OOTS #1156 - The Discussion Thread

[Peelee]

They're all dwarves, meaning that Hel got to place her own dark spirits inside of each. Even after no longer being thralls they would still follow her will.

If they wanted to. Just because they're vampire clerics made by Hel doesn't mean they have to have anything to do with her. They all just liked what they heard.

[woweedd]

If they wanted to. Just because they're vampire clerics made by Hel doesn't mean they have to have anything to do with her. They all just liked what they heard.

Indeed. Greg was fanatically loyal to Hel because he's a twisted reflection of Durkon, and Durkon wads fanatically loyal to HIS God, so Greg followed suit. If say, Roy became a Vampire, he'd probaly be just as reverent towards Hel as he was towards The Gods he followed in life. Which is to say: Not very.

[Kish]

I think "creating new stakeholders" is the page Redcloak has been on since the start of Start of Darkness. So to speak.

Spoiler

Show

"The Dark One will make sure no humanoid race will get the shaft in the next world" is functionally identical to, "The Dark One will make sure we, and the orcs and kobolds, and everyone else we recognize as like us, gets to join in hunting the sapient nonhumanoids for XP in the next world."

[Rrmcklin]

If they wanted to. Just because they're vampire clerics made by Hel doesn't mean they have to have anything to do with her. They all just liked what they heard.

Indeed. Greg was fanatically loyal to Hel because he's a twisted reflection of Durkon, and Durkon wads fanatically loyal to HIS God, so Greg followed suit. If say, Roy became a Vampire, he'd probaly be just as reverent towards Hel as he was towards The Gods he followed in life. Which is to say: Not very.

In line with this, since all, or at least a lot, of the people turned were already clerics/deeply religious, them going ahead with becoming Hel worshipers makes sense even after being freed.

[B. Dandelion]

I think "creating new stakeholders" is the page Redcloak has been on since the start of Start of Darkness. So to speak.

Spoiler

Show

"The Dark One will make sure no humanoid race will get the shaft in the next world" is functionally identical to, "The Dark One will make sure we, and the orcs and kobolds, and everyone else we recognize as like us, gets to join in hunting the sapient nonhumanoids for XP in the next world."

I agree with you more often than not, but man, I still think this reading is a major stretch.

Spoiler

Show

If the point was to indicate that Redcloak only cares about his in-group and is unconcerned with the larger concept of justice, it would have been much simpler to have him say that the Dark One would make sure no goblins would get the shaft in the next world. We know there were non-goblins created as sentient XP fodder, so it'd be obvious that he was specifically excluding them from his consideration.

By contrast there is no specific mention of non-humanoids being created as XP fodder. The humanoids were the ones specifically screwed over, so he says that they won't be getting screwed over this time. I don't see why that should imply that they will have no choice but to make another race of sapient beings to screw over and that Redcloak is indicating his support for that notion.

[Personification]

Yes, but at an unspecified point in the future. My intention now is to drag that date as far forward towards the present as I can.



Entire threads have been dedicated to this topic (and the related one "Where should you stop reading"). My own rule of thumb answer? Reaper Man.

"Guards! Guards!" and "Wyrd Sisters" are also perfectly valid too.

Grey Wolf

You would skip Equal Rites and Mort?

[Kish]

I agree with you more often than not, but man, I still think this reading is a major stretch.

Spoiler

Show

If the point was to indicate that Redcloak only cares about his in-group and is unconcerned with the larger concept of justice, it would have been much simpler to have him say that the Dark One would make sure no goblins would get the shaft in the next world. We know there were non-goblins created as sentient XP fodder, so it'd be obvious that he was specifically excluding them from his consideration.

By contrast there is no specific mention of non-humanoids being created as XP fodder. The humanoids were the ones specifically screwed over, so he says that they won't be getting screwed over this time. I don't see why that should imply that they will have no choice but to make another race of sapient beings to screw over and that Redcloak is indicating his support for that notion.

Spoiler

Show

If Redcloak meant "no race will get the shaft," why would he stick any qualifier in there--much less one that explicitly leaves out a number of races that exist in the OotS world already? Displacer beasts and worgs, for two examples that have been explicitly presented and thus can't really be argued to not exist in this particular D&D world. (I'm leaving out dragons because the existence of the gods Dragon and Tiamat makes their situation...at least less clear-cut than that of Joe and Dave.)

If Redcloak had said "no goblins will get the shaft," he would be, in effect, shouting at the camera, "And what anything noble-sounding I say actually means is that I want to be able to say 'screw you, Jack, I got mine.'" It would turn him from a well-intentioned and nuanced hypocrite to someone nearly as mustache-twirling as Xykon or Tarquin.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

You would skip Equal Rites and Mort?

Yes, obviously. I can't stand Eskarina, Mort OR Ysabell. Teenagers, specially bratty ones, are insufferable. There is other reasons too, but in the end it is still a rule of thumb, and I feel that the best place to start is the three I mentioned.

Grey Wolf

[Caerulea]

Yes, obviously. I can't stand Eskarina, Mort OR Ysabell. Teenagers, specially bratty ones, are insufferable. There is other reasons too, but in the end it is still a rule of thumb, and I feel that the best place to start is the three I mentioned.

Grey Wolf

You mentioned a debate on where to stop. What would you recommend, for when I (and others) finally get around to reading them?

—Caerulea

[Potatopeelerkin]

Noooooo! Green-jacket didn't even get to have a name.
Ah well. At least she's going to Valhalla, presumably.

The Exarch clearly went to the Sithrak school of religion.
"Convert to Hel- the goddess who hates you unconditionally!"

[deuterio12]

I agree with you more often than not, but man, I still think this reading is a major stretch.

Spoiler

Show

If the point was to indicate that Redcloak only cares about his in-group and is unconcerned with the larger concept of justice, it would have been much simpler to have him say that the Dark One would make sure no goblins would get the shaft in the next world. We know there were non-goblins created as sentient XP fodder, so it'd be obvious that he was specifically excluding them from his consideration.

By contrast there is no specific mention of non-humanoids being created as XP fodder. The humanoids were the ones specifically screwed over, so he says that they won't be getting screwed over this time. I don't see why that should imply that they will have no choice but to make another race of sapient beings to screw over and that Redcloak is indicating his support for that notion.

Spoiler

Show

What about animals and assorted low-level non-humanoid critters? They seem to get an even shorter end of the stick, hunted for both food/pelts/materials and XP fodder.

Besides cats I guess. They hunt humanoid commoners.

Speaking of which what about all the monsters that have humanoids as their primary food source? Like vampires for example.

[B. Dandelion]

Spoiler

Show

If Redcloak meant "no race will get the shaft," why would he stick any qualifier in there--much less one that explicitly leaves out a number of races that exist in the OotS world already? Displacer beasts and worgs, for two examples that have been explicitly presented and thus can't really be argued to not exist in this particular D&D world. (I'm leaving out dragons because the existence of the gods Dragon and Tiamat makes their situation...at least less clear-cut than that of Joe and Dave.)

If Redcloak had said "no goblins will get the shaft," he would be, in effect, shouting at the camera, "And what anything noble-sounding I say actually means is that I want to be able to say 'screw you, Jack, I got mine.'" It would turn him from a well-intentioned and nuanced hypocrite to someone nearly as mustache-twirling as Xykon or Tarquin.

Spoiler

Show

I don't really see much daylight between him being willing to screw over only non-goblin sapients and being willing to screw over only non-humanoid sapients. In either case he would be announcing to the camera that he has no genuine principles that are offended by the situation. XP-fodder sapients are fine with him, in theory, there's nothing innately awful about the gods betraying their own creations. He just doesn't want certain preferred people screwed over, and in one case that group of people is somewhat larger.

It definitely would have been clearer to simply say "no one will get the shaft" rather than "no humanoids," but I do think there is reason he might cite them in particular, because they were the only ones specifically mentioned to have been screwed over the first time. If sapient non-humanoids exist in this world and weren't given a raw deal this time, he just might not be worried that they would get screwed over the next time, and thus not mention them specifically. Unless we presume that sapient XP-fodder races are a necessity of world-building, but that wasn't exactly the impression I had from the crayons.

[M.A.D]

Hmm, mechanically I wonder if they failed to dominate her or just decided she wasn't important enough to even try. It looks like they dominated the other bodyguard.

It's only the three vampires, right? The Ex-Exarch, the nameless one he took with him, and the one who fled the other battle.

She had a pretty good Will saving throws. Probably built up her stats from having to listen to her mother all the time.

[Anansiil]

Aww, sounds like logic right out of my HR department. I feel like I'm back in my non-profit!

[danielxcutter]

Yes, obviously. I can't stand Eskarina, Mort OR Ysabell. Teenagers, specially bratty ones, are insufferable. There is other reasons too, but in the end it is still a rule of thumb, and I feel that the best place to start is the three I mentioned.

Grey Wolf

Personally, my uncle gave me his used Kindle with almost the entire series(aside from some of the later ones at the end), so I just started reading them from The Color of Magic.

[ijuinkun]

Generalizations are dangerous, especially when dealing with a period that is generally considered to have lasted some 1000 years and that spans such a large area. By the late Middle Ages, at least in some regions, cities often heavily regulated the carrying of weapons and outright banned everything larger than a knife of this or that size, and occasionally even banned all weapons altogether.

Also, if you were of sufficiently low social rank in some places, you had no legal right to self-defense. If a nobleman decided that he wanted to cut your head off because he was annoyed at you, then you were expected to submit, and resisting was itself treated as a criminal offense.

[faustin]

Just so we're clear, Redcloak has stated he'd be perfectly fine with a scenario where the Snarl destroys the entire world, so long as The Dark One gets a sy in the next. Putting aside why that wouldn't work, it's also an excellent example of what I said earlier, vs-a-vis Redcloak caring more about hypothetical future goblins then actual present goblins. Also, The Dark One is still Evil: I don't see a plan where he gets access to a god-killing abomination working out well.

I have been thinking about the eventual parlay between Durkon and Redcloak.

My craziest theory is that the Dark One will eventually agree to Thor's terms, but Redcloak will not .
Sounds insane? Maybe, but the way I see RC he is too caught up with "The Plan must continue", the sunk cost fallacy and his own guilt for the murder of Right Eye to being able to stop now regardless his own god's will.

[RatElemental]

I have been thinking about the eventual parlay between Durkon and Redcloak.

My craziest theory is that the Dark One will eventually agree to Thor's terms, but Redcloak will not .
Sounds insane? Maybe, but the way I see RC he is too caught up with "The Plan must continue", the sunk cost fallacy and his own guilt for the murder of Right Eye to being able to stop now regardless his own god's will.

You just described one of the few instances where a cleric can fall.

[woweedd]

I have been thinking about the eventual parlay between Durkon and Redcloak.

My craziest theory is that the Dark One will eventually agree to Thor's terms, but Redcloak will not .
Sounds insane? Maybe, but the way I see RC he is too caught up with "The Plan must continue", the sunk cost fallacy and his own guilt for the murder of Right Eye to being able to stop now regardless his own god's will.

All indication is that, in terms of Evil, The Dark One outpaces Redcloak to a fair degree. That said, yeah, I very much doubt this story will end with Redcloak getting everything she ever wanted. Partly, as mentioned, he's still a slave-holding jerk who's content to throw away the lives of his men for the sake of a "Greater Good' that may never come, and partly because, given the direction of his arc, particularly him talking to "Right-Eye" in the mirror, saying "It'll all be worth it", I doubt the conclusion of the narrative is gonna be that it really WAS all worth it.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

You mentioned a debate on where to stop. What would you recommend, for when I (and others) finally get around to reading them?

—Caerulea

"Thud!" although, again, please understand that this is a rule of thumb and not an universal truth (as evidenced by people already popping up to pick other starting positions).

Personally, my uncle gave me his used Kindle with almost the entire series(aside from some of the later ones at the end), so I just started reading them from The Color of Magic.

I tried that. It caused me to write off Pratchett for years. It is not representative of his latter (and more extensive body of work) style, and unless you are really familiar with the things he is parodying, it falls quite flat. But again: rule of thumb. THis is not the palce to discuss the specifics, we have had plenty of threads in the Media subforum for that.

Grey Wolf

[littlebum2002]

Yes, obviously. I can't stand Eskarina, Mort OR Ysabell. Teenagers, specially bratty ones, are insufferable. There is other reasons too, but in the end it is still a rule of thumb, and I feel that the best place to start is the three I mentioned.

Grey Wolf

I wouldn't say that I don't like Equal Rites or Mort, but I will say that they were both by far the least good books for their respective protagonists. You could skip them and start at Wyrd Sisters and Reaper Man and not miss very much.

I also want to add to your list the Nac Mac Feegles and Tiffany Aching who are insufferable and who ruined my favorite storyline (the witches)

"Thud!" although, again, please understand that this is a rule of thumb and not an universal truth (as evidenced by people already popping up to pick other starting positions).

I can't say that I agree with this assessment, since I just realized I haven't actually read any books after Thud! so I don't know if they're good or not.

(Reading the list again, I have read and enjoyed Making Money)

I tried that. It caused me to write off Pratchett for years. It is not representative of his latter (and more extensive body of work) style, and unless you are really familiar with the things he is parodying, it falls quite flat. But again: rule of thumb. THis is not the palce to discuss the specifics, we have had plenty of threads in the Media subforum for that.

Grey Wolf

And again I have to agree. The first two books were pretty terrible and just so much different from the rest of the series it's almost like they're a different thing altogether.


EDIT: I noticed that two of your starting places are after Pyramids (including Guards Guards which came right after it). Does this mean you did not enjoy that book, or is it just not a "good place to start"?

[LadyEowyn]

In my opinion there’s absolutely no need to read the Discworld books in order. I started with Thud! and loved it.

My suggestion would be to pick a few books from different character-group categories and see which you like, and the. read the other books in that grouping. For example, I like the Watch, find the witches passable, and can’t stand Rincewind.

There’s also other ways to group the books, like the ones that are based around Earth pop culture (Moving Pictures, Soul Music) and the ones that are satires on classic literature (Wyrd Sisters, Night Watch, Maskerade).

Basically, start in the middle, find something you like, branch out from there.

[Peelee]

Spoiler

Show

I don't really see much daylight between him being willing to screw over only non-goblin sapients and being willing to screw over only non-humanoid sapients. In either case he would be announcing to the camera that he has no genuine principles that are offended by the situation. XP-fodder sapients are fine with him, in theory, there's nothing innately awful about the gods betraying their own creations. He just doesn't want certain preferred people screwed over, and in one case that group of people is somewhat larger.

It definitely would have been clearer to simply say "no one will get the shaft" rather than "no humanoids," but I do think there is reason he might cite them in particular, because they were the only ones specifically mentioned to have been screwed over the first time. If sapient non-humanoids exist in this world and weren't given a raw deal this time, he just might not be worried that they would get screwed over the next time, and thus not mention them specifically. Unless we presume that sapient XP-fodder races are a necessity of world-building, but that wasn't exactly the impression I had from the crayons.

Given the rarher large gulf between Redcloak's words and Redcloak's actions concerning hobgoblins at the very least, I see no reason to take his states motivation at face value.

I have been thinking about the eventual parlay between Durkon and Redcloak.

My craziest theory is that the Dark One will eventually agree to Thor's terms, but Redcloak will not .
Sounds insane? Maybe, but the way I see RC he is too caught up with "The Plan must continue", the sunk cost fallacy and his own guilt for the murder of Right Eye to being able to stop now regardless his own god's will.

I also think this will happen. Redcloak mentioned the only feedback he gets that his god is still pleased is that he gets spells, so getting that taken away would be quite jarring, as well as foreshadowed.

[Dungeon-noob]

Something i just realized on the nth reread of this comic: the lower cleric(s?) of Hel are upset that people get the naming wrong, because that is actively hurting their goddess: keeping her from recieving Worship, as per the divine food diagram. Goes to show how far she's fallen: not even people in her own hemisphere, who worship the pantheon to which she belongs, Worship her, but (literally) swear by the devil's domain instead.

I think Redcloak can go two ways: stay the way he is, fall, and die because of his flaws, as per the usual Giant paradigm, or take another route, which i find more likely. I think that between the Order trying to connect/open his eyes, the new information, and the built up feedback from everything that's happened, plus maybe the MitD or Xykon (inadvertantly) helping him realize what he's become, he can see what's going wrong and at least try to change. Helping the Order would be the place to start, and then if he's still alive depending on events in the last book, his epilogue might very well be walking the earth like V to try to atone for a burden of wrongs he might never be able to right. Or die a villian, as he's killed in events or loses the mantle and all that age catches up with him, who knows.

As for the Pratchett discussion, the first two/three books are indeed very different, but i enjoyed Mort a lot. Probably helps that i like Death a lot. I myself consider it a decent starting point, but i usually make a point of staying as close to the starting point of a series as i can. So take that for what you will.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

(Reading the list again, I have read and enjoyed Making Money)

Making money is, to me, the first of the bad ones, which I define as books in which the antagonist is clearly not a threat.

EDIT: I noticed that two of your starting places are after Pyramids (including Guards Guards which came right after it). Does this mean you did not enjoy that book, or is it just not a "good place to start"?

I tend to forget it exists. I don't find it that funny, and it is not part of any of the continuities. It's not bad, just not the one I would think of when recommending a place to start.

Grey Wolf

[hroþila]

I also think this will happen. Redcloak mentioned the only feedback he gets that his god is still pleased is that he gets spells, so getting that taken away would be quite jarring, as well as foreshadowed.

Do you envision Redcloak eventually relenting, him being replaced by e.g. Jirix (this would require a time skip during the epilogue to allow him to level up, I guess), or just Thor's plan not quite being implemented?

[pendell]

I think "creating new stakeholders" is the page Redcloak has been on since the start of Start of Darkness. So to speak.

I'm pretty sure the vampires don't want more stakeholders. Stakeholders, get it?

...

Fine, fine.

I fail to see why co-optation is so much worse. When you have these many sapients all competing, of whom a third are diametrically opposed to justice and another third can be swayed either way, you're not going to get a just Prime Material world.

Real justice can only exist on the outer planes, in Celestia or in whatever the NG afterlife is. It might not even fully exist in the Happy Hunting Grounds, since chaotics are permitted to lie and steal and do all kinds of other things that push back against the idea of justice. Justice is what you get when society is lawful and good, without any evil stakeholders like Kubota to contaminate the societies they influence. You need both a lawful good framework and lawful good people to practice it.

Given these facts, given that one third of the creators of the world are evil , given that there are chaotics among neutral and good, the prime material plane is never going to be anything but an arena of struggle. A place where sapients live out their alignments and, by their example, capture souls into their world view. But a truly just order simply cannot exist there.

The only thing we CAN do is make the Prime Material plane a better place than it was. For example, by allowing goblinoids and other sentients full equality rather than life as walking XP.

And so the world becomes just a bit better -- that is, it is more just, so it is not "better" to everyone. The chaotic evil don't like the new place better with more equal and more fair treatment. But since the world is more solid and more snarlproof, it's objectively better in the only measure that all the deities can agree to.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Aveline]

Incidentally, as a programmer who struggles to explain to non-programmers the difference between Java and JavaScript (the latter was renamed from LiveScript to ride on Java's coattails), the irritation at conflating hell and Hel is deeply felt for me.

[Peelee]

Do you envision Redcloak eventually relenting, him being replaced by e.g. Jirix (this would require a time skip during the epilogue to allow him to level up, I guess), or just Thor's plan not quite being implemented?

Not the third one.

[Rrmcklin]

I don't imagine all the information about quiddity and how the Dark One is special will be pointless, but I also agree with the notion that Redcloak will see the light or end up being validated are not in the cards. How we get to that point could happen in any number of ways, though.