OOTS #1252 - The Discussion Thread

[Vikenlugaid]

Responsible? No. But he still seems to be the focal point of the conflict.
Granted, this might mean there would be conflict even without him, but this conflict would have another target.

But let's see:
Dorukan and Liran were in a romantic relationship. They probably didn't have that much conflict.
Serini and Girald still had some communication after the split up, so they seemed to get along fine. (The trap was set to inform both) I don't think there was any indication of conflict between Serini and any other member of the Scribblers. Rather the opposite, given recent strips.

Girald and Dorukan seemed to be on the same side in the nearly fight against Soon. Otherwise there is not too much known about their relationship, as far as I know.

So, maybe unpopular opinion, but...
Is it really a broken party if there are 5 living members and conflict revolving around one of them? Or is it one person not fitting into the party, which would work just fine without this one person?

This.
I don't think this will be so simple as "Soon was the only bad party member", but everything we know about that party points in the way that Soon's was the main comflict, we haven't seen any conflict that doesn't involve Soon.
So, until something prooves the contrary, I will think Soon was the main problem.

[Kardwill]

The party was already broken. All Serini did was prevent a potentially lethal fight. There was no turning back at that point, no possibility of continued cooperation.

Yeah, the party was broken, and nothing would have convinced Draketooth and Soon to work together, or even tolerate each other's existence. But the 3 other members' friendship could still be salvaged. Serini's grief-fueled proposal to not ever meet any other member of the group again, not even checking on them to see if there was a problem, was rather extreme. To the point that the two lovers had to break the rule and see each other in secret like naughty teenagers.

She lashed out in grief and came up with the way the gates would be defended in the future. And that plan (one party member and their followers for each gate, with an oath preventing them from asking for help and a need of secrecy meaning they would be limited to their own personal ressources) utterly failed when an epic enemy made a serious attempt at controling the gates.

And it was not a stupid plan, since it ensured that each gate would get a powerful defense and that it would be real difficult to find and take out every one of them. But I think Serini is not happy when she sees how it turned out.

[Liquor Box]

I dunno, the Order isn't "kill first ask questions never" and hasn't been for a while. And "lethal force" is a bit tricky when it's incredibly hard to outright one-shot someone at the level and optimization the party is.

In 3.5 lethal damage is anything which does actual hit point damage. Because enough of it will be lethal. It isn't limited to attacks that can one-shot someone.

And the first attacks the Order made in the Serini fight would have caused lethal damage if they'd hit (Hayley fired her bow and the dwarf threw his hammer). It probably wouldn't have killed Serini and beholder if it had hit, but they didn't know who was attacking them - and it might have killed some enemies.

And as for "hasn't been for a while", they had several kills in their very last fight - against the frost giants.

[Vikenlugaid]

Maybe we should make a distinction between lethal and deadly attacks. In D&D any attack that lows the hit points is considered lethal, if someone aim for the legs, is lethal dmg, but not deadly.

[Metastachydium]

The CE character is not always the party's most disruptive personality. Just as a thought experiment, let's look at the alignments of the Scribblers. (Feel free to ignore the alignments I assign, your values may vary from mine, and I have not read the prequels.)

Soon = LG
Dorukon = NG
Lirian = TN
Serini = CG
Kraggor = C (N or G)
Girard = CN

Just from this one may infer that Soon was the odd man out. His attempts to lead the party in an organized and structured way may well have had results similar to Miko's attempts to lead The OotS. Of course, Girard would have been most opposed to him and far more charismatic, with the majority of the party on his side philosophically.

This would have put Dorukon in the position of peacemaker, and he would likely have spent a great deal of his efforts in trying to get Soon to go along with the party and being ignored or in a state of constant argument. If there was justification for blaming him for Kraggor's unmaking, that would have put Dorukon in a much worse position, or he would have to have joined in the accusations leveled at Soon, with the added burden of having wasted his time trying to get Soon to cooperate.

In this case, Soon was the Belkar of The Order of the Scribble.

Your metric for who the outlier would be is somewhat questionable. First of all, while it is reasonable to assume that Serini is CG (I'd peg her down there myself), Lirian is canonically NG (and she would look more like that than TN even if that weren't the case), so Soon being the outlier alignment-wise is fully dependent on an unknown variable, i.e. Kraagor's alignment, since if Kraagor was Good and especially if Kraagor was NG, then suddenly Girard, the only non-Good party member is the clear outlier.

Secondly, in the other Order, we have two LG, two CG, a TN and a CE character. If we presume that alignments are the key factor here, then we are essentially bound to conclude that the actual outlier of the Order is V, rather than Belkar, since V's alignment doesn't match that of anyone else in the party on either axis, whereas Belkar is C, just like a further third of the whole party. Nevertheless, while V is not always a model citizen, the problem player is clearly not them but Belkar (and for quite some time, Elan (who briefly splits the party when Roy decides he shouldn't be rescued from the party)).

Further, I'd like to challenge the notion that Girard was necessarily far more charismatic thatn Soon. While Girard did indeed have to possess a CHA score of 19+, his multiclass build was a MAD one as well (in the Crayons strips we see him with blades drawn whenever he gets involved in a fight, counterintuitive as it may be), and CHA is an important stat for paladins. Case in point, Soon was able to inspire absolute unwavering loyalty in others (okay, those others were paladins, but the oath they swore was pretty cumbersome even by paladin standards).

Moreover, the premise that all the party was united against Soon is (so far as we can tell) false, not to mention the fact your "best candidate for playing peacemaker" was one of the only two party members flinging accusations at him. There is zero indication in the text that Lirian was anti-Soon, strongly of otherwise. As for Serini, she stopped a fight where action economy and caster/martial disparity were strongly stacked against Soon.

That leaves us with Dorukan and Girard. The former was clearly upset about Kraagor's death and acused Soon of not caring about the same (he might have blamed Soon for death itself as well, but we don't know that), going so far as to get ready to fight Soon. It would appear, however, that he calmed down some time afterwards. It is fairly evident that he did at the very least trust Soon implicitly well enough that even the final ultimate magic sigil defense of his Gate was based around a trick that wouldn't have been much of an obstacle for Soon.

So, finally, we have Girard. Now, Girard didn't begin to resent Soon after Kraagor's death. Probably due to his upbringing in the West (that's a pretty decent theory for how he ended up like that), he had a pathological level of mistrust of authority figures (apparently for most of his life, to boot) and he didn't really believe honour is a real thing. He explicitly stated in the desert illusion that he always expected that Soon will turn against the rest of the Order and he'll try to take over. As such, Girard's hostility towards Soon could hardly be expected to reflect the entire Order's opinion of him. Also (and this occured to me just now), Girard was the group's mapmaker, and apparently the others knew the coordinates from him. This would mean that he gave Soon all the other coordinates, figuring that he'll try to take over those Gates. Additionally, he says Serini has the true coordinates of his Gate. He never says Lirian and Dorukan have them as well. I wonder what that tells us.

[brian 333]

Subdual damage is non-lethal, as are status attacks, such as sleep or paralysis. Otherwise, lethal.

[KorvinStarmast]

Yeah, but Dorukan never set traps to murder any of the other Scribblers.

And Girard didn’t have to be Evil to be the most disruptive of the party.

Chaotic is sufficient partial alignment to be the party jerk, IME. If the shoe fits Girard he wears it.

there's a decent chance that Dorukan or Lirian would at least have been willing to hear the Order out. Even Serini isn't resorting to murder as a first choice.

Another good point as regard's Serini PoV.

[danielxcutter]

Your metric for who the outlier would be is somewhat questionable. First of all, while it is reasonable to assume that Serini is CG (I'd peg her down there myself), Lirian is canonically NG (and she would look more like that than TN even if that weren't the case), so Soon being the outlier alignment-wise is fully dependent on an unknown variable, i.e. Kraagor's alignment, since if Kraagor was Good and especially if Kraagor was NG, then suddenly Girard, the only non-Good party member is the clear outlier.

To be fair, we have no idea what Kraagor's alignment was, but since he was traveling with Soon he almost certainly wasn't Evil. Even if he wasn't Good aligned though, TN isn't an alignment that clashes with others a lot.

Secondly, in the other Order, we have two LG, two CG, a TN and a CE character. If we presume that alignments are the key factor here, then we are essentially bound to conclude that the actual outlier of the Order is V, rather than Belkar, since V's alignment doesn't match that of anyone else in the party on either axis, whereas Belkar is C, just like a further third of the whole party. Nevertheless, while V is not always a model citizen, the problem player is clearly not them but Belkar (and for quite some time, Elan (who briefly splits the party when Roy decides he shouldn't be rescued from the party)).

CN is the memetically disruptive alignment(though honestly that really is more of a meme than anything and if nothing else that obviously wasn't Girard's CN archetype), but CE's real bad yeah. The only reason Belkar wasn't even more of a problem was for most of the comic pre-character development was because he was either pointed towards enemies that were okay to kill or under the Greater Mark of Justice.

Also on a tangent, if I only had to judge by his actions from BRitF and onwards, and not any of the things before, I'd probably assume he was CN and not CE.

Further, I'd like to challenge the notion that Girard was necessarily far more charismatic thatn Soon. While Girard did indeed have to possess a CHA score of 19+, his multiclass build was a MAD one as well (in the Crayons strips we see him with blades drawn whenever he gets involved in a fight, counterintuitive as it may be), and CHA is an important stat for paladins. Case in point, Soon was able to inspire absolute unwavering loyalty in others (okay, those others were paladins, but the oath they swore was pretty cumbersome even by paladin standards).

Moreover, the premise that all the party was united against Soon is (so far as we can tell) false, not to mention the fact your "best candidate for playing peacemaker" was one of the only two party members flinging accusations at him. There is zero indication in the text that Lirian was anti-Soon, strongly of otherwise. As for Serini, she stopped a fight where action economy and caster/martial disparity were strongly stacked against Soon.

Actually fun fact, Paladins have Diplomacy as a class skill but both Sorcerer and Ranger don't! The only others with it as a class skill were Serini and oddly, Lirian(it's on the Druid list for some reason, though that's honestly one of the less OP things they have).

That leaves us with Dorukan and Girard. The former was clearly upset about Kraagor's death and acused Soon of not caring about the same (he might have blamed Soon for death itself as well, but we don't know that), going so far as to get ready to fight Soon. It would appear, however, that he calmed down some time afterwards. It is fairly evident that he did at the very least trust Soon implicitly well enough that even the final ultimate magic sigil defense of his Gate was based around a trick that wouldn't have been much of an obstacle for Soon.

Spoiler: SoD

Show

I mean, in his fight against Xykon he summons celestials. While a wizard fights with every tool he has prepared, I can't help but notice that the summoning trap in the Draketooth pyramid was a fiendish creature. Maybe it's just a coincidence, but I don't think Dorukan had Girard's deiphobia, Epic Paranoia feat, or Spite Paladin class feature.

So, finally, we have Girard. Now, Girard didn't begin to resent Soon after Kraagor's death. Probably due to his upbringing in the West (that's a pretty decent theory for how he ended up like that), he had a pathological level of mistrust of authority figures (apparently for most of his life, to boot) and he didn't really believe honour is a real thing. He explicitly stated in the desert illusion that he always expected that Soon will turn against the rest of the Order and he'll try to take over. As such, Girard's hostility towards Soon could hardly be expected to reflect the entire Order's opinion of him. Also (and this occured to me just now), Girard was the group's mapmaker, and apparently the others knew the coordinates from him. This would mean that he gave Soon all the other coordinates, figuring that he'll try to take over those Gates. Additionally, he says Serini has the true coordinates of his Gate. He never says Lirian and Dorukan have them as well. I wonder what that tells us.

This also makes Serini look comparatively worse since besides overconfidence and flaunting the oath Dorukan and Lirian seemed decent, but she was trusted by the hypocritical narcissist. Though I doubt Serini's nearly as bad as Girard.

[PontificatusRex]

I think it's really a mistake to try an identify "the troublemaker" in the party. As I've mentioned, every group we've seen in the Ootsverse seems to have an Elan, but not necessarily a Belkar.

My view as that Draketooth and Soon were two decent people with drastically different worldviews. They were able to get past those for the sake of their world-saving mission, but once they were done and triggered by the death of Kraagor, it all came roaring to the front.

[mjasghar]

This argument seems to be forgetting something - Soon founded the Scribblers. Without him they would never have become a group - so by necessity he is the one they are pushing against.
The insinuation from the creation of Gates as opposed to simply sealing them suggests that Lirian and Dorukan were already pushing against the purpose Soon had founded the Order for - namely, closing the rifts (assuming he accepted his wife was dead beyond raising).
As for Girard - he likely lived long enough to have some influence on his clan and their subsequent actions paint them as balanced towards the evil side. So I’m thinking he went evil later on and his actions in the scribble cartoons are a foreshadowing (the bigoted reference to the Southern Pantheon)

[KorvinStarmast]

CN is the memetically disruptive alignment(though honestly that really is more of a meme than anything and if nothing else that obviously wasn't Girard's CN archetype), but CE's real bad yeah.

Elan is CG, and just as dangerous a character type. "Hey, what does this do, oh, wait, I pushed the button?"
In the current edition (5) I have played with a handful of players who decide that it's funny to do "haha, look how stupid I am" as their schtick. That approach only works in a group where everyone is on board with "let's goof off" (which is one of many ways to play D&D).
It is a version of toxic behavior whose severity is a spectrum ... (and the PC alignment only occasionally informs how that causes friction at a table, or can).
But the key crutch is the "chaotic" half of the alignment assignment.

[brian 333]

The focus on Chaotic as disruptive in play ignores how disruptive Lawful can be. When one character is constantly giving orders and demanding they be obeyed, stifling the goals of other characters by demanding his own take precedence, and browbeating the party into conformity, the party can be very resentful. Add to that the death of a popular party member likely at the orders of the domineering member, and the result is a fractured party.

Next, I will lay out how stifling TN can be to those characters on the corners of the alignment chart.

[Liquor Box]

Maybe we should make a distinction between lethal and deadly attacks. In D&D any attack that lows the hit points is considered lethal, if someone aim for the legs, is lethal dmg, but not deadly.

Even if people were meaning deadly, the Order's opening salvo could have been deadly for all the knew. They didn't know that they were facing a beholder and a high level character. For all they knew they were facing a low level monster who could have been killed.

And there's nothing wrong with the Order using potentially deadly force. We know Serini was mostly (except for wanting to turn Hayley to stone) using non-deadly force, but that wouldn't have been obvious to the Order yet. I think a full response when attacked in a DnD setting is the norm.

The focus on Chaotic as disruptive in play ignores how disruptive Lawful can be. When one character is constantly giving orders and demanding they be obeyed, stifling the goals of other characters by demanding his own take precedence, and browbeating the party into conformity, the party can be very resentful. Add to that the death of a popular party member likely at the orders of the domineering member, and the result is a fractured party.

I don't really think that lawful characters require others to obey them. Chaotic and lawful both have a world view about the way things do and should work, but i'm not sure either is inherently more zealous about imposing their views on others. It may be that lawfuls feel a little more inclined to preach than chaotics where their perspective is also backed by laws or rules or societal norms. But not to the extent that you can assume the lawful character is the more controlling one.

In terms of the debate about who was the most disruptive member of the Scribble, i think it would assist to bear in mind that there are aspects of personality that contribute to disruptiveness other than alignment.

[Forum Explorer]

Even if people were meaning deadly, the Order's opening salvo could have been deadly for all the knew. They didn't know that they were facing a beholder and a high level character. For all they knew they were facing a low level monster who could have been killed.

And there's nothing wrong with the Order using potentially deadly force. We know Serini was mostly (except for wanting to turn Hayley to stone) using non-deadly force, but that wouldn't have been obvious to the Order yet. I think a full response when attacked in a DnD setting is the norm.



I don't really think that lawful characters require others to obey them. Chaotic and lawful both have a world view about the way things do and should work, but i'm not sure either is inherently more zealous about imposing their views on others. It may be that lawfuls feel a little more inclined to preach than chaotics where their perspective is also backed by laws or rules or societal norms. But not to the extent that you can assume the lawful character is the more controlling one.

In terms of the debate about who was the most disruptive member of the Scribble, i think it would assist to bear in mind that there are aspects of personality that contribute to disruptiveness other than alignment.

Sure, but Serini knew what the Order was capable of (or thought she did), and she may have made the judgement call that Sunny was in no significant danger from them, either through mercy, incompetence, or a combination of the two.


Require? No, lawful character's aren't required to make people obey them. But a lawful character can be just as disruptive to a party as a chaotic character can.

[Peelee]

Even if people were meaning deadly, the Order's opening salvo could have been deadly for all the knew. They didn't know that they were facing a beholder and a high level character. For all they knew they were facing a low level monster who could have been killed.

Given the context that they are in Kraagor's Tomb, a dungeon built by Serini to house some of the nastiest monsters in the world, it is possible that they thought that, but probably quite unlikely.

[Liquor Box]

Sure, but Serini knew what the Order was capable of (or thought she did), and she may have made the judgement call that Sunny was in no significant danger from them, either through mercy, incompetence, or a combination of the two.

I have no concerns with Serini bringing her beholder into her ambush (except that I don't think she should have attacked them at all). She would have had no chance without it. I don't think the beholder is a child, it just has child-like personality.

I'm not commenting on that. I'm just saying that the Order usually respond with potentially lethal force when attacked.

Given the context that they are in Kraagor's Tomb, a dungeon built by Serini to house some of the nastiest monsters in the world, it is possible that they thought that, but probably quite unlikely.

I expect their attacks might be strong enough to kill the creature that blocked the entrance, or the monster called Franklin. I certainly don't think that the Order considered whether their attack might killed before responding to the attack.

[Peelee]

I expect their attacks might be strong enough to kill the creature that blocked the entrance, or the monster called Franklin. I certainly don't think that the Order considered whether their attack might killed before responding to the attack.

I'm sorry, I thought we were talking about their expectations, not audience knowledge.

[Liquor Box]

I'm sorry, I thought we were talking about their expectations, not audience knowledge.

I am talking about what they might have thought, had they taken the time to do so. We know they were firing at a beholder and a high level rogue, but they didn't.

They knew Serini was in the vicinity but would have expected she'd have no rational reason to attack them. They knew Xykon's party was nearby, but saw him go the other way. I suppose they might have guessed that the attackers were the bugbears from the valley (backed by a shaman with darkness) - and depending on level they might have been able to have been one shotted by the Order.

But, I don't think they thought about it all, I think they instinctively reacted to an attack by firing back.

[Exantius]

The part about illusions is in fact not correct. Neither undead in general nor liches in particular are immune to illusions; they're only immune to mind-affecting effects, and not all illusions are mind-affecting. Of the nine spells on the list in #842, only Wall of Gloom and possibly Phantasmagoria (I couldn't find a spell by that name) are mind-affecting. The other seven would work just fine against Xykon.

I stand corrected, thank you for pointing this out. I guess I was thinking about 5e where liches get constant True sight and trying to fool them with illusions is pointless. That would have made the confrontation even more in the Draketooths' favor. That's probably why they had to die to Familicide

Still, the Draketooths were absolutely not only able but probably extremely willing to use scry-and-die on and quite literally destroy the Order; there's a decent chance that Dorukan or Lirian would at least have been willing to hear the Order out. Even Serini isn't resorting to murder as a first choice.

I don't think they would have straight up murdered the Order on the spot. Even if they would've killed any Soon's paladins it would've been clear the wasn't from Azure city: none of them has blue hair or uniforms, and three of them aren't even humans. They would also know three gates had already fallen.

I think the first thing the Draketooths would want to do in that scenario is find out how these random adventurers know about the gates and what were their roles in the destruction of the previous three, and they'd need them alive for that. I don't say they would've been friendly, they definitely would've captured the Order for interrogation, violently if they resisted, but using lethal force from the get-go wouldn't serve their interests

[Metastachydium]

I am talking about what they might have thought, had they taken the time to do so. We know they were firing at a beholder and a high level rogue, but they didn't.

They knew Serini was in the vicinity but would have expected she'd have no rational reason to attack them. They knew Xykon's party was nearby, but saw him go the other way. I suppose they might have guessed that the attackers were the bugbears from the valley (backed by a shaman with darkness) - and depending on level they might have been able to have been one shotted by the Order.

But, I don't think they thought about it all, I think they instinctively reacted to an attack by firing back.

That's not exactly correct. At the point they began actually attacking Team Serini, they had already known they were standing in the AMF projected by a Monster with All the Magic Eyeballs.

[Liquor Box]

That's not exactly correct. At the point they began actually attacking Team Serini, they had already known they were standing in the AMF projected by a Monster with All the Magic Eyeballs.

Yes, I see you are right.

In that case, I still think they were prepared to use deadly force in the encounter. But i have nothing more to back that up than the fact that they have used deadly force in most of their other encounters, and we saw nothing to indicate they weren't.

[Peelee]

I am talking about what they might have thought, had they taken the time to do so.

Ah. Then have you considered that gven the context that they are in Kraagor's Tomb, a dungeon built by Serini to house some of the nastiest monsters in the world, it is possible that they thought that they were facing a low level monster, but probably quite unlikely?

Like... If they didn't think abiut it, what I said makes sense. If they did think about it, what I said makes sense. I don't write understand what point you're trying to make here.

[KorvinStarmast]

I don't really think that lawful characters require others to obey them.

Correct. Their mechanical alignment problem (depending on which edition is being played) derives from inter player mismatch: why is this party even together in the first place? When one has a common goal, there can be rational alliances between party members with disparate alignments and motives. When people pick an alignment for a personal choice, and hang onto it for dear life, and fail to understand how to build a team, that clash takes a lot of forms.
And then there's the "won't associate with X alignment' restriction in some editions that once again renders some parties moot.
Roy(Rich) has done a nice job of (over time) illustrating how a party of disparately aligned characters can form a common goal and a team, even if their 'fit' isn't perfect. (Like Durkon and Minrah wandering off to talk to Redcloak).

[brian 333]

I agree there is nothing inherently disruptive about Lawful alignments, though Haley had a bit to say on that subject. My post was meant to show that alignments other than Chaotic can lead to disruptive gameplay.

Indeed, a broad array of character traits can have both positive and negative impacts on party unity. I once ran a campaign in which all of the characters were Chaotic. This intrepid band of individualists stuck together for a long time because each benefited more together than they would have separately.

The same players also played a disciplined army special forces unit composed of Lawful characters under a chain of command. It wasn't alignment that determined their success, it was players creating and playing characters that wanted to get along. This was not always the case, though. Occasionally a character came along and the character's behavior infuriated other characters. Usually it was funny or playful on the player's part, but sometimes the player rather than the character was the issue.

In the case of Soon vs. Girard, my read based on Serini's diary is that Soon was the odd man out. The other Scribblers joined in teasing him. This is reinforced by the breakup scene.

I am prepared to be proven wrong, but so far the evidence seems to support my theory without resorting to speculation.

[Metastachydium]

In the case of Soon vs. Girard, my read based on Serini's diary is that Soon was the odd man out.

?
All we learn about Soon from the diary is that his name was Soon and he did already sport that scowl as his default facial expression back then.

The other Scribblers joined in teasing him.

That's not exactly how I'd describe that one panel from the Crayons strips, if that's what you mean. Serini teases him playfully, Kraagor apparently fails his Sense Motive and reacts as if Serini were serious, Girard flings an insult at Soon (but that's Girard, and we know he never ever liked or trusted Soon), and finally an annoyed looking Dorukan proclaims that he prefers paladin-style stoic silence over Serini's unending chatter. Meanwhile, Lirian says nothing.
That's hardly a united front against Soon.

This is reinforced by the breakup scene.

I've recently gave my detailed reading on that scene, so I'll only repeat a few points made: Lirian did not interfere; Girard never liked Soon, so his attitude is not indicative of much; Serini probably saved Soon's life (because action economy and caster/martial disparity); and Dorukan eventually got over it, since based on his defenses it is safe to conclude that he continued to implicitly trust Soon.

I am prepared to be proven wrong, but so far the evidence seems to support my theory without resorting to speculation.

Like I said, I've addressed your theory in detail, so suffice it to say, much of it is resorting to speculation (the argument from alignment; the notion that it has always been Soon vs the rest of the Order; the notion that, at the very least, it was Soon vs the rest of the Order after Kraagor's death; the idea that Girard liked and trusted everyone other than Soon equally and there were no rifts in the Order-minus-Soon etc.). I've also presented evidence against your theory.
Mind you, I'm not saying Soon was blameless. He was likely responsible to some extent for Kraagor's death (although not necessarily in a direct way), but it seems pretty clear that Girard was both biased and antagonistic towards him from the get-go and overreacting to "the breaking point". In fact, based on what we've seen of both him and the others thus far, "Girard was right and it's all Soon's fault" would be the explanation for what happened that I'd find by far the most surprising.

[Peelee]

?
All we learn about Soon from the diary is that his name was Soon and he did already sport that scowl as his default facial expression back then.



That's not exactly how I'd describe that one panel from the Crayons strips, if that's what you mean. Serini teases him playfully, Kraagor apparently fails his Sense Motive and reacts as if Serini were serious, Girard flings an insult at Soon (but that's Girard, and we know he never ever liked or trusted Soon), and finally an annoyed looking Dorukan proclaims that he prefers paladin-style stoic silence over Serini's unending chatter. Meanwhile, Lirian says nothing.
That's hardly a united front against Soon.



I've recently gave my detailed reading on that scene, so I'll only repeat a few points made: Lirian did not interfere; Girard never liked Soon, so his attitude is not indicative of much; Serini probably saved Soon's life (because action economy and caster/martial disparity); and Dorukan eventually got over it, since based on his defenses it is safe to conclude that he continued to implicitly trust Soon.



Like I said, I've addressed your theory in detail, so suffice it to say, much of it is resorting to speculation (the argument from alignment; the notion that it has always been Soon vs the rest of the Order; the notion that, at the very least, it was Soon vs the rest of the Order after Kraagor's death; the idea that Girard liked and trusted everyone other than Soon equally and there were no rifts in the Order-minus-Soon etc.). I've also presented evidence against your theory.
Mind you, I'm not saying Soon was blameless. He was likely responsible to some extent for Kraagor's death (although not necessarily in a direct way), but it seems pretty clear that Girard was both biased and antagonistic towards him from the get-go and overreacting to "the breaking point". In fact, based on what we've seen of both him and the others thus far, "Girard was right and it's all Soon's fault" would be the explanation for what happened that I'd find by far the most surprising.

I couldn't have put it better myself.

[pyrefiend]

Ah. Then have you considered that gven the context that they are in Kraagor's Tomb, a dungeon built by Serini to house some of the nastiest monsters in the world, it is possible that they thought that they were facing a low level monster, but probably quite unlikely?

Like... If they didn't think abiut it, what I said makes sense. If they did think about it, what I said makes sense. I don't write understand what point you're trying to make here.

"Built to house some of the nastiest monsters in the world" is consistent with "also houses hordes of weaker monsters." If I were Roy, then I wouldn't assume that literally every monster in the dungeon is super tough. (I mean, what do those super tough monsters eat?)

[Liquor Box]

Ah. Then have you considered that gven the context that they are in Kraagor's Tomb, a dungeon built by Serini to house some of the nastiest monsters in the world, it is possible that they thought that they were facing a low level monster, but probably quite unlikely?

Like... If they didn't think abiut it, what I said makes sense. If they did think about it, what I said makes sense. I don't write understand what point you're trying to make here.

OK, well my conclusion is that the Order was prepared to use lethal force in the fight against Serini (at least until they understood who she was and wanted to capture her instead), and were prepared to kill.

To support that conclusion I made the point that they did use lethal attacks early in the fight without knowing who they were facing. It was possible at that point that it might have been weak monsters like Franklin (of course they didn't know who franklin was, he was just an example of the type of weaker monster who might have been present). I suppose if they had thought about the odds of it being weak or powerful monsters, they might have concluded that powerful monsters were more probable, but weak monsters remained possible, so I don't think makes much difference.

Metastachydium then pointed out that Durkon could see it was a beholder, so they knew exactly who they were attacking (making any speculation about the probable power of the monsters redundant). This undermined my point that their initial salvo might have killed (because beholders are unlikely to die to a single attack), although they still were using lethal attacks.

But I still think that the Order were prepared to kill, based on the fact that they have used deadly force in the vast majority of their encounters.

Does that make sense now? If not, which part?

My post was meant to show that alignments other than Chaotic can lead to disruptive gameplay.

I agree with this. Although i don't think I agree with the rest of your point that Soon was the problem in this case.

[brian 333]

I agree with this. Although i don't think I agree with the rest of your point that Soon was the problem in this case.

Your interpretation is valid, but I think mine is better supported by what is seen in comic. Be that as it may, I was reacting to what I perceived as a presumption that Girard was the Belkar of the party because he was Chaotic. In both cases that both characters are portrayed together Soon is the target of the most party members and nobody supports him.

This may be a result of Girard being a charismatic jerk, or it may be the result of hearing the story only from Soon's point of view. Certainly my first interpretation isn't the only one possible. My experience says both probably share the blame, and they both burned Dorukon who appeared to me to be trying to be the peacemaker. But that's a personality rather than an alignment based speculation.

[hungrycrow]

But I still think that the Order were prepared to kill, based on the fact that they have used deadly force in the vast majority of their encounters.

V used prismatic spray on Sunny. One of the possible effects of prismatic spray is petrification, which as Sunny pointed out would have meant death at that height. Another one is just an instant death poison. So the Order was definitely prepared to kill during the first half of the encounter.