OOTS #1256 - The Discussion Thread

[JonahFalcon]

now it's actually her own position that hinges on trusting Law and Authority to act the way she would.

Unfortunately, she still has the mindset that Xykon is completely and totally unbeatable, when he's been defeated at least twice.

[danielxcutter]

I mean she’s at least going to make a token effort now it seems. She doesn’t have to join combat herself to aid them immensely.

[bunsen_h]

There are other examples, you just have to look.

Searching the net with the terms "baby bestiary" and "beholder" turns up a few.

[JonahFalcon]

Searching the net with the terms "baby bestiary" and "beholder" turns up a few.

Well, judging by your avatar, I assume you agree with me that the way to defeat Xykon is giant prunes.

[arimareiji]

Well, judging by your avatar, I assume you agree with me that the way to defeat Xykon is giant prunes.

And now I'm imagining the universe sitting on the toilet, straining to expel Xykon... until the heroic bunsen_h comes along to save the day. It tracks. (^_~)

[Precure]

If it was, wouldn't someone have told Roy when he was trying to kill his cleric and invalidate Hel's vote?

Difference is, Roy is not following an order from Hel.

[Thermophille]

Difference is, Roy is not following an order from Hel.

It was made eminently clear that intention does not matter in the godsmoot, which is why the other priests weren't able to attack Durkon, even after learning that he had killed members of godsmoot staff.

This was likely included as an intentional loophole by Loki, in case he really needed to circumvent his vote, and he'd likely suggest it to any gods who wanted to switch but didn't think of it on their own.

If you have any basis for your point though, feel free to say, but I can't think of why Roy's independent actions would be fully within the rules, but a bodyguard killing their cleric at the behest of their god would be a violation.

[Precure]

If you have any basis for your point though, feel free to say, but I can't think of why Roy's independent actions would be fully within the rules, but a bodyguard killing their cleric at the behest of their god would be a violation.

Because it would ruin the whole point of "no backsies" rule. Every god who changed their mind would simply order their church's guardian to kill the cleric, automatically disqualify their own vote.

[hungrycrow]

Because it would ruin the whole point of "no backsies" rule. Every god who changed their mind would simply order their church's guardian to kill the cleric, automatically disqualify their own vote.

Or this situation never came up before and they didn't think of bodyguards killing their own clerics when making the rule. If they were aware that was a loophole, they would have just ruled that bodyguards can't kill their own clerics at all, rather than some weird thing where they can as long as their god doesn't order them to. That would be very obviously abusable.

[Thermophille]

Because it would ruin the whole point of "no backsies" rule. Every god who changed their mind would simply order their church's guardian to kill the cleric, automatically disqualify their own vote.

And you think most gods would be willing to kill their high priest on a whim? Besides, it still doesn't allow you to flip your vote, just eliminate it, which is much weaker.

[JonahFalcon]

The entire point of the rules is for all of the gods to tell each other "no". As Thor noted, the Good gods are vastly outnumbered by Evil and Neutral ones.

[Xenocide586]

Lol, I thought she said elven not eleven eyes.

[KorvinStarmast]

Lol, I thought she said elven not eleven eyes.

speaking of eyes...

[Satohika]

Elan x Sunny is my new OTP.

[T.D.O.W.]

Lol, I thought she said elven not eleven eyes.

Glad that I was not the only one!

"... failing to resist elven puppy dog eyes" was indeed a head-scratcher, until I squinted at the text more closely. :)

[Quizatzhaderac]

This was likely included as an intentional loophole by Loki....

I'm of the opinion that the OotS gods are incompetent. Specifically, that just because a thing has happened because of them, that doesn't mean that anybody specifically wanted that.

You'd think after billions of years they would have found and eliminated all the simple loop holes, but no, their parliamentary procedure is actually so basic webcomic readers can find faults in their first read through. This is conjecture on my part, but I suspect that they're not really capable of rationally looking at themselves and their institutions rationally, (or maybe much less rationally that humans).

[Thermophille]

I'm of the opinion that the OotS gods are incompetent. Specifically, that just because a thing has happened because of them, that doesn't mean that anybody specifically wanted that.

You'd think after billions of years they would have found and eliminated all the simple loop holes, but no, their parliamentary procedure is actually so basic webcomic readers can find faults in their first read through. This is conjecture on my part, but I suspect that they're not really capable of rationally looking at themselves and their institutions rationally, (or maybe much less rationally that humans).

I was actually thinking something similar, which is supported by text. The way gods think is dictated by their worshippers, and this is restrictive enough that gods are sometimes physically unable to perform certain actions, even if they want to (Loki's rant to Thor). It is perhaps the case that doing things like finding loopholes in policies is just something most gods are actually unable to do, leaving Loki to essentially dominate as the only one able to think up his various schemes.

Of course, this is largely conjecture (which is why I didn't mention it), but it was mentioned rather early on that the gods are more vulnerable to the Snarl than mortals, which leaves the door open for the narrative to show that gods are less capable than mortals in many areas, which is a concept I really like.

[hungrycrow]

I'm of the opinion that the OotS gods are incompetent. Specifically, that just because a thing has happened because of them, that doesn't mean that anybody specifically wanted that.

You'd think after billions of years they would have found and eliminated all the simple loop holes, but no, their parliamentary procedure is actually so basic webcomic readers can find faults in their first read through. This is conjecture on my part, but I suspect that they're not really capable of rationally looking at themselves and their institutions rationally, (or maybe much less rationally that humans).

I think it's more that OotS gods are exactly as competent and rational as humans. If you pointed those same readers at real world rule systems, they'd point out flaws just as quickly, but they'd never agree on what a "rational" system would look like. OotS gods have radically different competing worldviews, so the only system they can agree on is a flawed one that all of them think is dumb.

Also, this loophole is obvious because we happen to be in an iteration where that loophole comes up. None of the other bodyguards considered attacking their own cleric even after Roy pointed out the loophole. Roy only thought of it because Durkula betrayed him by making his vote, so Roy wanted to kill Durkula anyways. So this situation only happened because Hel's cleric could only get to the Godsmoot by tricking a friend into taking him, which in turn only came up because of the bet Hel made. That's a special circumstance a rational person wouldn't think of when brainstorming rules.

[tanonx]

You'd think after billions of years they would have found and eliminated all the simple loop holes, but no, their parliamentary procedure is actually so basic webcomic readers can find faults in their first read through. This is conjecture on my part, but I suspect that they're not really capable of rationally looking at themselves and their institutions rationally, (or maybe much less rationally that humans).

It's possible, but I'd like to suggest a simpler answer: The gods don't play by Air Bud rules.

Just because "there ain't no rule" doesn't mean you'll get away with an obvious workaround. And it will be obvious. Durkon's knowledge and ability to handle the end of the world is currently being limited by his lack of prepared spells, so I think it's safe to say the gods don't generally do outbound calls. Your prospective cleric will need to cast something to get your instruction, then carry it out. There are a lot of ways this can go wrong, and you have everyone's eyes on you, from gods to curious Outsiders to your fellow high priests.

So, let's say you convince your high priest to bite it for the greater Good/Evil/Neutral. You tell your fellow gods, "well, the priest isn't there, so there's no vote. I didn't technically take back the vote." And, for the sake of argument, let's say the response isn't "technically doesn't cut it" or "you already cast your vote" or even "nobody cares, this whole rules thing won't mean jack if we get Snarl'd." You're feeling pretty good.

Then you remember your high priest is in a room full of the highest level divine casters in the area, and they take a dim view of their gods' will being subverted. The "internal church dispute" argument no longer applies, and casting helpful spells on your fellow high priests has already been threatened. Good luck trying to outdamage a fistful of the world's biggest healing machines.

So, let's say you think of that, and don't clue in your high priest, and make sure your bodyguard designate is ready and willing to off them, if needed. Let's say you build your entire priestly hierarchy around cheesing a Godsmoot tiebreaker... and that the other bodyguards in the area aren't willing to sacrifice themselves in turn, in order to take yours out and save the world. Hey, it's a story-driven world out there, you know the odds are good.

Well, you have 6-12 seconds to complete the procedure for closing up the vote before someone drops a Miracle on the corpse and brings it back, willing or not. And we've already had the final voting count interrupted for a while by a scruffy-looking dwarf's ominous line, so a bloody and violent fight to the death will probably give you enough pause for that.

These are the highest-level divine casters in the area, after all. Sure, there are plausible lower-level alternatives, like trapping the soul or doing some crazy undead shenanigans, but why settle? Could that be construed as hostile? Maybe. But your whole argument hinges on that corpse not being your high priest anymore, so it's fair game.

I could go back and forth for a bit (and it is fun), but let's just say that, somehow, despite all odds, you pull it off. Well, now you get to deal with the diplomatic fallout for the rest of eternity. And you're stuck being the one whose escape from punishment relies on heretofore-unseen malicious rules lawyering being fair play.

I think I'd look at my other options, myself.

[Thermophille]

I mean practically speaking, it doesn't apply much outside of "Crap, everything is going downhill, and if we don't change our votes right now everything is going to explode"

Since voting usually happens over the course of, oh, about a minute, I can't imagine that scenario pops up terrible often. Outside of the situation where you A: Have a deadlock; B: The tiebreaker refuses to vote because of an oath, and C: Circumstances radically change that require changing votes by any means necessary....

This just might be the first time this has ever happened, because normally, most gods wouldn't kill their high priest over 'Wait, Loki voted the same way I did. Maybe I should reconsider", which is exactly the sort of thing Loki was trying to prevent when he instated the no backsies rule.

[Peelee]

This just might be the first time this has ever happened, because normally, most gods wouldn't kill their high priest over 'Wait, Loki voted the same way I did. Maybe I should reconsider", which is exactly the sort of thing Loki was trying to prevent when he instated the no backsies rule.

We don't know instituted the "no backsies" rule, or for what reason.

[JonahFalcon]

All of the bodyguards and priests are 100% loyal to their gods.

Roy is NOT loyal to Hel.

[Thermophille]

We don't know instituted the "no backsies" rule, or for what reason.

Loki's exact line is "Ugh, I should have never pushed for that 'no backsies' rule", which indicates that Loki considers himself responsible for the institution of that rule. Why might a god of mischief and schemes institute such a rule? Because I can't think of one that makes more sense than 'keeping people from backing out when they realize they got caught up in a scheme'.

[arimareiji]

It's possible, but I'd like to suggest a simpler answer: The gods don't play by Air Bud rules.

Spoiler: collapsed for space

Show

Just because "there ain't no rule" doesn't mean you'll get away with an obvious workaround. And it will be obvious. Durkon's knowledge and ability to handle the end of the world is currently being limited by his lack of prepared spells, so I think it's safe to say the gods don't generally do outbound calls. Your prospective cleric will need to cast something to get your instruction, then carry it out. There are a lot of ways this can go wrong, and you have everyone's eyes on you, from gods to curious Outsiders to your fellow high priests.

So, let's say you convince your high priest to bite it for the greater Good/Evil/Neutral. You tell your fellow gods, "well, the priest isn't there, so there's no vote. I didn't technically take back the vote." And, for the sake of argument, let's say the response isn't "technically doesn't cut it" or "you already cast your vote" or even "nobody cares, this whole rules thing won't mean jack if we get Snarl'd." You're feeling pretty good.

Then you remember your high priest is in a room full of the highest level divine casters in the area, and they take a dim view of their gods' will being subverted. The "internal church dispute" argument no longer applies, and casting helpful spells on your fellow high priests has already been threatened. Good luck trying to outdamage a fistful of the world's biggest healing machines.

So, let's say you think of that, and don't clue in your high priest, and make sure your bodyguard designate is ready and willing to off them, if needed. Let's say you build your entire priestly hierarchy around cheesing a Godsmoot tiebreaker... and that the other bodyguards in the area aren't willing to sacrifice themselves in turn, in order to take yours out and save the world. Hey, it's a story-driven world out there, you know the odds are good.

Well, you have 6-12 seconds to complete the procedure for closing up the vote before someone drops a Miracle on the corpse and brings it back, willing or not. And we've already had the final voting count interrupted for a while by a scruffy-looking dwarf's ominous line, so a bloody and violent fight to the death will probably give you enough pause for that.

These are the highest-level divine casters in the area, after all. Sure, there are plausible lower-level alternatives, like trapping the soul or doing some crazy undead shenanigans, but why settle? Could that be construed as hostile? Maybe. But your whole argument hinges on that corpse not being your high priest anymore, so it's fair game.

I could go back and forth for a bit (and it is fun), but let's just say that, somehow, despite all odds, you pull it off. Well, now you get to deal with the diplomatic fallout for the rest of eternity. And you're stuck being the one whose escape from punishment relies on heretofore-unseen malicious rules lawyering being fair play.

I think I'd look at my other options, myself.

I'm 100% with you on "When you start playing fast and loose with the spirit of the rules, don't be surprised when others do the same and find a way to subvert your clever ploy... let alone whether "Just tell your high priest to kill themselves" is particularly believable. (For me, it calls to mind the mind games Lee was playing with Vaarsuvius.)

And I'm pretty sure that 1) they'd just find another way, and 2) we're already debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, so I'm being silly to take it further.

But technically, if our cheating deity convinced their high priest... then when the high priest gets the notification that a rival priest is trying to resurrect them, they'll just send it to voicemail and resume their dinner at All Steaks Go To Heaven. And even if a Miracle is used, it's hard for me to imagine the DM not rolling with "You're duplicating a spell effect, so you're bound by the same rules that govern Resurrection."

[Larsaan]

Loki's exact line is "Ugh, I should have never pushed for that 'no backsies' rule", which indicates that Loki considers himself responsible for the institution of that rule. Why might a god of mischief and schemes institute such a rule? Because I can't think of one that makes more sense than 'keeping people from backing out when they realize they got caught up in a scheme'.

Or he's just easily bored by bureaucracy (as many Chaotic characters are), and was fed up with other gods flip-flopping and extending the debates.

[mjasghar]

The high priests aren’t necessarily the highest level priests the deity has - they merely have to be high enough in level to cast the spell to manifest the avatars.
High priest is more about political rank
It’s almost certain there are adventurer priests that are higher level.

[Jacky720]

I think it would come down more to the climate of all the other clerics and how many are focused on the spirit of the rules vs. the vote nullification being good for them. The argument in #1002 isn't over the rules, but over everyone else's loyalty to their gods. Either nobody interfering or everybody interfering would be within the rules. Clerics in favor of the nullification could counterspell the healing/resurrection, no?

[Quizatzhaderac]

It's possible, but I'd like to suggest a simpler answer: The gods don't play by Air Bud rules.

The main problem with that is that the gods have been playing by air-bud rules. "Don't kill the ushers" strikes me as a much more obvious unwritten rule than "Dogs can't play basketball".

However, I think you are right in that after this Hell will have earned the scorn of multiple gods, and such tricks would have been extremely unwise without such a huge potential payoff.

Or he's just easily bored by bureaucracy (as many Chaotic characters are), and was fed up with other gods flip-flopping and extending the debates.

I can't really see this taking up much time. In real live I'd say changing votes midcount is only something that would happen with maybe with one voter on every few hundred issues.

With the Oots pantheon I can see an average of two or three changing their vote once because of another god's stated reason, another god didn't vote as promised, or an unsavory ally, but we're still looking at less than a minute of haranguing.

2) we're already debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, so I'm being silly to take it further.

Zero: 3.5e angels don't have the skill Perform (dance).

[Fyraltari]

Zero: 3.5e angels don't have the skill Perform (dance).

Unless the dance in question is a gavotte, in which case there's exactly one angel who has the necessary skill.

[KorvinStarmast]

All of the bodyguards and priests are 100% loyal to their gods.

Roy is NOT loyal to Hel.

A much better observation if you remove the 100% from the first sentence.

Or he's just easily bored by bureaucracy (as many Chaotic characters are), and was fed up with other gods flip-flopping and extending the debates.

I like the other explanation of why a Trickster god would advocate for no backsies rule: he sets people up to be pranked/gotcha'd due to who he is and what he is.

The high priests aren’t necessarily the highest level priests the deity has - they merely have to be high enough in level to cast the spell to manifest the avatars.

A case in point being Hilgya.