OOTS #595 - The Discussion Thread

[Swordguy]

Future evil? Who are you, the Oracle? Are we going to start executing people because they SAY or MIGHT perform an evil act?

Yes, given a past history of committing evil and not giving a damn about reformation. Redemption requires a desire on the part of the evil party to actually and genuinely reform. After a certain point, Good is no longer required to extend infinite chances for evil to "reform". Kabuto here is clearly showing no desire to reform, and in fact is actively and openly planning to do more evil by his own admission.

If they say they're going to perform an evil action, then they clearly desire to do so. It's just like how, if you say you're going to kill someone, can be prosecuted for attempted murder, even though you haven't done anything yet.

Again, there's no "good" option for V to take here, but one of them prevents future evil from happening, even though it's slightly more evil in the short term. That should count for something, and it's saddening that people would rather see evil perpetuate itself rather than take action against it. The weight of every death Kabuto would cause after this point would be on V's head if he chose not to take action.

[Ganurath]

I tink V might of been moving at the speed of plot to get there.

Ah, but V hates plot devices, letting alone relying upon them rather than superior intellect or arcane might.

[Starscream]

I'd say that V is True Neutral, myself. S/he has shown compassion in the past (such has when s/he went off to rescue Elan with the others even when the Lawful Good Roy did not), but is also rather pragmatic when it comes to getting things done. And a neutral character can commit the occasional evil act and get away with it.

I could be argued that the act wasn't actually evil, anyway. Killing an evil creature is not considered evil in D&D, or paladins would be falling left and right. Kubota has a devil for an advisor, so he is most certainly evil. The only extenuating circumstance is that he was technically helpless at the time.

But even then, he had just outlined his foolproof plan to escape justice and continue his evil deeds unpunished, so he was far from truly helpless if you think about it.

[Hithros]

Yay! Serves Kubota right! I thought he was actually going to get away with it.....heh......

Disintegrate!

[JonahFalcon]

Um, yes they can? Their clothing turns beige.

Yeah, because they can't get new clothes.

[JonahFalcon]

I'd say that V is True Neutral, myself.

Or maybe V is under stress. You might notice a distinct shift in personality and behavior. Burlow's made it a specific plot point that V's suffering from sleep deprivation, despite schklee's insistance schklee doesn't need sleep.

[Nevitan]

Ah, but V hates plot devices, letting alone relying upon them rather than superior intellect or arcane might.

V didn't depend on it, it secretly aided Hir.

and I think V would of chucked out some more spells to kill Kubato if thst didn't work fast enough.

[Zeku]

All the people praising V are looking at this comic as if it were a fantasy world in which being a vigilante is 'cool.'

I suppose that's perfectly valid, but if we're looking at these characters as being real people, V just went 100% evil. There is nothing about killing someone in cold blood that is even remotely neutral. Ever tried stabbing someone with a knife, or shooting them? If you're in a calm frame of mind, it's almost impossible, because none of us are that evil.

The only way V could have done that casually is if his mind is nearly completely gone, all concerns other than proving his own magical supremacy having become totally irrelevant. His usual cold insults are no longer light hearted, he means every word completely literally.

The next step is talking to the demon. Tell me you didn't see that coming from the first time the imp appeared. I suppose it's a little late to bring it up, of course.

[Enlong]

Well. That was definitely something. Just goes to further my belief that V will be on the cover and title page of book #4.

[redwulf25_ci]

Yeah, because they can't get new clothes.

This is Order of the Stick. Barring Elans use of the disguise skill or a change in class people in this universe only seem to HAVE one suit of clothing.

[EvilElitest]

Yes, given a past history of committing evil and not giving a damn about reformation. Redemption requires a desire on the part of the evil party to actually and genuinely reform. After a certain point, Good is no longer required to extend infinite chances for evil to "reform". Kabuto here is clearly showing no desire to reform, and in fact is actively and openly planning to do more evil by his own admission.

Just because Kabuto claims he will do evil doesnt' mean he will be able to pull it off. He is still a prisoner and has done no evil or threatening actions while captured.

If they say they're going to perform an evil action, then they clearly desire to do so. It's just like how, if you say you're going to kill someone, can be prosecuted for attempted murder, even though you haven't done anything yet.

You can be prosecuted, not executed without trial. Talking about commiting evil is not an evil action. It is simply nasty. He could very well say what ever wants, it isn't a crime.

Again, there's no "good" option for V to take here, but one of them prevents future evil from happening, even though it's slightly more evil in the short term. That should count for something, and it's saddening that people would rather see evil perpetuate itself rather than take action against it.

No whats sadding is people giving into defeatism in order to give themselves or people they like justification for actions of their enemies. Its actually quite revolting, because it requires somebody to deliberately narrow the situation down to only two options when this clearly isnt' the case, see last post

The weight of every death Kabuto would cause after this point would be on V's head if he chose not to take action.

Fallacy. Any evil actions Kabuto committed would be blood on his hands, not on the hands of people who tried their best to prevent him from doing so in a good manner. He is a human being he can make his own choices

I could be argued that the act wasn't actually evil, anyway. Killing an evil creature is not considered evil in D&D, or paladins would be falling left and right. Kubota has a devil for an advisor, so he is most certainly evil. The only extenuating circumstance is that he was technically helpless at the time.

Um, yes, yes it is. killing an evil person isn't evil when they are activilly commiting evil actions/threating innocents or yourself with their actions. Unless they are an always evil creature, killing an evil person simply for being evil is murder, and so is killing an unarmed prisoner
from
EE

[Eraniverse]

yes there is, because letting Kuboto get a trial isn't evil. It is an out right lie to claim that the only "good" solution is to murder an unarmed prisoner. Evil through inaction would be Elan and V refusing to act as witnesses against Kubota in his trial, IE taking his words at face value and giving up before even trying to convict him. A good solution would be to attempt to get Kuboto tried and convicted. There is still evidence against him, and he certainly will suffer through a reputation loss. In fact, even if he gets off, that wouldn't be an evil act on the part of the good guys, that is just them failing the trial, better luck next time

Taking Kubota to trial would not be evil. But it certainly would be lawful and time consuming. V being chaotic good sees little value in the trial of a known villain and will not tolerate further inaction towards the world ending threat which they must prevent.

[Lamech]

Yes, given a past history of committing evil and not giving a damn about reformation. Redemption requires a desire on the part of the evil party to actually and genuinely reform. After a certain point, Good is no longer required to extend infinite chances for evil to "reform". Kabuto here is clearly showing no desire to reform, and in fact is actively and openly planning to do more evil by his own admission.

Well in DnD actually if they are willing to change aligment and they have acess to an atonment spell they can change to good very easily. Durkon can provide the atonment, and I'm pretty sure the threat of death will provide the will.

[JonahFalcon]

This is Order of the Stick. Barring Elans use of the disguise skill or a change in class people in this universe only seem to HAVE one suit of clothing.

Forget Haley having a ton of clothes to change into with Celie when Belkar started having technicolor yawns.

[Sucrose]

Future evil? Who are you, the Oracle? Are we going to start executing people because they SAY or MIGHT perform an evil act?

When they give an explicit promise to cause further evil? Well, it wouldn't be unreasonable. Comments like his are terroristic threats. Promises of anarchy.

Beyond that, dear Kubota had already done more than enough to justify his execution, and had just explained the very good reason to believe that this would not occur through the normal avenues of law.

You can argue V's motivations all you like, but it is my opinion that things are more likely to go in a positive direction (with some obvious fallout) than they would have if V had not intervened, and regardless of hir motives, V did carry out the proper lawful punishment for the cretin, and in likely a more painless way than anyone else could have.

[JonahFalcon]

Well in DnD actually if they are willing to change aligment and they have acess to an atonment spell they can change to good very easily. Durkon can provide the atonment, and I'm pretty sure the threat of death will provide the will.

That's bad writing, which supersedes everything.

[Swordguy]

Fallacy. Evil can committed through inaction, but Elan is not going to result to inaction. He is would attempt to get Kabuto properly punished. Just because Kuboto says he'd get off, doesn't mean he would. Simply put, Elan isn't going to simply not take action, he is just going to avoid committing evil,

...


I'm not talking about Elan here. V has the power to ensure that Kabuto will not commit evil again. Kabuto is in the middle of a monologue about how he's going to rig the trial and go free, and go right back to committing evil acts and trying to kill people (one of whom, Elan, is V's friend - don't underestimate how much that might influence V's decision-making).

When the bad guy himself is telling you exactly what he's done as is going to do, how much more evidence of guilt do you need before you realize that there isn't a good way of dealing with the situation?

yes there is, because letting Kuboto get a trial isn't evil. It is an out right lie to claim that the only "good" solution is to murder an unarmed prisoner. Evil through inaction would be Elan and V refusing to act as witnesses against Kubota in his trial, IE taking his words at face value and giving up before even trying to convict him. A good solution would be to attempt to get Kuboto tried and convicted. There is still evidence against him, and he certainly will suffer through a reputation loss. In fact, even if he gets off, that wouldn't be an evil act on the part of the good guys, that is just them failing the trial, better luck next time

But he's just gotten done explaining exactly how he's got the system rigged to make sure he goes free, and right back to what he was doing. With that information, it's absolutely evil to STILL let him go to a trial you know he's going to have rigged in his favor.

Tell you what - find another way, aside from killing him, to guarantee Kabuto doesn't commit another evil act (setting aside, for a moment, the possibility of ressurrection in a D&D setting) in the future.

[JonahFalcon]

When they give an explicit promise to cause further evil? Well, it wouldn't be unreasonable. Comments like his are terroristic threats. Promises of anarchy.

Beyond that, dear Kubota had already done more than enough to justify his execution, and had just explained the very good reason to believe that this would not occur through the normal avenues of law.

You can argue V's motivations all you like, but it is my opinion that things are more likely to go in a positive direction (with some obvious fallout) than they would have if V had not intervened, and regardless of hir motives, V did carry out the proper lawful punishment for the cretin, and in likely a more painless way than anyone else could have.

Oooh, a promise from a politician. That's binding.

How do you know he wasn't basically taunting Elan?

And no, things won't go in a positive direction, because "les gens heureux n'ont pas d'histoire".

You keep thinking Hinjo is stupid and won't find out.

[JohnnyPsycho]

This comic has a way of bringing big laughs from time to time that often deserve attention. The last one I can think of was Belkar's discovery of the Oracle's Kobold Village.

It was a great way to finish off one fairly annoying side-story, as long as there were no other witnesses besides Elan and V him/herself. It took me a second to figure out why V cast the second spell, until it hit me: no evidence, no "crime". The fact that V did something so cold-heartedly precise was not only amazingly unexpected, it also just shows how much the damn elf needs some rest. Some might call it an evil act, i just call it pragmatic and efficient.

[docstrange]

It was worth doing, and NOT because it's justice.
It made sense. NOT because of V's alignment, whatever it is.

We've had so many tear-inducing strips or made-of-awesome strips and high storytelling that we often forget one of the things that has made OOTS great from the beginning: turning tropes on their ears, FOR COMEDY!!!!!

On the ship, Kubota recites chapter and verse of the hero/villain handbook and Elan plays along because that's what his prestige class does. Up to and including the surrender and a second gloating monologue. Where's it all going? Nowhere interesting! Did we really need another trial scene?

How to solve this mess? SOMEBODY has to slay the villain in the middle of his speech about how he can't be slain. Why? Because it's FUNNIER that way. This is why Rich never tells us for sure things like alignment, level, heck even the gender of a main character. To do so cramps the storytelling, and OOTS is a story first.

Kubota has to die, for the story. Somebody has to kill him, and V is the best literary character available for the job. Rich doesn't look at his meticulously crafted character sheet for V and say, "aw, darnit. He's Lawful Boring. Well, I guess I have no choice but to do 60 strips of a trial."

Remember the Law of Straczynski : "all ships move at the speed of plot."

[JonahFalcon]

...


I'm not talking about Elan here. V has the power to ensure that Kabuto will not commit evil again. Kabuto is in the middle of a monologue about how he's going to rig the trial and go free, and go right back to committing evil acts and trying to kill people (one of whom, Elan, is V's friend - don't underestimate how much that might influence V's decision-making).

When the bad guy himself is telling you exactly what he's done as is going to do, how much more evidence of guilt do you need before you realize that there isn't a good way of dealing with the situation?




But he's just gotten done explaining exactly how he's got the system rigged to make sure he goes free, and right back to what he was doing. With that information, it's absolutely evil to STILL let him go to a trial.

That isn't evil - just good planning. Again, how do you know Hinjo wouldn't have had him executed legally?

[nathanbrazil]

YEA! Woo hoo! Giant rules..

[EvilElitest]

When they give an explicit promise to cause further evil? Well, it wouldn't be unreasonable. Comments like his are terroristic threats. Promises of anarchy.

Talking is not a crime, and even threats are not actions to be responded to with death. He is still an unarmed prisoner and so killing him would still be an evil action

Beyond that, dear Kubota had already done more than enough to justify his execution, and had just explained the very good reason to believe that this would not occur through the normal avenues of law.

execution is only valid if their is a proper trial, while V is simply taking justice into his own hands, and committing murder by D&D standards not good at all

You can argue V's motivations all you like, but it is my opinion that things are more likely to go in a positive direction (with some obvious fallout) than they would have if V had not intervened, and regardless of hir motives, V did carry out the proper lawful punishment for the cretin, and in likely a more painless way than anyone else could have.

1) Murdering an unarmed prisoner is not a proper lawful punishiment, its cowardly and cruel. Ignoring the fact it is putting yourself below your enemies in terms of evil, it is also defined as evil in D&d
2) Just because they aren't killing him doesn't mean they are doing inaction. Murder is not the solution to every problem and is in fact not normally the good solution
from
EE

[Lord_Drayakir]

Oh my Gods, is amazing, I can only hope that s/he is now definitely a female, because I am so in love with her!!! That's the way to do things, the Wizard way!

[Ryusacerdos]

Very Chaotic, ignoring any and all Azure City laws and procedure. Neutral in that the guy really, really deserved it.

[Eraniverse]

All the people praising V are looking at this comic as if it were a fantasy world in which being a vigilante is 'cool.'

It's DnD... genocide is "cool."

How many sentients have the party killed?

[JonahFalcon]

It was worth doing, and NOT because it's justice.
It made sense. NOT because of V's alignment, whatever it is.

We've had so many tear-inducing strips or made-of-awesome strips and high storytelling that we often forget one of the things that has made OOTS great from the beginning: turning tropes on their ears, FOR COMEDY!!!!!

On the ship, Kubota recites chapter and verse of the hero/villain handbook and Elan plays along because that's what his prestige class does. Up to and including the surrender and a second gloating monologue. Where's it all going? Nowhere interesting! Did we really need another trial scene?

How to solve this mess? SOMEBODY has to slay the villain in the middle of his speech about how he can't be slain. Why? Because it's FUNNIER that way. This is why Rich never tells us for sure things like alignment, level, heck even the gender of a main character. To do so cramps the storytelling, and OOTS is a story first.

Kubota has to die, for the story. Somebody has to kill him, and V is the best literary character available for the job. Rich doesn't look at his meticulously crafted character sheet for V and say, "aw, darnit. He's Lawful Boring. Well, I guess I have no choice but to do 60 strips of a trial."

Remember the Law of Straczynski : "all ships move at the speed of plot."

But you're ignoring the consequences. If he did it for plot expediency, he'd have Kubuto attack Elan, forcing Elan to kill him.

No, this complicates things (unless Burlow decides to undergo Bad Writing and pretend nothing happened.)

[Lamech]

That's bad writing, which supersedes everything.

It wouldn't make a good story so that justifies it? Well then I guess Xykon is good I mean if their was no BBEG what story would their be.

[JonahFalcon]

It's DnD... genocide is "cool."

How many sentients have the party killed?

Only Belkar's killed out of anything but immediate survival. What alignment is Belkar again?

[Swordguy]

I suppose that's perfectly valid, but if we're looking at these characters as being real people, V just went 100% evil. There is nothing about killing someone in cold blood that is even remotely neutral. Ever tried stabbing someone with a knife, or shooting them? If you're in a calm frame of mind, it's almost impossible, because none of us are that evil.

Well, thanks. I'll be sure to call up my old platoon sergeant and tell him that we're all evil. Those people we shot at in our engagement zone were wearing body armor and headscarves and carrying RPGs and rifles, and there were no friendlies but us operating in that area, and they were setting up a mortar position to drop fire in our firebase...but they hadn't actually done anything yet, so it was CLEARLY evil for us to shoot them. The fact we found documentation on them showing that they had put fire on us on previous occasions clearly means nothing, does it?