's no perfect system it refers to the fact that there's no way to create a system which can account for all circumstances and bring about a satisfactory result for each of them without involving human judgement. Which is important because the idea that your DnD group is going to consist of reasonable people is often going to be wishful thinking.

[danielxcutter]

“Jirix is bad for stomping on the demon-roach” honestly sounds to me as yet another “goblins are bad and Redcloak’s grievances are all lies” type of opinion.

[hroþila]

It's not that he stomped on a demon roach as such, it's what that symbolizes. It's what he chose to do the very moment he had the authority to do whatever he wanted. The demon roach could be a stand-in for Team Evil, and thus it could represent Jirix's rejection of Team Evil, a sign that he had just been pretending up to that point. Or it could just be a show of petty tyranny, asserting his dominance through arbitrary violence.

[danielxcutter]

Yes, but I think there’s way too little context besides that to really draw an “oh look we told you goblins are bad and discriminating them is cool” result.

[hroþila]

Yes, but I think there’s way too little context besides that to really draw an “oh look we told you goblins are bad and discriminating them is cool” result.

Who said that?

[Fyraltari]

It depends on how you read comic #833, his last appearance. Up to that point, Jirix was sucking up mightily to Team Evil, but a second after they leave, his face changes and he crushes an infernal roach.

You can read this in several ways, but my reading was that he would eschew Redcloak's (goblin-egalitarian) ways and become a standard issue (hobgoblin-supremacist) tyrant.

Spoiler: How the Paladin Got its Scar

Show

In my interpretation, Jirix and the Former Supreme Leader (FSL) are not the same. I think their demeanors are quite different - the FSL is always seen as cool and collected, almost like a goblin Vetinari, and tries to draw attention away from himself. On the other hand, Jirix puts himself in the middle of things, and randomly stomps on roaches, which to me is an indicator of mustache-twirling cruelty.

However, I think we can safely assume that the scheming FSL in "How the Paladin..." and the SL that abdicates to Redcloak in the main comic are one and the same, mainly because of the "Supreme Leader gear" visual gag, but also because they are similarly characterized as cunning individuals that were also good rulers.

The FSL is one of my favorite tertiary characters, and one can't deny that he brought unmatched prosperity to the hobgoblin settlements, which is the reason they were such a formidable force by the time Team Evil took over. Once you remove Team Evil and their sycophants out of the equation, one would think that he would make a bid for power again.

In many ways he's the polar opposite of Redcloak, in that he doesn't pretend to be a good person, but he consistenty does what he rationally considers to be the best for (hob)goblinkind.

tl;dr: jirix you better watch your gouda

Spoiler

Show

Stomping on the roach doesn’t read as morally worse than poisoning the previous leader’s court and blaming on the humies to me. I read Jirix as doing the same thing that the former leader did : suck up to the people in power until he was in position to take it himself. And his policy, as established by his intronisation speech, of trade and focus on economic growth is similar to the former leader’s. If they’re not one and the same, they are from the same mould

I don't really get how Jirix stomping on a demon roach somehow makes him a monster.

For one thing if a human stomped on a roach nobody would give a damn.

And yes this particular roach could talk but it was also a demon roach and I believe generally it's accepted that while goblinoids are sapient mortals who shouldn't be judged by their appearance demons, devils and daemons are literally made out of negative energy and evil intent and that kind of stuff. Which may sound like we're just shifting the discrimination but an important difference is that when you research a goblinoid you'll find blood and flesh and bones and no inherent ties to the Lower Planes, whereas if you researched demons you'd find that being hit by positive energy actively hurts them.

Arguably getting rid of a demon infestation when you're trying to establish a new nation which is meant to stand the test of time is a sign that you're taking your job seriously.

While I find the distinction between « demons are evil because they’re made of it, therefore it’s okay to kill them » and « goblins are evil because it’s in their blood to be, therefore it’s okay to kill them » to be academic at best, I will say that an important difference between stomping on the roach and killing a mortal is, if my understanding of D&D cosmology is correct, that the roach isn’t actually dead in any meaningful sense and can come back to the material plane in the same way they came before.

I'd say there could be recipes that are good enough. How about granting XP for succesfully performing the specific sort of actions you are supposed to perform in a given situation (be it fighting, healing, tanking attacks for the others &c.)?

You’d be punishing players for thinking outside of the box.



[potatopeelerkin]But... defeating a much stronger enemy and getting nothing for it feels wrong too! If there's no perfect recipe, why make the game decide in the first place? That's what the DM's for, surely. You could just provide some general guidelines and considerations so the DM can make a decision that seems appropriate.[/QUOTE]

Isn’t general guidelines, precisely what’s in the books? I say, having never played the game.

If, say, a level 25 fighter and a level 3 Paladin are fighting a level 27 barbarian in a pure brawl, and the barbarian dies, if feels like the contribution of the Paladin was negligible and so they shouldn’t earn XP.

If, however, the Paladin deliberately triggered a rockfall that squashed the barbarian like a bug then obviously the Paladin should get the credit (and XP) for that victory.

The game designers have to consider the most common situations and write rules with those in mind, but at the end of the day, the Game Master is the Game Master and they get to say when rules should apply and when they shouldn’t.

[Nomen]

Its not convenient. It means if the gods destroy the world the new one has an expiration date.
It means Durken can't comfort himself with his own plan B if the world goes belly up. Because even though he would not let real dwarves die for the sake of theoretical future dwarves. When put on such a large scale the thought that at least the problem will be fixed even if not for them would have been a comfort.

[drazen]

Panel 9 does perhaps show Redcloak struggling with a major flaw in his thinking. If the gods destroy the world BEFORE the Plan is carried out, TDO has no actual leverage. Even if he survives, the other gods can make a goblin free world and leave him out entirely, which will leave him with no worship and no power and ultimately he'd wither away anyway.. and thus so would goblinkind, because the gods won't make the same mistake again.

[Heksefatter]

"I'm willing - we goblins are willing .."

Now there was a revealing slip if there ever was one.

[ebarde]

Even if Jirix is the former supreme leader, he is clearly pretty low level. He got killed pretty easily, and him backing out from challenging Redcloak after he easily dispatched a hobgoblin(if that was him that is), makes me think that he is way lower level than Redcloak. On top of that, ever since then Redcloak gained a lot of experience while Jirix did not. I thought that Jirix stepping on the roach was mostly a signifier that he disliked Xykon's occupation of the city, and took out on the roaches, which to a degree are representative of Xykon's influence.

[Metastachydium]

YouÂ’d be punishing players for thinking outside of the box.

Not at all. While I must admit that ”supposed to” was an ill-chosen verb, what I meant was rewarding people for succesfully performing whatever actions they are performing, regardless of the type of action as long as it is a meaningful contribution to, say, solving a problem at hand (supposed to was supposed to refer to something deemed necessary by the players or something required by their plan, rather than what they have to do because of what they are).

[ebarde]

Not at all. While I must admit that ”supposed to” was an ill-chosen verb, what I meant was rewarding people for succesfully performing whatever actions they are performing, regardless of the type of action as long as it is a meaningful contribution to, say, solving a problem at hand (supposed to was supposed to refer to something deemed necessary by the players or something required by their plan, rather than what they have to do because of what they are).

I feel this might lead to severely mismatched levels, which I generally don't like. It's a bit of a pain to run a game if the players are all different levels, and I think it could also lead to be a bit of a spyral as someone get's an early lead in XP and just sorta get's to be more effective and do more things, thus gaining even more XP.

[The_Weirdo]

He's too noble for them. He doesn't react.

Good. I'd hate to cause this thread to be breaking bad.

[danielxcutter]

I think it’d be okay to give a little bonus in some form for players who come up with creative tactics, as long as this isn’t abused and everyone has been clear they’re okay with it.

[Skull the Troll]

L
How does he get Reddie away from Xykon to contribute to that fix? (We, on the outside, know that if Redcloak betrays Xykon MiTD eats him ... )

This is sort of off topic, but I don't think the MiTD will even though that's the focus of Xykons plan and the dominate spell. Dominate can be broken if it goes against the true nature of the being and if Redcloak is being a good guy and trying to play nice in the sandbox (which would be why Xykon wants to off him) then I think the dominate spell would break, after a few tense moments and us waiting around making a 35 page forum post while we wait for the next page.

[Metastachydium]

I feel this might lead to severely mismatched levels, which I generally don't like. It's a bit of a pain to run a game if the players are all different levels, and I think it could also lead to be a bit of a spyral as someone get's an early lead in XP and just sorta get's to be more effective and do more things, thus gaining even more XP.

And how does rewarding meaningful contribution (in any form the players are capable of providing / choose to provide it) rather than rewarding certain specific sorts of contribution or – worse yet – mere participation do that, exactly?
(Please note that in actual fact, I have no idea how XP-guidelines work, so I might be completely missing the point here.)

[Asmotherion]

Am I too hopeful for still expecting a successful... diplomacy check?

[The MunchKING]

I will say that an important difference between stomping on the roach and killing a mortal is, if my understanding of D&D cosmology is correct, that the roach isn’t actually dead in any meaningful sense and can come back to the material plane in the same way they came before.

Depends on how they got there. If they were summoned with one of the Summon Monster spells, that would be true. If they got there under their own power (or calling spells, like Gate), then they are Evil Outsiders, and we know what happens to Outsiders that die.

[Metastachydium]

Am I too hopeful for still expecting a successful... diplomacy check?

At this point? With a number of witnesses present? I'd say yes.

[KorvinStarmast]

I feel kind of horrible for wanting that, although it gives a new meaning to "Kill the messenger," and a bad pun justifies a lot.

That means, I think, that Haley will be involved since she shoots arrows and I recall the cliche as being "Don't shoot the messenger."
But I'm just being a little silly there.

You can read this in several ways,

Sometimes, a roach stomp is simply a roach stomp. I stomp on 'em when I find 'em in my house.

I don't really get how Jirix stomping on a demon roach somehow makes him a monster. For one thing if a human stomped on a roach nobody would give a damn.

Concur. And demon roaches would seem to be a bane to any humanoid.

It's not that he stomped on a demon roach as such, it's what that symbolizes.

As Dr Freud might tell Anna: Sometimes, a roach stomp is just a roach stomp. (Oblique SNL reference)