OOTS #1227 - The Discussion Thread

[arimareiji]

Let's play a thought experiment where of what info Serini might be working by.
Let's say, through divination potions (pretty sure it's a thing?) she gets who destroyed each of the four gates. Redcloak (think he got most of the blame? Can't remember details of SOD), Order of the Stick, Sapphire Guard, and Order again. She also knows the trap Girard set was tripped, suggesting that the paladins broke their Oath (unlikely Girard would give additional information on this in his prerecorded message) and were seeking out the other gates.
So the team that destroyed two Gates are heading to the last Gate, to join up with the team that destroyed their own Gate and broke their oaths, to stop the team that destroyed another Gate.
I can see why Serini isn't instilled with confidence about her chances of existence.

Weird mechanics question: We know the source of knowledge that powers answers to a divination (Augury, Commune, etc) is a deity and/or their minions, but what about a potion? Because iirc, we've heard that for divinations the gods have information regarding the gates and the Snarl locked up tighter than Miko's sphincter used to be*.

<sub>* - I just realized that "assumes facts not in evidence", as a lawyer might say. I.e. it might be that even post-mortem, it could still turn a lump of coal into a diamond in two weeks.

Edit: Added footnote</sub>

[Peelee]

Only if it’s the American one, otherwise we’ll have to have a ‘meeting’😉

Going from how all the Brummies who accidentally post in the wrong subreddit sound, you people are delightful and that would surely be fun!

Where does anyone get judicial authority...?

Mutual agreement between the people and their governments, and on an international scale nations and each other. Now, Shojo can spin the "I am authorized by the twelve gods but you can't see the paperwork stop asking" all he likes, but I'm under no obligation to assume that it's turning from straw to gold.

[Jasdoif]

Now, Shojo can spin the "I am authorized by the twelve gods but you can't see the paperwork stop asking" all he likes, but I'm under no obligation to assume that it's turning from straw to gold.

The next step is usually some form of "God, being omni-present and all-knowing, is considered to have signed this document by default."

[Fyraltari]

The next step is usually some form of "God, being omni-present and all-knowing, is considered to have signed this document by default."

I think the OOTS-worlders know that their gods are neither of these things.

[Jasdoif]

Now, Shojo can spin the "I am authorized by the twelve gods but you can't see the paperwork stop asking" all he likes, but I'm under no obligation to assume that it's turning from straw to gold.

The next step is usually some form of "God, being omni-present and all-knowing, is considered to have signed this document by default."

I think the OOTS-worlders know that their gods are neither of these things.

Hence why Shojo doesn't let anyone see the document with the paperwork. That and Shojo, unlike the Crimson Corporation, would be unwilling and unable to throw dissenters into atomic furnaces.

[Good Coyote]

Didn't Hinjo (an actual paladin) depose Shojo immediately upon finding out what he was up to with the Order of the Stick? That seems like a strong contradiction that Shojo had legitimate authority (particularly from the gods) to do it.

Edit: Wanted to make sure I went back to the facts. Comic #406. Hinjo technically does not arrest Shojo, because the magistrate needs to come and do it, but legal proceedings would have been in the works if Miko hadn't gotten extrajudicial.

Obviously we don't know what the outcome of that trial would have been. But it is certainly not explicit in canon that Shojo had proper authority. Hinjo is the most in the know about what the local laws and the divine mandate actually say.

Shojo himself is explicit that he is not acting with mundane Azure City authority. If he had been, then violating national boundaries like that might very well be construed as an act of war.

However, he is also not acting within a divine mandate. He's not a paladin but he took the same oath and was actively breaking it. He pulled in a phony "spirit of pure good and law."

All of this goes more to whether he was being Lawful or Chaotic though, and I think we all know he was being Chaotic. He had the same authority that most Good-aligned adventurers act under, namely "It needs to be done and I'm the one who can do it."

[hungrycrow]

Shojo didn't need any paperwork. His friend, a being of Pure Law and Good, was vouching for him.

[Fyraltari]

Didn't Hinjo (an actual paladin) depose Shojo immediately upon finding out what he was up to with the Order of the Stick? That seems like a strong contradiction that Shojo had legitimate authority (particularly from the gods) to do it.

Hinjo doesn't question the extra-territorial arrst of the Order, though, and that is what Shojo claimed to have legal authority for. He questionned the rigging a trial by impersonnating an angel bit which Shojo never calimed to be legal in the first place. Oh, and the Oath-breaking and making your loved ones thought you had gone senile bit, but I don't think those were on legal grounds. Okay, maybe the Oath-breaking bit if Azure City has a law on perjury (and then again since the SG is a secret society I'm not sure their Oath would be legally binding).

[Ruck]

That's an interesting point. It makes good sense that they wouldn't know everything we know now, and this deserves exploration... but my weird brain is starting to even wonder how we know everything we know now.

Questions like "How do you research something that even the gods won't divulge?", or "Why were Kraagor and Soon anywhere near the Snarl? How do you 'fight' or even tank against something that rips apart the threads of your existence as soon as you touch it?"

It raises a lot of questions. I was thinking in terms of, "If they didn't know they were saving the world, just trying to prevent anyone else from accidentally stumbling upon a soul-eating abomination, that kinda takes away the argument of 'saving the world in self-interest', huh?"

But it raises more questions than even I realized. I assume Serini is going to be able to fill in some of those for us.

[Good Coyote]

Hinjo doesn't question the extra-territorial arrst of the Order, though, and that is what Shojo claimed to have legal authority for. He questionned the rigging a trial by impersonnating an angel bit which Shojo never calimed to be legal in the first place. Oh, and the Oath-breaking and making your loved ones thought you had gone senile bit, but I don't think those were on legal grounds. Okay, maybe the Oath-breaking bit if Azure City has a law on perjury (and then again since the SG is a secret society I'm not sure their Oath would be legally binding).

You make a good point about "maybe he would have had divine authority to arrest the Order if he hadn't been lying." But that gets very muddy, since he was lying. *

I think I misunderstand what you mean about not claiming the angel bit was legal. Could you explain that further?

For the rest of it, there's got to be something that Hinjo objected to on legal grounds, or there'd be no mention of magistrates. The perjury makes sense.


*Basically, to my understanding, the argument is "what Shojo did is different (more Lawful?) because he had proper authority." But it seems that in reality, it was not a situation of proper authority. It was a situation of improper abuse of authority.

Shojo may have the authority to basically grant warrants for the paladins, but if a paladin somehow lied to him and said "this person scanned Evil" or something when the paladin knew that the person only scanned Evil because they were holding Xykon's crown, or something like that. Or whatever other dishonesty it would take to get approval to drag them back to the city for their own purposes. Then that paladin would not be acting as a legitimate authority, even though there was a "legal" warrant granted. It's still not legitimate authority when it's Shojo who lies (or selectively presents the truth).

[Riftwolf]

I think the OOTS-worlders know that their gods are neither of these things.

Except Miko, from what I recall (who chose to believe that everything, no matter how inconsequential, was divine influence on the universe performed directly in service to her destiny. Kind of like next-tier solipsism.

I have wondered about the possibility of Serini having contact with the Oracle, and how she might've accidentally jerked her questions through bad phrasing, but that might be a bit convoluted.

[Sky_Schemer]

but did they know the rifts would eventually grow and destroy the planet? How did they learn that? Shojo says they sealed the rifts "to keep anyone from suffering the same fate" as Mijung, not that they learned they could destroy the whole world.

The relevant bit is three panels later: "Soon and his allies learned that the gods could remake the prison without the rifts...but to do so would require the raw threads of reality that were currently being used by the world". Followed closely by: "They agreed it was best to not let things deteriorate to the point where the gods felt they had no choice but to destroy the world to rebuild the prison."

So, yeah, they all knew what they were doing. They just didn't know this was world number million-something.

[danielxcutter]

It does make me wonder if they knew about the quiddities and stuff. I believe in SoD it was mentioned that TDO sent forces to capture a Gate once but the Scribblers fought it off? Redcloak did mention that Kraagor killed a lot of goblins.

[Riftwolf]

Just realised: did we really get through a discussion about Armor reshaping without bringing up the sexual dimorphism of Skyrim clothing?

[mjasghar]

In terms of jurisdiction
1)the pantheons jointly make the world so theoretically a threat to the world allows cross border jurisdiction
2) the pantheons can be touchy,however. Notice Tiger not letting Thor help beyond normal spell granting.
I’m not seeing the Northern pantheon objecting to this intervention in any way so presumably it’s allowed.

[Kelenius]

I'm actually going to argue that Serini is Lawful Good.

Why? She considers taking a level in paladin, and the only counterargument she gets is that she's not the type. Had she not been LG, someone from the order would have probably pointed that out. And I don't think that anything we've seen her do so far is out of possibility for a LG person. Rogues can be LG too, after all.

[hroþila]

I'm actually going to argue that Serini is Lawful Good.

Why? She considers taking a level in paladin, and the only counterargument she gets is that she's not the type. Had she not been LG, someone from the order would have probably pointed that out. And I don't think that anything we've seen her do so far is out of possibility for a LG person. Rogues can be LG too, after all.

The thing is, "I don't know if you're the paladin type" could easily refer to her not being Lawful.

She suggested they should all retire to guard the gates, but she didn't. She suggested they should never contact each other again, but it is possible that she remained in touch with Girard. We have seen her lie to the paladins both for a good reason and just for a laugh. We've seen very little of her, but what we have doesn't suggest Lawful to me.

[Riftwolf]

The thing is, "I don't know if you're the paladin type" could easily refer to her not being Lawful.

She suggested they should all retire to guard the gates, but she didn't. She suggested they should never contact each other again, but it is possible that she remained in touch with Girard. We have seen her lie to the paladins both for a good reason and just for a laugh. We've seen very little of her, but what we have doesn't suggest Lawful to me.

Should also point out that not everyone in oots knows other people's alignments, and the ones that do tend to be 4th wall demolitionists.

[Kelenius]

The thing is, "I don't know if you're the paladin type" could easily refer to her not being Lawful.

She suggested they should all retire to guard the gates, but she didn't. She suggested they should never contact each other again, but it is possible that she remained in touch with Girard. We have seen her lie to the paladins both for a good reason and just for a laugh. We've seen very little of her, but what we have doesn't suggest Lawful to me.

She didn't suggest to cut all ties, she just said no interference in the other gates. Also, lawful people can lie. Roy does it frequently enough, he's still LG. She may not be the paragon of Lawful Goodness, but I still believe she could be LG.

Should also point out that not everyone in oots knows other people's alignments, and the ones that do tend to be 4th wall demolitionists.

Serini says she has the Charisma for it in the same conversation, so I think they're aware of their stat blocks there.

[hroþila]

Sure, Lawful people can lie, but my point is what little we do have does not point towards Lawful. I'm not saying it's impossible or that it would be inconsistent if she turned out to be Lawful. As for cutting ties, she did say "We're done with each other".

[Dion]

You make a good point about "maybe he would have had divine authority to arrest the Order if he hadn't been lying." But that gets very muddy, since he was lying.

May I humbly suggest that you read Catch-22? It’s probably the most honest book ever written about the true nature of authority.

That book explains precisely where Shojo and Hinjo and (and Tarquin) derive their judicial authority, and describes the philosophical underpinnings of the right to arrest and put on trial any person.

[arimareiji]

May I humbly suggest that you read Catch-22? It’s probably the most honest book ever written about the true nature of authority.

That book explains precisely where Shojo and Hinjo and (and Tarquin) derive their judicial authority, and describes the philosophical underpinnings of the right to arrest and put on trial any person.

Spoiler: Explanation and spoiler for Catch-22

Show

Throughout the book, the mysterious regulation "Catch-22" is used as the basis for all sorts* of irrational and/or unfair decisions... but without ever being cited. Near the end, the protagonist finally finds out Catch-22 means (paraphrased) "We can do anything you can't stop us from doing." When he asks whether they showed it to the person telling him this, she says she was told Catch-22 says they don't have to.

_{* - Memorably, many of the situations are something like this: You can only prove you're loyal by signing a Loyalty Oath. But you're not allowed to sign one unless you can prove you're loyal. It's why "Catch-22" became a slang term for a situation where it's impossible to get permission or the ability to do something, until you already have it.}

_{Edit: Fixed broken tag
Edit 2: Footnote}

[Fyraltari]

I think I misunderstand what you mean about not claiming the angel bit was legal. Could you explain that further?

For the rest of it, there's got to be something that Hinjo objected to on legal grounds, or there'd be no mention of magistrates. The perjury makes sense.

Shojo was an accomplice in the impersonation of the mandated juror of a trial by the father of one of the accused with the intent of having the accised be declared innocents so that he could then pressure the accused into helping him commit oathbreaking (which may or may not be illegal on its own). That's all kinds of illegal and Shojo never denied that. That's what Hinjo planned to charge his uncle with, since he discovered at the same time that his uncle retained the full extant of his mental faculties and therefore was responsible for his actions which blows away the defense tjat Shojo had planned for, namely: I'm a delirious old man who thinks his cat is the actual ruler of the kingdom, I can't be blamed for this random oathspirit taking advantage of my diminished state (not formuled like that of course).

Hinjo, O-Chul, Lien and the rest of the Sapphire Guard were completely fine witj Shojo having a bunch of foreign suspects arrested on foreign soil to face judgement provided the trial was genuine and not a sham cooked up by a manipulative octogenarian with trust issues. This suggests that the law of the land, at least as interpreted by the SG does grant Shojo the legal authority to have bunch of foreign suspects arrested on foreign soil to face judgement when the Gates are involved.

[elros]

May I humbly suggest that you read Catch-22? It’s probably the most honest book ever written about the true nature of authority.

That book explains precisely where Shojo and Hinjo and (and Tarquin) derive their judicial authority, and describes the philosophical underpinnings of the right to arrest and put on trial any person.

Catch-22 also has an accurate (if downbeat) description of human existence:

Man was matter, that was Snowden's secret. Drop him out a window, and he'll fall. Set fire to him and he'll burn. Bury him and he'll rot, like other kinds of garbage. The spirit gone, man is garbage.

[KorvinStarmast]

Spoiler: Explanation and spoiler for Catch-22

Show

Throughout the book, the mysterious regulation "Catch-22" is used as the basis for all sorts* of irrational and/or unfair decisions... but without ever being cited. Near the end, the protagonist finally finds out Catch-22 means (paraphrased) "We can do anything you can't stop us from doing." When he asks whether they showed it to the person telling him this, she says she was told Catch-22 says they don't have to.

_{* - Memorably, many of the situations are something like this: You can only prove you're loyal by signing a Loyalty Oath. But you're not allowed to sign one unless you can prove you're loyal. It's why "Catch-22" became a slang term for a situation where it's impossible to get permission or the ability to do something, until you already have it.}

_{Edit: Fixed broken tag
Edit 2: Footnote}

The problem of with understanding social recursion is that you have to first understand social recursion ...

[Fyraltari]

Catch-22 also has an accurate (if downbeat) description of human existence:

"People die when you kill them" is entirely true but it's hardly a novel take.

[DBear]

Didn't we already go thru the portrayal of chaotic stupid with Girard?

[arimareiji]

The problem of with understanding social recursion is that you have to first understand social recursion ...

I was going to make a joke about recursive logic, but I get the feeling the conversation would eventually spiral down to repeated choruses of The Song That Doesn't End.

[Dion]

"People die when you kill them" is entirely true but it's hardly a novel take.

Sure, but in Catch-22 it’s funny because it’s true.

Well, that’s really a big lie. The first half of the book funny because it’s true. Near end it stops being funny, and just stomps a boot on your face and laughs at you. It’s a little like 1984, if Orwell hadn’t been so optimistic about the future..

[Peelee]

It’s a little like 1984, if Orwell hadn’t been so optimistic about the future..

JEEZ that makes me both want to read it and also never let it within 5 miles of me at the same time.