A question regarding Tarquin and the Empire of Blood

[Ionathus]

Those are more than valid points, especially concerning real-life examples of the phenomenon you decry. I just don't see how any sequel, prequel or side story with Tarquin as one of the main characters would or could work, especially considering the author's stated opinion on this character of his and his refusal to give Belkar an actual backstory.

There's a but, however. What's the difference between Tarquin and, say, Xykon? The Bony Bastard is a lot more powerful, even pettier, all things considered, and he absolutely revels in needless and pointless destruction, a "regimen" he would keep on the table forever. He murdered and zombified his whole family for the crime of trying to help him and it never got better from there. And yet, he got half, or, let's say a third of a prequel all to himself. And it worked.

I'd argue there are two main differences between Tarquin and Xykon that make a prequel book for one make more sense than the other:

1. Tarquin is already defeated. Much like a serial killer in jail, he has already done his damage. He isn't a direct threat to the heroes anymore; in fact, his actual downfall is considered a foregone conclusion by (I assume) most of the audience. So whereas Xykon continues to be an active threat (the active threat, depending who you ask), Tarquin isn't considered relevant anymore. Therefore, bringing him back into the spotlight with a prequel story, especially one that humanizes him any further, wouldn't serve the drama of "will they defeat him??" - it would just give him more opportunities to be cool or sympathetic or clever. This feeds into the other difference...

2. It's literally what Tarquin wants. There's a specific kind of sensationalized true crime storytelling that takes this exact prequel angle. The real-world serial killer has already committed their famous murders, and the entire story is about how they got there. How they became the person who could commit such horrors. In the worst cases, it turns being a murderer into near-celebrity status. There's a play called "Down the Road" by Lee Blessing that explores this exact dynamic. I highly recommend it to any true crime fans.

Writing a villain prequel book (or a serial killer's biography), it's nearly impossible to not glorify the subject one way or another, either demonizing or humanizing them; interestingly, Start of Darkness did both with its two villains. It demonized Xykon by showing that he was always a horrible bastard, and it humanized (goblinized?) Redcloak by showing the hardships he faced and the sins he committed as a result.* The reason Xykon and Redcloak are allowed a prequel book, IMO, is that neither Xykon nor Redcloak really care about fame. Xykon doesn't seem to mind it, but he's spelled out his raison d'être clearly in 1266: he wants power, because he doesn't want anyone telling him what to do ever again. That desire turns him into an unrelenting force in the story (and an explicitly supernatural one at that), rather than just some man who is cool and smart and deserving of the attention he craves, because he kills innocent people in an interesting way. Xykon isn't scary because his mind is twisted and fractured in a relatable way, like so many true crime stories like to portray: Xykon is scary because he's a powerful magic jerkwad corpse that's going to get us all killed if we don't stop him.

But Tarquin does care about fame, more than he seems to care about almost anything else. He is obsessed with his legacy, so obsessed that he murders his own son and tries to cripple the other's fight to save the world, because they don't say the right words on his cue. The whole thing is about his ego, about what people think of him, and so giving him a prequel story undermines his ending - being left behind as an irrelevant subplot.

* Your mileage may vary, of course. Redcloak in particular committed a few acts in SoD that made him less sympathetic to portions of the audience.

(These are those moments when I'm almost growing envious of other people's eye problems.)

Blue-light blocking glasses can come in a wide array of frames! Join us at the cool, dignified kids' table!

[Metastachydium]

Sure, but she's not supposed to blindly obey him, she's suppose to trick him into fullfilling her bosses's wishes.

For most of what we see of her career, she markedly wasn't doing that, though.

And it's not just Quarr's opinion. A strip called "Where her loyalties lie" where one character tells her being loyal to Nale over the Directors would end up badly for her that ends with her telling Nale she's with him "all thr way" while she walks out of the frame. Short of flaming 200-foor-high letters, this is the clearest way there is to telegraph that she will indeed chose Nale over her masters and pay the price for it.

I'll continue to disagree, especially regarding the "pay the price bit" for which you don't even have the title.

They're embodiment of pure evil. There's a recurring motif in this comic about evil characters being unable to truly grasp the motivations of more selfless characters and to notice change in others. The idea that a succubus with a long history of evil service would willfully incure their wrath out of love for a dead mortal would very plausibly escape them.

Hard disagree. Lee canonically can understand even Good people (or people more righteous than TN, anyhow) and Cedrik is said to use instinct as much as intellect if not more. They work on more than some mouldy Evil concepti of human nature or whatever. Also, breaking the Hell-Damned TV like that was a pretty tall set of flaming letters.

It's a good thing no one's made it then. I'm not saying Sabine would just fly up to Tarquin had start draining levels. Murder's not about brute force. Murder is about planning and waiting for the opportune moment.

Malack was much to terrible a for for Nale to take on on paper. And yet...

Nale was training to do that and anticipating it for quite the long while and he had help (including a high level wizard), luck and some advantages specific to him (namely his relationship with Sabine and hence his protections from negative energy) and doing what he did was still an incredibly stupid thing to do. Sabine doesn't have that time, or allies of her own and her usual tricks don't really work on Tarquin. I'm not saying you people are arguing that she could just pop there and one-shot him, but I do hold that you appear to seriously overstate her chances of success.

Therefore I think the prequel will focus on Nale and his life (and aftermath of his demise), with Tarquin being an antagonist.

I'm not sure Nale could carry a story himself, to be honest. The most I could see would be the story of T.'s marriage with Elan's mother told from her perspective or something like that, and that would still be quite dark while serving little purpose.

[Fyraltari]

For most of what we see of her career, she markedly wasn't doing that, though.

And?

I'll continue to disagree, especially regarding the "pay the price bit" for which you don't even have the title.

Sure.

Hard disagree. Lee canonically can understand even Good people (or people more righteous than TN, anyhow) and Cedrik is said to use instinct as much as intellect if not more.They work on more than some mouldy Evil concepti of human nature or whatever.

They do understand people. But only the bad bits of people. They got V by appeal to V's pride ("run and tell Master to come clean your mess") and thirst for power, the strip's title and the Oracle both point out that the Elf took the deal for the wrong reasons. And later, their reasoning for foreseeing V would attack Xykon did not hinge on V wanting to save the world or anything like that but on V wanting to challenge the baddest dude around.
It's like how in The Lord of the Rings Sauron can manipulate Saruman, Denethor or Ar-Pharzôn and predict how they going to act, but is at a loss when it comes to Gandalf, Frodo or Aragorn because the former act on their evil impulses and thought-process while the latter don't and he can only relate to that anymore.

Also, breaking the Hell-Damned TV like that was a pretty tall set of flaming letters.

I'd say there's a qualitative difference between throwing a tantrum and sabotaging the mission.

Nale was training to do that and anticipating it for quite the long while and he had help (including a high level wizard), luck and some advantages specific to him (namely his relationship with Sabine and hence his protections from negative energy)

Yes, preparation and waiting for the opportune moment. Once Elan's plan has come to fruition, who's to say in what state Tarquin will be?

I'm not saying you people are arguing that she could just pop there and one-shot him, but I do hold that you appear to seriously overstate her chances of success.

Roy's chances of success against Xykon are pretty slim too, yet the first time they met he exploded the lich. Circumstances account for a lot in a fight.

[Ruck]

Those are more than valid points, especially concerning real-life examples of the phenomenon you decry. I just don't see how any sequel, prequel or side story with Tarquin as one of the main characters would or could work, especially considering the author's stated opinion on this character of his and his refusal to give Belkar an actual backstory.

Leaving aside my thoughts on the moralistic approach to fiction criticism-- Tarquin has been around long enough that a prequel story for him doesn't have to be a backstory or explain him at all. It could just simply be an early adventure of the Vector Legion, or something along those lines.

[Peelee]

But Sabine is more selfless than they are.

Then maybe blanket statements about embodiments of evil don't really hold up, and your argument falls on its face.

Nobody in the comic can't understand change or growth because they are evil. If they can't understand things, it's because of actual character flaws. Hell, V couldn't understand that familicide was bad until they had it shoved in their face and they're neutral. Roy couldn't understand the vampire wasn't Durkon and he's Good. It's not alignment that causes misunderstandings, it's the characters own personality traits.

And frankly, nothing implies the IFCC can't or don't understand the things you claim they don't.

[Metastachydium]

his actual downfall is considered a foregone conclusion by (I assume) most of the audience. So whereas Xykon continues to be an active threat (the active threat, depending who you ask), Tarquin isn't considered relevant anymore.

Well, technically so is Xykon's and as the annexed figure (the annexed figure being, of course, Fyraltari) shows, there are people who think T.'s still to play a major role in some way.

Therefore, bringing him back into the spotlight with a prequel story, especially one that humanizes him any further, wouldn't serve the drama of "will they defeat him??" - it would just give him more opportunities to be cool or sympathetic or clever. This feeds into the other difference...

I mean, I can't quite see what the Giant could possibly do to humanize him. Nor does he need to do that: he certainly didn't humanize Xykon in the slightest in SoD and while X. got to do stuff that is arguably cool and clever (as in showing him to be strong, resourceful and smarter than he looks), I'm pretty sure few if any people liked the Bony Bastard more for that.

2. It's literally what Tarquin wants. There's a specific kind of sensationalized true crime storytelling that takes this exact prequel angle. The real-world serial killer has already committed their famous murders, and the entire story is about how they got there. How they became the person who could commit such horrors. In the worst cases, it turns being a murderer into near-celebrity status. There's a play called "Down the Road" by Lee Blessing that explores this exact dynamic. I highly recommend it to any true crime fans.

Writing a villain prequel book (or a serial killer's biography), it's nearly impossible to not glorify the subject one way or another, either demonizing or humanizing them; interestingly, Start of Darkness did both with its two villains. It demonized Xykon by showing that he was always a horrible bastard, and it humanized (goblinized?) Redcloak by showing the hardships he faced and the sins he committed as a result.* The reason Xykon and Redcloak are allowed a prequel book, IMO, is that neither Xykon nor Redcloak really care about fame.

I'd argue that Redcloak as-is doesn't mind being the (in)famous Supreme Leader in war and peace that even the gods fear. Otherwise yes, I agree. Tarquin got exactly what he deserved. Voiding that would take away from the story.

Xykon isn't scary because his mind is twisted and fractured in a relatable way,

Unless you count his initially furious, and later almost melancholy reflection upon having lost the many signs and symptoms of being alive, his daunting boredom born out too much time he cannot spend but cannot run away from either and the like… The difference is more like this: Tarquin only cares about fame and the spotlight. That's where he begins, that's where he ends.

Blue-light blocking glasses can come in a wide array of frames! Join us at the cool, dignified kids' table!

I don't know. How would I even look like without blue light?

Leaving aside my thoughts on the moralistic approach to fiction criticism-- Tarquin has been around long enough that a prequel story for him doesn't have to be a backstory or explain him at all. It could just simply be an early adventure of the Vector Legion, or something along those lines.

And what would be the point of that? SoD served a purpose. Watching the Legion succeed at some task that has no bearing on the plot… Would not.

They do understand people. But only the bad bits of people. They got V by appeal to V's pride ("run and tell Master to come clean your mess") and thirst for power, the strip's title and the Oracle both point out that the Elf took the deal for the wrong reasons. And later, their reasoning for foreseeing V would attack Xykon did not hinge on V wanting to save the world or anything like that but on V wanting to challenge the baddest dude around.
It's like how in The Lord of the Rings Sauron can manipulate Saruman, Denethor or Ar-Pharzôn and predict how they going to act, but is at a loss when it comes to Gandalf, Frodo or Aragorn because the former act on their evil impulses and thought-process while the latter don't and he can only relate to that anymore.

The thing is, we don't know that. We know how they played V. We don't know how they played people more righteous than V. They know what friendship is and they seem to understand love. Yes, they know a lot about vice. But how's that the same thing as not knowing anything about anything that isn't vice?

I'd say there's a qualitative difference between throwing a tantrum and sabotaging the mission.

It implies a serious emotional involvement, serious enough that she's willing to suffer for it.

Yes, preparation and waiting for the opportune moment. Once Elan's plan has come to fruition, who's to say in what state Tarquin will be?

You, apparently, given that you think he'll still be useful for the Directors?

Roy's chances of success against Xykon are pretty slim too, yet the first time they met he exploded the lich. Circumstances account for a lot in a fight.

"Circumstances" in this particular case mainly amount to "early installment weirdness" and even then, Roy merely inconvenienced Xykon for a short while without realizing, in the meantime, how little his "great victory" ultimately achieved.

[Fyraltari]

Then maybe blanket statements about embodiments of evil don't really hold up, and your argument falls on its face.

Why not?

Nobody in the comic can't understand change or growth because they are evil. If they can't understand things, it's because of actual character flaws. Hell, V couldn't understand that familicide was bad until they had it shoved in their face and they're neutral. Roy couldn't understand the vampire wasn't Durkon and he's Good. It's not alignment that causes misunderstandings, it's the characters own personality traits.

Alignment doesn't cause anything, it's supposed to be a (pretty bad) descriptors of personnality traits.
What I am saying is that the comic shows consistantly that the more evil characters have trouble recognizing growth and good motivations. Bozzok couldn't recognize Crystal thinking for herself for once; Tarquin can't understand Elan priorizing people over stories, Durkon* couldn't understand Sigdi and thought Thor was a liar, Redcloak thought the Azurite prisoners would reject O-Chul rather than be awed by his resolve, Hilgya thinks thinks Durkon is a serial philanderer and so on.

The Giant is also on record saying being evil isn't something you can turn on on the job and turn off with the family, it seeps into every facet of your life. If the universe labels you evil, it's not just because you're kind of selfish prick, like Enor and Ganji, it means there is something seriously wrong with you at a fundamental level.

Hell, I could go so far as to say that this comic shows people having trouble relating with people of opposite alignment on both axis the further they identify with one (just see how badly Girard misreads Soon while Roy, who hovers over the line to Neutral Good has a better relationship with the Chaotics of his team than Durkon; or how Belkar and Haley were the ones who won over Serini). Evil just seems to have it worst.

The Giant is also, also on record saying inborn alignment should be left for the overtly supernatural. So when he presents us with three archfiends working across Law-Chaos lines for the Greater Evil, I expect them to be as close to tge purest evil as the comic is going to get.

And frankly, nothing implies the IFCC can't or don't understand the things you claim they don't.

[QUOTE=Metastachydium;25578970]
The thing is, we don't know that. We know how they played V. We don't know how they played people more righteous than V. They know what friendship is and they seem to understand love. Yes, they know a lot about vice. But how's that the same thing as not knowing anything about anything that isn't vice?
Answering both of you here:
We've had two scenes and a handful of cutaways with the Directors and they've spent most of it being very coy about what they're doin and why. 90% of our conversations about them is speculation.

To be clear, I am not saying it's 100% sure they'd be blindsided by Sabine betraying them because I'm 100% sure they don't understand true wuv, I'm saying ot wouldn't be absurd for the comic to unfold around these lines.

(the annexed figure being, of course, Fyraltari)

What is that supposed to mean, exactly?

he certainly didn't humanize Xykon in the slightest in SoD and while X. got to do stuff that is arguably cool and clever (as in showing him to be strong, resourceful and smarter than he looks), I'm pretty sure few if any people liked the Bony Bastard more for that.

He even said he specifically tried to keep Xykon as unlikable as possible, to not make any excuses for him. But Xykon's not the protagonist of SoD, that's Redcloak. Xykon is the antagonist, at least in the second half.

It implies a serious emotional involvement, serious enough that she's willing to suffer for it.

Meh, it's a tantrum. It people throw tantrums over trivial things sometimes and then regret them.

You, apparently, given that you think he'll still be useful for the Directors?

I'm more hypothezing events happening in the reverse orders (VL being used by the IFCC, Elan's plan coming into action defeating leading into a kill-still by Sabine). The problem is I don't have a sodding clue what Elan's plan actually is, so I can't integrate it well into my theory.

"Circumstances" in this particular case mainly amount to "early installment weirdness" and even then, Roy merely inconvenienced Xykon for a short while without realizing, in the meantime, how little his "great victory" ultimately achieved.

Still beat him. Lilewise, Belkar shouldn't have been able to kill Durkon* by numbers alone but Durkon's intervention made it possible.

[Ruck]

And what would be the point of that? SoD served a purpose. Watching the Legion succeed at some task that has no bearing on the plot… Would not.

What was "the point" of "The Uncivil Servant"? Or "Haleo and Julelan"? Or, say, the Katos or Mr. Scruffy story, or the eventual C.P.P.D. story?

An entertaining story doesn't need any further justification for being.

[Peelee]

Why not?

..... Really? You make a blanket statement about embodiments of evil being incapable of understanding selflessness, then say that one embodiment of evil can be more selfless, and then you wonder why maybe that is incompatible with the blanket statement?

Because I gotta say, I quite seriously cannot explain it any better than that.

[Fyraltari]

..... Really? You make a blanket statement about embodiments of evil being incapable of understanding selflessness, then say that one embodiment of evil can be more selfless, and then you wonder why maybe that is incompatible with the blanket statement?

Because I gotta say, I quite seriously cannot explain it any better than that.

Did you miss the part when I said I don't think Sabine is an embodiment of pure evil?

[Peelee]

Did you miss the part when I said I don't think Sabine is an embodiment of pure evil?

Ah. I missed that.

We now have the problem of why you think three fiends are embodiments of pure evil and yet somehow think that a fourth fiend is not an embodiment of pure evil. And yet strangely, still the same problem of not making blanket statements about embodiments of pure evil.

[MesiDoomstalker]

Leaving aside my thoughts on the moralistic approach to fiction criticism-- Tarquin has been around long enough that a prequel story for him doesn't have to be a backstory or explain him at all. It could just simply be an early adventure of the Vector Legion, or something along those lines.

I get the distinct feeling that Tarquin vastly overstated his importance in the group's dynamics. I have little doubt that an unobjective view of the Vector Legion's early days and the start of the kingdom swapping scheme paints Tarquin as a barely tolerated narcist whose only value is his genre savviness (and even then, they must sift through his ego to get anything useful). I fully believe he was a even more insufferable Elan counterpart in his early adventuring days.

[Ruck]

I get the distinct feeling that Tarquin vastly overstated his importance in the group's dynamics. I have little doubt that an unobjective view of the Vector Legion's early days and the start of the kingdom swapping scheme paints Tarquin as a barely tolerated narcist whose only value is his genre savviness (and even then, they must sift through his ego to get anything useful). I fully believe he was a even more insufferable Elan counterpart in his early adventuring days.

Well, that's fine too. Vector Legion adventure, why not? Tarquin doesn't have to be the star or hero; I kinda figured he wouldn't be all that central among the group in a story like that.

Also, I think you mean objective, not unobjective.

[Fyraltari]

Ah. I missed that.

We now have the problem of why you think three fiends are embodiments of pure evil and yet somehow think that a fourth fiend is not an embodiment of pure evil. And yet strangely, still the same problem of not making blanket statements about embodiments of pure evil.

So, let me reiterate then: she's fallen in love. She genuinely cares about another being above her own interest. That's a good motivation. You can't be pure evil and have even a single good motivation, at this point you're just very evil. Maybe she was pure evil at some point, maybe she never was, it hardly matters, she isn't now. The leaders of the IFCC don't have any kind of backstory, or character really, besides "evil, smooth schemers". Maybe it'll turn out Nero found himself a boyfriend too, I don't know, but until we have more information, I am comfortable saying these fiends are pure evil and this one isn't, because that squares with what the comic shows and the author's words on the subject of evil and alignment.

[Metastachydium]

Answering both of you here:
We've had two scenes and a handful of cutaways with the Directors and they've spent most of it being very coy about what they're doin and why. 90% of our conversations about them is speculation.

To be clear, I am not saying it's 100% sure they'd be blindsided by Sabine betraying them because I'm 100% sure they don't understand true wuv, I'm saying ot wouldn't be absurd for the comic to unfold around these lines.

Absurd, no, unlikely (as far as I'm concerned), yes.

What is that supposed to mean, exactly?

Unless I'm gravely misunderstanding something, you posit that Tarquin will become an active threat again in service of the IFCC and therefore his story is not yet done.

He even said he specifically tried to keep Xykon as unlikable as possible, to not make any excuses for him. But Xykon's not the protagonist of SoD, that's Redcloak. Xykon is the antagonist, at least in the second half.

Well, Tarquin can't really be the protagonist of anything without the Giant shooting himslef in the foot, so…

Meh, it's a tantrum. It people throw tantrums over trivial things sometimes and then regret them.

A being of supposedly pure Evil who supposedly only felt some lust reacting so strongly to "something trivial" risking the anger of extremely powerful beings she supposedly serves unfailingly and unquestioningly is something that might strike a careful planner as odd.

I'm more hypothezing events happening in the reverse orders (VL being used by the IFCC, Elan's plan coming into action defeating leading into a kill-still by Sabine). The problem is I don't have a sodding clue what Elan's plan actually is, so I can't integrate it well into my theory.

Elan's action prettymuch can't possibly account for the IFCC's designs, because V told Roy about their active involvement after said plan was handed over to Ian.

Still beat him.

Again, that wasn't luck or seizing an opportunity. That was early installment weirdness resulting from the Giant not being sure yet how powerful Team Evil is supposed to be and therefore having them act off.

Lilewise, Belkar shouldn't have been able to kill Durkon* by numbers alone but Durkon's intervention made it possible.

Durkon destroyed Greg; Belkar was merely a weapon he employed. And that was the result of him playing a book-long game, not that of jumping at some sudden opportunity.

What was "the point" of "The Uncivil Servant"?

That's a main character.

Or "Haleo and Julelan"?

Transtextual fun outside the established canon.

Or, say, the Katos

Their whole point is "redshirts evolve into relevance/full characters". It fits the mould.

or Mr. Scruffy story,

Part of the main ensemlbe by association.

or the eventual C.P.P.D. story?

Let's cross that bridge when it's reached.

An entertaining story doesn't need any further justification for being.

A story about a creep of a character whose entire arc revolved around how he wanted to have stories about him and how the best way to beat him is denying him that pleasure? I'd say yes, yes it does.

[Shining Wrath]

I think that Tarquin is a Magnificent Bastard, and that once he finds out what happens to Laurin, he will Magnificently work on sealing that rift, even if it costs him everything. Because he's smart enough to know that his legend won't survive the annihilation of the world. He's got access to high level spell casters and the wealth of an entire nation, and even though he's an evil SOB, it's very important to him that there still be a world.

[Resileaf]

I get the distinct feeling that Tarquin vastly overstated his importance in the group's dynamics. I have little doubt that an unobjective view of the Vector Legion's early days and the start of the kingdom swapping scheme paints Tarquin as a barely tolerated narcist whose only value is his genre savviness (and even then, they must sift through his ego to get anything useful). I fully believe he was a even more insufferable Elan counterpart in his early adventuring days.

Although Tarquin clearly thinks himself more important than he probably was for the Legion, genre savyness is not the only thing he's got going for him. He's a very good, if flashy, fighter as well and a very clever strategist, and his charisma probably opened a lot of doors for the group.

[Peelee]

So, let me reiterate then: she's fallen in love. She genuinely cares about another being above her own interest. That's a good motivation. You can't be pure evil and have even a single good motivation, at this point you're just very evil. Maybe she was pure evil at some point, maybe she never was, it hardly matters, she isn't now. The leaders of the IFCC don't have any kind of backstory, or character really, besides "evil, smooth schemers". Maybe it'll turn out Nero found himself a boyfriend too, I don't know, but until we have more information, I am comfortable saying these fiends are pure evil and this one isn't, because that squares with what the comic shows and the author's words on the subject of evil and alignment.

Ok, but here's the thing. Sabine is a fiend. Lee, Nero and Cedric are fiends. They are the same level of "embodiment of evil", even if they are different species. It's lime saying that zombies and skeletons are the same level of undead, or cats and dogs are the same level of living creature. If you say embodiments of evil cannot understand falling in love, then Sabine cannot fall in love. If you say Sabine can fall in love, then embodiments of evil can understand that.

Youre trying to eat your cake and have it too. You're painting the IFCC with an incredibly broad brush with no basis other than "I haven't personally seen them do X in the limited time they have had on screen" for no reason other than that they are fiends while not taking into account we have seen another fiend do exactly what you claim fiends are incapable of doing.

[Shining Wrath]

Ok, but here's the thing. Sabine is a fiend. Lee, Nero and Cedric are fiends. They are the same level of "embodiment of evil", even if they are different species. It's lime saying that zombies and skeletons are the same level of undead, or cats and dogs are the same level of living creature. If you say embodiments of evil cannot understand falling in love, then Sabine cannot fall in love. If you say Sabine can fall in love, then embodiments of evil can understand that.

Youre trying to eat your cake and have it too. You're painting the IFCC with an incredibly broad brush with no basis other than "I haven't personally seen them do X in the limited time they have had on screen" for no reason other than that they are fiends while not taking into account we have seen another fiend do exactly what you claim fiends are incapable of doing.

I'd make the argument that if Sabine truly loved Nale, she stopped being a fiend. There's one of two plot twists available; she's no longer a fiend despite appearances, and thus can betray IFCC; or she never truly loved Nale despite appearances, and can betray him for her true masters. Shouldn't Nale be somewhere in the lower realms where Sabine could visit him?

[Fyraltari]

Ok, but here's the thing. Sabine is a fiend. Lee, Nero and Cedric are fiends. They are the same level of "embodiment of evil", even if they are different species. It's lime saying that zombies and skeletons are the same level of undead, or cats and dogs are the same level of living creature. If you say embodiments of evil cannot understand falling in love, then Sabine cannot fall in love. If you say Sabine can fall in love, then embodiments of evil can understand that.

Youre trying to eat your cake and have it too. You're painting the IFCC with an incredibly broad brush with no basis other than "I haven't personally seen them do X in the limited time they have had on screen" for no reason other than that they are fiends while not taking into account we have seen another fiend do exactly what you claim fiends are incapable of doing.

You realize it's possible to experience something without understanding it at first, right? I'd say the Belkar from #0001 wouldn't understand where the current Belkar's head is at. Hell, I'd say that for very syrong emotions such as romantic love or grief, you can't really understand them in others until you've gone through something similar yourself, you can grasp it intellectually but not really, really understand, if you get my meaning. So it would make sense for the Directors not to recognize love in a place they wouldn't expect it to be, another fiend.

Roy's deva described herself as a being of pure Law and Good, implying that all Outsiders are, or at least start as pure embodiments of their respective plane's alignment. So that's my default assumption regarding the leaders of the IFCC, until given reason to re-asses. Sabine probably did start pure evil, but one way or another she's got some good in her evil just like how Lee got some Chaos in his Law and Cedrik some Law in his Chaos (not that they have any distinctive traits thay show that off, these three are one character for all narrative intents an purposes).

Maybe it's as easy as the company you keep rubbing off on you. All the Outsiders who stay in their native planes have an easier time staying true to their alignment because everybody around them is of that alignment, it's a feed-back loop, but the Outsiders who frequently go to Earth where everything is muddled and in shades of grey have bigger chances of slipping.

[brian 333]

On the topic of Sabine's not being pure Evil:

The evidence of this is her love for Nale. Selfless love is a Good act, and therefore cannot exist in a being of pure Evil.

But is her love selfless? Is it True Love at all?

We see a demon who exploits a living being at her masters' request. The demon enjoys doing so, even going so far as to use his fantasies to manipulate him. But is this love? Or is she simply enjoying the attention?

When Nale gets dusted she responds with violence. But would she have behaved differently had he simply been her favorite chew toy? Was she truly in love with him, or did she consider him a pet?

Evil beings can love and be loved. It won't be the brand of love with which you may be familiar. It may even be a bit strange and twisted. But it is what they feel that counts.

Sabine may be Evil and love Nale for being someone who stimulates her emotionally. She may be Evil and love Nale because he is her best toy. She may be Evil and had a plan to pretend to love Nale to further her Evil agenda, and her anger was at years worth of manipulation wasted when Nale got dusted.

Or, maybe, she really does experience selfless love. It's just not the only possible explanation for what we see.

[Yuki Akuma]

I'd make the argument that if Sabine truly loved Nale, she stopped being a fiend.

Well, that's literally not how it works in D&D, so that would be a pretty bad argument.

[Mike Havran]

I'm not sure Nale could carry a story himself, to be honest. The most I could see would be the story of T.'s marriage with Elan's mother told from her perspective or something like that, and that would still be quite dark while serving little purpose.

I can totally see a set of short(ish) stories following a timeline, with alternating focal characters, much like a combination of SoD and GDGU. Example contents:

1. (~25 years ago, a few pages only). Introduction and early days of Vector Legion.
2. (~20 years ago, short story). Plot introduction. Elan's mom breaks up with Tarquin. Tarquin and Nale arrive on Western continent. Origin of Tarquin's scheme. Introduction of IFCC, monitoring the situation.
3. (~12 years ago, short story). Nale's "forming days". Nale meets Thog. Malack does something to Nale, or possibly sires his offspring. Miron owns Tarquin a favor. Sabine enters the story on behest of IFCC.
4. (~2 years ago, main story). LG ascent. Sabine falls in love with Nale. Empire of Blood. Enter Zz'dtri and Yikyik. Falling out between LG and VL, demise of Malack's offspring, escape, Hilgya enters, plot for Talisman.
5. (contemporary, second longest story). Sabine on Western continent. Amun Zora's revenge attempt, Elan's plan, Ian, Geoff. Sabine ends up with a suitable wessel and joins the main OotS plot.
6. (unspecified future, a few pages only). Denouement of Vector Legion. Shoulder Pad Guy finally says something.

[Fyraltari]

Unless I'm gravely misunderstanding something, you posit that Tarquin will become an active threat again in service of the IFCC and therefore his story is not yet done.

I meant "why are you calling me an "annexed figure"".

[pearl jam]

Ok, but here's the thing. Sabine is a fiend. Lee, Nero and Cedric are fiends. They are the same level of "embodiment of evil", even if they are different species. It's lime saying that zombies and skeletons are the same level of undead, or cats and dogs are the same level of living creature. If you say embodiments of evil cannot understand falling in love, then Sabine cannot fall in love. If you say Sabine can fall in love, then embodiments of evil can understand that.

Youre trying to eat your cake and have it too. You're painting the IFCC with an incredibly broad brush with no basis other than "I haven't personally seen them do X in the limited time they have had on screen" for no reason other than that they are fiends while not taking into account we have seen another fiend do exactly what you claim fiends are incapable of doing.

That evil fails to understand love is hardly a new theme in literature, as Fyraltari has previously pointed out with Sauron. It was a repeated theme with regard to Voldemort as well. Also with less extreme examples such as Scrooge or the Grinch before their respective epiphanies. The point isn't that the IFCC are incapable of understanding another fiend, broadly speaking, as your response here is doing, or even so much that they can't understand Sabine specifically so much as they don't properly understand genuine love and if, as is being suggested, Sabine is operating out of genuine love for Nale, then the IFCC may not properly recognize that. It doesn't really seem to be that controversial of an opinion and certainly has plenty of literary precedent.

[Peelee]

That evil fails to understand love is hardly a new theme in literature, as Fyraltari has previously pointed out with Sauron. It was a repeated theme with regard to Voldemort as well. Also with less extreme examples such as Scrooge or the Grinch before their respective epiphanies. The point isn't that the IFCC are incapable of understanding another fiend, broadly speaking, as your response here is doing, or even so much that they can't understand Sabine specifically so much as they don't properly understand genuine love and if, as is being suggested, Sabine is operating out of genuine love for Nale, then the IFCC may not properly recognize that. It doesn't really seem to be that controversial of an opinion and certainly has plenty of literary precedent.

Yeah, it this is not Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter or How the Grinch Stole Christmas or a Christmas Carol. I've already shown the author of this very work who explicitly explained a story where the heroes grossly undercut themselves by assuming that evil would not understand love because they assumed the purely logical aspect without thinking of the emotional aspect at all.

Or, to sum up, despite Fyraltari's claims, I have not seen that as a theme in OotS. And, in fact, I have seen the opposite. Why an embodiment of evil literally showcasing the opposite of what he claims is somehow not an empediment to his argument I will not pretend to understand, but to me it is so patently plain that it shows him to be wrong that after multiple attempts at explaining it, I have given up and will just let the narrative go where it will, which I think will not be in the direction he thinks it will.

[Fyraltari]

I've already shown the author of this very work who explicitly explained a story where the heroes grossly undercut themselves by assuming that evil would not understand love because they assumed the purely logical aspect without thinking of the emotional aspect at all.

Okay, but the point of that story is that one may have villains who have genuinely good traits in them. Not that the author would never have villains with zero good traits as should be patently obvious by the fact that Xykon exists.

The Giant also made it clear on a couple occasions thay when it comes to alignment he draws a line between mortal characters and "overtly supernatural ones".

Or, to sum up, despite Fyraltari's claims, I have not seen that as a theme in OotS. And, in fact, I have seen the opposite.

Tarquin, Bozzok, Durkon*, to a lesser extent Crystal, Nale and Malack.

Why an embodiment of evil literally showcasing the opposite of what he claims is somehow not an empediment to his argument I will not pretend to understand but

I have explained it several times, let me make one last attempt: People can change, even if you are a pure embodiment of something, you may not stay that way.

to me it is so patently plain that it shows him to be wrong that after multiple attempts at explaining it.

To me it seems that you are refusing to listen to the arguments I presented, and it is starting to wear my patience off.

[Kish]

I think it was certainly huge and central to the most recent book that Tarquin didn't understand love. Or understand that he didn't understand love.

I would not be at all surprised if the same is true of Xykon and the leaders of the IFCC.

And for Redcloak, love would obviously be "something weaker than ego."

I don't know how healthy Sabine and Nale's relationship was or ever could be, considering the participants, but Sabine is already different from Lee, Nero, and Cedrik in that she's been depicted doing things that aren't focused on whatever the IFCC's mysterious evil goal is, ever.

[Metastachydium]

I meant "why are you calling me an »annexed figure«".

Would you prefer Exhibit A? (On a more serious note, it's a turn of phrase I like for some reason; I didn't mean to offend you and apologies if I did that anyway.)

[Bedinsis]

If we ever return to Tarquin & C:o, here's how I'd like to see it play out:

As things turn out, the only reason the Empire of Blood hadn't collapsed already despite Tarquin thinking like a story is that Malack was in place to keep him under wraps and not indulge in his proclivities. With him out of the picture, in conjunction with the plan Elan provided Ian, Amun-Zora, Enor and Gannji, the empire is toppled in a deliberately unspecified way, and Tarquin is forced to live a regular life. Being denied his position both as a de facto dictator and as a main villain of a story, he decides to pursue the Order to have a grand climactic showdown to at least assure the latter. In the showdown he gains the upper hand, before Elan lures him by telling how he'll retell his adventures and how he was conflicted by one of his main antagonists being related to him (something that makes Tarquin go "Yes! Yes! Yes!") before revealing that he'd merge his character with Nale in his story, since it is easier to keep track of, the audience already know of the character and any budding villain hearing the story would conclude that Nale's behaviour was worth emulating since he apparently ruled an empire, thereby stopping them in their tracks. That will leave Tarquin outraged, him being denied the glory, to which Elan will claim that he is already sounding more and more like Nale. They then defeat him, his only possible role in the story going forwards being the one left void by Nale, i.e. as a reoccurring minor threat not worth considering.