Why didn't Durkon tell Redcloak that.....

[Mad Humanist]

Why didn't Durkon tell Redcloak that after sealing the rifts, the goblins would be recognized by the gods as having a special role in holding the world together and that killing Goblinoids (except in the direst self-defence) would henceforth be blasphemous. I mean I am sure that Durkon could have persuaded Thor and Odin to promise this and they could probably have persuaded Loki and others to buy into such a deal. This I think would have been much more persuasive.

Of course I realize the Giant did not want Durkon to succeed at this point, but I feel the final deal will include some such provision and could have done earlier.

[Peelee]

You're asking why Durkon would have told Redcloak something that wasn't true?

[Mad Humanist]

You're asking why Durkon would have told Redcloak something that wasn't true?

Maybe I did not word it terribly well. Durkon proposed a deal that did involve getting Thor and co to buy into the deal. I think this could have been added to the deal and should have been, because it will be necessary to spot-weld rifts going forward and Goblinoid clerics are essential to that. So actually he status of Goblinkind would have been raised to considerably and to a unique position in the deal. How one puts that into practice is a matter for what the gods tell their clerics.

I don't think Durkon thought have this, but then I suppose he really had not thought about the Goblin perspective at all and so had not thought of this aspect.

[Emanick]

Maybe I did not word it terribly well. Durkon proposed a deal that did involve getting Thor and co to buy into the deal. I think this could have been added to the deal and should have been, because it will be necessary to spot-weld rifts going forward and Goblinoid clerics are essential to that. So actually he status of Goblinkind would have been raised to considerably and to a unique position in the deal. How one puts that into practice is a matter for what the gods tell their clerics.

I don't think Durkon thought have this, but then I suppose he really had not thought about the Goblin perspective at all and so had not thought of this aspect.

I think that probably would have been a smart thing to offer, and likely would have helped. Durkon's biggest mistake (IMO) was not offering enough to get Redcloak to buy in, and this would have been a big concession. (Obviously he would have had to run it by Thor, but as an opening offer, it's pretty significant.)

I think you're probably correct that the main reason why Durkon didn't suggest this is that he didn't think of it. He only had a couple of days to mull things over, and had much less information about Redcloak's desires and motives than we do. Plus, I read him as having fairly average intelligence. Not dumb, but not brimming over with innovative ideas, either.

[Metastachydium]

It's really Thor's fault. He didn't give anything for Durkon to offer in the first place, and that's why Durkon ended up offering those table scraps that almost got him imploded.
Now, during a second round of negotiations, Durkon would be in an even worse position: now he basically knows Thor won't really help him put together an acceptable deal and that the gods would really rather preserve as much of the status quo as possible.

[BloodSquirrel]

Because IMPLOSION.

Durkon never got that far because Redcloak tried to kill him at the "Hey, let's try to make a deal" stage of the negotiations. It wasn't like they were discussing detailed terms or had reached an impasse. Redcloak made a brief show of listening to him before flipping the table because he's all-or-nothing into the plan, and wasn't going to compromise.

Also, it's a fairly weak claim, and I doubt even a more reasonable version of Redcloak (the kind of Goblin Durkon thought he'd be negotiating with) would buy it. Why would goblins get special protection? All of the four colors are equally necessary, and Thor could be expected to be just as jealous of his followers as The Dark One of his. Of all the gods, the Dark One is in the weakest position- he has something they want, but they have something that he needs, since he'll be the one to die if this world blows up.

Durkon made the right call- get Redcloak to agree that a negotiated deal could at least be potentially better than continuing with his current plan, then work out the details. The problem was that Redcloak was going to reject any deal short of "All of the non-goblinoids agree to be your slaves and hand the gate over to the Dark One to do whatever he wants with it".

[Metastachydium]

Durkon never got that far because Redcloak tried to kill him at the "Hey, let's try to make a deal" stage of the negotiations. It wasn't like they were discussing detailed terms or had reached an impasse. Redcloak made a brief show of listening to him before flipping the table because he's all-or-nothing into the plan, and wasn't going to compromise.

What Durkon offered wasn't a huge compromise either. Of course, that Redcloak went IMPLOSION! instead of retorting with a counteroffer might be telling. (But then, he sat down to talk, so…)

Also, it's a fairly weak claim, and I doubt even a more reasonable version of Redcloak (the kind of Goblin Durkon thought he'd be negotiating with) would buy it. Why would goblins get special protection? All of the four colors are equally necessary, and Thor could be expected to be just as jealous of his followers as The Dark One of his. Of all the gods, the Dark One is in the weakest position- he has something they want, but they have something that he needs, since he'll be the one to die if this world blows up.

Now that's a better point. (I'm also pretty sure no one really wants to see what'd happen if saving the world depended on Durkon's Bluff modifier.)

"All of the non-goblinoids agree to be your slaves

That's not part of the Plan, though.

[Nymrod]

Durkon's opening argument should have been that if there is any risk that Redcloak succeeds the Gods are already with their hand on the trigger ready to destroy this world and his god will not survive the process. Would be interesting to have the Dark One listen to that viewpoint in a Commune. Sure he would not want to believe it but he would at least investigate and maybe then Loki might have a chance convincing him to try and save this world (and then he'd get a chance to get SOME concessions).

Ultimately though NOTHING Durkon could say would ever get Redcloak to abandon the plan because that would immediately mean that everything he has done has been for naught and he would never be willing to confront his mistakes. He'd rather sacrifice every last goblin on the planet than take a step back. Redcloak's entire point is that he rationalizes everything evil he does and justifies it because of the plan or just through spite.

[BloodSquirrel]

What Durkon offered wasn't a huge compromise either. Of course, that Redcloak went IMPLOSION! instead of retorting with a counteroffer might be telling. (But then, he sat down to talk, so…)

That's because you can't offer a compromise until the other side is at least asking for something concrete. Redcloak never gets as far as telling Durkon what he actually wants. All he says is "I want more" and "I don't trust you".

That's not part of the Plan, though.

Tell that to the slaves in Gobbotopia.

[BloodSquirrel]

Durkon's opening argument should have been that if there is any risk that Redcloak succeeds the Gods are already with their hand on the trigger ready to destroy this world and his god will not survive the process. Would be interesting to have the Dark One listen to that viewpoint in a Commune. Sure he would not want to believe it but he would at least investigate and maybe then Loki might have a chance convincing him to try and save this world (and then he'd get a chance to get SOME concessions).

The problem with that kind of hard opener is getting Redcloak to believe it. It's too easy for someone as dug-in as Redcloak to dismiss it as a lie precisely because his only alternative is to immediately change all at once. A softer opening at least gives him time to think.

[Metastachydium]

That's because you can't offer a compromise until the other side is at least asking for something concrete. Redcloak never gets as far as telling Durkon what he actually wants. All he says is "I want more" and "I don't trust you".

Tell that to the slaves in Gobbotopia.

Wrong on both counts. Redcloak tells Durkon that he wants better resources and an equal status (no attacking goblinoids on sight for being goblinoids &c.) for his species. In the same strip, he also tells Durkon that if the problems he brought up are addressed, his "people will have no reason to seize further human territories", heavily implying, to say the least, that enslaving all non-goblinoids is not a part of the Plan.

[BloodSquirrel]

Wrong on both counts. Redcloak tells Durkon that he wants better resources and an equal status (no attacking goblinoids on sight for being goblinoids &c.) for his species. In the same strip, he also tells Durkon that if the problems he brought up are addressed, his "people will have no reason to seize further human territories", heavily implying, to say the least, that enslaving all non-goblinoids is not a part of the Plan.

In the same strip, he also tells Durkon that if the problems he brought up are addressed, his "people will have no reason to seize further human territories", heavily implying, to say the least, that enslaving all non-goblinoids is not a part of the Plan.[/URL]

Yes, if they give goblinoids all of their stuff, they won't need to seize it. And, no, I'm not being facetious there. Durkon directly asks Redcloak if whether he just wants humans to stop killing goblins or if he wants goblins to be allowed to kill humans, and Redcloak goes on a rant justifying murdering humans instead of giving him a straight answer. Then, right after Durkon tries to tell him that they'll agree to not murdering each other, Redcloak tries to murder Durkon.

Redcloak deliberately attaches an open-ended qualifier to his side of the peace offer that works out to "give me everything I want". He never asks for anything more specific or bounded than that, even when directly prompted. And this is just what Redcloak- someone who is not known for being honest either with himself or others- is willing to say openly. Meanwhile, while not at the negotiating table, he's admitted to being willing to blow up the whole world if he doesn't get his way.

[Metastachydium]

Yes, if they give goblinoids all of their stuff, they won't need to seize it. And, no, I'm not being facetious there.

Yes, you are.
1. Do point out where Redcloak says he wants ALL of their stuff. All he brings up is better resources and an equal standing.

Durkon directly asks Redcloak if whether he just wants humans to stop killing goblins or if he wants goblins to be allowed to kill humans, and Redcloak goes on a rant justifying murdering humans instead of giving him a straight answer.

2. No, the rant is in response to "you are already equal enough, and moreso than dwarves in certain respects; stop whining" (which is phenomenally undiplomatic).

Then, right after Durkon tries to tell him that they'll agree to not murdering each other,

3. That's not what Durkon offers. Durkon offers nothing (I'll maybe talk to some guys and the current status quo may end up preserved for a while; but then, maybe not). Redcloak's "response" is of course pretty much inexcusable, but that doesn't make Durkon's so called "deal" any better.

Redcloak deliberately attaches an open-ended qualifier to his side of the peace offer that works out to "give me everything I want". He never asks for anything more specific or bounded than that, even when directly prompted.

4. Yes he does. Better resources and an equal standing is a lot more specific than "everything I want."

And this is just what Redcloak- someone who is not known for being honest either with himself or others- is willing to say openly.

I'm not going to dignify that with an answer, sorry.

[Mike Havran]

It would not have worked. As long as Xykon is around, Redcloak has no safer alternative than to continue with the plan.

[Jasdoif]

Why didn't Durkon tell Redcloak that after sealing the rifts, the goblins would be recognized by the gods as having a special role in holding the world together and that killing Goblinoids (except in the direst self-defence) would henceforth be blasphemous. I mean I am sure that Durkon could have persuaded Thor and Odin to promise this and they could probably have persuaded Loki and others to buy into such a deal.

They weren't in agreement without ceding such things to the Dark One; if Thor couldn't persuade them then, why would asking even more from them work any better?

[woweedd]

Wrong on both counts. Redcloak tells Durkon that he wants better resources and an equal status (no attacking goblinoids on sight for being goblinoids &c.) for his species. In the same strip, he also tells Durkon that if the problems he brought up are addressed, his "people will have no reason to seize further human territories", heavily implying, to say the least, that enslaving all non-goblinoids is not a part of the Plan.

*Ahem*, not part of the plan as far as Redcloak KNOWS. I absolutely think that's, at least, included in the Dark One's plan for what to do after unleashing the Snarl and recreating the world.

[Hurkyl]

And there are a few unresolved plot threads that could tie together into a conspiracy. IFCC and Tiamat are meddling in the gates. Tiamat has relations with both IFCC and TDO. The other gods think Tiamat is trying to manipulate them in pursuit of some secret agenda.

The conspiracy could be anything from a gambit to be the only gods in the new world to trying to manipulate TDO in a position to help seal the gates. But I'm expecting something to come from it in relation to The Plan.

[Ruck]

Durkon also didn't mention the part about the Dark One not surviving to the next world. He didn't mention a few things that might have been relevant to Redcloak, because he thought what he was offering was good enough to convince him, because he badly misunderstood Redcloak's deeper goals and his real level of commitment to seeing the Plan through.

[Metastachydium]

*Ahem*, not part of the plan as far as Redcloak KNOWS. I absolutely think that's, at least, included in the Dark One's plan for what to do after unleashing the Snarl and recreating the world.

Destroying the world/letting it get destroyed is plan B rather than the Plan itself, and Big Purple will never hold enough leverage to achieve that much, especially if he fires off the nuke.

And there are a few unresolved plot threads that could tie together into a conspiracy. IFCC and Tiamat are meddling in the gates. Tiamat has relations with both IFCC and TDO. The other gods think Tiamat is trying to manipulate them in pursuit of some secret agenda.

The conspiracy could be anything from a gambit to be the only gods in the new world to trying to manipulate TDO in a position to help seal the gates. But I'm expecting something to come from it in relation to The Plan.

Yes, please! This story needs more Tiamat!

[Dion]

Why didn't Durkon tell Redcloak that after sealing the rifts, the goblins would be recognized by the gods as having a special role in holding the world together and that killing Goblinoids (except in the direst self-defence) would henceforth be blasphemous.

Because Durkon isn’t a lying liar who lies.

Which is why he’s a lawful good cleric of Thor, and not a used car salesman.

[Mad Humanist]

Because Durkon isn’t a lying liar who lies.

Which is why he’s a lawful good cleric of Thor, and not a used car salesman.

I don't think it would be a lie, but I already explained that above.

[Dion]

I don't think it would be a lie, but I already explained that above.

Durkon has no reason to believe that what you suggest is even possible.

And, Durkon would be lying if he gave Redcloak the idea that there was any possibility he could convince the gods to do that.

Thor’s offer was “Get Redcloak to help seal the rift and in exchange I’ll convince be the other gods to save the world”.

That’s it. That’s all Thor offered. I thought he made it pretty clear that he could t do any more than that.

If Thor wanted a delusional negotiator to sell redcloak on empty promises and impossible hopes, he should have sent Hilgya.

[Mad Humanist]

Durkon has no reason to believe that what you suggest is even possible.

And, Durkon would be lying if he gave Redcloak the idea that there was any possibility he could convince the gods to do that.

Thor’s offer was “Get Redcloak to help seal the rift and in exchange I’ll convince be the other gods to save the world”.

That’s it. That’s all Thor offered. I thought he made it pretty clear that he could t do any more than that.

If Thor wanted a delusional negotiator to sell redcloak on empty promises and impossible hopes, he should have sent Hilgya.

Maybe Thor had not thought through all the implications. We have plenty of evidence that the Gods are not all that wise. But once they have done one, they will need to reseal the other rifts and then any new rifts that appear. Thor may not be able to persuade even a majority of this, but he should be able to persuade several - his allies, Odin, Baldr etc. Once it is proven to work he can persuade the others. There needs to be a supply of Dark One clerics to make that work. Certainly all four quiddities are needed but purple only has one god. So the implication of Durkon's deal was that Goblinoids would have a special role post deal. I guess Durkon did not see this. Maybe Thor did not see it. Certainly Redcloak did not see it. But the implication is there.

[Metastachydium]

Some of the gods (I'm looking at you, Tyr) are on the record stating that they'd gladly see the world destroyed before conceding an inch's worth of ground to Big Purple. Thor knows this and Durkon knows this.

[Mad Humanist]

Some of the gods (I'm looking at you, Tyr) are on the record stating that they'd gladly see the world destroyed before conceding an inch's worth of ground to Big Purple. Thor knows this and Durkon knows this.

That does not really impinge on my point. They would just be the last hold outs. It would still be a better deal for Goblins then they have now. And if the Dark One had proven to be helping to hold the world together even Tyr might change his mind.

I do take the point that Tyr is being unhelpful here. But so is Redcloak (and so presumably is the Dark One though we have not heard him speak directly).

[Jasdoif]

I don't think it would be a lie, but I already explained that above.

There's quite a bit of difference between Durkon's proposal to get Thor to say "hey, if we can agree with this thing these mortals wrote to solve their problem, we can solve our problem; what do you say?" and your proposal to get Thor to say "hey, you know that Dark One we couldn't all agree to deal with to solve our problem? If we just give him tons more stuff we can solve our problem; what do you say?" Namely, your proposing that Thor can get the other gods to sign on with paying a price personally to come to an agreement...and if Thor could do that, why wasn't he able to get them to come to an agreement before adding a personal cost to themselves into the mix?

As Durkon said himself, some of the gods are real jackasses, which is the reason he proposed backing the whole thing with a mortal treaty instead...I imagine he thinks trying to place impositions on them himself is unreliable at best.

[Psyren]

It's really Thor's fault. He didn't give anything for Durkon to offer in the first place, and that's why Durkon ended up offering those table scraps that almost got him imploded.
Now, during a second round of negotiations, Durkon would be in an even worse position: now he basically knows Thor won't really help him put together an acceptable deal and that the gods would really rather preserve as much of the status quo as possible.

To be fair to Thor, he had no way of talking to Redcloak to figure out what to offer until his cleric (Durkon) sat down with him, thanks to the "dumb god laws tying his hands." So while Durkon is in a worse position now due to the prior negotiations having failed, he's also in the better position of knowing what Redcloak wants and what might potentially appeal to him. We know what Redcloak wants because we had a number of solo scenes and a whole prequel book to learn his perspective, but the heroes didn't until right now.

Does that excuse Redcloak for trying to murder the first cleric to actually ask him what he wanted, of course not, but Redcloak is a walking Sunk Cost Fallacy anyway so convincing him was never going to be easy.

Maybe I did not word it terribly well. Durkon proposed a deal that did involve getting Thor and co to buy into the deal. I think this could have been added to the deal and should have been, because it will be necessary to spot-weld rifts going forward and Goblinoid clerics are essential to that. So actually he status of Goblinkind would have been raised to considerably and to a unique position in the deal. How one puts that into practice is a matter for what the gods tell their clerics.

I don't think Durkon thought have this, but then I suppose he really had not thought about the Goblin perspective at all and so had not thought of this aspect.

Putting aside that (as mentioned above) Durkon had no way of knowing the "Goblin perspective" until moments before getting imploded - you yourself are making some pretty big assumptions as to what the state of the world will look like post-purple quiddity. Thor mentions spot-welding the rifts that pop up, yes, but he never says they need the goblins to do it. Given that he thinks only a drop is needed to solve all of the existing rifts, the goblins may not need to be an ongoing part of the solution at all.

[Squire Doodad]

I think a "the gods have been running from the Snarl for ages, so if TDO were to help fix that, they'd be pretty grateful to TDO" tidbit would have gotten Redcloak on the right path to realize what he has to gain, but then Durkon knows they can't just poof the world into being different so he wouldn't be able to give concrete examples outside of, like, maybe gods encouraging their followers to set up some trade routes with Gobbotopia.

[Mad Humanist]

........but he never says they need the goblins to do it......

That could have been a pretty big omission. It seems pretty unlikely that purple quiddity would not be needed in future, even if that is strictly speaking logically consistent with what Thor said.

For the spot-welding I believe they only need one god from each of the four pantheons. For one of those the Dark One is the only choice. And who worships the Dark One?

Strict logical consistency is one thing. What follows plausibly from what we know is another.

[Psyren]

That could have been a pretty big omission. It seems pretty unlikely that purple quiddity would not be needed in future, even if that is strictly speaking logically consistent with what Thor said.

For the spot-welding I believe they only need one god from each of the four pantheons. For one of those the Dark One is the only choice. And who worships the Dark One?

Strict logical consistency is one thing. What follows plausibly from what we know is another.

I agree it's plausible that they will need all the goblins on an ongoing basis. The fact though is that we don't know what form the post-current-crisis will take. As it stands, only one goblin cleric in the entire world can cast 9th-level spells, so for Durkon to say that all the others are necessary too would be a lie and thus something he wouldn't say.