Results 241 to 270 of 316
-
2022-09-17, 07:21 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
I think that's the misunderstanding. Contract law is *never* an ironclad agreement that somebody will do something. You only get that guarantee with crypto.
Instead contact law is about constructing a series of escalating consequences for breaching the written word of the agreement, both agreed upon in the contract, implicitly enforced by the history of contract law, and also just based on whatever ad hoc adjustments the two parties agree to in the moment.
-
2022-09-17, 01:55 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2018
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
This is a fantasy world with beings of pure law
Real world law allows negotiations and renegotiation and paying money into the judge’s election fund
That’s not what we have here'Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalië ar Atanatári, utúlie'n aurë! “The day has come! Behold, people of the Eldar and Fathers of Men, the day has come!" And all those who heard his great voice echo in the hills answered, crying:'Auta i lómë!" The night is passing!"
-
2022-09-17, 02:25 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
Except that, if you read into serious legal philosophy, you quickly find out that "The letter of the law" can never be 100% explicit regarding all possibilities, and always relies on existing convention and dumb human languages which themselves are vague and allow room for interpretation.
And this isn't just a practical problem. It's a fundamental one, along the same lines as the "is-ought divide". There is no completely non-ambiguous law or language in which it could be expressed that can be observed as an objective fact of reality on which human laws and contracts can be built on top of.
Case in point: Why is signing your name at the bottom of a piece of paper considered an iron-clad symbol of agreement to it? That's a highly arbitrary notion when you think about it. It's just a convention that is so old and so commonly accepted that nobody challenges it- a "being of pure law and order" wouldn't be able to justify it any more than you or I could.
-
2022-09-17, 03:13 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
What is being described is not pure law, but pure order. The modron contracted for a trivially miniscule increase in the order of the universe. By negating the contract at the earliest opportunity, the miniscule increase in order cannot achieve its maximum potential.
The modron has every incentive to overlook errors that Xykon immediately tries to correct, and zero incentive to declare breach of contract until it's aims are obviously no longer achievable.
Example: I contract for the purchase of 1000 liters of salad oil per week. The party with whom I have contracted discovers he can only make 1000 quarts available per week, and is willing to adjust the price to compensate, but cannot secure additional quarts to make up the shortage.
I could terminate the contract, but in arbitration the judge will ask why the offer is not sufficient. The arbitrator will want to know the degree of harm I incur. Assuming 1000 quarts is all that is available on the market, I may incur even greater loss by terminating the contract. It is in my best interest to renegotiate, and contract law has procedures in place which allow just that.
So, the question is not how quickly the contract can be terminated, but how many failures the modron can tolerate before the terms of the bargain are no longer achieving its intended result, in however meagre a portion.Last edited by brian 333; 2022-09-17 at 03:27 PM.
-
2022-09-17, 06:38 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2018
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
There’s no point continuing a discussion when there’s no addressing of the points raised.
'Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalië ar Atanatári, utúlie'n aurë! “The day has come! Behold, people of the Eldar and Fathers of Men, the day has come!" And all those who heard his great voice echo in the hills answered, crying:'Auta i lómë!" The night is passing!"
-
2022-09-17, 06:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
-
2022-09-17, 06:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2015
- Gender
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
I do think this is a pretty solid observation, and it would make sense if the Quinton simply didn't blink out if Xykon failed once, but somehow waited or compelled him to continue trying. (Indeed, I've been having a hard time determining if Xykon is actually working on following the contract himself, or if it somehow compels him to finish every sentence with an odd-lettered word.)
-
2022-09-18, 04:49 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2018
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
My point is this is not a real world court which is influenced by the culture of the country you live in - your example isn’t how it would work in the uk. Real world law is a combination of a surface attempt to seem LG or even NG combined with a lot of LN or even CE. And that’s even in seemingly modern developed nations. Your arguments are based on your own culture and the principles of law applied there.
This is the Oots world which is a parody of d&d and to an extent other franchises. This is a world where a spell requires a diamond and that diamond is obtained by going to an earlier page. A world where peoples weapons physically change as the edition changes.
Wrongeye agreed to a magical contract with a being dedicated to pure law and order - a being allegedly a fraction of the prime architect who serves the Visage of the prime architect (according to dragon 414)
As an example of how the system works - remember the celestial that was about to discover something wondrous and then gets summoned? If you could twist the contract of the summons he could easily have twisted it to make sure he answered the call a bit later.
If you address my points then we can continue discussing. If you do what you’ve done previously and continue with the line that this is what real life American lawyers do then there’s no point and I’ll ignore you from now on.Last edited by mjasghar; 2022-09-18 at 04:50 AM.
-
2022-09-18, 07:55 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2015
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
Given that the author is American, your objection is overdone.
You write what you know.
The assumptions that brian is working off of are valid given who is writing the strip. That does not make your point invalid in the larger sense - OotS world works as it works by the whims of the author, and the strip is based in a game as well as the clunky alignment system of that game - but it certainly puts your 'tossing the toys out of the pram' ultimatum in a poor light.Last edited by KorvinStarmast; 2022-09-18 at 07:57 AM.
Avatar by linklele. How Teleport Worksa. Malifice (paraphrased):
Rulings are not 'House Rules.' Rulings are a DM doing what DMs are supposed to do.
b. greenstone (paraphrased):
Agency means that they {players} control their character's actions; you control the world's reactions to the character's actions.
Second known member of the Greyview Appreciation Society
-
2022-09-18, 08:33 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2018
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
One of the points raised was the case would go to arbitration so it’s better to not go there and just ignore violations
So tell me how the modron is going to go to arbitration?
And again you’re just ignoring my point and saying the comic should run like modern American law. Since we don’t see the lawyer characters turning up to advise Redcloak not to sign etc I don’t see any sign of these being taken before a judge let alone one who can be openly bribed via donations'Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalië ar Atanatári, utúlie'n aurë! “The day has come! Behold, people of the Eldar and Fathers of Men, the day has come!" And all those who heard his great voice echo in the hills answered, crying:'Auta i lómë!" The night is passing!"
-
2022-09-18, 08:47 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
That's just it: I'm not twisting anything.
Example, Xykon clearly completes a sentence, then adds a parenthetical statement, claiming he is still speaking the same sentence. At that point the letter of the contract has been breached.
The modron does not cancel it's service agreement, but allows Xykon to flounder his way through. Why?
Because In his clumsy way Xykon is attempting to honor the contract. The modron accepts the spirit of the agreement above the letter of the agreement in this very specific incident. Why?
Holding a contractee to the letter of the contract is not automatically Lawful. A contract is an attempt to reach a meeting of the minds, and it is that meeting of the minds that is most important.
So long as Xykon tries, and so long as those attempts benefit the modron, it will not cancel its agreement. When the agreement is no longer beneficial, the modron may indeed use a technical violation as an excuse to terminate the contract. That won't be because it is Lawful and is therefore compelled to abide by the letter of the contract. (That's already been violated.) It will be because it is no longer benefitting from the contract.
I hope that is a better explanation of my point.
I don't know that arbitration is a thing in the spell used, but it would be funny to see another quinton show up to settle the dispute. My opinion is that the role of arbitrator (usually held by the DM) would fall to the author, and be abstracted as the universal laws of magic or something.
Redcloak could dismiss the spell at will. Absent a DM, I'm uncertain how the quinton can terminate its service for any perceived technical violation. Perhaps, after accepting service, the summoned being's service is voluntary?
But then, what if the Gated being's alignment is Chaotic and they don't feel like helping? What compels them to even pay lip service to honoring any agreement?
I stipulate that I've answered that already. It will honor the agreement only so long as it is beneficial to do so. A salad wouldn't even need a technical violation at that point.
So, again, it comes down to a meeting of minds. Are you getting what you contracted to get? Is your contract partner actively attempting to fulfill it's agreement? Is that effort producing the benefits in a sufficient quantity to justify continuing to abide by it?
The exact word only comes into play when one party is seeking a way to break or exploit the contract. Otherwise, intent rules.Last edited by brian 333; 2022-09-18 at 09:07 AM.
-
2022-09-18, 08:55 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2018
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
Holding a contractee to the letter of the contract is exactly lawful though - especially from a being that is a facet of pure Law with no Good or Evil.
In fact your argument defeats your point as accepting trying is LG as said by the devaLast edited by mjasghar; 2022-09-18 at 08:56 AM.
-
2022-09-18, 08:58 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2017
- Location
- France
- Gender
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
It's almost as if "Lawful" is an incredibly vague concept that different people could interpret in wildly different ways.
Forum Wisdom
Mage avatar by smutmulch & linklele.
-
2022-09-18, 09:13 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
Your argument is not invalid. However, by the letter of the agreement, the agreement has already been breached, yet the modron remains.
In almost all cases of 'letter of the contract' disputes, one party is seeking to exploit the contract. (Not always the one who makes the claim.) Faustian bargains and the genie wishing game come to mind. Letter of the contract enforcement appears to have an Evil component, unless the other party is the one exploiting it and the injured party is seeking remediation.
A being of pure law would have no interest in exploiting the agreement. In this specific case, with the only available remediation being termination of the agreement, it would benefit less through termination based on a minor technicality.
The very instant it realizes the contract is no longer beneficial I fully expect it to terminate services. (At that point there will probably be a gross violation of terms anyway.)
Oh, I'm sure that a few decades of internet debates on the subject will result in a consensus opinion shared by all.Last edited by brian 333; 2022-09-18 at 09:31 AM.
-
2022-09-18, 09:17 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2018
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
'Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalië ar Atanatári, utúlie'n aurë! “The day has come! Behold, people of the Eldar and Fathers of Men, the day has come!" And all those who heard his great voice echo in the hills answered, crying:'Auta i lómë!" The night is passing!"
-
2022-09-18, 09:18 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2017
- Location
- France
- Gender
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
At no point does the letter of contract specifies when a sentence ends. Or specifies what "a sentence" even is. Does "Aaaah!" count?
That's the issue with the idea that anyone could just objectively follow the letter of anything. All language require some interpretation to mean anything.Forum Wisdom
Mage avatar by smutmulch & linklele.
-
2022-09-18, 09:37 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
-
2022-09-18, 09:45 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2017
- Location
- France
- Gender
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
Sure, it is rare enough for the two of us to agree.
I feel like the Modron explaining his reason for his demand (making Xykon abide by a restriction on his speech forces him to consider his word which makes him oh-so-slightly less Chaotic, which is a win in the Modron's book) means it is part of their verbal agreement. The Quinton doesn't actually care how the sentences Xykon utters end (as shown by his immediate agreement to the exact opposite constraint), only that Xykon is reining himself in, this is just a convenient way for it to happen. Therefore Xykon stumbling and correcting himself is just as good to the Modron as Xykon doing it effortlessly. Hell, if Xykon did it effortlessly, it might even have meant that this wasn't a good restriction to use in the first place.Forum Wisdom
Mage avatar by smutmulch & linklele.
-
2022-09-18, 10:27 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
-
2022-09-18, 11:49 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
-
2022-09-18, 01:50 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Location
- Birmingham, AL
- Gender
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
Agreed. The quinton doesn't actually care about ending sentences with X number of letters. He cares about trying to introduce more order into the world. The agreement is simply his way or doing that. So long as Xykon keeps to the agreement, even with backpedals when he realizes he needs to amend his speech, that is still introducing more order, so the quinton's objective is being achieved.
Just like Good isn't Stupid, Lawful isn't Pedantic. Exemplifying it as such is oversimplifying to the point of missing the mark.Cuthalion's art is the prettiest art of all the art. Like my avatar.
Number of times Roland St. Jude has sworn revenge upon me: 2
-
2022-09-18, 05:00 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2015
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
Avatar by linklele. How Teleport Worksa. Malifice (paraphrased):
Rulings are not 'House Rules.' Rulings are a DM doing what DMs are supposed to do.
b. greenstone (paraphrased):
Agency means that they {players} control their character's actions; you control the world's reactions to the character's actions.
Second known member of the Greyview Appreciation Society
-
2022-09-18, 09:00 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2021
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
Exactly what I was saying! The quinton wants more order [period]. The quinton still being there, despite Xykon's missteps, proves that these mistakes don't matter as much to it as the net positive order. If it didn't think Xykon would give it an eventual net positive amount of order the contract would've ended in breach with the first misstep.
I would even argue that Xykon waffling is producing even more order with each misstep as he struggles to accommodate.
-
2022-09-18, 09:10 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2016
- Location
- Seoul
- Gender
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
Also, remember what the deva said to Roy - trying is important.
Cool elan Illithid Slayer by linkele.
Editor/co-writer of Magicae Est Potestas, a crossover between Artemis Fowl and Undertale. Ao3 FanFiction.net DeviantArt
We also have a TvTropes page!
Currently playing: Red Hand of Doom(campaign journal)Campaign still going on, but journal discontinued until further notice.
Extended sig here.
-
2022-09-18, 10:44 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
On the other hand, I think that if it were to learn that the success of Redcloak's project would potentially result in the Snarl being released, it would seize on any good justification to end its assistance.
-
2022-09-18, 10:49 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2016
- Location
- Seoul
- Gender
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
Oh absolutely. That's probably why Redcloak didn't tell it.
Cool elan Illithid Slayer by linkele.
Editor/co-writer of Magicae Est Potestas, a crossover between Artemis Fowl and Undertale. Ao3 FanFiction.net DeviantArt
We also have a TvTropes page!
Currently playing: Red Hand of Doom(campaign journal)Campaign still going on, but journal discontinued until further notice.
Extended sig here.
-
2022-09-19, 02:59 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2022
- Location
- Bracciano (Italy)
- Gender
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
A Quinton has a +32 Listen check and a +28 Sense Motive check. His Intelligence is over the roof.
He is not more that a meter from MitD when it plots to hinder Xykon's efforts.
If Quinton was somehow interested in results, he would tell MitD to not act, or inform Redcloak, or even declare MitD an "hostile" and block it himself.
As it didn't even comment on MitD's resolution, I'd suppose that Quinton is fine either with Xykon to fail, or for him to have an hard time.
I personally think that he is trying to teach him a lesson, so erring is fine as long as he gives an honest effort.Last edited by Laurentio III; 2022-09-19 at 02:59 AM. Reason: Typo
-
2022-09-19, 10:15 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
- Location
- Bristol, UK
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
That's not really that probable, in my view. If the snarl gets out, the gods build another world around it, they've done that millions or billions of times already. The Snarl killing all of the gods and escaping into the wider material plane (does a wider material plane even exist?) in this particular instance of this universe is highly improbable. So, in my opinion, if the Quinton learned that, it probably shouldn't be very worried about it, it's strongly Lawful, but not Good.
Last edited by halfeye; 2022-09-19 at 10:18 AM.
The end of what Son? The story? There is no end. There's just the point where the storytellers stop talking.
-
2022-09-19, 10:25 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2016
- Location
- Seoul
- Gender
Re: OOTS #1267 - The Discussion Thread
Neutral does not always equal apathetic.
Cool elan Illithid Slayer by linkele.
Editor/co-writer of Magicae Est Potestas, a crossover between Artemis Fowl and Undertale. Ao3 FanFiction.net DeviantArt
We also have a TvTropes page!
Currently playing: Red Hand of Doom(campaign journal)Campaign still going on, but journal discontinued until further notice.
Extended sig here.
-
2022-09-19, 10:37 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
- Location
- Bristol, UK