OOTS #1233 - The Discussion Thread

[Worldsong]

Which goblins have they fought multiple times?

They've fought against Xykon's faction multiple times, which has Redcloak as a subfaction.

[Jason]

Unfortunately I don't think Jirix has the mojo to contribute 9th level spells, now or any time soon -- I still suspect Redcloak will be instrumental to the resolution here, even if he's unfit to lead the goblin peoples.

Yes, I think Redcloak will be instrumental to resolving the main plot, but I see it as a death=redemption role. Perhaps he will meet the Dark One face to face and realize TDO is no more concerned with goblin welfare than Fenris was, and give Durkon that 9th level spell just before TDO or Xykon destroy him. Either way, I think it unlikely that he will survive the story.

[Ionathus]

I don't like this "oppressor-oppressed" narrative where the second is immediately exculpated of having had free will and agency in leading their own lives and to this situation during all the years this world's existed - because they got slighted centuries or millennias before.
An event whose actual consequences in relation to present times we know *nothing* about I'd like to add, something multiple people pointed out and that gets routinely ignored.

Nothing of what you cited above changes this, and in fact has been already throughly discussed and rebutted in the previous thread.

Well, I have good news for you! That's not actually the message.

If you read the last several pages and concluded that Thor, Durkon, and Roy are all 100% excusing the actions of Redcloak or the Hobgoblin Army that conquered Azure City, that's a result of your personal interpretation, not the text itself. By all measures, each of them have condemned the goblinoids' actions in one way or another.

If you refuse to acknowledge that someone can be right about a problem and wrong about the solution, there's really nothing left to debate here.

[Spartan360]

Hard to say what the good gods can even do at the moment, they couldn't really do much when Hel sent her vampires to fulfill her mission. Most at that moment, the only thing thor really could do was make sure that Hel didn't break any rules.

[Gallowglass]

Indeed man, as a "Roy" type who considered the viewpoint of the enemy and realized it's bogus, I share the sentiment that people should stop blindly taking the bait of Redcloak's narrative of oppression without question - and instead put it through serious scrutiny, including the supposed "enemy" oppressors.

You are not a "Roy" type.

Maybe a "Miko" type.

[Robots]

If you refuse to acknowledge that someone can be right about a problem and wrong about the solution, there's really nothing left to debate here.

Oh god, THANK YOU. You're saying what I have been thinking.

[Ganbatte]

He was right about the fact that the gods (or to be more specific, the god who made his species) didn't care enough about the goblins to improve on their lives.

Why should they? Or better yet, can they?
As someone already pointed out the most gods seem to do with a world once it's created is provide clerical magic, which the goblins already have access to, and even that seems strictly regulated (Control Weather bit).

To be angry because a Deus Ex Machina isn't helping them out... I dunno, seems kinda weak. Help yourselves.

[Jason]

He was right about the fact that the gods (or to be more specific, the god who made his species) didn't care enough about the goblins to improve on their lives.

Redcloak believes that all the gods at the creation of Stickworld agreed to actively favor their "chosen" races over goblinkind, because they wanted goblins to be easily killable xp for their clerics, and that is not true.
He also seems to believe that dwarves are all rich because of the blessings of their gods, and that the gods would never destroy the world while their favored races are still living there. He's wrong on both of those counts too.

[Ganbatte]

Well, I have good news for you! That's not actually the message.

If you read the last several pages and concluded that Thor, Durkon, and Roy are all 100% excusing the actions of Redcloak or the Hobgoblin Army that conquered Azure City

Bzzzt, stop. You've missed my point completely.
I'm not talking about the evil actions they're taking now.
I'm talking about the idea that the situation of goblinkind today is due to "divine fault" rather than the goblins not making the right choices to improve their situation through history.

And that does seem to be the message here.
That the goblins aren't responsible for shaping their own fate, that it was all someone else's fault.

[Ionathus]

Thor just revealed to him that a good chunk of Redcloak's version of it was pure nonsense.

What? Are you really ignoring the clear grain of truth in the middle of both versions of events, which Durkon and Thor both acknowledged? Redcloak's version of events was wrong in several big ways, yes...but one of the gods whom it accuses just admitted that it was right, on at least the biggest point. You're going to throw that point out with the proverbial bathwater because it was wrong elsewhere?

Man, you would HATE Rashomon.

Yes, I think Redcloak will be instrumental to resolving the main plot, but I see it as a death=redemption role. Perhaps he will meet the Dark One face to face and realize TDO is no more concerned with goblin welfare than Fenris was, and give Durkon that 9th level spell just before TDO or Xykon destroy him. Either way, I think it unlikely that he will survive the story.

I recall before the 7th HP book, there were all these books and articles theorizing about who would die, even going so far as to give the odds and explain their reasoning. In the book I skimmed, Harry was like 2:1 odds, Hermione & Ron in the 5:1 range, and Voldemort of course was a 1:1 - "i.e. he's going down no matter what."

On that basis, I'd probably put Redcloak somewhere around 3:1. I personally believe we'll get something more unique than redemption=death, but I'm definitely not ruling it out.

Spoiler: Harry Potter #7

Show

Tragically, the death predictions book gave Dobby something like 500:1 odds because there's NO WAY they'll kill the adorable funny non-human ally...

Edit: ninja

Bzzzt, stop. You've missed my point completely.
I'm not talking about the evil actions they're taking now.
I'm talking about the idea that the situation of goblinkind today is due to "divine fault" rather than the goblins not making the right choices to improve their situation through history.

And that does seem to be the message here.
That the goblins aren't responsible for shaping their own fate, that it was all someone else's fault.

Narratively speaking, the time to acknowledge any sort of "goblinoids have been bringing this on themselves for generations" argument was in either the Durkon/Redcloak discussion or the Durkon/Thor one. Because none of those three characters ever brought it up, even though it would be in their interests to do so (sans Redcloak), I am not inclined to believe it ever happened or is relevant to the main point.

You are mistaking the hypothetical "maybe the goblinoids caused this by not optimizing their civilization centuries ago" as a proven fact that needs to be addressed in this comic. But it's not. If it was, it would be in there. Characters would be debating it.

To paraphrase the author: instead of making assumptions that don't fit the text, why not try new assumptions that do fit the text?

[Robots]

Why should they? Or better yet, can they?

...Are you asking me why the gods should improve on the lives of goblins? Not every goddamn goblin is a Redcloak, Ganbatte.

Remember in Start of Darkness, where members of the Sapphire Guard

Spoiler: Start of Darkness Spoilers

Show

massacred Redcloak's village and killed every man, woman and child solely because of their species?

Wow, I guess that means every member of the Sapphire Guard is equivalent to those paladins.

From what I understand, you're basically saying that since Redcloak and his troops Did A Bad, goblins shouldn't be given fair treatment by the gods, even the ones that have nothing to do with RC's dirty dealings.

[Gallowglass]

Redcloak believes that all the gods at the creation of Stickworld agreed to actively favor their "chosen" races over goblinkind, because they wanted goblins to be easily killable xp for their clerics, and that is not true.
He also seems to believe that dwarves are all rich because of the blessings of their gods, and that the gods would never destroy the world while their favored races are still living there. He's wrong on both of those counts too.

When the world was created, the dwarves were spawned in the ore-rich mountains, forming a natural geographic defense, and with innate skills and abilities related to mining. Sorry, but that counts as a blessing of the god toward getting rich.

Several other races spawned with innate +s in attack and damage against goblinkind, didn't they? I don't know, its been a while since I've played 3.5. Hard not to see that as a god-based incentive toward poor future race relations

[Larsaan]

I feel like it's worth noting that if they'd asked the goblins in Dorukan's Dungeon why they fight, their answer would have been "because Xykon ordered me to". Those goblins never chose to fight, they weren't desperate for food or land, because they already had those things. Maybe not the best quality, but good enough that they were happy to live in peace with their neighbours.

No one ever wonders what Trigak's motivation(s) were.

[Worldsong]

Bzzzt, stop. You've missed my point completely.
I'm not talking about the evil actions they're taking now.
I'm talking about the idea that the situation of goblinkind today is due to "divine fault" rather than the goblins not making the right choices to improve their situation through history.

And that does seem to be the message here.
That the goblins aren't responsible for shaping their own fate, that it was all someone else's fault.

When the deity responsible for your creation does a bad job of it and then abandons you while other races both have better designs and more reliable divine assistance you might actually have a fair argument that fate seems to have it in for you.

Goblins might have the free will to try and improve their situation, but so does everyone else who then also has natural advantages and one or more deities on their side. And since there are only limited resources that means goblins just get kicked around, as admitted by Thor who was there when it happened.

Having free will doesn't mean that the hand you're given no longer matters, and the goblins were given a very poor hand indeed.

[Robots]

No one ever wonders what Trigak's motivation(s) were.

He was a mercenary!

[Ionathus]

When the world was created, the dwarves were spawned in the ore-rich mountains, forming a natural geographic defense, and with innate skills and abilities related to mining. Sorry, but that counts as a blessing of the god toward getting rich.

Several other races spawned with innate +s in attack and damage against goblinkind, didn't they? I don't know, its been a while since I've played 3.5. Hard not to see that as a god-based incentive toward poor future race relations

That statement from Redcloak was serving double-duty: in addition to Redcloak's main argument, it was also showing that Redcloak was baselessly assuming Durkon lived a charmed life, while in reality he very much grew up dirt-poor.

[Jason]

Bzzzt, stop. You've missed my point completely.
I'm not talking about the evil actions they're taking now.
I'm talking about the idea that the situation of goblinkind today is due to "divine fault" rather than the goblins not making the right choices to improve their situation through history.

And that does seem to be the message here.
That the goblins aren't responsible for shaping their own fate, that it was all someone else's fault.

I would find it objectionable if that were the message too, but I don't think that is the message here. I think the basic message is that an injustice was done to the goblins and it should be rectified simply because it was not fair, not because it excuses the goblins' behavior since.

[Ganbatte]

...Are you asking me why the gods should improve on the lives of goblins?

Indeed, cutting the rest which is not something I ever argued.
The God's main policy was stated to be one of mostly non-intervention once creation is finalized, so why should they actively mess with one specific race that has nothing to do with their portfolio now, after the world's been rolling for millennias?

It doesn't sound like something the OotSverse gods (very rule bound) would do, or could do, or should do.

[Gallowglass]

Point of order: that statement from Redcloak was serving double-duty: in addition to Redcloak's main argument, it was also showing that Redcloak was baselessly assuming Durkon lived a charmed life, while in reality he very much grew up dirt-poor.

I think its well understood by just about everyone in this discussion that one of the main disconnects has to do with attributing entire species with the characteristics of a small number or single representative member, yes.

if -most- dwarves are well off, that doesn't mean they all are. but the baseline dwarf living in poverty is still better off by leagues than the baseline goblin living in poverty.

[Robots]

Indeed, cutting the rest which is not something I ever argued.
The God's main policy was stated to be one of mostly non-intervention once creation is finalized, so why should they actively mess with one specific race that has nothing to do with their portfolio now, after the world's been rolling for millennias?

Because even if they finalized the decision years ago, it is like, still a problem for the species. Goblins still have sucky land and are seen as XP fodder. Ignoring a problem for years won't automatically make the problem go away.

[Rrmcklin]

It seems to me the conflict in this thread are due to two opposing view-points: either personal circumstances and beginnings matter, or they don't.

If you believe they don't, and that all failings or hardships of a person or people must fall on themselves for just not trying to hard enough then I really don't see a way this story could be satisfying to you, because it's been clear for a very long time now the writer just does not prescribe to that same point of view.

Which isn't to say you have to think this story is well written even if you don't prescribe to that sort of absolutism, I've certainly seem allegories of oppression fumbled before. But if you're just not opening to a story like this at all, and are constantly going to be making assumptions about the story that fit what you want to believe, instead of what it is telling you is actually the case, I don't see how you can enjoy this.

[Ionathus]

I think its well understood by just about everyone in this discussion that one of the main disconnects has to do with attributing entire species with the characteristics of a small number or single representative member, yes.

if -most- dwarves are well off, that doesn't mean they all are. but the baseline dwarf living in poverty is still better off by leagues than the baseline goblin living in poverty.

No argument from me! Its complexity is why I liked that line so much: it still conveys Redcloak's point in a way that is understandable and relatively sympathetic, but it also shows how consumed by hate and jealousy he is, that he believes other humanoids were literally showered with treasure in comparison to goblins. Redcloak dips between making points that resonate really well with Durkon ("the gods just see us as poker chips or crops") and making ones that completely fall flat ("of course YOU don't understand, you grew up surrounded by treasure!"), and that mixture is the mark of a good fictional argument, because it gives us a more nuanced and complicated interaction.

[Ganbatte]

When the world was created, the dwarves were spawned in the ore-rich mountains, forming a natural geographic defense, and with innate skills and abilities related to mining. Sorry, but that counts as a blessing of the god toward getting rich.

Several other races spawned with innate +s in attack and damage against goblinkind, didn't they? I don't know, its been a while since I've played 3.5. Hard not to see that as a god-based incentive toward poor future race relations

On the opposite side Goblins were designed to be a "Swarm-tier" type of race so it makes sense that the more limited Dwarves could theoretically get overrun (hello Moria!) and have their riches captured, and that other races would be given some advantage in clearing out the hordes easier.

It's just that once the "swarm" fails once and is then controlled so its size can never reach threatening levels again, the other race's advantages are gonna become dominant.
But that's a design demerit, not really injustice or being treated with bad intentions.

[Ionathus]

The God's main policy was stated to be one of mostly non-intervention once creation is finalized, so why should they actively mess with one specific race that has nothing to do with their portfolio now, after the world's been rolling for millennias?

It doesn't sound like something the OotSverse gods (very rule bound) would do, or could do, or should do.

They can't, and they won't. Durkon literally said "I think we're on our own in solvin' this mess" in the last strip.

[Ganbatte]

Because even if they finalized the decision years ago, it is like, still a problem for the species. Goblins still have sucky land and are seen as XP fodder. Ignoring a problem for years won't automatically make the problem go away.

And that's what the gods are for, to remove all problems from the world?
Because everyone has some, and once the DM essentially breaks the rules and intervene mid-game to help one every other deity could claim the same right for theirs.

Dunno, it seems like the kind of stuff that creates more problems than it solves.

[Lethologica]

On the opposite side Goblins were designed to be a "Swarm-tier" type of race so it makes sense that the more limited Dwarves could theoretically get overrun (hello Moria!) and have their riches captured, and that other races would be given some advantage in clearing out the hordes easier.

It's just that once the "swarm" fails once and is then controlled so its size can never reach threatening levels again, the other race's advantages are gonna become dominant.
But that's a design demerit, not really injustice or being treated with bad intentions.

Except that this is not a RTS game, and what comes off as a 'design demerit' in that context turns out to be an injustice (of stupidity, to be fair) for the people actually living in the world - compounded by their subsequent abandonment.

Designers have a responsibility to the players which includes things like game balance, but not things like the well-being of the race's units. Creators have a responsibility to their creations. The ethics are quite different.

[Gallowglass]

On the opposite side Goblins were designed to be a "Swarm-tier" type of race so it makes sense that the more limited Dwarves could theoretically get overrun (hello Moria!) and have their riches captured, and that other races would be given some advantage in clearing out the hordes easier.

It's just that once the "swarm" fails once and is then controlled so its size can never reach threatening levels again, the other race's advantages are gonna become dominant.
But that's a design demerit, not really injustice or being treated with bad intentions.

I mean, I realize this is a narrative and not real life... but you honestly can't see the difference between living breathing thinking creatures and starcraft units?

[Snails]

On the opposite side Goblins were designed to be a "Swarm-tier" type of race so it makes sense that the more limited Dwarves could theoretically get overrun (hello Moria!) and have their riches captured, and that other races would be given some advantage in clearing out the hordes easier.

It's just that once the "swarm" fails once and is then controlled so its size can never reach threatening levels again, the other race's advantages are gonna become dominant.
But that's a design demerit, not really injustice or being treated with bad intentions.

"So my Zerg Rush failed. What that means is it is no fair to now employ your superior buildings to create better units and control the lion's share of the resources. We need a Superuser to edit the game state to fix that."

Yeah, I am not seeing that as a compelling moral argument.

Durkon really went as far as it makes any sense to try, which is to accept goblin owership of Goblotopia (was Azure City). There is the messy detail of getting other people to agree, obviously, but this reveal does not actually change anything.

[hroþila]

You guys are conflating Fenrir with the goblinoids and ascribing some sort of moral responsibility to the latter for their innate vital characteristics. The zerg rush was Fenrir's plan. There's no indication that the goblinoids actually did anything but live shorter lives and reproduce faster than humans, while fighting over resources like every other group. This is not a goblin plot that failed and for which they now want compensation. This is something that was done to them.

[Jason]

You guys are conflating Fenrir with the goblinoids and ascribing some sort of moral responsibility to the latter for their innate vital characteristics. The zerg rush was Fenrir's plan. There's no indication that the goblinoids actually did anything but live shorter lives and reproduce faster than humans, while fighting over resources like every other group. This is not a goblin plot that failed and for which they now want compensation. This is something that was done to them.

Even if the goblins were totally onboard with Fenrir's plan and really did try to conquer the world, which I believe is entirely plausible, the currently living goblins had nothing to do with their ancetors' bad choices but must still live with the consequences.