Serini is a moron

[Ionathus]

So why doesn't that apply to Serini? She's a big girl, she doesn't need defending, the Order (and myself for that matter) are allowed to disagree with her, etc.

I should've specified "in-story criticism." It becomes a different discussion when audience members are criticizing a character in the story we're all reading.

The Order are allowed and expected to disagree with her in the world. I want to see them do so.

I just don't believe that forum members who call her an idiot from the outside looking in are making valid or logically-sound arguments.

[Psyren]

I just don't believe that forum members who call her an idiot from the outside looking in are making valid or logically-sound arguments.

I can't speak for those who've called her an "idiot" as I'm not among them.

With that said, my opinion of her not even deigning to pick up the phone when the literal world is at stake is at this point well-documented, I feel.

[Ionathus]

With that said, my opinion of her not even deigning to pick up the phone when the literal world is at stake is at this point well-documented, I feel.

After 32 pages, one would certainly hope so

I'm beginning to think we all just like to hear ourselves talk...

[Peelee]

Breaking Bad. She wrote an opinion piece somewhere about it, it's pretty good stuff. But yeah, the show does a really good job of making you empathize with Walt, and his simultaneous badass evolution and moral descent over the series is absolutely meant to play out as a power fantasy for the audience, but they maybe set up that empathy a little too well.

I think I was never caught in that trap since I didn't watch it until a couple years ago, long after it was already out. I could binge on it, and so it was crystal clear from the beginning that Walt just jumped into bed with the first person who came along at every possible juncture, and then stuck by and defended that decision even though it was patently obvious it was a bad decision. Every single time. He was a stubborn ass who refused to ever recognize that he could be wrong and managed to succeed despite himself. Conveniently, this also let me empathize a lot with Skylar and I never even knew there was a huge hate campaign against her until after I finished the series and looked around online. Again, probably the benefit of not having to wait a week for the next installment every time and being able to process everything within a fairly short timetable.

[Hurkyl]

I'm beginning to think we all just like to hear ourselves talk...

No, it's just that someone's wrong on the internet! Phew, maybe now Ionathus will stop being wrong on the internet!

[Liquor Box]

Sure, I don't personally think Serini's behavior is worthy of hatred. I do still think she's meant to be an annoyance/aggravation to the Order, because that's sometimes how foils work -- you can't refine and explain your point of view if there's nobody around to disagree with you.

My big issue with the "die painfully" mentality is probably stemming from how the discussion of Serini has dipped into Skyler White vibes for me on occasion. Actively wishing for Serini's death, just because she's serving her job as a narrative foil who is still trying to protect the world but just has a different approach than the heroes, is a step too far in my book. Audience reaction to characters who make themselves annoying to the heroes is often extreme, and it's not just harmless banter -- Anna Gunn got death threats over this crap.

I like the Order. I want them to win. I think they're more in the right than Serini is. But they're big kids: they don't need me to defend them from criticism. Characters are allowed to disagree with them -- it makes the story more interesting.

Yeah, I thought of Skyler as well. Oppose the protagonist at your own risk.

I agree characters are allowed to disagree with them. My objection is when the disagreement is poorly thought out.

[danielxcutter]

I should point out that not everyone on the "I disagree with Serini and not because she doesn't know what we do" team wants her to die painfully.

[Sindeloke]

Kinda related to that, a villain can be awful and annoying and readers won't mind as much because there is the expectation that they'll be punished for it.

Serini may be an obstacle but she's still a 'good guy'. It's unlikely she'll actually face retribution for her actions.

That, too.

Relatedly,

I trust the Giant to write a verbal takedown of her that I'll find satisfying and deserved.

I don't really, not after what happened (or rather, failed to happen) with Hilgya.

I anticipate something along the lines of "the Order may or may not apologize to her or at least in some way make a strong show of remorse for their destruction of previous gates; she will definitely not apologize to them or make any show of remorse for her obstruction, though a tacit admission of their validity will be obvious in her (likely still grudging) decision to free the paladins/provide some assistance to the Order against Xykon/with the Gate issue; the Order will thank her with varying levels of sincerity/politeness and go about their business." People who think she's in the wrong won't consider it an exoneration of her, people who think she isn't in the wrong will think it was, and she'll fade into the Miko zone of "no one talks about her any more because the plot has moved on, but don't think for a second that anyone has forgiven or forgotten."

[Ruck]

I think I was never caught in that trap since I didn't watch it until a couple years ago, long after it was already out. I could binge on it, and so it was crystal clear from the beginning that Walt just jumped into bed with the first person who came along at every possible juncture, and then stuck by and defended that decision even though it was patently obvious it was a bad decision. Every single time. He was a stubborn ass who refused to ever recognize that he could be wrong and managed to succeed despite himself. Conveniently, this also let me empathize a lot with Skylar and I never even knew there was a huge hate campaign against her until after I finished the series and looked around online. Again, probably the benefit of not having to wait a week for the next installment every time and being able to process everything within a fairly short timetable.

I think Skyler was also poorly served by the pilot episode, where she really was written as much more emasculating (there's one scene in particular I'm thinking of; if you've seen it, you probably are too) in order to make Walt's decision seem more sympathetic.

The real problem with Skyler as a character is that they never really found a good dramatic role for her, waffling between moral counterpoint and co-conspirator.

[Ionathus]

I should point out that not everyone on the "I disagree with Serini and not because she doesn't know what we do" team wants her to die painfully.

Certainly. Not even most, or perhaps even many. It seems like a niche opinion...it's just such an objectionable one to me that I came out really strongly against it.

I think Skyler was also poorly served by the pilot episode, where she really was written as much more emasculating (there's one scene in particular I'm thinking of; if you've seen it, you probably are too) in order to make Walt's decision seem more sympathetic.

Interesting. If it's the scene I'm thinking of, it never came across as emasculating to me...it just seemed like an indicator that intimacy had faded from their marriage and they were both going through the motions.

The real problem with Skyler as a character is that they never really found a good dramatic role for her, waffling between moral counterpoint and co-conspirator.

Which I don't really mind. In a show like that, it can be nice to see characters struggle with which side to take. Skyler knew the "right" choice, but making the "right" choice would ruin her entire life for no real benefit to anyone. I like how the show played with her attempts to salvage the mess Walt had made, while still objecting to it. She's not a perfect moral paragon: she seemed to behave like how a real human spouse would react to such a bonkers situation.

[Psyren]

I too thought the Skyler hate was vastly overblown once I finally got around to watching BB, but Captain Marvel and Star Wars and Invincible etc etc have taught me that there is just a bunch of misogyny in fandom circles anyway.

I don't see the relevance of that for the situation occurring in the comic, as none of our criticisms of Serini's actions are rooted in her gender. (Hell, the Serini critics are rooting for Haley! Lean in, sister!)

I don't really, not after what happened (or rather, failed to happen) with Hilgya.

I anticipate something along the lines of "the Order may or may not apologize to her or at least in some way make a strong show of remorse for their destruction of previous gates; she will definitely not apologize to them or make any show of remorse for her obstruction, though a tacit admission of their validity will be obvious in her (likely still grudging) decision to free the paladins/provide some assistance to the Order against Xykon/with the Gate issue; the Order will thank her with varying levels of sincerity/politeness and go about their business." People who think she's in the wrong won't consider it an exoneration of her, people who think she isn't in the wrong will think it was, and she'll fade into the Miko zone of "no one talks about her any more because the plot has moved on, but don't think for a second that anyone has forgiven or forgotten."

Andi certainly occupies that zone too.

But honestly, I was pretty happy with Hilgya's resolution. Yeah what she did to Durkon was pretty heinous... because it was supposed to be. She's Chaotic Evil, remember? I'm sure if she keeps associating with Durkon and Kudzu that they'll pull her up to at least CN, and I'm equally sure I don't need to see any of that happen on-panel.

[Ionathus]

I too thought the Skyler hate was vastly overblown once I finally got around to watching BB, but Captain Marvel and Star Wars and Invincible etc etc have taught me that there is just a bunch of misogyny in fandom circles anyway.

I don't see the relevance of that for the situation occurring in the comic, as none of our criticisms of Serini's actions are rooted in her gender. (Hell, the Serini critics are rooting for Haley! Lean in, sister!)

Ugh, Invincible had a toxic hatedom too? Was it Amber that triggered it? I'm going to assume it was Amber, because at one point she dared to criticize the main character?

And my reference to Skyler was less about Serini also being female and more about the specific death wishes for a relatively minor transgression -- specifically, she also criticizes and opposes the protagonists' choices, and that alone seems to be enough to set some people off into scary levels of hate. As I said earlier, the majority of Serini critics don't go this far.

Andi certainly occupies that zone too.

But honestly, I was pretty happy with Hilgya's resolution. Yeah what she did to Durkon was pretty heinous... because it was supposed to be. She's Chaotic Evil, remember? I'm sure if she keeps associating with Durkon and Kudzu that they'll pull her up to at least CN, and I'm equally sure I don't need to see any of that happen on-panel.

I wasn't plugged into the Andi arc, but it certainly feels like the comic itself condemns Andi and "puts her in her place" more than it does Hilgya. I expect Serini will probably fall between Andi and Hilgya (or even below Hilgya, but still greater than zero), rather than between Miko and Andi, in terms of "severity of getting called out on their worldview."

[Psyren]

Yeah it was due to Amber. I do personally think Evincible is a superior ship, but some of the vitriol I've seen is insane.
Fair point on the Skyler analogy.

Again I don't see any issue with how the comic handled Hilgya. It's telling that even murdering Durkon in a fit of pique ultimately did less to impede the Order's goals than what Serini is currently doing. (In fact, it's implied that Hilgya's actions may have given the gods themselves* critical info that they might not have gotten otherwise.)

*Anyone else find it weird that Odin doesn't seem to know what's up when his high priest is hinting that he knows about it?

[KorvinStarmast]

The real problem with Skyler as a character is that they never really found a good dramatic role for her, waffling between moral counterpoint and co-conspirator.

She was trapped, and she wasn't allowed to push an easy button to get out of that trap. (Beyond the obvious Tell Hank, he's married to your sister solution that the writers chose not to explore because they wanted to embed the 'hiding in plain sight' thing into the story. Gus was another example of that).

Interesting. If it's the scene I'm thinking of, it never came across as emasculating to me...it just seemed like an indicator that intimacy had faded from their marriage and they were both going through the motions.

That came across when we watched it.

Which I don't really mind. In a show like that, it can be nice to see characters struggle with which side to take. Skyler knew the "right" choice, but making the "right" choice would ruin her entire life for no real benefit to anyone. I like how the show played with her attempts to salvage the mess Walt had made, while still objecting to it. She's not a perfect moral paragon: she seemed to behave like how a real human spouse would react to such a bonkers situation.

In a no win situation, what do you do? Muddle through is sometimes the best one can manage.

[RatElemental]

*Anyone else find it weird that Odin doesn't seem to know what's up when his high priest is hinting that he knows about it?

Maybe being connected to a mortal helps with his clarity, or he just doesn't want Thor to know he knows for some reason.

[Ionathus]

Maybe being connected to a mortal helps with his clarity, or he just doesn't want Thor to know he knows for some reason.

Thor does mention "he has his good days and bad days." Seems like a smart way to play a prophetic character so they don't just spoil all the plot points in the wrong order.

[Sindeloke]

Ugh, Invincible had a toxic hatedom too? Was it Amber that triggered it? I'm going to assume it was Amber, because at one point she dared to criticize the main character?

If there's a fandom bigger than twelve people, there's probably a toxic hatedom. If there's a female character who has an independent thought now and then, switch that to a fandom bigger than six.

Again I don't see any issue with how the comic handled Hilgya. It's telling that even murdering Durkon in a fit of pique ultimately did less to impede the Order's goals than what Serini is currently doing. (In fact, it's implied that Hilgya's actions may have given the gods themselves* critical info that they might not have gotten otherwise.)

I mean, Durkon is like "Mom, she assaulted me in one of the most comprehensive and permanently scarring ways available in this setting" and his mom responds with "well, maybe try not to deserve it next time, then." Yeah, she then turns around and threatens Hilgya in private, and we get the one single panel in the entire arc of Hilgya looking less than smug and cocky, but comprehensively, the message "Hilgya is doing bad things, here," really does not come across. What comes across is "don't hurt him because he's mine, even if we both know he deserves it," and that's the strip's final word on that event, full stop. And that's just for killing Durkon, which is the only thing she sees any consequences for at all, even to that mild degree of "being scolded to the point of being taken aback." She's never forced to answer for or even consider her culpability in Kudzu being used as a human shield, and in fact walks off into the sunset at the end of the arc with full custody of said child, without ever even having questioned that she might have done something wrong in endangering him, much less ever feeling a moment of panic or regret about it. She also gets rewarded with an offer of tentative friendship and compromise from Durkon, and an offer of familial acceptance and support from Sigdi.

Compare this to Andi, who didn't cost anybody any character levels or recklessly endanger any infants for whom she was responsible, but got her pay docked, her ego crushed, and spent multiple panels looking chastised and miserable in the wake of a failure that she knew was a failure even as it happened, let alone after. Certainly no one we're meant to like or sympathize with (or, in fact, anyone at all) validates her behavior, or offers her anything but contempt and condemnation in the aftermath. I'm definitely with Ionathus here, that's a huge disparity in the narrative calling them out.

Of course, Andi was only ever an obstacle, while both Serini and Hilgya have crucial use to the Order as recalcitrant allies, so the Order themselves being more lenient makes a certain sense. It doesn't necessarily follow that the story framing has to agree with them, though.

[Ruck]

She was trapped, and she wasn't allowed to push an easy button to get out of that trap. (Beyond the obvious Tell Hank, he's married to your sister solution that the writers chose not to explore because they wanted to embed the 'hiding in plain sight' thing into the story. Gus was another example of that).

Well, I think that's kind of the problem-- the writers don't want the character to take the obvious action because that would end the story. But in more practical terms, it made her a character who would sometimes scold Walter for his business and sometimes actively participate in it. I'm not surprised she came off as annoying and hypocritical, although I certainly didn't agree with or participate in the broader criticisms and harassment from the fans who thought Walter was a cool alpha male being held back by his wife. I simply find characters who commit to a course of dramatic action instead of wavering more compelling in a story.

(For the record, my dislike of Carmela Soprano-- not as a character, but as a person-- was for a similar reason, her hypocrisy in scolding Tony while luxuriating in the benefits of what he does and showing them off to her friends. Probably not a coincidence that there was a scene in The Sopranos where someone explicitly tells Carmela what the moral course of action is, and she doesn't take it.)

ETA: I'll bring it up again because it's my favorite TV drama of all time, but The Shield's Corrine Mackey is a good counterpoint here-- she's also the wife of a criminal who's the father of her children and has fondness and love for him because of that, but she also realizes (even before she knows the extent of his deeds) that the marriage is untenable and he's a chaotic force, and she takes steps to separate from him pretty early on in the series. It happens slowly and steadily, and is difficult especially because Vic is so strong-willed and aggressive about getting what he wants, but she does keep trying step by step, and eventually she succeeds.

[KorvinStarmast]

broader criticisms and harassment from the fans who thought Walter was a cool alpha male being held back by his wife.

The name of the show was Breaking Bad, and Walter was a very dark character who took Michael Douglas in Breaking Down[and turned it up to eleven, and then as the seasons went on they turned it up to eleventy nine. The writers discussed very candidly their concern with "How dark can we go before we are done" and they arrived at a good enough answer to that. (Although they milked it for another half a season beyond that beause the money was so good).
"Cool alpha male being held back by his wife" is not Walter White. Were they all taking the blue sky meth too?

[hungrycrow]

The name of the show was breaking bad, and walter was a very dark character who took Michael Douglas in Breaking Down and turned it up to eleven, and then eleventy nine. "Cool alpha male being held back by his wife" is not Walter White. Were they all taking the blue sky meth too?

Walt thought he was a "cool alpha male being held back by his wife", so I guess fans fell for his hype?

[KorvinStarmast]

Walt thought he was a "cool alpha male being held back by his wife", so I guess fans fell for his hype?

Really? I have no time for that. I am married, I was still raising kids when that came out. That show was so dark my wife refused to watch it at first. It was a few years later, when my son showed her episode 1, and it was in the beginning of season 4, that she gave it a try.
And got addicted.
And we binge watched until we caught up.
Some of the best TV ever done. (With a few weak episodes).

My first episode was in season 1, ep 5 or 6, where Walter calls the bluff of a drug dealer as regards stuff that blows up. That is what caught my eye. As I watched the next ep on AMC my wife read me the riot act about watching crappy, evil TV shows.

Funny, how it all turned out. We watched every episode of Better Call Saul as it came out from seasons 1 through 3.

[Ruck]

The name of the show was Breaking Bad, and Walter was a very dark character who took Michael Douglas in Breaking Down[and turned it up to eleven, and then as the seasons went on they turned it up to eleventy nine. The writers discussed very candidly their concern with "How dark can we go before we are done" and they arrived at a good enough answer to that. (Although they milked it for another half a season beyond that beause the money was so good).
"Cool alpha male being held back by his wife" is not Walter White. Were they all taking the blue sky meth too?

Falling Down, but, yeah, I know all this well enough.

Like most rotten ideas, there's a kernel of truth there-- Walter is a brilliant man who should have accomplished much more in his life than he did-- but the conclusion and assignment of blame is all wrong. Walter has no one to blame but himself, and his narcissism, pride, insecurity, and bottomless self-pity. Instead, he gave in to those traits and let them curdle for decades until they were finally unleashed in the deadliest manner possible.

My first episode was in season 1, ep 5 or 6, where Walter calls the bluff of a drug dealer as regards stuff that blows up. That is what caught my eye. As I watched the next ep on AMC my wife read me the riot act about watching crappy, evil TV shows.

Funny, how it all turned out. We watched every episode of Better Call Saul as it came out from seasons 1 through 3.

I didn't start watching it until 2010 or so, but I started watching with the pilot, and that immediately hooked me-- with the pace of other dramas, I thought the opening flash-forward in the RV would be the end of the season or something; instead, it was resolved in that episode. Breaking Bad was maybe the best-paced drama on TV (at least for stretches) while it was on the air. (The Shield is still the all-time winner.)

I liked those first few seasons of BCS quite a bit, but I thought season 4 was a bit of a step back. Season 5 was better, but I still feel one of the problems of the show is that the writers don't want to move at the pace the story demands, so there's a lot of time on unnecessary plots and montages and stuff that people call a "slow burn" or "character work" but that doesn't really reveal anything new about the characters to us.

[Peelee]

Michael Douglas in Breaking Down[and turned it up to eleven

Apropos of absolutely nothing, but speaking of heavy metal and Michael Douglas movies, Iron Maiden wrote a song about the film Falling Down.

[Psyren]

Thor does mention "he has his good days and bad days." Seems like a smart way to play a prophetic character so they don't just spoil all the plot points in the wrong order.

Point - perhaps the Godsmoot was a "good day."

"Mom, she assaulted me in one of the most comprehensive and permanently scarring ways available in this setting"

"Permanently scarring?"
They joke quite literally about the revolving door afterlife (repeatedly). While there are several similarities between our world's morals and theirs, the attitude of adventurers (especially high level ones) to sudden/repeated death is not one of them, as evidenced by the very phrase "repeated death." In short, you're applying a lens and impact to Hilgya's situation that just doesn't apply, particularly since she herself has the means to repair death.

[Rynjin]

Ugh, Invincible had a toxic hatedom too? Was it Amber that triggered it? I'm going to assume it was Amber, because at one point she dared to criticize the main character?

I think it was more that she came across as incredibly manipulative in hindsight after the reveal. Disagreeing with him that being a superhero is the best way to save lives? Would be admirable. Eve does so right to his face as well after she ****s off from fighting crime to help people plant crops, build houses, etc. faster with her powers.

Amber, on the other hand, essentially tries to manipulate him into giving up on being a hero through deceptive means, to the point she even maintains the facade (or possibly worse, genuine anger) of being angry at him for "flaking" on helping out at the soup kitchen when he's comatose and nearly dead in the hospital.

The hatedom likely goes too far, as it always does when kids have a strong emotion about a series for the first time, but Amber's actions during the series are toxic overall, and I'm fairly certain that was meant to be intentional. Amber is meant as a contrast to Eve; someone who treats helping people out and activism in general as an ego boost and to help fuel their superiority complex, where the latter just wants to do the most good they can with what they have.

[Sindeloke]

"Permanently scarring?"
They joke quite literally about the revolving door afterlife (repeatedly). While there are several similarities between our world's morals and theirs, the attitude of adventurers (especially high level ones) to sudden/repeated death is not one of them, as evidenced by the very phrase "repeated death." In short, you're applying a lens and impact to Hilgya's situation that just doesn't apply, particularly since she herself has the means to repair death.

He lost two character levels. In a world where limbs can be regrown in minutes, the loss of a level that might take decades to earn back, if you ever even do, is about as dire a mutilation as can be done to a player character. That's permanent removal of hit points, spell knowledge, class features, potentially feats - in short, a fundamental and profound weakening of mind, body, and capability for which there is no recourse from any amount of magic.

The lens I'm applying is the one the Giant himself has imposed on the setting in his own posts: True Resurrection is not a thing here because death means something, and it is important to the setting and the verisimilitude of people's behaviors and reactions that that is true. Dying is not painless. Coming back from the dead is neither cheap nor likely, nor can it by any means get you all the way back to where you were before. We are supposed to take death seriously despite the presence of resurrection because the Giant believes that death mattering is important to the message of the story mattering. When an author is that clear about his setting or his intent, I try to take him at his word.

But quite frankly, that's completely irrelevant anyway. Because even if all she had done was hit him upside the head with a stick, that would still be assault, and it would still be a completely inappropriate response to him simply saying something she didn't like, and his own mother telling him he deserved it to both of their faces would still be an absurd piece of victim-blaming that has no place in the mouth of a character we're supposed to consider a moral and sympathetic person, and she would still have faced no judgement in story of any kind by anyone of her handing her son to a vampire on a platter. You said yourself that what she did to Durkon was heinous, but where's the evidence in the story that anyone agrees? Literally the only comment in the text that anyone made about it was to support it.

Meanwhile, Miko's gods showed up to personally tell her what an idiotic putz she is, and Andi got told off by half her crew. If we're looking at other ally/antagonists who were less obstructive but also made clear errors in moral or practical judgement, we've got Shojo watching his city die, Haley's dad sitting miserably in a dungeon stewing in his own lonely paranoia, Eugene barred from paradise and forced to watch his son run around as a fighter. Karma Houdinis are vanishingly rare in OotS, making it all the more bizarre that Hilgya doesn't even get a slap on the wrist for her behavior.

I think it was more that she came across as incredibly manipulative in hindsight after the reveal. Disagreeing with him that being a superhero is the best way to save lives? Would be admirable.

Eh. In a vacuum, maybe. In a superhero story, where everybody is watching explicitly because they want to see the protagonist go be a superhero, in a genre that has as its fundamental premise that it's effective and important to be a superhero, all this is ever gonna do is make people hate the girlfriend. I don't watch Invincible, but it was a huge problem for me in getting into Black Lightning - bad enough the man himself is spending the entire first season refusing to spit or get off the pot, we've got his wife constantly pushing him away from it? The show is literally called "Black Lightning." We know he's gonna be Black Lightning. You're preventing the plot from progressing. How are we supposed to react to that with anything other than irritation? Even without the weird "don't lie to me when I'm lying to you" aspect of the Invincible situation, that's never going to go over well.

[Peelee]

"Permanently scarring?"
They joke quite literally about the revolving door afterlife (repeatedly). While there are several similarities between our world's morals and theirs, the attitude of adventurers (especially high level ones) to sudden/repeated death is not one of them, as evidenced by the very phrase "repeated death." In short, you're applying a lens and impact to Hilgya's situation that just doesn't apply, particularly since she herself has the means to repair death.

Not that I'm claiming that Durkon was permanently scarred, but I am not as comfortable as you writing off death so trivially, even when fixed. In the print version of Don't Split the Party, the author devoted an entire page's worth of commentary to discuss how he wanted to make it clear that, spells or no spells, death was a major setback. Sure, there are jokes, because the comic is primarily a comedy. That doesn't mean that we should just shrug off someone killing a person just because they can bring them back.

[Liquor Box]

I mean, Durkon is like "Mom, she assaulted me in one of the most comprehensive and permanently scarring ways available in this setting" and his mom responds with "well, maybe try not to deserve it next time, then." Yeah, she then turns around and threatens Hilgya in private, and we get the one single panel in the entire arc of Hilgya looking less than smug and cocky, but comprehensively, the message "Hilgya is doing bad things, here," really does not come across. What comes across is "don't hurt him because he's mine, even if we both know he deserves it," and that's the strip's final word on that event, full stop. And that's just for killing Durkon, which is the only thing she sees any consequences for at all, even to that mild degree of "being scolded to the point of being taken aback." She's never forced to answer for or even consider her culpability in Kudzu being used as a human shield, and in fact walks off into the sunset at the end of the arc with full custody of said child, without ever even having questioned that she might have done something wrong in endangering him, much less ever feeling a moment of panic or regret about it. She also gets rewarded with an offer of tentative friendship and compromise from Durkon, and an offer of familial acceptance and support from Sigdi.

Compare this to Andi, who didn't cost anybody any character levels or recklessly endanger any infants for whom she was responsible, but got her pay docked, her ego crushed, and spent multiple panels looking chastised and miserable in the wake of a failure that she knew was a failure even as it happened, let alone after. Certainly no one we're meant to like or sympathize with (or, in fact, anyone at all) validates her behavior, or offers her anything but contempt and condemnation in the aftermath. I'm definitely with Ionathus here, that's a huge disparity in the narrative calling them out.

Of course, Andi was only ever an obstacle, while both Serini and Hilgya have crucial use to the Order as recalcitrant allies, so the Order themselves being more lenient makes a certain sense. It doesn't necessarily follow that the story framing has to agree with them, though.

Is your point that obstructive (or evil) characters don't need to get some sort of cumeuppance, I agree. Real life doesn't always work out karmically, neither should stories (or at least those that are not fairy tails).

[danielxcutter]

I dunno, a lot of stories (especially fantasy) tend to give bad guys a kick in the pants.

[Liquor Box]

I dunno, a lot of stories (especially fantasy) tend to give bad guys a kick in the pants.

Yeah, a lot do, but not all. It's just not my preference - all the good guys doing great, and all the bad guys getting their just desserts is not to my taste.