OOTS #1235 - The Discussion Thread

[arimareiji]

The thing is that many people (me included) didn't read Durkon's and Roy's point as being:
"We must solve this problem for others because they're problems, not because we caused them."
But rather as being:
"We must solve this problem for others because we benefit from it, not because we caused them."
Or being:
"We must solve this problem for others because we don't have it, not because we caused them."
And this is what people have been debating.

I don't want to open this debate again, i'm just pointing out that "We must solve this problem because it needs to be solved." is not what people were debating. No one had an issue with Roy saying "We must stop Xykon because someone has to stop him".

For clarity, I was referring to numerous other threads where it's happened. Tbh, I didn't have this thread in mind at all (although that doesn't mean someone hasn't, and I missed reading it or it just didn't register).

[bunsen_h]

Elan would absolutely be one of those Facebook users c. 2010 that posts just about everything that pops into their minds.

I'm so glad that that kind of thing is solidly in the past.

[Squire Doodad]

I'm so glad that that kind of thing is solidly in the past.

Unlike, say, Redcloak's niece.

[Wizard_Lizard]

May i ask you what NB means in this instance?

Sure! In this case it's referring to Non-binary

[Petrocorus]

For clarity, I was referring to numerous other threads where it's happened. Tbh, I didn't have this thread in mind at all (although that doesn't mean someone hasn't, and I missed reading it or it just didn't register).

OK, i understand your point better then.
I was under the impression we were still talking about the recent strips.

Unlike, say, Redcloak's niece.

Redcloak's Niece is love.
Redcloak's Niece is life.

[Mariele]

Redcloak's Niece is love.
Redcloak's Niece is life.

Redcloak's Niece is laughter.
You forgot the Holy Trinity (that no stereotypical white suburban home is complete with) there, pal.

I'm sure you're all glad I'm being kept awake and barely coherent by this horrendous toothache so I can continue to crappost on this forum.

[Fincher]

As someone who wasn't a fan of the last two strips (and really, there aren't many strips in the comic I don't like), I thought this one was pretty much a perfect pivot away from that discussion. Elan and Belkar make everything better.

[Squire Doodad]

I'm sure you're all glad I'm being kept awake and barely coherent by this horrendous toothache so I can continue to crappost on this forum.

Oh geez, you okay? Definitely call a doctor or something if that keeps up.

[The_Weirdo]

Redcloak's Niece is laughter.
You forgot the Holy Trinity (that no stereotypical white suburban home is complete with) there, pal.

I'm sure you're all glad I'm being kept awake and barely coherent by this horrendous toothache so I can continue to crappost on this forum.

Get well soon. *Hugs, if you allow*

[Rhyvurg]

Huh?

Never mind, I don't think I should try to parse a calculus where the Chaotic Evil team member is "based."

Because he's the only one talking sense.

The gods are who are responsible. That's exactly who Redcloak already wants to lash out at, and it's exactly who Durkon and Roy want to convince Redcloak to help.

Your suggestion is an excellent way to ensure that Redcloak will not help them seal the Snarl's prison.

Completely wrong. Because it isn't "gods," it's just one god. Fenrir made that decision all on his own, Redcloak however wants to hold completely innocent people responsible for that choice and make them suffer for it.

I find it fairly easy to both sympathize with the reasons that bring desperate people to their actions, even while also thinking they must be stopped or corrected. And I'm also capable of separating the acts of individuals from the people suffering at large. None of this strikes me as complicated or illogical.

They deserve no sympathy. If a man burns down his neighbor's house, that neighbor doesn't get to drive to the next street and burn down someone else's house because he's mad about it. The goblins have been lashing out at the wrong people. They had no way of knowing, but evil acts are evil acts. There is no subjective good and evil in D&D, good and evil are objectively defined cosmic forces. No grey areas exist.

That's an extremely-unfortunate choice of words, considering how many people have been expressing it.

Also, as wiser people than I have observed: 1) Figuring out who's wrong does nothing to make it right. 2) War doesn't prove who's right, just who's left. 3) "Hate, it has caused a lot of problems in this world, but it has not solved one yet." 4) Evil causes problems for others. Neutral leaves problems for others because they didn't cause them. Good solves problems for others because they're problems, not because they caused them.

Knowing who's responsible gives you the opportunity to redeem yourself of the evil you've done. What Roy and Durkon are suggesting is they're partially responsible for the goblins' situation, because they benefitted from it. That's not how that works, they're not obligated to do anything. The first two panels of the previous comic, Roy called it "passing the buck." It's not. Roy's just feeling guilt over something he absolutely should not be. Tell the goblins which specific god screwed them over, if their very next act is not to leave Azure City, they're irredeemable villains and deserve the sword.

[Yirggzmb]

Elan is me at 3am, when I really wanna spout off whatever nonsense is going through my head. But everyone's asleep, and even random posts on social media get no attention.

[Fyraltari]

Elan is me at 3am, when I really wanna spout off whatever nonsense is going through my head. But everyone's asleep, and even random posts on social media get no attention.

If you're awake at 2am you should just go to bed. Nothing good ever happens at 2am.

Unless you've got an actual reason to be awake at 2am like working the night shift or a condition that keeps you awake or something.


This goes even more for 3am.

[arimareiji]

If you're awake at 2am you should just go to bed. Nothing good ever happens at 2am.

*coughs halfway to purple* Ahem. To quote Shojo, "you haven't been eating at the right tables". (^_~)

Although I have to admit you may have circumvented my objection, by not phrasing it as "go to sleep".

More seriously, as a general rule this is overwhelmingly true if you add "in Internet discussion forums".

[Athas]

The Giant said at the time that:



If each +1 is "5% increase" then 5 +1s are "25% increase".

isn't it 27.62% increase?

[warmachine]

Vaarsuvuis's response made me laugh out loud.

[hamishspence]

Knowing who's responsible gives you the opportunity to redeem yourself of the evil you've done. What Roy and Durkon are suggesting is they're partially responsible for the goblins' situation, because they benefitted from it. That's not how that works, they're not obligated to do anything.

One can be "not in any way responsible for a bad thing" and still be responsible for fixing it because one benefits from that bad thing.

Specifically, when one has bought stolen goods, and then found out that they are stolen.

You are not in any way responsible for the theft, but you are obliged to hand the stolen goods over to law enforcement, rather than keep them.

good and evil are objectively defined cosmic forces. No grey areas exist.

Even BOVD, one of the most "black and white morality" 3e splatbooks, admits that there are grey areas.

The point of Celia's big speech at the Order's trial, is that nuance and exception exist:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0282.html

[Fyraltari]

isn't it 27.62% increase?

It's five additional percent from the base value, not from each successive value.


Because each side of a fair 20-sided die has a 5% chance of coming up. So a +1 bonus is 5% more chance you'll suceed at whatever it is you're trying to do.

[Ruck]

One can be "not in any way responsible for a bad thing" and still be responsible for fixing it because one benefits from that bad thing.

Specifically, when one has bought stolen goods, and then found out that they are stolen.

You are not in any way responsible for the theft, but you are obliged to hand the stolen goods over to law enforcement, rather than keep them.

I feel like some people are forgetting that Roy and Durkon are Lawful Good characters with, respectively, a strong sense of responsibility and duty. If they become aware of an injustice, of course they're going to consider what they can do to fix it.

Even BOVD, one of the most "black and white morality" 3e splatbooks, admits that there are grey areas.

The point of Celia's big speech at the Order's trial, is that nuance and exception exist:

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0282.html

If no grey areas existed, what would even be the point of having a Deva review your life, since it would be black-and-white anyway?

[Werbaer]

My first thought when I read this strip was it felt like kind of a letdown, nothing important was said and the plot did not advance.

It looks like that.

Remember strip #418 about Hinjos junk? Looked like a simple gag filler strip when it was published.
But was used to provide the information why there was a single boat still waiting in the harbour much later, at the end of the third book.

Maybe it gets important later that the Telepathic Bond spell, although cast on multiple targets, allows several different 1-on-1 conversations at once.

Or maybe it's just to switch away from Roy and Durkon for a moment, so that they might have divised a plan in the meantime without us readers listening.

[Czhorat]

It looks like that.

Remember strip #418 about Hinjos junk? Looked like a simple gag filler strip when it was published.
But was used to provide the information why there was a single boat still waiting in the harbour much later, at the end of the third book.

Maybe it gets important later that the Telepathic Bond spell, although cast on multiple targets, allows several different 1-on-1 conversations at once.

Or maybe it's just to switch away from Roy and Durkon for a moment, so that they might have divised a plan in the meantime without us readers listening.

IT's also a weird way to read a comic; if you had the book completed you'd not stop to analyze each page on its own. Once this arc is written and read as a single piece it will probably read better, or at least differently.

The serial nature of publication one page at a time means that we keep getting slightly unnatural stopping points (and that each page has to end with a bit of a conclusion).

[danielxcutter]

I mean, if everything was black-and-white, what would Neutral be for?

[Worldsong]

I mean, if everything was black-and-white, what would Neutral be for?

Characters who only want to fix problems they themselves caused.

[Vikenlugaid]

What Roy and Durkon are suggesting is they're partially responsible for the goblins' situation, because they benefitted from it. That's not how that works, they're not obligated to do anything. The first two panels of the previous comic, Roy called it "passing the buck." It's not. Roy's just feeling guilt over something he absolutely should not be.

That maybe works for a neutral, but Roy and Durkon are good, not just good, maybe the "goodest" characters in the comic. They both have sacrificed their own lifes to protect others and that wasn't their "duty" at all, they just did it couse they are that good. We are not talking about "normal" people who just live their lifes on their own, being "more or less good", Roy and Durkon are real Heros of Goodness.

And yes, if you are that good, you feel guilty when you realize that you are not doing "your best".

It's five additional percent from the base value, not from each successive value.


Because each side of a fair 20-sided die has a 5% chance of coming up. So a +1 bonus is 5% more chance you'll suceed at whatever it is you're trying to do.

But that is "logic" if we are talking about the attack bonus... but that blacksmith is talking about the damage bonus increasing 25% too, and if the greatsword damage is 2d6, a +5 is almost a +50% not a +25%. So i also think is talking about "+4 -> +5" couse then that is a +25% in both attack and dmg bonus, and not "non magical -> +5" couse then the bonus in damage has no sense.

[Roselily2006]

I'm afraid to ask... I know blue means sarcasm or at least non-seriousness, what does red mean?

---

I'm more confused about what purple is. Is there some master thread about text colors and what they mean?

[KorvinStarmast]

My first thought when I read this strip was it felt like kind of a letdown, nothing important was said and the plot did not advance.

This is not the first strip that has done this. And I doubt it will be the last. Rich spends a lot of time with character "inner monologues" using various artifices (V's is with Blackwing, Roy just talks, Haley had her alter egos and now Elan, and so on)

Characters who only want to fix problems they themselves caused.

Which leads us in this direction:
Hi, I'm chaotic neutral. I'm part of the problem, not part of the solution.

[Worldsong]

Which leads us in this direction:
Hi, I'm chaotic neutral. I'm part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Oh, sure, blame Chaos. Next you'll tell me the Warp is a bad place to be.

[danielxcutter]

Oh, sure, blame Chaos. Next you'll tell me the Warp is a bad place to be.

HERETIC! (*smashes Exterminatus button*)

[Shining Wrath]

Alas, poor Elan. To have a deep thought he'd have to fall down a well.

[Worldsong]

HERETIC! (*smashes Exterminatus button*)

[Fyraltari]

I'm more confused about what purple is. Is there some master thread about text colors and what they mean?

Red is for moderator action. Everything else is whatever you want to itnto be.

Blue is quite popular to denote sarcasm. There is no other consensus I am aware of. Except for white, which to hide text for later.

I used purple once to "autoscrub", that is to say, to remove something I wrote, that in hindsight I doubt was rules-compliant but I didn't want to use red, not beind a moderator.