Will somebody arrive mid-fight to seize The Gate?

[gbaji]

But can we have a palate cleanser while I think about your comment? In the spirit of alternative hypothesis formation, do you think there is anything Sabine could be doing, other than bringing back Nale or getting revenge on Tarquin? Others tell me Nale is never coming back, and more others tell me Tarquin is never coming back.

If Tarquin is shown in the story again, it'll be in some sort of denoument type deal. The main story will end when the crisis with the gates and TE and the Snarl ends.

I don't think Nale will be back at all. Sabine doing something to try to get Nale back is a plot twist that may add something to the story, especially if it interferes with the Fiends plans (perhaps in some small way that gives the Order a window of opportunity to do something about it). Sabine succeeding in getting Nale back accomplishes nothing from a story telling point of view though, so I doubt it'll happen (doesn't mean it wont though).

Grief and anger over the loss of a loved one can be used by an author to provide the motivation for characters do things that create plot twists in stories which, absent that character motivation, might be very hard for the author to justify. Bad authors just hand idiot balls to characters and have them do random things that just happen to create needed plot effects. Good authors set up the motivation for those characters to do those things ahead of time. Rich is a good author. He used the ABD's grief over the death of her son to go after V. That character action set up an entire chain of events which were quite significant for the overall story. If true resurrection existed as a spell any 17th level cleric could cast, it would be much harder to justify the actions of the ABD (and was precisely the point Rich was making in that old post).

We don't yet know what Sabine's grief and anger over the loss of Nale may motivate her to do. But, just as with the ABD, the existence of true resurrection as a spell that can be cast by any 17th level cleric makes it harder to justify whatever other, possibly more extreme or desperate, actions she may decide to take as a result. If Rich wants her part in the story to be taking those actions, then having true resurrection exist as a spell that can be cast by a high enough level cleric also steps on that motivation (just as it would have with the ABD).

And this is precisely why Rich said that the spell "breaks plots".

Also, do you think there is any evidence yet to prefer either Sabine coming into the Final Dungeon or her staying in hell? Of course others tell me Sabine is never coming back, but she can still participate in the story from hell if her part of the story is interacting with V when V's on a timeout, and depending on how the vessel and artifact work she may be critical in the Final Dungeon.

Yeah. I'm quite certain that she will be involved in some direct way in whatever interaction the Fiends engage in at the Final Gate. It's hard to say (but fun to speculate) about what exactly what will be, but yeah, she's one of their more powerful/trusted minions, so it's a good bet she'll be there.

I think it came up when we were discussing whether Julia was Julia, Eugene, or Sabine. If it was just one guy expressing a minority opinion, hey, great, but I am really sick of, "We're done with that character," arguments so it sticks with me.

Maybe it's only whether she's coming to the Final Dungeon? I definitely remember the good old, "What would the point be?" argument, and someone suggesting, "She could round out her interactions with Haley."

I dunno, bit of a digression.

There were a lot of different things said in that thread, IIRC. I don't think anyone argued that Sabine would not be involved at all (it's possible though). I think the primary argument was against it being Sabine pretending to be Julia. And honestly, I don't recall all of the details in terms of what was said.


But yeah. Put me down as "Sabine will be there at the Final Fight". It would be strange for whatever the Fiends are doing not to include her in some way. Plus, as I speculated above, there's the possiblity that she may be involved in some sort of additional plot twist.

[Grendelkin]

I fully expect Sabine to betray Cedric, Lee and Nero for a chance to get Nale back somehow. She enjoys the perks of her job, but Nale getting shanked and his corpse destroyed? That made her truly angry, even if she had been nudging Nale to serve the interests of the IFCC.
Sabine is illicit desire made flesh, and we know what she desires in defiance of what should be expected of her.

[Kish]

More or less insulting than finding out all your biggest fans think it's easiest to believe that your comic is written without planning or research?

Irrelevant question: no one has said that.

Also, I am arguing that Rich has feelings only to the extent we observe, not to the exclusion of all else. If you think Rich is a slave to his id, show me where that happens.

Ox, I'm one of the people arguing for treating Rich's informational statements as information, and you're the one arguing for treating them as a kind of verbal spasm. So, for example, when he said "And more to the point, True Resurrection is a terrible, narrative-wrecking spell that should not exist, as it has no real purpose for players who die in battle (as they can almost always be returned via simple Resurrection) and only ever comes in to play to undo plot points," that contains specific words, which are incompatible with "and also I am five books into writing an epic story in which one of the plot points hinges on True Resurrection." Saying: well, that doesn't count because I'm talking about a brilliant use of True Resurrection, not a bad one! runs into the problem that explicitly denying any such thing as a brilliant use of True Resurrection exists is the essence of what he's saying.

(Also, this is all so unnecessary. If you want to speculate about Nale being brought back with the support of the IFCC, you could just propose that right after Vaarsuvius returned to the mortal world, Lee handed Sabine a bag with a pinch of Nale's disintegrated dust in it. That would be enough for Resurrection, and Laurin's claim that she could make Nale stay dead hinges on no one being in a position to grab dust before it's completely scattered through the desert. This is a case that perfectly supports Rich's argument, where True Resurrection is wholly unnecessary for any legitimate plot use because Resurrection works perfectly well. And even that assumes Nale's original body is important and Sabine isn't just going to grab his soul and stick it in a new body. So many options if the plot calls for Nale to come back, why are you focusing on the one Rich has denied?)

[Tubercular Ox]

If, as some of us have speculated, they somehow interact with the creative power of the prime material plane in some way (sure, just one speculation of many),

It's funny, I've stood up twice for making stuff up in this thread, but I read this one and my first thought is still, "This isn't necessary." You could have cut this out, put in, "And then Rich does something clever," and all of the evidence for the story continues to exist and continues to support the story.

Was there competition for this spot? Or what is the story behind this story?

Ox, I'm one of the people arguing for treating Rich's informational statements as information, and you're the one arguing for treating them as a kind of verbal spasm.

Kish, when I suggested that Rich didn’t like taking advice from his fans about how to write his own comic, I did not realize that this was only possible if he were less stable than a teenager trying to score with a yoga student on top of an exercise ball. Thank you for teaching me that saying what you mean is incompatible with any kind of emotion.

Is it okay if I encourage other people to examine the context of Rich’s quotes before deciding what they mean, or is everyone at risk of turning into a loon the first time they see pixels older than their dog?

And can you help me with my quoting dilemma, now that I know there is no way to understand Rich except through the people who keep all his quotes on hotkey? When I suggest Rich is following a rule, people give me a quote saying he doesn’t follow rules, and when I suggest he’s gone off on his own somewhere, people give me a quote saying he promised to follow the rules. These quotes come from two different groups of people, but they never argue with each other.

Looking at just the quotes, I think Rich might be a Markov chain and either supports the rules or not based on random die rolls. While that explains how he can contradict himself so readily, it doesn’t explain how people know which quote to use at any given time.

It’s possible Rich really does just hate me and everything I have to say, and that wisdom is being transmitted to me by selfless people with unsullied hands, but hate is an emotion and we just established that’s incompatible with Rich passing along real information.

I look forward to learning how people crush the urge to confront the inconsistencies when the people allowed to think use Rich’s quotes to bar every possible outcome.

[Kish]

1) You didn't say "maybe he means what he says but also he has this negative emotion around it," Ox. You said based on his emotional state that the entirety of the factual information in what he said--that he sees no use for True Resurrection--should be treated as not there at all, leaving only expressions of emotional state.
2) If you want me to speculate about why two people you're paraphrasing as "Rich doesn't follow rules" and "Rich promised to follow the rules" can both express disagreement with you without seeming to think they contradict each other, I would guess, because each of them would disagree with your paraphrase of them.

[Tubercular Ox]

It was wrong of me to post my personal dilemma in a context that would put others in a position of having to confirm or deny it without me supplying full confirmation. I would promise to construct all of my arguments in the darkness of my basement, making sure they are fully researched, referenced, and cited before posting them, but then I am not sure how to get the supervision I require to make sure my opinions are correct before posting.

It's a dilemma, but since I have no way to cite my own experience, I guess it cannot be communicated to others.

[ziproot]

> Which group of antagonists is the least likely to appear, if any?

Trigak. He specifically said he would return when least expected.

[Precure]

That would make them the most likely.

[Liquor Box]

And can you help me with my quoting dilemma, now that I know there is no way to understand Rich except through the people who keep all his quotes on hotkey? When I suggest Rich is following a rule, people give me a quote saying he doesn’t follow rules, and when I suggest he’s gone off on his own somewhere, people give me a quote saying he promised to follow the rules. These quotes come from two different groups of people, but they never argue with each other.

I'm not someone who has a library of the Giant's quotes (did there used to be a thread indexing them?), but I don't think they've ever struck me as quite that starkly inconsistent.

Every quote I can remember seeing from his seems roughly consistent with the principle that he generally follows the rules, but will depart from them from time to time when it improves his story.

[Kish]

There still is an Index of the Giant's Comments thread. Rich once called it "incredibly useful."

[Liquor Box]

So there is:

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthre...t%27s+Comments

[Precure]

He also said that he no longer post on this forum because he say things that people use out of context.

There was a time when I involved myself more in conversations, OOTS-based and otherwise, but that would inevitably lead to me saying something that I didn’t really think through entirely, which would then be plucked out of context and preserved forever as the Word of the Author.

[Peelee]

He also said that he no longer post on this forum because he say things that people use out of context.

I have been informed that I cannot trust that quote.

[Precure]

I have been informed that I cannot trust that quote.

I have been informed that I cannot trust you.

[Peelee]

I have been informed that I cannot trust you.

I think we're talking about the exact same thing.

[Precure]

I think we're talking about the exact same thing.

You claim to be the Word of Rich "The Giant" Burlew?

[brian 333]

You claim to be the Word of Rich "The Giant" Burlew?

Peelee spends far too much time on the forum to be the author. Unless he colors on one device and posts on another simultaneously.

New theory: Peelee and The Author are conjoined twins who simultaneously mod the forum and write the comic.

It all fits! Now how do we explain his personal appearances at conventions and such? Hmm.

Okay, that guy's a paid actor! Done and done!

Wait, doesn't he also draw OotS style portraits at those?

Crap.

Let me work on it, I'm sure I can figure out how to turn my theory based on nothing into an Internet fact.

Edit: I found the answer!

Spoiler

Show

[Precure]

It's actually a triad of distinct persons with one essence.

The Giant: Rich Burlew himself. The Creator of the comic and this forum.
Peelee: The Word of Rich Burlew and his incarnation amongst the forum.
Kish: Rich Burlew's creative spirit which live within us.

[Tubercular Ox]

Every quote I can remember seeing from his seems roughly consistent with the principle that he generally follows the rules, but will depart from them from time to time when it improves his story.

Thank you! I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks I was learning the wrong thing about Rich.

So there is:

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthre...t%27s+Comments

I've had bad experiences with that thread. Once, Rich said a thing, it was a bit complicated, and there was a vote on whether it should be enshrined with the summary, “There is no blue carbuncle.” I posted Rich’s drawing of a blue carbuncle (ctrl-+ if you can't see the blue stone in its forehead), but the vote went ahead anyways. Thankfully it failed, but people’s argument was that blue carbuncles aren’t important enough to enshrine.

So even if Rich said it, it may not be in the OP, if it is in the OP it may not be summarized properly, and if it is summarized properly, it may not be consistent with what Rich actually does.

Despite that I think it’s a great resource when used respectfully, and Jasdoif himself is respectfully brilliant, but I’m happy if my interaction with it is researching the context of things people try to use against me.

[Peelee]

You claim to be the Word of Rich "The Giant" Burlew?

Never mind, you've completely lost me.

ETA: I was referring to this:

You can't trust people presenting Rich quotes.

Albeit i slightly paraphrased to make it less personal.

[KorvinStarmast]

I will endeavor to become more trustworthy by posting Poor quotes.

Spoiler: Poor Richard's quotes ...

Show

"Who has deciev'd thee so oft as thy self?"
"If your head is wax, don't walk in the Sun"
"Pay what you owe, and you'll know what is your own"
"Eat to live; live not to eat"
"Three may keep a secret if two of them are dead"

Spoiler: source

Show

https://www.bookrags.com/studyguide-poor-richards-almanack/quotes.html#gsc.tab=0

[Precure]

Never mind, you've completely lost me.

You lost me the moment you uttered those words.

[Aquillion]

I fully expect Sabine to betray Cedric, Lee and Nero for a chance to get Nale back somehow. She enjoys the perks of her job, but Nale getting shanked and his corpse destroyed? That made her truly angry, even if she had been nudging Nale to serve the interests of the IFCC.
Sabine is illicit desire made flesh, and we know what she desires in defiance of what should be expected of her.

Also, just from a narrative standpoint... Cedric, Lee, and Nero are barely characters. They've only appeared in a handful of pages and we know almost nothing about them (and what we do know implies that they're pretty flat, character-wise.)

Their decisions and the ultimate outcomes of those decisions aren't likely to be *central* to the denouncement. This doesn't mean they won't be a major obstacle at the end but it would make sense for the actually important things to rely on the choices made by major characters connected to them who have been more fleshed-out (eg. V, Sabine, even Qarr.) The fiend's plans are more likely to be backdrop or setup to that.

[Peelee]

You lost me the moment you uttered those words.

Ok.

I will endeavor to become more trustworthy by posting Poor quotes.

Spoiler: Poor Richard's quotes ...

Show

"Who has deciev'd thee so oft as thy self?"
"If your head is wax, don't walk in the Sun"
"Pay what you owe, and you'll know what is your own"
"Eat to live; live not to eat"
"Three may keep a secret if two of them are dead"

Spoiler: source

Show

https://www.bookrags.com/studyguide-poor-richards-almanack/quotes.html#gsc.tab=0

I dunno, I'm pretty sure the guy who wrote those was rich.

[ziproot]

That would make them the most likely.

No, because now someone expects Trigak to return, making it impossible for Trigak to return.

[Peelee]

No, because now someone expects Trigak to return, making it impossible for Trigak to return.

I was told to expect the unexpected but i have to constantly change my expectations!

[Precure]

Ok.

I dunno, I'm pretty sure the guy who wrote those was rich.

Make sense 'cause the guy wrote this comic is poor.

[KorvinStarmast]

I was told to expect the unexpected but i have to constantly change my expectations!

Bruce Lee has a different approach to that: kick its butt. (Expect the unexpected was a fairly well-memed line from one of his movies).

[Peelee]

Bruce Lee has a different approach to that: kick its butt. (Expect the unexpected was a fairly well-memed line from one of his movies).

Sure, but that also feeds into that old trope - when the only tool you have is a Bruce Lee, everything looks like a kickable thing.

[KorvinStarmast]

Sure, but that also feeds into that old trope - when the only tool you have is a Bruce Lee, everything looks like a kickable thing.

He's not the only tool in those movies ...