Redcloak and his way of thinking

[The Pilgrim]

That said, I don't truly believe he's crossed any Moral Event Horizons yet.

Well, in Start of Darkness...

Spoiler

Show

He murdered his little brother.

That's solid "Crossing The Moral Event Horizon" for me.

In my opinnion, all his character development in the Main Comic has been driven by the purpose of making him grow as a villain, and turning him into a credible threat to both the Order and Xykon.

The fact that during the conversation with Durkon he has begin to use the "We the Goblins" means he has begun to act like all the good fanatic megalomaniacs, by identifying his own will as the will of all of the Goblins - something he had never done before. Sure, he's not still there, but has been going down the slide for all the main comic's plot.

[Edric O]

But to me, there's nothing more alien than the guy who doesn't believe in anything, and will happily stab you in the back just for the $5 Bill you have in your wallet.

You're describing Xykon.

The reason why Redcloak isn't the guy who doesn't believe in anything is because we already have another villain character who is that guy, and it wouldn't be a very good story if both of the main villains were the same.

[danielxcutter]

You're describing Xykon.

The reason why Redcloak isn't the guy who doesn't believe in anything is because we already have another villain character who is that guy, and it wouldn't be a very good story if both of the main villains were the same.

I'd say that's a little closer to Tarquin than Xykon, frankly. Xykon would stab you for the lulz.

[Ionathus]

Well, in Start of Darkness...

Spoiler

Show

He murdered his little brother.

That's solid "Crossing The Moral Event Horizon" for me.

Yes, I know that's your position - you've stated as such in previous responses and threads.

Some Moral Event Horizons are absolute and obvious. I think of Tarquin setting escaped slaves on fire and expecting his son to appreciate it, for instance. Or heck, TarKIN blowing up Alderaan.

Others can be subjective. What crosses the line of "irredeemable" will vary by the audience member.

Basically, I find it a little strange that a comic wherein Vaarsuvius (aka Familicide McSoulSplice) is portrayed as a flawed but redeemable person and a member of Team Heroes, but the Right-Hand Man of the Big Bad is completely beyond redemption because of the choice he made at the end of SoD.

I don't presume to know your thoughts on V's actions. But I believe a narrative that leaves the door open to V's redemption has more than enough room for a change of heart in Redcloak.

[KorvinStarmast]

(Anyone read "Shoe" with Senator Belfry?)

For many years. ( McNally's comic? )

... do you think Redcloak is, generally speaking, a good person?

No. The SoD moment

Spoiler: SoD spoiler

Show

where he killed his brother

is for me the clincher. But I do believe that he sincerly desires to improve the general conditions for goblinkind. Whether or not he's going about it the right way is a matter of opinion.

To extend the comparison: they both ruined their Bearers' lives.

Bingo. Amen. Yes. Power can corrupt, and absolute power ...

{snip} But then, where's the fun in an easy redemption?

Given what Rich expressed through Soon, to Miko, regarding redemption I'd love to see how he tackles a possible redemption for Redcloak.
What complicates this slightly is that the only agent for Redcloak's redemption, mechanically, would seem to be The Dark One, who is the deity Redcloak's serves, and who doesn't seem to be a very sympathetic deity: "Don't screw this up...no pressure, though" is hardly indicative, in tone, of that feeling toward's TDO's highest ranking servant in OoTSland.

[ReaderAt2046]

You've been making a lot of arguments in this thread and poking at a lot of other people's arguments. I don't have a problem with that, nor do I have a problem with you holding whatever views of the story you hold. But I think I - and I think a lot of other folks here - could find the answer to one question enlightening: you've admitted that Redcloak is self-identifiably Evil, but do you think Redcloak is, generally speaking, a good person?

Most definitely not. Redcloak is just as much a wicked monster as Xykon, he's just a different kind of evil. He's a living illustration of the "Journey before Destination" principle, the truth that doing the wrong thing for the right reasons is still doing the wrong thing.

Well, in Start of Darkness...

Spoiler

Show

He murdered his little brother.

That's solid "Crossing The Moral Event Horizon" for me.

Yes, I know that's your position - you've stated as such in previous responses and threads.

Some Moral Event Horizons are absolute and obvious. I think of Tarquin setting escaped slaves on fire and expecting his son to appreciate it, for instance. Or heck, TarKIN blowing up Alderaan.

Others can be subjective. What crosses the line of "irredeemable" will vary by the audience member.

Basically, I find it a little strange that a comic wherein Vaarsuvius (aka Familicide McSoulSplice) is portrayed as a flawed but redeemable person and a member of Team Heroes, but the Right-Hand Man of the Big Bad is completely beyond redemption because of the choice he made at the end of SoD.

I don't presume to know your thoughts on V's actions. But I believe a narrative that leaves the door open to V's redemption has more than enough room for a change of heart in Redcloak.

For myself, I'd say that Redcloak's Moral Event Horizon is right here. I believe that anyone can be redeemed, provided they are willing to acknowledge their sins as sins and repent. But here, Redcloak is given the chance once again to turn aside from his evils and embrace a better way, but he chooses instead to double down on the Xykon Plan rather than admit his own mistakes. That is the point where redemption becomes impossible, not because Redcloak's crimes are too severe to be forgiven, but because his own pride won't let him admit that what he did was wrong.

[hungrycrow]

Most definitely not. Redcloak is just as much a wicked monster as Xykon, he's just a different kind of evil. He's a living illustration of the "Journey before Destination" principle, the truth that doing the wrong thing for the right reasons is still doing the wrong thing.





For myself, I'd say that Redcloak's Moral Event Horizon is right here. I believe that anyone can be redeemed, provided they are willing to acknowledge their sins as sins and repent. But here, Redcloak is given the chance once again to turn aside from his evils and embrace a better way, but he chooses instead to double down on the Xykon Plan rather than admit his own mistakes. That is the point where redemption becomes impossible, not because Redcloak's crimes are too severe to be forgiven, but because his own pride won't let him admit that what he did was wrong.

Belkar is also on the path to change, despite being an unrepentant psychopath at the start of the comic. I don't think there's any point a character couldn't plausibly come back from as far as OOTS goes. But that change takes time, and there isn't much time left.

[KorvinStarmast]

For myself, I'd say that Redcloak's Moral Event Horizon is right here. I believe that anyone can be redeemed, [I]provided they are willing to acknowledge their sins as sin

Heh, is that his Miko Moment?

Belkar is also on the path to change, despite being an unrepentant psychopath at the start of the comic. I don't think there's any point a character couldn't plausibly come back from as far as OOTS goes. But that change takes time, and there isn't much time left.

I am not sure that Belkar ever gets to redemption; but we have another 200 strips, roughly, to discover if I am right or wrong about that.

[Doug Lampert]

For myself, I'd say that Redcloak's Moral Event Horizon is right here. I believe that anyone can be redeemed, provided they are willing to acknowledge their sins as sins and repent. But here, Redcloak is given the chance once again to turn aside from his evils and embrace a better way, but he chooses instead to double down on the Xykon Plan rather than admit his own mistakes. That is the point where redemption becomes impossible, not because Redcloak's crimes are too severe to be forgiven, but because his own pride won't let him admit that what he did was wrong.

Miko couldn't be redeemed, because she never really admitted that she'd done anything wrong.

V can be redeemed, because V has admitted that he did something wrong.

RC? At present, definitely in the Miko camp on this one.

Nor do I expect this to change. The entire "get the Dark One or his cleric to contribute a spell to seal the rift" is a described plan, plans described in the story in advance never work. Elan can explain this. Nor does that plan explain or need an explanation of the planet in the rift, and who wastes foreshadowing like that?

[hungrycrow]

Heh, is that his Miko Moment?
I am not sure that Belkar ever gets to redemption; but we have another 200 strips, roughly, to discover if I am right or wrong about that.

I think whether V and Belkar count as achieving redemption might end up being up to the reader. But the point is that they both regret their actions and are trying to be different. Conceivably Redcloak could do the same, he just isn't doing so now with the climax of the comic fast approaching.

[KorvinStarmast]

I think whether V and Belkar count as achieving redemption might end up being up to the reader. But the point is that they both regret their actions and are trying to be different. Conceivably Redcloak could do the same, he just isn't doing so now with the climax of the comic fast approaching.

I see no evidence that Belkar admits to, nor regrets, wrong doing (beyond that hard core ultimate apology to Durkon ) but he is becoming different ...

[quinron]

I don't know. I think Redcloak and Miko are clearly foils in a lot of ways, but there's a major difference for me. Miko believes that doing awful things for the sake of a good cause excuses her actions; she doesn't admit that she's done bad things, because as a good person, they can't be bad if she's doing them. Redcloak justifies his actions; he admits he's done plenty of bad things, but because they were for a good cause, he feels that he'll be given leniency.

The thing about Redcloak, though, is that he is capable of realizing his mistakes - for example, his change of heart about the hobgoblins. But he never realizes the flaws in his thinking until his actions have already caused harm. Assuming he were to complete the Plan, I think we'd see him panicking and regretting that decision as soon as the gods start unmaking the world, but not a moment before.

[Ionathus]

For myself, I'd say that Redcloak's Moral Event Horizon is right here. I believe that anyone can be redeemed, provided they are willing to acknowledge their sins as sins and repent. But here, Redcloak is given the chance once again to turn aside from his evils and embrace a better way, but he chooses instead to double down on the Xykon Plan rather than admit his own mistakes. That is the point where redemption becomes impossible, not because Redcloak's crimes are too severe to be forgiven, but because his own pride won't let him admit that what he did was wrong.

I disagree that his attempted Implosion of Durkon is a point of no return. As far as negotiations go, Durkon got a lot farther than could've been expected! Keep in mind this is the first time a member of the Order has gotten a chance to speak with Redcloak in terms of diplomacy. Both sides have been openly hostile for the entire run of the comic, and suddenly they pause hostilities to talk! That's a huge bit of progress in my opinion. This first meeting, narratively speaking, could just as easily have been about sowing yet another seed of doubt in Redcloak's mind.

In Return of the Jedi, Vader says "it is too late for me, my son" when the two of them are alone, rejects his attempt at redemption, then turns him over to Palpatine. They even have a nasty, brutal duel after that! Then, when the chips are down and Palpatine is frying Luke, Vader turns. I'm not saying the same thing has to happen here, but I don't think it's out of the question!

Miko couldn't be redeemed, because she never really admitted that she'd done anything wrong.

V can be redeemed, because V has admitted that he did something wrong.

RC? At present, definitely in the Miko camp on this one.

I think whether V and Belkar count as achieving redemption might end up being up to the reader. But the point is that they both regret their actions and are trying to be different. Conceivably Redcloak could do the same, he just isn't doing so now with the climax of the comic fast approaching.

Counterpoint: what better time for Redcloak to have those regrets than right at the climax?

Nor do I expect this to change. The entire "get the Dark One or his cleric to contribute a spell to seal the rift" is a described plan, plans described in the story in advance never work. Elan can explain this. Nor does that plan explain or need an explanation of the planet in the rift, and who wastes foreshadowing like that?
(Emphasis mine)

"Get the Dark One or his cleric to help seal the rift" isn't a plan, it's an entire quest. It's an end goal.

"Take The Ring to Mt. Doom and cast it into the fire", "blow up the Death Star (twice)," and "Defeat the Fire Lord before he destroys the world" all succeeded despite being just as specific.

[The Pilgrim]

I don't know. I think Redcloak and Miko are clearly foils in a lot of ways, but there's a major difference for me. Miko believes that doing awful things for the sake of a good cause excuses her actions; she doesn't admit that she's done bad things, because as a good person, they can't be bad if she's doing them. Redcloak justifies his actions; he admits he's done plenty of bad things, but because they were for a good cause, he feels that he'll be given leniency.

The thing about Redcloak, though, is that he is capable of realizing his mistakes - for example, his change of heart about the hobgoblins. But he never realizes the flaws in his thinking until his actions have already caused harm. Assuming he were to complete the Plan, I think we'd see him panicking and regretting that decision as soon as the gods start unmaking the world, but not a moment before.

Haven't seen him yet realize that his actions in SoD were a mistake.

Spoiler: SoD

Show

1) Recruiting Xykon -> Mistake
2) Keep working with Xykon -> Mistake
3) Murdering his own brother to protect Xykon -> Mistake

His change of heart about the Hobgoblins is the sole time he has acknowledged a mistake. It's an exception, not a rule. It's relevance for the comic was to mark the point were Redcloak regained his own agency, no longer being Xykon's glorified lackey like he was from the start of the comic. It was not to mark the beggining of a redemption plot for Redcloak.

[quinron]

Haven't seen him yet realize that his actions in SoD were a mistake.

Spoiler: SoD

Show

1) Recruiting Xykon -> Mistake
2) Keep working with Xykon -> Mistake
3) Murdering his own brother to protect Xykon -> Mistake

His change of heart about the Hobgoblins is the sole time he has acknowledged a mistake. It's an exception, not a rule. It's relevance for the comic was to mark the point were Redcloak regained his own agency, no longer being Xykon's glorified lackey like he was from the start of the comic. It was not to mark the beggining of a redemption plot for Redcloak.

Oh, I fully agree with you. Sorry if I got a bit muddled. I was mostly just pointing out that Miko isn't as clean a parallel to Redcloak as one might be inclined to think. I would also be more inclined to depict the hobgoblin exception more cynically than I did here - yes, he changed his mind, but it took him being personally benefitted by a hobgoblin to do so.

My point re:redemption is that if he does have any kind of change of heart regarding the Plan, it's almost definitely not going to happen until AFTER the damage has been done. Miko died thinking she'd never done anything wrong; Redcloak seems like the kind of guy who might admit he was wrong, but not until he was dying.

[Darth Paul]

Redcloak has regretted his actions in SoD:

Spoiler

Show

that's clear when he looks at his reflection wearing the eyepatch and says to his brother, in spirit, "It will all be worth it."

But he hasn't regretted them because, in any sense, they were the wrong thing to do; he's regretted them because they cost him something. Allying with Xykon cost him his autonomy and self-respect, not to mention the major event of the story, which I won't mention. He's also dragged into having to work with Tsukiko, who he disposes of in an efficient but gruesome way; he could see this as another result of his mistake in allying with Xykon in the first place.

But at no point does RC say to himself, in essence, "I have done specific, horrible things, beyond the 'evil' deeds I would expect to do; I have crossed the line between everyday villainy and cartoonish supervillainy; what kind of person am I?" He only regrets his actions because he has lost something by them, not because he realizes they were wrong.

[Darth V]

Are we talking about Star Wars? I think we are talking about Star Wars. Let's talk about Star Wars!

The entire "get the Dark One or his cleric to contribute a spell to seal the rift" is a described plan, plans described in the story in advance never work. Elan can explain this. Nor does that plan explain or need an explanation of the planet in the rift, and who wastes foreshadowing like that?

Yeah i don't see that as a solution either. It feels like both Obi-Wan and Yoda trying to convince Luke that he has to kill Vader. Ok, that it is the end goal of the Big Good Guys that can't be bothered to do stuff themself, but the actual hero(es) of the story will throw a big curveball on that for sure.

Always talk about Star Wars!

[brian 333]

In Return of the Jedi we see Luke recognize that he has become his father when he compares his damaged prosthetic hand to the severed limb of Vader. He immediately rejects this outcome and disarms.

Redcloak has had many such moments, specifically his change of heart regarding hobgoblins at Azure City, and yet he has continued on his path deluding himself that it will pay off in the end.

Redemption is possible, but Redcloak has yet to admit he's just like his father.

[Dion]

Redemption is possible, but Redcloak has yet to admit he's just like his father.

Do you remember that scene in Jedi where pieces from destroyed Death Star II, The Quickening stripped away the atmosphere of Endor (or maybe Endor’s moon), killing the Ewoks and everyone else, ending the movie series forever?

I do. I remember it fondly.

[brian 333]

Sorry, but I've only seen the digitally remasterd version.

[Jason]

You can't have redemption without realizing that you were doing something wrong.

[Goblin_Priest]

I’m sorry, I thought D&D was supposed to be a fantasy game.

Also, it’s not too hard to draw parallels between the goblins and real life minorities.

Just because you can do something, doesn't mean that it's pertinent to do so.

[Dion]

I am not sure that Belkar ever gets to redemption; but we have another 200 strips, roughly, to discover if I am right or wrong about that.

Belkar already achieved as much redemption as anyone ever really gets, in strip 1194.

Will he ever get more than that? Yeah, probably. I predict he’s going to die, and Roy and the rest of the party will actually be sad that he’s dead. Roy might even put up a statue.

That’s his “redemption”, for some narrow little definition of redemption.

He’s not going to tip some cosmic balance beam over to the “good” side or anything. He’s just going to remembered by a few people as someone who wasn’t a complete bastard.

[KorvinStarmast]

He’s not going to tip some cosmic balance beam over to the “good” side or anything. He’s just going to remembered by a few people as someone who wasn’t a complete bastard.

I am pretty sure that Haley will only ever remember him as a complete little (censored) thanks to his DSTP shenanigans when she was the nominal OoTS leader.
Elan can see the good in anyone.
Roy has been putting up with him for the sole reason that he can keep pointing Belkar at the bad guys. All Belkar has done recently is make that less of a burden.
Durkon is so big hearted that he'll say nice things about Belkar at his funeral, plus, Belkar laying the stakes on Durkula was what got Durkon to finally get free of Durkula.

V ... is a hot mess inside anyway. Blackwing may persuade V to say something nice about Belkar.

Belkar dies, and the Order of the Stick goes into the future with six members: Roy, Haley, Durkon, V, Elan and Minrah. To me, Minrah is the Belkar replacement character. Minrah is also the only OoTS member who has only ever met the New Belkar (faking it or not). She'll be the one to put the statue project together and see it to completion.

Redemption? Not seeing it.

[The Pilgrim]

Belkar dies, and the Order of the Stick goes into the future with six members: Roy, Haley, Durkon, V, Elan and Minrah. To me, Minrah is the Belkar replacement character. Minrah is also the only OoTS member who has only ever met the New Belkar (faking it or not). She'll be the one to put the statue project together and see it to completion.

I was going to say that the replacement for Belkar should be O-Chul. But O-Chul is too cool for the Order. Though he might contribute to the Belkar Statue Project by cutting a chunk of marble rock and shaping it into Belkar's likeness with his bare hands. While blindfolded, of course.

[Goblin_Priest]

Belkar dies, and the Order of the Stick goes into the future with six members: Roy, Haley, Durkon, V, Elan and Minrah. To me, Minrah is the Belkar replacement character. Minrah is also the only OoTS member who has only ever met the New Belkar (faking it or not). She'll be the one to put the statue project together and see it to completion.

Lien is the Elan replacement.

[KorvinStarmast]

I was going to say that the replacement for Belkar should be O-Chul. But O-Chul is too cool for the Order. Though he might contribute to the Belkar Statue Project by cutting a chunk of marble rock and shaping it into Belkar's likeness with his bare hands. While blindfolded, of course.

Yes, vintage O-Chul.

Lien is the Elan replacement.

If only that were true.

[Ironsmith]

Lien is the Elan replacement.

...Can we just appreciate something real quick? She's one letter off from being an anagram of Elan/Nale, and has an alignment that sits between them (Lawful Good, as opposed to Elan's Chaotic Good and Nale's Lawful Evil). Elan made a joke about possibly having a "neutral sibling named Lean or Anel or something".

Just something to smirk over.

[KorvinStarmast]

...Can we just appreciate something real quick? She's one letter off from being an anagram of Elan/Nale, and has an alignment that sits between them (Lawful Good, as opposed to Elan's Chaotic Good and Nale's Lawful Evil). Elan made a joke about possibly having a "neutral sibling named Lean or Anel or something".

She's from Azure City. She knows who her parents are. (GDGU material). Interesting coincidence, but no sale on her being a long lost sibling of Elan and Nale.

[Ironsmith]

She's from Azure City. She knows who her parents are. (GDGU material). Interesting coincidence, but no sale on her being a long lost sibling of Elan and Nale.

Obviously. I just thought it was a funny coincidence.