If the Goblins had good land from the start, how would that be better?

[ZhonLord]

The Hobgoblins at least seem to have had a big, organized social structure that existed long before they conquered Azure City.

As proven way back at Xykon's first evilgasm of the comic. It may have been built on mountainous terrain and had few resources to work with, but it was a city of considerable size nonetheless.

[Keltest]

As proven way back at Xykon's first evilgasm of the comic. It may have been built on mountainous terrain and had few resources to work with, but it was a city of considerable size nonetheless.

I did the math once, and if I remember correctly, assuming that fully half the population of the city was militarized and mobilized (which is extremely generous from a logistics perspective) it was about the size of medieval London.

[hroþila]

There's no reason to believe medieval standards apply, though. Since its ~30,000 strong army was said to represent 90% of its population, if we assume that actually meant 90% of all military-age males (which seems reasonable to me), even assuming a human-like demographic distribution (which doesn't seem reasonable to me) that would give a population of ~100,000 as an upper limit, and probably closer to ~80,000. Which would certainly have been impressive in 14th-century western Europe, but not so much in the OotS-verse where these hobgoblins were marching against just one human nation with a population of 500,000, 250,000 of them living in the capital city.

The hobgoblins were scrapping by, and even their relative prosperity was the result of recent and rather extraordinary circumstances stemming from the open-mindedness of a handful of people.

[Keltest]

Since its ~30,000 strong army was said to represent 90% of its population

Was it? When was this said?

[Saint-Just]

There's no reason to believe medieval standards apply, though. Since its ~30,000 strong army was said to represent 90% of its population, if we assume that actually meant 90% of all military-age males (which seems reasonable to me), even assuming a human-like demographic distribution (which doesn't seem reasonable to me) that would give a population of ~100,000 as an upper limit, and probably closer to ~80,000. Which would certainly have been impressive in 14th-century western Europe, but not so much in the OotS-verse where these hobgoblins were marching against just one human nation with a population of 500,000, 250,000 of them living in the capital city.

The hobgoblins were scrapping by, and even their relative prosperity was the result of recent and rather extraordinary circumstances stemming from the open-mindedness of a handful of people.

half of the population in the capital city is definitely something absolutely impossible by medieval standards, so yes all comparisons with real history go out of window.

[Jasdoif]

Since its ~30,000 strong army was said to represent 90% of its population

Was it? When was this said?

Spoiler: War and XPs Bonus Content

Show

In strip 320a, Redcloak says it'd never occurred to the hobgoblin's previous Supreme Leaders to mobilize 90% of their population before; something Xykon attributes to their self-preservation, that he doesn't expect to continue being a problem....

[Keltest]

Spoiler: War and XPs Bonus Content

Show

In strip 320a, Redcloak says it'd never occurred to the hobgoblin's previous Supreme Leaders to mobilize 90% of their population before; something Xykon attributes to their self-preservation, that he doesn't expect to continue being a problem....

Huh, interesting. That makes Redcloak's later commentary about the family left behind at the founding of Gobbotopia rather odd though.

[hamishspence]

I figure the remaining 10% represents children far too small to fight, and their mothers.

[gbaji]

There's no reason to believe medieval standards apply, though. Since its ~30,000 strong army was said to represent 90% of its population, if we assume that actually meant 90% of all military-age males (which seems reasonable to me), even assuming a human-like demographic distribution (which doesn't seem reasonable to me) that would give a population of ~100,000 as an upper limit, and probably closer to ~80,000.

Why assume only military age males? Sure, the art only seems to show males, but that may just be Rich not wanting to spend time/effort creating female hobgoblin images, and scattering them into the battle scenes. Certainly, having been given an order by their new supreme commander to mobilize everyone who can fight, and who's got this lich enforcer who kills and zombifies folks for fun as additional motivation, those scrambling to comply with that order would not limit themselves in their compliance. If Redcloak says it was 90% of the population, maybe we should assume it was actually 90% of the population. Which now drops us down to about ~33k total population.

That's still a huge number for the described region, but it's possible that there were initially a large number of smaller hobgoblin villages and settlements thinly spread out in the area, until the order was given, and then they mobilized as ordered into one area, bringing everybody physically capable of getting there, and bringing every scrap of supplies with them. Er, and they built a big fort/town in the second valley?

The hobgoblins were scrapping by, and even their relative prosperity was the result of recent and rather extraordinary circumstances stemming from the open-mindedness of a handful of people.

Also, the mobilization itself would be a completely unsustainable action, but that was the point. Team Evil only needed these folks long enough to take Azure city. By mobilizing "everyone" and not just a number the population could sustain, you get a much bigger army. Uh. The numbers are still pretty ridiculous, but I've always seen the whole hobgoblin army bit as just something we're expected to suspend disbelief on and just accept. It requires a large amount of industry and infrastructure to support a military that size (using earth normal human rules of course). But this isn't earth. And these aren't humans.

It does absolutely highlight the one key advantage a race that breeds fast and has a short lifespan has though. The ratio of able bodied fighters to developing/aged ones is much much higher, making something like this possible. So a combination of rare circumstances that allowed them to breed for several generations in relative peace, followed by a new supreme leader coming along and mobilizing them in this way, made the whole thing possible. Dunno.

[Fyraltari]

Why assume only military age males? Sure, the art only seems to show males, but that may just be Rich not wanting to spend time/effort creating female hobgoblin images, and scattering them into the battle scenes. Certainly, having been given an order by their new supreme commander to mobilize everyone who can fight, and who's got this lich enforcer who kills and zombifies folks for fun as additional motivation, those scrambling to comply with that order would not limit themselves in their compliance. If Redcloak says it was 90% of the population, maybe we should assume it was actually 90% of the population. Which now drops us down to about ~33k total population.

That's still a huge number for the described region, but it's possible that there were initially a large number of smaller hobgoblin villages and settlements thinly spread out in the area, until the order was given, and then they mobilized as ordered into one area, bringing everybody physically capable of getting there, and bringing every scrap of supplies with them. Er, and they built a big fort/town in the second valley?




Also, the mobilization itself would be a completely unsustainable action, but that was the point. Team Evil only needed these folks long enough to take Azure city. By mobilizing "everyone" and not just a number the population could sustain, you get a much bigger army. Uh. The numbers are still pretty ridiculous, but I've always seen the whole hobgoblin army bit as just something we're expected to suspend disbelief on and just accept. It requires a large amount of industry and infrastructure to support a military that size (using earth normal human rules of course). But this isn't earth. And these aren't humans.

It does absolutely highlight the one key advantage a race that breeds fast and has a short lifespan has though. The ratio of able bodied fighters to developing/aged ones is much much higher, making something like this possible. So a combination of rare circumstances that allowed them to breed for several generations in relative peace, followed by a new supreme leader coming along and mobilizing them in this way, made the whole thing possible. Dunno.

Spoiler: HotPghS

Show

I think our best look at what hobgoblin mobilization is like comes from HtPghS, in the form of the impromptu war party at the beginning. It is made up of seven hobgoblins:

• The leader who wields a greatsword and sports a facial scar, implying previous combat experience.
• The one with the shield: the only woman of the group, fights with a shield and sword. Her outfit is similar to Bo's and might be armour.
• The one with the axe: fights with an axe. Appears to be wearing an apron into battle.
• The one with the beard. wields a sword. Also uncelar if he's wearing armour or not. Survives one katana strike from O-Chul which might imply he's slightly higher level than his fellows who otherwise all die in one hit.
• The one with the spear. Fights with a spear and is clearly wearing armour.
• Pangtok and Tingtox: two commoners with zero fighting abilities press-ganged into going into battle wearing casual clothing and wielding what appear to be a dagger each. Only there because the leader was strong enough to push them around.

So I'm guessing that the hobgoblin horde was gender-mixed but that a large portion of it (maybe half of it) had no training nor proper equipment.

[Liquor Box]

Why would you think that? All evidence in the comic is that the various PC races, who did get roughly equal high quality starting resources, have stayed more or less equal to each other. There's no reason to think that had the goblins gotten a starting position as good as what the elves got they wouldn't be as well off today as the elves are.

I don't think there's any evidence of that at all in the comic. Other than the fact that dwarfs live underground (which seems to me to be a bad starting position), we have no idea what the starting position was of any of the PC races. I also don't think the comic portrays PC races as equal now - it appears that humans are everywhere and elves/dwarves/halflings are confined to corners of the world or being minorities in human lands.

In real life, starting position does not equal outcomes either. For example, Africa has more resources (is a better starting position) than any other continent, but mostly has a below average standard of living nowadays. Japan has very few natural resources, but has a high standard of living. The fortunes of different countries rise and fall for a variety of reasons, often unrelated to resources.

[Fyraltari]

In real life, starting position does not equal outcomes either. For example, Africa has more resources (is a better starting position) than any other continent, but mostly has a below average standard of living nowadays. Japan has very few natural resources, but has a high standard of living. The fortunes of different countries rise and fall for a variety of reasons, often unrelated to resources.

Which is what I was getting at when I said the comic isn't a treatise in socio-economics. The notion that the goblins' problems stem from them being shafted at the beginning of the world is a simple cause that would not make sense in the real world that we kind of have to accept as is because:

A) Giving a cause that would hold up to scrutiny would involve completely derailling the comic as we delve deep into the history of this world in excrutiating details.

And

B) the specifics of the wronging don't really matter. What matters is how people react to this wrong, on the goblin side (trying to make the most of a bad situation vs seeking justice/revenge) and on the human side (not caring/making the situation worse vs trying to make it right).

[hroþila]

Why assume only military age males? Sure, the art only seems to show males, but that may just be Rich not wanting to spend time/effort creating female hobgoblin images, and scattering them into the battle scenes.

Rich did absolutely do it that way because he just copy/pasted the hobgoblins and only later realized that meant there were no women, but then he figured it was also a useful way to make the reader root for the Azurites a bit more by making them more relatable. Still, the art shows what it shows, and the art shows no women in the hobgoblin army, even though we saw some in HtPGHS. So I think it's possible to believe the women were not part of the general mobilization (mobilizing 90% of your able-bodied men is already pretty unsustainable, especially if trained women are only a small minority, because you're basically gambling the survival of the whole tribe on a single battle).

Still, I guess it's possible that we only saw a portion of all hobgoblin forces, that the ones with actual training were used first, that those were largely male, or indeed that only male soldiers happened to be caught on panel.

Who knows. Maybe 90% of all hobgoblins were indeed mobilized, but many of them would have been porters - who knows what the tooth-to-tail ratio of an OotS-verse hobgoblin army would be. In that case, 30,000 could be the number of actual fighting troops (in which case the term 'legion' would be essentially a military term, as a way to record combat troops only), or the army's total number including porters (in which case 'legion' would be an administrative term of military origin which would refer to the whole hobgoblin population). But that would mean Team Evil would no longer have a 3:1 advantage at the siege, which is kinda important.

Certainly, having been given an order by their new supreme commander to mobilize everyone who can fight, and who's got this lich enforcer who kills and zombifies folks for fun as additional motivation, those scrambling to comply with that order would not limit themselves in their compliance. If Redcloak says it was 90% of the population, maybe we should assume it was actually 90% of the population. Which now drops us down to about ~33k total population.

Sure, that's possible, and it is the most parsimonious interpretation, but it does have its problems.

[Mechalich]

B) the specifics of the wronging don't really matter. What matters is how people react to this wrong, on the goblin side (trying to make the most of a bad situation vs seeking justice/revenge) and on the human side (not caring/making the situation worse vs trying to make it right).

The specifics of the wrongdoing absolutely matter. The goblins are, currently impoverished and suffering compared to the status of the other major sapient species. That's known, but there's a huge difference between an inequality that arose primarily due to the active oppression of the goblins by other sapients versus an inequality that arose primarily through external factors (environmental, ecological, etc.) or through divine neglect (a sort of special case external factor).

If other species, such as the dwarves, have been oppressing the goblins, then they can be said to owe compensation. By contrast, if other sapient weren't involved - for example the residents of the western continents who have no interaction with the goblins at all, they don't owe anything. It would still be charitable of them to help the goblins, but there's not obligation. In D&D alignment terms, this is the difference between a situation where not helping the goblins would be an evil act versus a neutral one.

[Fyraltari]

The specifics of the wrongdoing absolutely matter. The goblins are, currently impoverished and suffering compared to the status of the other major sapient species. That's known, but there's a huge difference between an inequality that arose primarily due to the active oppression of the goblins by other sapients versus an inequality that arose primarily through external factors (environmental, ecological, etc.) or through divine neglect (a sort of special case external factor).

If other species, such as the dwarves, have been oppressing the goblins, then they can be said to owe compensation. By contrast, if other sapient weren't involved - for example the residents of the western continents who have no interaction with the goblins at all, they don't owe anything. It would still be charitable of them to help the goblins, but there's not obligation. In D&D alignment terms, this is the difference between a situation where not helping the goblins would be an evil act versus a neutral one.

So, you would say the dwarves of Firmament owe Oona's tribe compensation, for example?

The fact that the PC races have been picking on the goblins and other monster species is important of course*, it's the specifics of how that came about that don't matter.

*see the "making it worse" reaction in my little list.

[Keltest]

So, you would say the dwarves of Firmament owe Oona's tribe compensation, for example?

The fact that the PC races have been picking on the goblins and other monster species is important of course*, it's the specifics of how that came about that don't matter.

*see the "making it worse" reaction in my little list.

I disagree strongly. If goblins are treated with hostility because they have a generations long habit of attacking their neighbors unprovoked, it's really their own fault that nobody wants them around, whereas if they are fighting in self defense then maybe compensation is owed.

[Liquor Box]

Which is what I was getting at when I said the comic isn't a treatise in socio-economics. The notion that the goblins' problems stem from them being shafted at the beginning of the world is a simple cause that would not make sense in the real world that we kind of have to accept as is because:

A) Giving a cause that would hold up to scrutiny would involve completely derailling the comic as we delve deep into the history of this world in excrutiating details.

And

B) the specifics of the wronging don't really matter. What matters is how people react to this wrong, on the goblin side (trying to make the most of a bad situation vs seeking justice/revenge) and on the human side (not caring/making the situation worse vs trying to make it right).

I think that, looking at it through a more realistic lens, one might draw the conclusion that it was not the goblins poor starting position that led to their current state, but rather other factors (like the path they cut for themselves and the choices they made). But I agree with you, that the comic is avoiding such complexities and means for us to conclude that the gods giving goblins less advantageous land is what has led to them being less well off than others.

Avoiding such complexities probably makes for a better story, but also probably makes any intended analogy with the real world less meaningful.

[brian 333]

Perhaps hobgoblin female attributes are muted outside of their fertile times, or when not actively raising young? As an example, Oona, viewed at a distance, looks similar to the males of her tribe. She certainly does not act differently.

In fact, now I have a head canon for use in my world: dominant females breed, and their pheromones suppress the fertility cycle of submissive females, who can usually only become fertile in the times dominants are not emitting strong pheromones while pregnant or nursing.

[BloodSquirrel]

I think that, looking at it through a more realistic lens, one might draw the conclusion that it was not the goblins poor starting position that led to their current state, but rather other factors (like the path they cut for themselves and the choices they made). But I agree with you, that the comic is avoiding such complexities and means for us to conclude that the gods giving goblins less advantageous land is what has led to them being less well off than others.

Avoiding such complexities probably makes for a better story, but also probably makes any intended analogy with the real world less meaningful.

This is highly debatable. As I noted before, this assertion comes from exactly one source: Redcloak. Thor spends his time with Durkon explaining why it's more complicated than that, and not even the other goblinoids seem to be caught up on what land they had to start of with 1,000 years ago.

And even taking Redcloak's story at face value: Considering what the Dark One's army did after his death, it seems like they must have at least temporarily had possession of whatever lands the humans they were killing were on, and must have been later pushed back. So the idea that land distribution has remained completely static simply is directly contradicted by Redcloak himself.

We have two options here: Believe something that is highly implausible, or believe that the confirmed unreliable narrator is oversimplifying things.

[Liquor Box]

This is highly debatable. As I noted before, this assertion comes from exactly one source: Redcloak. Thor spends his time with Durkon explaining why it's more complicated than that, and not even the other goblinoids seem to be caught up on what land they had to start of with 1,000 years ago.

And even taking Redcloak's story at face value: Considering what the Dark One's army did after his death, it seems like they must have at least temporarily had possession of whatever lands the humans they were killing were on, and must have been later pushed back. So the idea that land distribution has remained completely static simply is directly contradicted by Redcloak himself.

We have two options here: Believe something that is highly implausible, or believe that the confirmed unreliable narrator is oversimplifying things.

It's an opinion also expressed by Durkon (and accepted by Roy). Whether you think it's a rational opinion based on what they know, it does seem to be communicating to the audience how the comic wants us to see it.

Also, I think you go to far to label it highly implausible that the Goblin's limited starting spot is the reason for their lack of resources now. Just because that's not the only way things can work out, nor the way it has tended to work in the real world, does not make it implausible. And even if it were implausible it is intuitive, and the Giant not necessarily being an expert in such things may have still written his comic that way.

[Fyraltari]

Perhaps hobgoblin female attributes are muted outside of their fertile times, or when not actively raising young? As an example, Oona, viewed at a distance, looks similar to the males of her tribe. She certainly does not act differently.

In fact, now I have a head canon for use in my world: dominant females breed, and their pheromones suppress the fertility cycle of submissive females, who can usually only become fertile in the times dominants are not emitting strong pheromones while pregnant or nursing.

What the hell did I just read?

[Tzardok]

Musings on the possible reproductive biology of hobgoblins. Where's the problem?

[Fyraltari]

Musings on the possible reproductive biology of hobgoblins. Where's the problem?

Well let's break it down:

Perhaps hobgoblin female attributes are muted outside of their fertile times, or when not actively raising young?

Is a very odd theory to come up with to explain a difficulty to ascertain biological sense at a glance in stick figures. Remember that lots of people thought Banadana and Andi were men when they first showed up and the elves' whole androgyny and social genderqueerness came about because readers couldn't tell whether V was a man or woman, even though The Giant thought that was clear at first.

As an example, Oona, viewed at a distance, looks similar to the males of her tribe.

Oona only looks similar to the menfolk of her tribe in that they wear face-concealing masks and in some cases large capes. Oona's mask is long enough to partially hide her noticeable breasts in the comic's artstyle which is why she could be confused for a man, not because her "female attribute" are muted.

She certainly does not act differently.

Considering we haven't seen anyone from her tribe but Oona speak, I have to wonder what Brian means here. How exactly would he expect a bugbear woman to act? And based on what?

In fact, now I have a head canon for use in my world: dominant females breed, and their pheromones suppress the fertility cycle of submissive females, who can usually only become fertile in the times dominants are not emitting strong pheromones while pregnant or nursing.

If by "my world" Brian means a work of fiction unrelated to Oots, okay cool, you do you. But if, as "head cannon" and the fact that he brings this up in an OOTS thread suggest, this is him theorizing about hobgoblins in OOTS. I can only wonder why he thinks there are "dominant" and "submissive" women in hobgoblin society, where he got the idea that hobgoblins affect each other's physiology through pheromones.
This notion that goblins have little control over their own reproduction, ascribing their dynamics to biology rather than sociology , the constant use of zoological terms like "female" and "male" instead of "man" and "woman" or "breed", and various other posts by Brian on the matter point to him seeing the (hob)goblins more like an invasive species of animals rather than the orange/green/brown skinned humans with pointy teeth and fewer Hit Dice the comic portray them as.

Also, the notion that hobgoblins have biological checks on their ability to reproduce is directly contradicted by the comic telling us Fenrir wanted them to "breed a lot".

[brian 333]

Musings on the possible reproductive biology of hobgoblins. Where's the problem?

And an excuse for the non-depiction of females in the hobgoblin army. They were there, but to us humans they simply appeared male.

[dancrilis]

Why assume only military age males?

So I'm guessing that the hobgoblin horde was gender-mixed but that a large portion of it (maybe half of it) had no training nor proper equipment.

And an excuse for the non-depiction of females in the hobgoblin army. They were there, but to us humans they simply appeared male.

Or - and this is just a theory - when Redcloak stated 'back to the mountain forts where so many of your women and children still live' it was meant to imply that a lot of female hobgoblins had not marched with the army.

Seperately we do see a female hobgoblin in panel 12.

[BloodSquirrel]

It's an opinion also expressed by Durkon (and accepted by Roy). Whether you think it's a rational opinion based on what they know, it does seem to be communicating to the audience how the comic wants us to see it.

Two problems here:

1) Neither Roy nor Durkon know anything about what lands the goblins had 1,000 years ago- they are just taking what Redcloak says at (somewhat) face value and reacting to it.

2) Both Roy and Durkon are present-minded enough that it doesn't really matter to them whether the goblins are in a bad situation now because they were given lands 1,000 years ago or because things have just been crappy for them for the last couple of generations. Their conversation about what level of responsibility they have to fix it is agnostic to that point, so neither of them spend much time interrogating that part of the premise.

What's relevant is that the currently-living goblins inherited a bad position. Redcloak, doing what extremists do best, is taking the least nuanced position on it possible.

Also, I think you go to far to label it highly implausible that the Goblin's limited starting spot is the reason for their lack of resources now. Just because that's not the only way things can work out, nor the way it has tended to work in the real world, does not make it implausible. And even if it were implausible it is intuitive, and the Giant not necessarily being an expert in such things may have still written his comic that way.

1) Death of the author and all that- The Giant's (presumed) lack of expertise in economics does not bind us to interpreting his work in a way that is absurd when a more elegant interpretation fits the text just as nicely.

2) It is highly implausible. There are good reasons why it doesn't work that way in the real world- and we've seen evidence in-comic that goblins can and have conquered lands at various points. We've seen that geopolitical boundaries are not static, and 1,000 years is a very long time for them to be static.

Again: Even Redcloak contradicts himself on this point. If it really were a matter of "Well, we got screwed 1,000 years ago" the establishment of Gobbotopia should mean that the problem is fixed. But he doesn't think that way, because he's stuck reasoning backwards from his pre-existing conclusion (The Plan is justified and necessary), and everything else is just a matter of convenience for his narrative.

[Mechalich]

2) It is highly implausible. There are good reasons why it doesn't work that way in the real world- and we've seen evidence in-comic that goblins can and have conquered lands at various points. We've seen that geopolitical boundaries are not static, and 1,000 years is a very long time for them to be static.

It's not implausible, it's inconsistent. An environmentally deterministic fantasy world wherein the starting distribution of 'races' saw some of them placed at a tremendous disadvantage they could never overcome is quite possible. For an extreme example: 'hey why does this world have no gnomes? They got Antarctica. Oh...'

However, you are correct in that Stickworld does not appear to possess such a history. While the goblins may have begun at a disadvantage - if the hobgoblin settlements are an example they would seem to have been given moderately less fertile highland environments compared to lowland ones - they have clearly managed to acquire other, better lands at points. Also important is that because Stickworld goblins are essentially green humans with a dental quirk, they can live in lands used by humans just fine. They have no physiological variation that world place them at a permanent disadvantage in the way a species, for example, incapable of consuming cereals would be.

So yeah, the big problem is that the in-comic evidence of what the goblins socioeconomic status actually is contradicts statements by various characters as to that status being permanent disadvantage.

[Liquor Box]

Two problems here:

1) Neither Roy nor Durkon know anything about what lands the goblins had 1,000 years ago- they are just taking what Redcloak says at (somewhat) face value and reacting to it.

2) Both Roy and Durkon are present-minded enough that it doesn't really matter to them whether the goblins are in a bad situation now because they were given lands 1,000 years ago or because things have just been crappy for them for the last couple of generations. Their conversation about what level of responsibility they have to fix it is agnostic to that point, so neither of them spend much time interrogating that part of the premise.

What's relevant is that the currently-living goblins inherited a bad position. Redcloak, doing what extremists do best, is taking the least nuanced position on it possible.

That may be true, which was why I said "whether you think it's a rational opinion or not". Durkon clearly believes (and Roy accepts) that the Goblin's lack of resources is because of their poor starting position. Even if that it is not a well founded conclusion, in my opinion it is what the author is trying to communicate.

1) Death of the author and all that- The Giant's (presumed) lack of expertise in economics does not bind us to interpreting his work in a way that is absurd when a more elegant interpretation fits the text just as nicely.

2) It is highly implausible. There are good reasons why it doesn't work that way in the real world- and we've seen evidence in-comic that goblins can and have conquered lands at various points. We've seen that geopolitical boundaries are not static, and 1,000 years is a very long time for them to be static.

I don't think there is much to be gained in arguing the toss whether it is improbable or highly implausible, and if we start using real world examples it may tempt us toward the forbidden topics. I may have to suffice to say that I think it is merely improbable, whereas you think it is highly implausible.

Again: Even Redcloak contradicts himself on this point. If it really were a matter of "Well, we got screwed 1,000 years ago" the establishment of Gobbotopia should mean that the problem is fixed. But he doesn't think that way, because he's stuck reasoning backwards from his pre-existing conclusion (The Plan is justified and necessary), and everything else is just a matter of convenience for his narrative.

This is a good point though. Whatever the reason the the goblins having poor lands at the start of the comic, why has the seizure of Azure City not remedied it? Are there any theories for why Redcloak presses on, other than zealotry?

[pyrefiend]

This is a good point though. Whatever the reason the the goblins having poor lands at the start of the comic, why has the seizure of Azure City not remedied it? Are there any theories for why Redcloak presses on, other than zealotry?

I thought he started to address this in his talk with Durkon, although Durkon cut him off. Something about wanting more recognition from the gods for the Goblins. Ideally he probably wants the gods to (i) apologize and (ii) make reparations to the Goblins.

[Mechalich]

This is a good point though. Whatever the reason the the goblins having poor lands at the start of the comic, why has the seizure of Azure City not remedied it? Are there any theories for why Redcloak presses on, other than zealotry?

Two reasons.

The first is that Redcloak is a priest and all the evidence is that he's genuinely devout. The Plan is, so far as he knows, the Dark One's will, and therefore it's his sacred duty to carry it out. If the Dark One told him to stop, he'd stop. He'd probably be upset about all that wasted effort, but he'd do it.

The second reason is Xykon. Redcloak has sold Xykon a bill of goods and if Xykon doesn't get what he believes he deserves he will absolutely turn his skeletal but around and lay waste to Gobbotoppia out of pure spite. Redcloak is very aware of this and as such his continued pursuit of the plan is also a means to protect Gobbotoppia. Now Redcloak should have the means to stop Xykon, since he has control of the phylactery, but because he believes that he needs Xykon's power to complete the plan - and he does, for the action economy if nothing else - so long as reason one remains he needs to keep Xykon moving.

Now, this does mean that the continued plot is entirely dependent upon the Dark One holding the divine idiot ball. A ten minute frank conversation with basically any of the other gods, with the possible exception of Hel, could resolve this. However, pretty that's not going to happen. OOTS has reached a point where the overall plot is that the mortals must rectify the failures of the gods.