Concerns About the Progressions of the Goblin Plot (@Rich)

[Lethologica]

I would appreciate a response including reference to the material and how it is not contradictory or somewhat damaging to Roy's character. Even if I was overreacting that would mean there is still an issue to react to.

I happen to hope I am overreacting and 100% wrong about where the strip is going. To clarify what I meant by a 'lesser version', any condemnation to Roy for how he's handled Goblins specifically is going to ring hollow and be character inaccurate, especially if it doesn't address his similar treatment of every other mook in the world regardless of species. I'm open to counter arguments but they need to be made for me to understand and agree with them.

See, words like 'condemnation' instead of 'criticism' worry me. I'm not a fan of choosing between 'Roy deserves to be condemned' and 'the comic is doing irreparable damage to Roy's character' when I don't think either of those things is accurate. Roy overlooked the question of the goblins' involvement. Ideally, he would not have. That's what the comic says. The comic does not say this oversight was terrible, or that it's a black mark on Roy's character, or that Roy mistreats goblins. That's you interrupting the conversation mid-stream to impute the worst.

[Telenil]

Roy isn't a bad person for not talking to attacking goblins. But the fact that even he, a Lawful Good person, didn't think to even TRY is meant to be a broad indicator of a problem, and maybe a gentle wake-up call.

What problem would that be exactly? That he occasionally prioritizes the survival of his party over talking to the guy trying to slaughter it? That Roy would have implicit biais (to use the fashionable term) against enemy soldiers that are actively attempting to kill him? That since he talked to some monsters, he should have tried talking to them all?

Maybe Roy should "ideally" have talked to goblins, but that's an unrealistic expectation. Even if he had, the best answer would have been "we don't have lands while you do", and if he had negotiated with Redcloak, it would have been "Implosion". Then what? They still don't know Redcloak has his own agenda, or that there is any daylight between him and Xykon. So the only difference is that Durkon couldn't blame Roy for not trying, which IMO makes Durkon ridiculously unfair. That Roy treats it as "oh no, what have I been thinking all along?" is what strains credulity.

I get this strip is a nod to real world issues. But in universe, this is happening while they are in a fight to the death against a tyrant trying to take over the world, a god-killer monstrosity is trying to get free, and most of the Pantheons looking at them to see if they should blow up the planet. Durkon should have better things to do than blaming his leader for not trying something that he had no reason to believe would work, didn't work when Durkon tried it, and Durkon only tried because he had a divine revelation from his God.

[hamishspence]

The point is that to save the world, they will need a 9th level spell slot, willingly expended, by a goblin caster. Which almost certainly means Redcloak in this context.

And Durkon needs to get through to Roy why they need to win Redcloak over - which must include the fact that Redcloak has a legitimate grievance.

[hroþila]

The problem is that he didn't really respect the goblins enough to e.g. ensure that surrendering goblins wouldn't be slaughtered by his subordinate or to ever wonder why they were fighting (beyond "they're goblins, they're minions, this is the natural order of things"). I think you're being too literal by focusing on Durkon's somewhat flippant response to Roy's objection. It goes deeper than literally talking to axe-wielding charging goblins - it's about Roy and Durkon's internalized worldview, which they now realize was biased.

[Telenil]

The problem is that he didn't really respect the goblins enough to e.g. ensure that surrendering goblins wouldn't be slaughtered by his subordinate or to ever wonder why they were fighting (beyond "they're goblins, they're minions, this is the natural order of things"). I think you're being too literal by focusing on Durkon's somewhat flippant response to Roy's objection. It goes deeper than literally talking to axe-wielding charging goblins - it's about Roy and Durkon's internalized worldview, which they now realize was biased.

So the message of the strip is that good people are supposed to wonder what the enemy soldier trying to cleave their skull in two is fighting for? I don't think I could say that out loud with a straight face.

Yes, trying to understand someone else's perspective is good advice in many situations. But here, I almost feel it is Roy who should blame Durkon for going against orders, screwing their plan and alerting the vilains to their presence. I wrote "almost" because, this being a story, Redcloak's motivations may turn out to be the key to the resolution.

[hamishspence]

But here, I almost feel it is Roy who should blame Durkon for going against orders, screwing their plan and alerting the vilains to their presence.

The comic begins with Roy sniping at Durkon for Not Following Orders. So he's already done that.

In addition to him getting a yell at Durkon the moment they reunited, and Durkon making the concession that Roy is entitled to yell:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1218.html

[hroþila]

So the message of the strip is that good people are supposed to wonder what the enemy soldier trying to cleave their skull in two is fighting for? I don't think I could say that out loud with a straight face.

After enough generations of fighting the same people in the same circumstances and nothing changing, then yes, maybe it'd be a good idea to think about it a little.

[Telenil]

The comic begins with Roy sniping at Durkon for Not Following Orders. So he's already done that.

In addition to him getting a yell at Durkon the moment they reunited, and Durkon making the concession that Roy is entitled to yell:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1218.html

True. Now would be a good time for Roy to ask what Durkon's attempt to consider the goblin perspective has brought them, aside from exposing them and inviting disaster.

[Precure]

Your honor, I must add these two strips as evidence.

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html
https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0408.html

[theNater]

I'd like to note that we're not talking about a handful of goblins leaping out of the bushes and trying to kill Roy. We're talking about an extended conflict between The Order of The Stick and Team Evil, including Haley's months-long stint organizing a resistance movement in Azure City. Even just from a strategic point of view, looking for internal divisions within Team Evil would have been a good idea.

[Telenil]

I'd like to note that we're not talking about a handful of goblins leaping out of the bushes and trying to kill Roy. We're talking about an extended conflict between The Order of The Stick and Team Evil, including Haley's months-long stint organizing a resistance movement in Azure City. Even just from a strategic point of view, looking for internal divisions within Team Evil would have been a good idea.

On that I agree, but Durkon's angle seem to be moral, not strategic. He was sympathetic to the notion that goblin should have better steal so they could beat the dwarves a bit more often, for example.

[WanderingMist]

Could it be that Roy doesn't see it as just? I.E. killing somebody in the heat of battle is okay, but torturing them when there's no reason is not okay? It's also in a non-combat situation. And as a side reminder, I don't believe he's ever interacted with Redcloak.

Thank you for the reply and I appreciate the citation btw :)

True. But he's never stopped to ask any of the goblins or hobgoblins, either, and did stop to ask Xykon. Along with this, while we've seen human, lizardfolk, orcs, etc. in the background of large city scenes (I'm assuming here that we have, I don't want to reread the whole comic at the moment to give citations, but may edit them in at a later time), I don't think we've ever seen a single goblin (in the online comic that I can remember anyway, unless you want to count Goblin Dan).

[Lethologica]

Maybe Roy should "ideally" have talked to goblins, but that's an unrealistic expectation. Even if he had, the best answer would have been "we don't have lands while you do", and if he had negotiated with Redcloak, it would have been "Implosion". Then what? They still don't know Redcloak has his own agenda, or that there is any daylight between him and Xykon. So the only difference is that Durkon couldn't blame Roy for not trying, which IMO makes Durkon ridiculously unfair. That Roy treats it as "oh no, what have I been thinking all along?" is what strains credulity.

I'm not sure what the unrealistic expectation is here. That Roy (or the party at large) would try to ascertain the motives of the people fighting them, perhaps even in the middle of a fight? They do this numerous times with other foes.

Which is not to say that the Order has had a great opportunity to assess goblin motives before now, or that not having made the attempt is some great moral failure. You seem to think the last panel treats it as one. I disagree.

I also think the conversation is far from over, and half the objections that have been mounted here are going to come up. This strip gets them only to a vague conclusion about goblins, not to any conclusion about how to handle Redcloak - and in the process of reaching that topic, some variant of "okay, but even if we talked to every goblin we met, we still wouldn't have found out Redcloak's particular problem, and even now we know, that doesn't tell us what to do about it" is likely to be said. Would that be satisfactory? Or is the strip already past the point of 'irreparable damage' in your eyes?

[Worldsong]

So the message of the strip is that good people are supposed to wonder what the enemy soldier trying to cleave their skull in two is fighting for? I don't think I could say that out loud with a straight face.

Seems like a reasonable course of action to me if you're trying to minimize bloodshed.

Remember, in OotS talking is a free action. It doesn't impair your ability to fight back in any way, so the usual counter argument of 'I need to focus on defending myself' doesn't apply.

Also if someone is charging you with murderous intent you can also just decide to try not to kill them so you can talk to them after they've been subdued. Given Roy's strength he could afford to do so with the vast majority of enemy combatants.

[Alsadius]

I think this has some legitimate points, but that it's a bit overstated on net. There's ways for this to go badly for the strip, but Rich usually has a pretty deft hand with these things.

Also, Durkon makes an important point with his bit about needing the right treatment and not just the right diagnosis. The diagnosis of "Yeah, goblins, your situation kinda sucks" is legit. How they treat that...well, that's likely the crux of this whole plotline. But if Rich handles it well, I expect it'll involve resolution very different than the one Redcloak currently has in mind.

[Dion]

So the message of the strip is that good people are supposed to wonder what the enemy soldier trying to cleave their skull in two is fighting for?

Yes. That message was explicitly stated in comic two strips ago.

Thor said that they once had a world where you could change someone’s mind by hitting them on the head, but now you actually have to talk to them.

[WanderingMist]

So the message of the strip is that good people are supposed to wonder what the enemy soldier trying to cleave their skull in two is fighting for?

That is the definition of being Good. Good is selfless and tries to right wrongs. But you can't right wrongs if you never stop to consider why Evil acts the way it does.

[Dragonus45]

Except no? He always wanted equality.

Redcloak: The Dark One has given me a vision. A vision that someday, all PC and NPC races will sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

"Then I can cast implosion on them while I taunt them."

[Bootman]

See, words like 'condemnation' instead of 'criticism' worry me. I'm not a fan of choosing between 'Roy deserves to be condemned' and 'the comic is doing irreparable damage to Roy's character' when I don't think either of those things is accurate. Roy overlooked the question of the goblins' involvement. Ideally, he would not have. That's what the comic says. The comic does not say this oversight was terrible, or that it's a black mark on Roy's character, or that Roy mistreats goblins. That's you interrupting the conversation mid-stream to impute the worst.

I actually agree that I am interrupting the conversation mid stream, that is the entire point of my post. That if in the next page Durkon and Roy agree that he was explicitly doing something bad or wrong or operated with a double standard (Something I believe is established in this strip), that is where the damage will be unrepairable in addition to the other contradictions I've already pointed out. condemnation and criticism mean the same thing in this context, along with chided, punished, looked down on, etc. The only relevant factor here is whether Durkon, Roy and the story itself think what he's done is wrong. I am saying what he's done is not wrong in the slightest.

The point is that to save the world, they will need a 9th level spell slot, willingly expended, by a goblin caster. Which almost certainly means Redcloak in this context.

And Durkon needs to get through to Roy why they need to win Redcloak over - which must include the fact that Redcloak has a legitimate grievance.

I disagree and so does Roy. They actually interrogated exactly what Roy thinks of the God plot and he establishes that he believes risking the whole mission for the God mission is a bad idea. He's shooting for it but he's not going to risk his team and the planet for it. It's completely possible to save millions of people by simply killing Redcloak and Xykon and keeping the gates functional for years after even if the world eventually reaches its lifespan. Remember, no more holes are known to have opened between the Scribble time and the current time. If they keep opening at the rate they have been you could expect potentially thousands of years of life that would all be risked for the God plot. Asking Roy to gamble everyone alive for the possibility of this world lasting longer overall is a bit much.

Aside from that I made a pretty solid case for Redcloak not having as much of a grievance given the resources we have seen the goblins to have and the lack of resources and total disadvantages we've seen other races have. Either they all have grievances or none of them do, and it they do it is no longer a racial thing, it's like a class action lawsuit from all the races that spawned on crappy land.

The problem is that he didn't really respect the goblins enough to e.g. ensure that surrendering goblins wouldn't be slaughtered by his subordinate or to ever wonder why they were fighting (beyond "they're goblins, they're minions, this is the natural order of things"). I think you're being too literal by focusing on Durkon's somewhat flippant response to Roy's objection. It goes deeper than literally talking to axe-wielding charging goblins - it's about Roy and Durkon's internalized worldview, which they now realize was biased.

Which is why I pointed out many other times where he hasn't asked why people are doing what they're doing or tried to find the most peaceful solution possible, and how many of those times involved other races, undead and humans. Meaning no matter what point the strip thinks its making it can't possibly be an internalized worldview as the significant cause. Also Roy interacted with Goblins he did not treat like minions when they were nice to him, but he has no problems killing enemy combatants.

Your honor, I must add these two strips as evidence.

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html
https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0408.html

I'm going to assume this is related to my stating Roy doesn't interrogate minions. Miko is not a minion first of all, she's an extensively fleshed out character with an arc. If you want to argue for in general story telling should make it so characters treat minions and higher up villains more consistently I'd actually agree with you but it would still undermine this theme. I appreciate the citations friend.

I'd like to note that we're not talking about a handful of goblins leaping out of the bushes and trying to kill Roy. We're talking about an extended conflict between The Order of The Stick and Team Evil, including Haley's months-long stint organizing a resistance movement in Azure City. Even just from a strategic point of view, looking for internal divisions within Team Evil would have been a good idea.

I agree strategically, but I think stating they did something wrong for not pursuing those options goes too far for me. It's a high expectation for people in an extreme circumstance.

True. But he's never stopped to ask any of the goblins or hobgoblins, either, and did stop to ask Xykon. Along with this, while we've seen human, lizardfolk, orcs, etc. in the background of large city scenes (I'm assuming here that we have, I don't want to reread the whole comic at the moment to give citations, but may edit them in at a later time), I don't think we've ever seen a single goblin (in the online comic that I can remember anyway, unless you want to count Goblin Dan).

As I stated earlier, I was very clear that Roy didn't interrogate the motivations of minions in general. Xykon, Miko and Greg all have personal reasons specifically for them being dealt with, but he doesn't talk with Tarquins soldiers, the ninjas that attack him in Azure city, etc.

I think the place of Goblins in wider society is a bit far from my current points, but I'll address it out of respect for your continued conversation. It always bugged me when Redcloak said something along the lines of "When you kill Goblins you're heroes, when we kill you we're monsters". Does that mean that Goblins see themselves as monsters when they kill humans? Absolutely not. We're talking about two distinct cultural groups. "Our brave warriors vs. their violent thugs" is a common thing throughout history. So his point is that when Goblins kill humans, humans don't like that. Like, of course, obviously.

By the same token about Goblins not being a part of wider human society, none of the other races aside from 'monster' races are seen to be a part of Goblin society. Cultural groups form unique relationships over time. This would honestly be a point in favor or human society, that it sees the value and chooses to associate with so many other races. It can't just be appearances that make the difference, right? Orcs have green skin and fangs too. So it must be something to do with the unique relationship between Goblins and the "PC Races" involving their history, actions and nations that causes this.

I'm not sure what the unrealistic expectation is here. That Roy (or the party at large) would try to ascertain the motives of the people fighting them, perhaps even in the middle of a fight? They do this numerous times with other foes.

Which is not to say that the Order has had a great opportunity to assess goblin motives before now, or that not having made the attempt is some great moral failure. You seem to think the last panel treats it as one. I disagree.

I also think the conversation is far from over, and half the objections that have been mounted here are going to come up. This strip gets them only to a vague conclusion about goblins, not to any conclusion about how to handle Redcloak - and in the process of reaching that topic, some variant of "okay, but even if we talked to every goblin we met, we still wouldn't have found out Redcloak's particular problem, and even now we know, that doesn't tell us what to do about it" is likely to be said. Would that be satisfactory? Or is the strip already past the point of 'irreparable damage' in your eyes?

On the first page fairly early on I go into why it is unrealistic to expect that, and in other areas on very post I've gone into how they only really do that with villains who are actual characters regardless of race.

I believe the last few panels of the comic do treat it as a failure and double standard, and many other people who agree with that comic agree that it represents the double standard of Roy as well. In fact you seem to imply it here when you talk about how the Order has assessed other motives but not the Goblins.

Aside from that I agree the conversation is far from over. The goal of my post is to intercept it in case these things were not planned.

Seems like a reasonable course of action to me if you're trying to minimize bloodshed.

Remember, in OotS talking is a free action. It doesn't impair your ability to fight back in any way, so the usual counter argument of 'I need to focus on defending myself' doesn't apply.

Also if someone is charging you with murderous intent you can also just decide to try not to kill them so you can talk to them after they've been subdued. Given Roy's strength he could afford to do so with the vast majority of enemy combatants.

Minimizing bloodshed isn't always the moral or reasonable response. When you're being attacked by enemies in the situation I have laid out in the first Dungeon and killing them will increase the odds of survival for you and everybody else you work with and you're the leader, valuing enemy lives ahead of your subordinates can be seen as very immoral

You can't decide that sometimes though. The fight or flight response is real and it takes a lot of willpower, training or the right kind of person to resist it. Which is why Roy is quite impressive for all the times he does. In a dungeon where the enemy is sending foes after you as you progress and every day you spend in attrition lowers your odds, and where every -2 to try and use your weapon nonlethally can get you hit back for 4 damage that will make the difference when you fight a chimera later... well, you're asking the people involved to take a lot of risks on themselves that I don't think you're asking them to take in other situations involving humanoids for instance.

I think this has some legitimate points, but that it's a bit overstated on net. There's ways for this to go badly for the strip, but Rich usually has a pretty deft hand with these things.

Also, Durkon makes an important point with his bit about needing the right treatment and not just the right diagnosis. The diagnosis of "Yeah, goblins, your situation kinda sucks" is legit. How they treat that...well, that's likely the crux of this whole plotline. But if Rich handles it well, I expect it'll involve resolution very different than the one Redcloak currently has in mind.

I agree. The point of my post is simply that this is the first time where I've spotted an instance of things going wrong on the technical craft level of OOTS that requires some for of back tracking or patching to fix and I'm concerned it won't receive those needed lines in the next comic. If it does, fantastic. The whole point of this was simply "If he doesn't this is a problem".

Yes. That message was explicitly stated in comic two strips ago.

Thor said that they once had a world where you could change someone’s mind by hitting them on the head, but now you actually have to talk to them.

For context, you're saying yes the message is that enemy soldiers should try and understand each others inner motivations as they fight. When you're fighting and your life is at stake, you have every right to kill the person you're opposing. You're essentially telling people to risk their lives for those who hate them. Have you ever been pumped? Like ran a lot and won something or beat people in a pushup contest? I assume you haven't been in a real fight or a battlefield but if you have that's relevant I suppose. When your heart rate is going and survival is at stake, fighting the fight or flight response is actually very difficult. There are times where the hesitation of considering your enemy's point of view for even a second, not pulling the trigger, will result in your death. In Roy's case, not just his own but the team he is responsible for.


Thank you everyone and thanks to Telenil for joining in.

[The Pilgrim]

The problem I see with the goblin plot right now is that Thor in #1232 never states that the Goblins were given worse lands. Thor says Fenris created them as people who "age fast and breeds a lot".(1)

Durkon in #1233 states his belief that the Goblins were treated poorly at the creation of the world. And the implication of his statement is that being created as a fast-growing, fast-breeding race means to be treated poorly. Which implies Goblins are defective by nature.

So, either Durkon is wrong (2), or Rich is failing at delivering his point. Unless his point is "goblins were created defective", which bears very uncomfortable implications.

...

(1) Thor also said that Fenris lost interest in them, later. Not a word creation, but after the goblin-rush failed to provide the returns Fenris expected.

(2) Durkon is, in fact, already wrong: He says the goblins were "treated poorly" for no reason at all. Which is false, Fernis created them with a winning strategy in mind. Which failed, yes, but there was a reason.

[Deathhappens]

I'm just going to point out that Durkon thinking all this does not automatically mean he's right. Heck, you could say he has a history of being absolute in his worldviews.

[hamishspence]

I disagree and so does Roy. They actually interrogated exactly what Roy thinks of the God plot and he establishes that he believes risking the whole mission for the God mission is a bad idea. He's shooting for it but he's not going to risk his team and the planet for it. It's completely possible to save millions of people by simply killing Redcloak and Xykon and keeping the gates functional for years after even if the world eventually reaches its lifespan.

Roy conceded that they do need to talk to Redcloak:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1200.html

but "after the immediate threat is stopped".

[Bootman]

I'm just going to point out that Durkon thinking all this does not automatically mean he's right. Heck, you could say he has a history of being absolute in his worldviews.

Completely possible, which is why I didn't bring it up until Roy seemed to agree. It's still possible to pull back which is the premise of my entire post.

Roy conceded that they do need to talk to Redcloak:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1200.html

but "after the immediate threat is stopped".

Yes, that's what I meant when I was saying he's still aiming for it. Like it's the ideal. But he's not going to risk everything or the people he's in charge of for that ideal more then is absolutely needed. If Roy had to kill Redcloak in the heat of battle to save even one life he wouldn't bat an eye I think.

[dancrilis]

As I stated earlier, I was very clear that Roy didn't interrogate the motivations of minions in general. Xykon, Miko and Greg all have personal reasons specifically for them being dealt with, but he doesn't talk with Tarquins soldiers, the ninjas that attack him in Azure city, etc.

Roy knows that Tarquin's soldiers and the ninjas in Azure city are following orders and he knows the benefits they have from following those orders - namely money, this doesn't apply to every one of them some might be serving out of fear or out of love of the job or whatever but ultimately they have jobs and they do their jobs for payment which they can use to get food, accommodation etc.

But that basic reason doesn't really apply to the goblins working for Xykon - if Xykon was simply paying them as soldiers then why don't some goblins in general just get normal jobs instead (like some humans do), the reason becomes that most people will not hire a goblin - which leads to the question of 'why do they only work for evil people?' and the answer of 'they are evil' and the question of 'why are they evil?' and the answer of 'they only work for evil people'.

Durkon is now telling Roy that that chain of questions and answers should perhaps be considered.

At the start if instead of goblins it has been elves who were working for Xykon there would likely have been a lot of questions (in universe and out) about 'why are elves working for this evil lich' (in fact to use a different creature type when Celia was encountered that question was asked) but there were very few questions (in universe or out) of 'why are goblins working for this evil lich'.

[woweedd]

I would note that Roy HAS shown an ability to negotiate with monsters and reach a peaceable solution in the past: Him doing that is HOW he and Durkon met. Also, while, yes, the goblins of Dorukan's dungeon were hostile, Start of Darkness reveals that they were, by and large, conscripts, who were drummed into Xykon's forces under threat of death. This not only explains why, in comic, they surrender literally the INSTANT he's dead, but means Roy probably COULD have gotten somewhere with negotiation, had he tried, and, givent hat talking is a free action in OOTS-verse laws of physics, I see no reason he shouldn't have.

[hamishspence]

Utterly Dwarfed (the book compilation of the strips, with commentary) made it clear that just defeating Xykon and Redcloak is not enough.

Spoiler: Utterly Dwarfed relevant commentary

Show

Round 7

Until now, it was reasonable to think that defeating Xykon and resealing the rifts would count as a win. But with the scope of the true problem laid out before him, Durkon can see that just resetting back to the state of things at the beginning of the series won't be enough. Not when there's hope for a more lasting victory over the forces of entropy and destruction. Of course, that victory will be a little more difficult to come by than simply bashing one lich and one goblin until they aren't a threat anymore, which raises the stakes for the conflict to come.

Round 8

...he now must find a way to make peace with Redcloak for the sake of the entire world.

[Bootman]

Roy knows that Tarquin's soldiers and the ninjas in Azure city are following orders and he knows the benefits they have from following those orders - namely money, this doesn't apply to every one of them some might be serving out of fear or out of love of the job or whatever but ultimately they have jobs and they do their jobs for payment which they can use to get food, accommodation etc.

But that basic reason doesn't really apply to the goblins working for Xykon - if Xykon was simply paying them as soldiers then why don't some goblins in general just get normal jobs instead (like some humans do), the reason becomes that most people will not hire a goblin - which leads to the question of 'why do they only work for evil people?' and the answer of 'they are evil' and the question of 'why are they evil?' and the answer of 'they only work for evil people'.

Durkon is now telling Roy that that chain of questions and answers should perhaps be considered.

At the start if instead of goblins it has been elves who were working for Xykon there would likely have been a lot of questions (in universe and out) about 'why are elves working for this evil lich' (in fact to use a different creature type when Celia was encountered that question was asked) but there were very few questions (in universe or out) of 'why are goblins working for this evil lich'.

I would note that Roy HAS shown an ability to negotiate with monsters and reach a peaceable solution in the past: Him doing that is HOW he and Durkon met. Also, while, yes, the goblins of Dorukan's dungeon were hostile, Start of Darkness reveals that they were, by and large, conscripts, who were drummed into Xykon's forces under threat of death. This not only explains why, in comic, they surrender literally the INSTANT he's dead, but means Roy probably COULD have gotten somewhere with negotiation, had he tried, and, givent hat talking is a free action in OOTS-verse laws of physics, I see no reason he shouldn't have.

The general sentiments here are the same so I'll respond to both.

Are you sure about that? Roy spent his whole time in the gladiator pit. There could be rebels in the guards, or some form of mind control, or will be killed if they don't serve. This is the point. The comic has chosen to go JUST into the Goblin motivation. You assuming there's no larger motivation or other possibilities involved with the soldiers, ninjas, beetle raiders, etc. is the same thing this strip is criticizing Roy for. Maybe the beetle raiders literally need humans to lay their larva in to survive, so we could have worked out a deal to give death row inmates to them along with a painkilling spell so that the beetles no longer have to live in conflict with humanity.

In the comics, maybe? Until we see more civilian Goblins (very few have even been mentioned) functionally all of them are warriors, even in Gobbotopia. But even there there was a Goldsmith who made Redcloak's amulet. There are non-military, non-evil jobs. I will reference the villages in Start of Darkness but I don't wish to make them integral because once again all outside material should not be required to understand the main material. So the point is we know there are other things you can do. The Hobgoblins had an independent nation with a standing army of 30,000 soldiers armed and armored. Those people need beds, clothes, food, cups, weapons, etc. So a much larger infrastructure of non-evil civilian jobs must exist. The specific Goblins working for Xykon are, of course, being held at gun point and were peaceful prior, and I think that is a bad bit of recontextualization that kills the comedy of the first 100 pages. And once again is only established in start of darkness.

Yes because Goblins tend to work for evil people. The fact it was never questioned says a lot about the Goblins themselves and how they have interacted with the world and less about Roy. The reason why he shouldn't have tried is because, once again, the fight or flight response is a thing and when somebody is attacking you you are justified to fight back without consideration, because consideration and hesitation can get you killed, your comrades killed and leave your father's soul in purgatory forever.

Utterly Dwarfed (the book compilation of the strips, with commentary) made it clear that just defeating Xykon and Redcloak is not enough.

Spoiler: Utterly Dwarfed relevant commentary

Show

Round 7

Until now, it was reasonable to think that defeating Xykon and resealing the rifts would count as a win. But with the scope of the true problem laid out before him, Durkon can see that just resetting back to the state of things at the beginning of the series won't be enough. Not when there's hope for a more lasting victory over the forces of entropy and destruction. Of course, that victory will be a little more difficult to come by than simply bashing one lich and one goblin until they aren't a threat anymore, which raises the stakes for the conflict to come.

Round 8

...he now must find a way to make peace with Redcloak for the sake of the entire world.

I don't consider arguments from word of god or outside the material itself to be valid since I believe in death of the author and that all media must be able to stand on its own.

However I will say that I believe Roy makes an excellent counter argument when he's talking with his sister on the ship and that these comments seem to be relating to Durkon's mental state. If they're not, it is the author explicitly giving his point of view on the scenario and he is welcome to do that, just as much as J.K. Rowling is. But their work must stand on their own and defeating Xykon and Redcloak would absolutely be a victory that saves millions. That is enough and frankly it is incredibly heroic of Roy to face enemies that much out power him for the sake of those millions.

[hamishspence]

Based on the Snarl's already being capable of reaching out from the rifts:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html

I think it's safe to say that Redcloak's helping seal the rifts will save the world itself, and come into play.


https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1195.html


"Making the last gate safe" will, IMO, need Redcloak and the Dark One to work at all.


And killing Redcloak will doom the world - and I predict Roy eventually ending up in a position to realise that.

[Bootman]

Based on the Snarl's already being capable of reaching out from the rifts:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html

I think it's safe to say that Redcloak's helping seal the rifts will save the world itself, and come into play.


https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1195.html


"Making the last gate safe" will, IMO, need Redcloak and the Dark One to work at all.


And killing Redcloak will doom the world - and I predict Roy eventually ending up in a position to realise that.

We know from the scribble crayon books that you can physically engage with and fight the snarl as it is reaching out so that you can seal the gates, and that the gates last quite some time if not interfered with by outside sources.

Roy does not believe he should gamble with the lives of the people who exist for the people who might exist in the future. The people in the here and now are his responsibility as hero.

I agree that as the story is progressing, most likely Redcloak will seal the rifts and that is obviously a preferable solution. But with everything Roy knows in the situation it would be wrong to risk the lives of the people to change the divine order of the cosmos forever. If Roy ever said anything to the effect of "These people should be okay risking their lives so that life will be better in the future, so I'll gamble their lives" then that would be the ultimate end of Roy's character and be completely inconsistent with everything we know about him, not to mention wrong in my subjective opinion.

[Telenil]

That is the definition of being Good. Good is selfless and tries to right wrongs. But you can't right wrongs if you never stop to consider why Evil acts the way it does.

I disagree. Durkon would still have been Good if he had followed Roy's command, instead of revealing himself to the enemy and destroying the possibility of surprise. I believe you should right wrongs when the war is over and Evil has been checked. Until then, an enemy's motivations are only relevant insofar as 1) you want to negotiate a truce, or 2) it helps you to defeat or otherwise neutralise him. Durkon tried the first, and apparently made things worse.

Good should never do evil acts. Once that is granted, Good is not supposed to follow the letter of its principles to the point doing so helps Evil win. This is not to say the end justifies the means, but merely that a good character can still think strategically. Maybe some clue in the conversation with Redcloak will turn out to be the one thing that saves the day, and something helpful will come out of Durkon's attempt at diplomacy. But so far, Durkon has nothing to show for it and Roy was right when he told him not to do it.

Bootman summed up the point rather well:

Minimizing bloodshed isn't always the moral or reasonable response. When you're being attacked by enemies in the situation I have laid out in the first Dungeon and killing them will increase the odds of survival for you and everybody else you work with and you're the leader, valuing enemy lives ahead of your subordinates can be seen as very immoral