OOTS #1209 - The Discussion Thread

[mjasghar]

I am kind of amazed that you are reading this comic when you apparently disagree with its core message that you don’t get to judge people by race. You only get to fight someone when they are actively harming yourself or somebody else not a moment sooner.

The idea that someone has to prove to be deserving of life is nothing less than sickening.

{scrubbed}
A LOT of people really don’t get the messages or worse the authors deliberately add ambiguity to get sales {scrubbed}

[Goblin_Priest]

Redcloak isn't really the improvising kind... he's also not the giving up kind.

While I get the arguments about pacing and the cliffhanger choice... would Redcloak REALLY kill himself, putting everything he put his whole life into in peril, when so close to his goal? It just doesn't fit him. If he did that, Durkon could grab all his stuff, including the Crimson Mantle, and get rid of the body. Then nobody would be rezzing him, probably ever, and the Order would get a great advantage in their quest to stop The Plan.

On the other hand, killing Durkon, the only witness to the conversation, conveniently puts an end to his self-doubts, and allows him to focus on accomplishing his life's work, with the bonus of weakening the opposing party his is now aware of.

Also, visually, Durkon's totally the one getting imploded.

Not sure why the cliffhanger was chosen like that. Maybe Durkon survives, though that doesn't seem to fit with me. Maybe someone steps in and counterspells it (though that also doesn't really fit with me, should be too late for that). Maybe Durkon's hammer does something against death effects? Don't they have a ton of potions of death ward? I mean, I don't know. Rich is good at surprising us.

But "Redcloak offed himself" doesn't feel like it's it. /Especially/ when the author is on record saying suicide is never the solution.

[Geech]

Redcloak isn't really the improvising kind... he's also not the giving up kind.

While I get the arguments about pacing and the cliffhanger choice... would Redcloak REALLY kill himself, putting everything he put his whole life into in peril, when so close to his goal? It just doesn't fit him. If he did that, Durkon could grab all his stuff, including the Crimson Mantle, and get rid of the body. Then nobody would be rezzing him, probably ever, and the Order would get a great advantage in their quest to stop The Plan.

On the other hand, killing Durkon, the only witness to the conversation, conveniently puts an end to his self-doubts, and allows him to focus on accomplishing his life's work, with the bonus of weakening the opposing party his is now aware of.

Also, visually, Durkon's totally the one getting imploded.

Not sure why the cliffhanger was chosen like that. Maybe Durkon survives, though that doesn't seem to fit with me. Maybe someone steps in and counterspells it (though that also doesn't really fit with me, should be too late for that). Maybe Durkon's hammer does something against death effects? Don't they have a ton of potions of death ward? I mean, I don't know. Rich is good at surprising us.

But "Redcloak offed himself" doesn't feel like it's it. /Especially/ when the author is on record saying suicide is never the solution.

The idea isn't that Redcloak killed himself out of despair, but that he killed himself to talk with The Dark One.

[Lethologica]

I have never understand the idea that "Redcloak won't change and they'll have to do something else" and "the status quo will be preserved" or somehow inherently contradictory, they are not. To me, it feels perfectly natural that the heroes of the story would somehow find a way to save the world and make it a fairer place along the way. Just because we don't know how that'll be done doesn't mean it can't be.

Maybe it's just because I'm invested in Redcloak in a different way from you (and apparently, a lot of other people). I do not intrinsically tie Redcloak's character arc as supposing to be some commentary on goblinoids and what they "deserve" as a whole.

Without saying anything about your or others' viewpoints, Redcloak is the chief figure in the narrative - the only significant figure, really - who is concerned with goblin equality. As such, how his character arc proceeds is going to have serious implications, both practical and thematic, for the cause of goblin equality.

Fundamentally, at the end of the day, Redcloak the sunk-cost fallacy expert is going to lose in some fashion, and Redcloak the advocate for goblin equality is going to win in some fashion. For that to happen, someone will have to stand for the latter Redcloak - if not him, then someone he inspires. That gives rough shape to his character arc.

And the only reason I can conduct that sort of analysis is because Redcloak's character arc is a commentary on goblinoids as a whole. He is, in part, the backlash, the revolution, the language of the unheard. And while the other part of his arc is the rage and despair (E: and ego) that drive him to sink deeper and deeper in pursuit of a sunk cost, there is still the question: how will he be heard, before the end? A question which implicates him and goblinoids both.

(Arguably that's what just happened. But all talk and no action makes for a dull arc. This conversation is only the beginning of that dialogue.)

[understatement]

Yes, and now that Durkon knows all of that, I'm sure it'll be relevant regardless of what happens with Redcloak. Roy has been on the "we can't totally trust the gods" bent for awhile, and Durkon, while still a devout follower of Thor, makes it clear in this strip he has his reservations about them, as a whole, known. I don't think I'm being unreasonable in thinking the good guys of the story will ultimately do something to improve this great injustice the story has made known to the readers for awhile, and has finally getting around to the protagonists. The same way I don't see this story ending with the status quo for dwarves unchanged, even though at this juncture I don't know what will be done about it.

What reason will the Order believe in Redcloak's claim on the status quo? He just tried to kill Roy's best friend, after all (Durkon believes him before the implosion effort).

I'm just spitballing that this meeting will not be the only one between the Order and Redcloak, discounting combat scenarios. I don't think there's disagreements elsewhere on the Order's role as the breakers of the status quo.

As for payoff for Redcloak, I guess that depends on what you mean. Like I said, I'm invested in Redcloak, but I'm not invested in him as a character who actually will solve the issues he's brought to the forefront, because a central part of his character is, as far as I can see, how those issues are, ultimately, secondary to his ego and guilt. He's not going to be validated with actually being a direct part of how those issues get resolved. In somewhat oversimplied terms, his arc is more like Miko's than Belkar's or V's, I think.

I meant payoff as in him playing a role besides "Xykon's henchman". He might help the Order. He might just blow the Gate out of spite. I'll be honest -- I was 40/60 on Redcloak working upward, but 1209 knocked it to 20/80. I agree that (if he dies) his ending will be more like Miko's, a bit ironically.

The idea isn't that Redcloak killed himself out of despair, but that he killed himself to talk with The Dark One.

a) the Giant has firmly said suicide is not the answer.

b) Gate, Commune, Plane Shift work exponentially better.

c) Implosion is messy, and this leaves his body and the cloak very vulnerable.

[Rrmcklin]

What reason will the Order believe in Redcloak's claim on the status quo? He just tried to kill Roy's best friend, after all (Durkon believes him before the implosion effort).

I'm just spitballing that this meeting will not be the only one between the Order and Redcloak, discounting combat scenarios. I don't think there's disagreements elsewhere on the Order's role as the breakers of the status quo.

Because Durkon clearly believes him? The ending of this strip establishes negotiations as no go, but it doesn't establish that all of the things that Redcloak was clearly upset about aren't things he's actually upset about, and Durkon himself admitted he has no trouble believing the gods would do those things.

I meant payoff as in him playing a role besides "Xykon's henchman". He might help the Order. He might just blow the Gate out of spite. I'll be honest -- I was 40/60 on Redcloak working upward, but 1209 knocked it to 20/80. I agree that (if he dies) his ending will be more like Miko's, a bit ironically.

Well, I think that's another place we're off track. I don't think Redcloak will ever get one over Xykon. He's convinced himself he's truly the one in control, but he's not, and I expect that when all things are done. Xykon is going to make that abundantly clear to him (this could immediately proceed Redcloak dying, but it doesn't have to).

[Geech]

a) the Giant has firmly said suicide is not the answer.

b) Gate, Commune, Plane Shift work exponentially better.

c) Implosion is messy, and this leaves his body and the cloak very vulnerable.

a) Redcloak has done a lot of things that I suspect Rich would not endorse as acceptable actions. I guess I don't know the context behind "suicide is not the answer", but it's not immediately obvious why this would be different.

b) Not for Redcloak, obviously. Or perhaps they are somehow unavailable. Because the comic strip just took great pains to stress that Redcloak has never communicated directly with the Dark One. The only feedback he receives is that he still has his powers. Durkon just presented Redcloak with a lot of information that would potentially impact his decisions, but Redcloak has no way of conferring with the Dark One to verify the proposed plan would/could be acceptable. This isn't a call he can make himself, and he apparently has no other option of meeting his god.

c) Yeah, but it's also a dramatic and unexpected suicide, so it's good for a twist. Maybe it does leave his cloak vulnerable, but he could be gambling on Durkon's goodwill not to double-cross him. If he believe's Durkon is serious about the mission, then it might make some sense.

[KorvinStarmast]

Except no one has delegated any negotiation authority to Durkon, save perhaps for Thor, but even then that wasn't so much a "you can trade him what's needed to get things done" as rather merely "just try to talk him out of it".

When Redcloak asks for deity level guarantees, Durkon knows he can't speak for them since the deities in question are a bunch of bickering egotists, such that one pantheon is willing to discard the world, one is not, and the third is split down the middle. What Redcloak wants None of the gods can guarantee either, not just Durkon. For the gods to guarantee that, they'd have to come to a consensus that it's worth their while to do so, which means that Thor has a hell of a job in front of him in selling the idea that purple quiddity solves their long term problem. What Thor is doing off screen is anyone's guess, but if he's just sitting there and waiting for Durkon to pull this off, Thor's being rather naive. For someone who has seen millions of worlds come and go, naive should not be a character trait - well, that's how I see it.

I guess I'm hoping there's some sort of payoff to a character that is the second-most important villain and had half a prequel book centered around him. YMMV on the commentary.

Reddie is at best the 3rd or 4th most important villain, since Xykon is the current/present villain, the IFCC has been stirring up chaos for some time now and will (with their vessel/artifact make a major move soon) and there may be another danger that Rich tosses out in this book: Hel basically showed up as a significant villain as book 5 transitioned into book 6, so a new major problem being introduced is not beyond the pale.

Arguably that's what just happened. But all talk and no action makes for a dull arc. This conversation is only the beginning of that dialogue.)

Yeah, since Durkon has no authority to close a deal on behalf of the deities, and that is who Redcloak's grievance is with.

I'm just spitballing that this meeting will not be the only one between the Order and Redcloak, discounting combat scenarios. I don't think there's disagreements elsewhere on the Order's role as the breakers of the status quo.

They did break Durokan's gate, and Roy did break the gate in the desert. Creating upset is more or less where they fit into the OoTS world.

[Dion]

If there is another way i don't see it,

Look, I’m not expecting them to go Tom Cruise Mission Impossible and fly a helicopter through the Chunnel or whatever.

But these are PCs in a story. There are other ways to accomplish the goal.

[PontificatusRex]

Well, that was kind of heartbreaking. From a meta standpoint, I know that Redcloak agreeing would end up in the story being wrapped up right when the book was beginning, so highly unlikely. But as a reader that is very sympathetic to his stated goals, it was very sad to see him reject the hand extended to achieve those goals peaceably.

But hey, guess what, Redcloak is Evil.

And the only reason I can conduct that sort of analysis is because Redcloak's character arc is a commentary on goblinoids as a whole. He is, in part, the backlash, the revolution, the language of the unheard. And while the other part of his arc is the rage and despair (E: and ego) that drive him to sink deeper and deeper in pursuit of a sunk cost, there is still the question: how will he be heard, before the end? A question which implicates him and goblinoids both.

I don't think Redcloak's action implicate anyone but him - maybe not even the Dark One. I mean, he could have said "I need to cast Commune and get some high level guidance on this" but he didn't even do that. This is Redcloak's trip and no one else's at this point. I think there are lots of goblinoids who would have taken the deal - we met a bunch of them in "How the Paladin Got His Scar".

[ShneekeyTheLost]

I'm not buying the apparent view of Durkon being the target of Implosion. It's just the wrong spell to use in the situation if all you want to do is kill a single dwarf.

Dwarves have a bonus to con, and thus also to Fort saves, and Clerics have a high Fort save. Implosion is Fort Save or die. That's too risky, and blowing a 9th level spell slot and wasting most of it. Remember, Implosion can be maintained with concentration for up to four rounds, killing one (corporeal) target per round. You're basically wasting a 9th level spell slot when a 7th level spell slot will do the job. That being Disintegrate, which we've seen Redcloak cast before. Sure, it's also a Fort save, but it also deals damage even on a successful save, and also isn't a Death effect so Death Ward won't block it. If all he wanted to do was blow away Durkon, that would be the spell to use. Granted, he's used it as single-target before (in his previous cleric duel vs an Azurite cleric), so it's not out of the question, but I think there's something else going on here.

Hell, a Blasphemy spell would probably work out better, to be honest. Redcloak casts 9th level spells, meaning a minimum 17th level. Durkon is... what, level 13? So that's a minimum 5 level difference, which means Paralyzed, Blinded, and Deafened... no save. None. Also out of a 7th level spell slot. If he's 20th level (we haven't seen anything Epic out of him, so that's the highball) with a feat or other class ability that gives him bonuses to caster level, he could easily have an effective caster level of 23, which means instant death. That paralysis is good for 1d10 *minutes*. That's more than enough to simply CDG him, even if it doesn't outright kill him.

With Durkon at level 13, he's got a base +8 Fort save, plus his Con. We know a 21 doesn't save from the previous cleric duel, so I'm going to assume that Redcloak has an 18 Wis, and thus Implosion's DC is (10+9+5=) 23. That's a coin flip if Durkon has a Con of 20. Too risky.

Wind Walk isn't going to save Durkon, though. It takes five rounds to switch from corporeal to insubstantial. He won't have time. Not unless he manages to pull a Time Stop out of his beard somehow, which I don't believe is possible.

He doesn't need to kill himself to talk to his god, that's what Commune is for. If he wanted to ask his god, that's what he'd use.

My bet is someone walked up on them off-screen. Redcloak cannot afford to let even the consideration of this deal reach Xykon. We know there's some unknown third party bumming around, because they took out the paladins as well, Redcloak seems to be the sort of fellow who keeps True Sight up, or at least some way of detecting normally undetectable threats. Could be something like that as well. Point is... I doubt Durkon is actually the target here.

[urbanwolf]

This feels a lot like the end of Watership Down; Durkan(Hazel) goes to Redcloak (General Woundwart), and offers up a plan. The refusal showing that showing that is is not really about being a leader and saving Goblins(rabbits), it is about the need to be right(eyed).

[Gluteus_Maximus]

With Durkon at level 13, he's got a base +8 Fort save, plus his Con. We know a 21 doesn't save from the previous cleric duel, so I'm going to assume that Redcloak has an 18 Wis, and thus Implosion's DC is (10+9+5=) 23. That's a coin flip if Durkon has a Con of 20. Too risky.

Destruction's DC was 10 + 7 + (wis) which at wis 18 would be 21, so RC's wisdom is 20+ if 21 saved, because you only have to match the DC in order to save.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Destruction's DC was 10 + 7 + (wis) which at wis 18 would be 21, so RC's wisdom is 20+ if 21 saved, because you only have to match the DC in order to save.

Right, but we aren't discussing Destruction, we're discussing Implosion. Which was used then, and used here.

Destruction would be a sucker's bet against a cleric. Disintegrate has the same DC as Destruction (both 7th level spells for Redcloak since he's casting from the Destruction domain slot), and doesn't have that pesky [Death] tag which Death Ward specifically negates. RC would assume Durkon has Death Ward up before talking to him.

[understatement]

Because Durkon clearly believes him? The ending of this strip establishes negotiations as no go, but it doesn't establish that all of the things that Redcloak was clearly upset about aren't things he's actually upset about, and Durkon himself admitted he has no trouble believing the gods would do those things.

Why would Roy believe Redcloak's status quo tale? Redcloak killed/maybe killed his friend while said friend did his best at a peacetalk. If Durkon dies, the Order has absolutely no reason to believe anything Redcloak has to say, and rightly so.

Improving/breaking the status quo isn't Roy's priority -- saving the world from Xykon is.

Well, I think that's another place we're off track. I don't think Redcloak will ever get one over Xykon. He's convinced himself he's truly the one in control, but he's not, and I expect that when all things are done. Xykon is going to make that abundantly clear to him (this could immediately proceed Redcloak dying, but it doesn't have to).

Maybe. I do expect him to become more than a "number two" from the Order's POV. I really don't know.

a) Redcloak has done a lot of things that I suspect Rich would not endorse as acceptable actions. I guess I don't know the context behind "suicide is not the answer", but it's not immediately obvious why this would be different.

b) Not for Redcloak, obviously. Or perhaps they are somehow unavailable. Because the comic strip just took great pains to stress that Redcloak has never communicated directly with the Dark One. The only feedback he receives is that he still has his powers. Durkon just presented Redcloak with a lot of information that would potentially impact his decisions, but Redcloak has no way of conferring with the Dark One to verify the proposed plan would/could be acceptable. This isn't a call he can make himself, and he apparently has no other option of meeting his god.

c) Yeah, but it's also a dramatic and unexpected suicide, so it's good for a twist. Maybe it does leave his cloak vulnerable, but he could be gambling on Durkon's goodwill not to double-cross him. If he believe's Durkon is serious about the mission, then it might make some sense.

a) the Giant has written the post somewhere, but I have a terrible record of fishing them up. Still, suicide here would technically used for a 'good' purpose -- getting RC to talk to his god -- and that's a very strong value dissonance. There's a difference between Redcloak committing atrocities and the narrative supporting it (which, fyi, it doesn't).

b) Even if he dies, there's no guarantee his god will talk to him.

c) He doesn't even trust his brother or the hobgoblin spy. I don't see why he would trust a dwarf, especially one part of an adventurer team that has thwarted him multiple times.

Reddie is at best the 3rd or 4th most important villain, since Xykon is the current/present villain, the IFCC has been stirring up chaos for some time now and will (with their vessel/artifact make a major move soon) and there may be another danger that Rich tosses out in this book: Hel basically showed up as a significant villain as book 5 transitioned into book 6, so a new major problem being introduced is not beyond the pale.

Team Evil (mainly, Xykon and Redcloak) is the most direct threat to the Order. The IFCC and Hel are beyond mortal powers, but they have to jump through loops and act through significantly weaker pawns. X and RC have no such drawbacks, so I consider them to be the more important set of villains. As for Redcloak himself, he's nowhere near Xykon's power, but 1209 is pretty clear that he's still a walking codzilla.

I don't know about the voices.

[Gluteus_Maximus]

Right, but we aren't discussing Destruction, we're discussing Implosion. Which was used then, and used here.

Destruction would be a sucker's bet against a cleric. Disintegrate has the same DC as Destruction (both 7th level spells for Redcloak since he's casting from the Destruction domain slot), and doesn't have that pesky [Death] tag which Death Ward specifically negates. RC would assume Durkon has Death Ward up before talking to him.

I'm saying that your decision to put RC at wis 18 was wrong.

[TheNecrocomicon]

The IFCC and Hel are beyond mortal powers, but they have to jump through loops and act through significantly weaker pawns.

Re the IFCC, not for long if #1183 is any indication, with all its vagueness-is-coming talk of an "artifact" and a promised "vessel" for the fiends.

And Murphy's Law being what it is, whatever the IFCC are plotting is likely going to hit at the absolute worst possible time (for the protagonists anyways).

[Paleomancer]

I'm not buying the apparent view of Durkon being the target of Implosion. It's just the wrong spell to use in the situation if all you want to do is kill a single dwarf.

Dwarves have a bonus to con, and thus also to Fort saves, and Clerics have a high Fort save. Implosion is Fort Save or die. That's too risky, and blowing a 9th level spell slot and wasting most of it. Remember, Implosion can be maintained with concentration for up to four rounds, killing one (corporeal) target per round. You're basically wasting a 9th level spell slot when a 7th level spell slot will do the job. That being Disintegrate, which we've seen Redcloak cast before. Sure, it's also a Fort save, but it also deals damage even on a successful save, and also isn't a Death effect so Death Ward won't block it. If all he wanted to do was blow away Durkon, that would be the spell to use. Granted, he's used it as single-target before (in his previous cleric duel vs an Azurite cleric), so it's not out of the question, but I think there's something else going on here.

Hell, a Blasphemy spell would probably work out better, to be honest. Redcloak casts 9th level spells, meaning a minimum 17th level. Durkon is... what, level 13? So that's a minimum 5 level difference, which means Paralyzed, Blinded, and Deafened... no save. None. Also out of a 7th level spell slot. If he's 20th level (we haven't seen anything Epic out of him, so that's the highball) with a feat or other class ability that gives him bonuses to caster level, he could easily have an effective caster level of 23, which means instant death. That paralysis is good for 1d10 *minutes*. That's more than enough to simply CDG him, even if it doesn't outright kill him.

With Durkon at level 13, he's got a base +8 Fort save, plus his Con. We know a 21 doesn't save from the previous cleric duel, so I'm going to assume that Redcloak has an 18 Wis, and thus Implosion's DC is (10+9+5=) 23. That's a coin flip if Durkon has a Con of 20. Too risky.

Wind Walk isn't going to save Durkon, though. It takes five rounds to switch from corporeal to insubstantial. He won't have time. Not unless he manages to pull a Time Stop out of his beard somehow, which I don't believe is possible.

He doesn't need to kill himself to talk to his god, that's what Commune is for. If he wanted to ask his god, that's what he'd use.

My bet is someone walked up on them off-screen. Redcloak cannot afford to let even the consideration of this deal reach Xykon. We know there's some unknown third party bumming around, because they took out the paladins as well, Redcloak seems to be the sort of fellow who keeps True Sight up, or at least some way of detecting normally undetectable threats. Could be something like that as well. Point is... I doubt Durkon is actually the target here.

I really don't see why people dispute this. Redcloak is distressingly prone to killing even own allies or prospective allies when expedient. He killed the Hobgoblin initiatior rather than finish the initiation. He was relieved when Azurite resistance killed the polymorphed hobgoblin spy, so he wouldn't have had to. He vaporized the body of an experienced hobgoblin artisan killed by Tsukiko, when he could have raised him instead. The simplest explanation based on the story is that Redcloak, for whatever complicated set of emotional reasons, has decided to kill Durkon (however reluctantly).

As for choosing Implosion, Redcloal repeatedly tends to favor overwhelming force when fighting, and save or die spells are an excellent example of such a tactic. Slay Living on the hobgoblin initiator, Destruction on the Azurite high priest, Disintegrate on Hinjo (who barely survived, likely because of a paladin's high Fortitude saves and Divine Grace), Implosion on the elven resistance... Under RAW, as others have calculated above, Durkon has maybe a 40-50% chance of success. Even for a high level character, that is not remotely good odds for survival, since failure means death, end of discussion on that. Obviously narratively Durkon is probably going to make his save, but Redcloak has no way of knowing that certainty :)

Implosion also destroys the body, which is good for keeping Xykon from noticing too much. Bad things tend to happen when Xykon gets curious or suspicious.

[Gurgeh]

As far as I know, it's currently day and thus not dusk yet, and that's when he would refresh his spells as an Evil-aligned cleric.

Just a correction here: spell preparation at dusk is not part and parcel of being an evil cleric.

A divine spellcaster chooses and prepares spells ahead of time, just as a wizard does. However, a divine spellcaster does not require a period of rest to prepare spells. Instead, the character chooses a particular part of the day to pray and receive spells. The time is usually associated with some daily event. If some event prevents a character from praying at the proper time, he must do so as soon as possible. If the character does not stop to pray for spells at the first opportunity, he must wait until the next day to prepare spells.

The High Priest of Hel prepared his spells at dusk, but that's got nothing to do with Redcloak - in fact, Redcloak's first appearance in this location had him just finishing up with refreshing his spells in broad daylight! Given the action is set at the north pole, there's also no reliable way to tell what time of day it is unless we've got a good indicator of the time of year. If it's midsummer then it'll be light all day long!

Or does Redcloak possibly have more than one 9th level spell slot as per 3.5e rules?

A Cleric will always be able to prepare at least two spells of a spell level they have access to, since they're always granted a domain spell along with their normal, level-scaled allotment. So even if Redcloak is 17th level and doesn't have high enough wisdom to get any bonus 9th-level spells, he's got capacity for one more 9th-level spell on top of the Implosion he just cast.

[Lethologica]

I don't think Redcloak's action implicate anyone but him - maybe not even the Dark One. I mean, he could have said "I need to cast Commune and get some high level guidance on this" but he didn't even do that. This is Redcloak's trip and no one else's at this point. I think there are lots of goblinoids who would have taken the deal - we met a bunch of them in "How the Paladin Got His Scar".

I am not claiming that every action of Redcloak's reflects on all goblinkind or that all goblins are like Redcloak. Only that the resolution of Redcloak's character arc is deeply bound up with the thematic portrayal and practical fate of goblinkind as well as Redcloak's personal demons. That is to say, one way or another, Redcloak will be instrumental to realizing whatever goblinoid endgame Rich has in mind, and Redcloak's character arc will be a primary vehicle for grappling with the nature of that endgame.

For example: what we are witnessing here is not just Redcloak and Durkon jawing about a deal among gods and mortals. We're laying out an ideological dispute about goblin equality and the path to it - whether to tactically accept social injustice and work by economic means to normalize an environment where more just discourse can thrive, or to insist on political equality from the Powers That Be because racial uplift is doomed in the face of societal oppression. This debate practically could have been written by Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. DuBois.

And what Redcloak does from here, what happens to him and his voice, is deeply tied to what happens to the DuBois perspective on goblin equality in this story. He can be redeemed or further villainized without affecting much; the key question is whether he is legitimized or delegitimized. His actions have been wrong, undoubtedly, and his personal demons have gotten the better of him at many points in the story. But is his perspective right? How Redcloak's character arc continues will play an important role in answering that question.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

I really don't see why people dispute this. Redcloak is distressingly prone to killing even own allies or prospective allies when expedient. He killed the Hobgoblin initiatior rather than finish the initiation. He was relieved when Azurite resistance killed the polymorphed hobgoblin spy, so he wouldn't have had to. He vaporized the body of an experienced hobgoblin artisan killed by Tsukiko, when he could have raised him instead. The simplest explanation based on the story is that Redcloak, for whatever complicated set of emotional reasons, has decided to kill Durkon (however reluctantly).

I don't disagree that he's very casual about killing. I just disagree that he would resort to it when he has a far better deal on the table. He's not stupid. He's in fact probably the single most cunning character in the entire comic. He's entirely ruthless, yes. However, the problem is that rejecting this offer is a lose/lose scenario all around. The deities wipe the board, everyone dies, including the Dark One since he will be entirely without voice in the creation of the new place. All goblinoids die, and there's no guarantee they will even *exist* in the next iteration. Rejecting this offer is a literal 'game over', as in the Game Master declares the campaign to be over, packs up the DM Screen, takes his books and notes, goes home, and tosses those notes into a shredder. Now, he may believe that a loss for everyone is still less of a loss for goblins, since they had less overall to lose, but it's still everyone on his side ceasing to exist.

Taking the deal... yea, they may be backstabbed at some point in the future. He's not wrong to be worried about that. However, it is a choice between a possible future backstab and an immediate Game Over. It's not about willingness to kill. It's about the deal being the only possible chance of any sort of survival.

Which is why I'm betting the actual target is something walking up on them, possibly one of the hobgoblins. As you said, and I agree with, no one's life is sacred to him.

As for choosing Implosion, Redcloal repeatedly tends to favor overwhelming force when fighting, and save or die spells are an excellent example of such a tactic. Slay Living on the hobgoblin initiator, Destruction on the Azurite high priest, Disintegrate on Hinjo (who barely survived, likely because of a paladin's high Fortitude saves and Divine Grace), Implosion on the elven resistance... Under RAW, as others have calculated above, Durkon has maybe a 40-50% chance of success. Even for a high level character, that is not remotely good odds for survival, since failure means death, end of discussion on that. Obviously narratively Durkon is probably going to make his save, but Redcloak has no way of knowing that certainty :)

Implosion also destroys the body, which is good for keeping Xykon from noticing too much. Bad things tend to happen when Xykon gets curious or suspicious.

Disintegrate also destroys the body. Drop a Blasphemy to guarantee immobilize Durkon. Drop a Harm to deal guaranteed damage, even on a successful save, one that explicitly cannot kill him. Then Disintegrate so that even on a successful save, he still gets dusted. Takes a couple extra lower level spell slots, granted, including his 7th level domain slot, but it's a hell of a lot less risky than a fifty-fifty shot that leaves the opponent cleric capable of either escaping (Word of Recall, Meld Into Stone...) or retaliating, risking your OWN shot at a potential failed save. Hell, just Blasphemy to paralyze, use a Titanium or Chlorine Elemental summon to kill him, and Disintegrate the body.

At this point, Redcloak has no one on his side capable of resurrecting him, and Xykon is more likely to do something childish like raise him as a lesser undead just to play around with him. So if he dies, so does any chance of the Dark One's ritual going off before the pantheons hit the reset button. He literally cannot afford the risk of a single failed save ruining everything at this point. Especially not one targeting the strong save of a race that is known to be particularly good at.

It's not just that it makes no sense for Redcloak to target Durkon, it's that it is too big a risk to Redcloaks current plans to fail to take him out at this point if he decides that force is necessary. It doesn't make sense that someone this competent would make such a risky move at this stage when other far less risky options exist.

[Psyren]

Real question is how are they going to convince him now, because that really is the only way to stop Snarl, but i doubt Roy's plan would work, i pin RC as someone who would be liable to say "if i am going down i am taking you all with me." In other words if OoTS somehow manages to defeat Xykon and RC and capture RC alive i could see RC deciding it's better to let the world die then fix it for the humans and other races, while goblins continue living as fodder. We already established he does not trust the gods, so another parlay is out of the question.

Just because he's being a prat now doesn't mean it's completely impossible to reach him. "What is even the point of being a cleric if divine revelations can't change your mind" after all.

In fact, Durkon never got around to perhaps the biggest revelation of all - that the Dark One himself (itself?) won't survive the world being destroyed. That might get Redcloak's attention (or even that of his boss) moreso than anything else Durkon revealed.

Granted, a lot of this is contingent on Durkon making his saving throw.

[Rogar Demonblud]

That is so patently a lie to serve Durkon's purposes Redcloak will reject it out of hand. Durkon would have to start with explaining the whole divine food pyramid to Redcloak, and then start working him through the steps. Worship? We've hardly seen a goblinoid other than a cleric do that. The two major characters who aren't clerics we've seen this discussion with have both declared TDO to be (in Oona's phrase) no big whoop. Belief? Goblinoids only, and possibly not even all of them. Other pantheons get Belief not only from their followers, but also followers of the other pantheons (and orcs, and dragons, lizardfolk, kobolds, goblinoids, heck even Redcloak Believes in the three pantheons). Dedication? I don't think we've seen anybody die with TDO's name on their lips, although that might be a limitation of the narrative focus. Which largely leaves TDO with Souls. Not all goblinoid souls, though, just those of his worshippers (see above).

The other kicker is that we have no idea how long it will take for the Snarl to calm down enough that the gods can start re-weaving its prison. The longer it takes, the more likely the weaker gods are to starve.

Maybe somebody should suggest TDO get a tour of the Graveyard of Worlds. Tiamat seems to be the only deity he still talks with, and I doubt another deity would mess with her.

[Lethologica]

I don't disagree that he's very casual about killing. I just disagree that he would resort to it when he has a far better deal on the table. He's not stupid. He's in fact probably the single most cunning character in the entire comic. He's entirely ruthless, yes. However, the problem is that rejecting this offer is a lose/lose scenario all around. The deities wipe the board, everyone dies, including the Dark One since he will be entirely without voice in the creation of the new place. All goblinoids die, and there's no guarantee they will even *exist* in the next iteration. Rejecting this offer is a literal 'game over', as in the Game Master declares the campaign to be over, packs up the DM Screen, takes his books and notes, goes home, and tosses those notes into a shredder. Now, he may believe that a loss for everyone is still less of a loss for goblins, since they had less overall to lose, but it's still everyone on his side ceasing to exist.

There are two reasons Redcloak would do this.

One, brinksmanship. Redcloak thinks he can get more concessions before he blinks. (Whether sending Durkon back to Thor in bits is likely to hinder further concessions...well, Redcloak has to weigh that against the hindrance posed by the Order and the benefits on that front of taking Durkon off the table.)

Two, ignorance. Redcloak thinks the end of the world means TDO gets to participate in creating the next one, so while he doesn't want the world to end, in some ways it's still a win from his perspective. He doesn't know TDO would get wiped off the board as well.

[RatElemental]

Right, but we aren't discussing Destruction, we're discussing Implosion. Which was used then, and used here.

Destruction would be a sucker's bet against a cleric. Disintegrate has the same DC as Destruction (both 7th level spells for Redcloak since he's casting from the Destruction domain slot), and doesn't have that pesky [Death] tag which Death Ward specifically negates. RC would assume Durkon has Death Ward up before talking to him.

1. Yes, it was Destruction. Redcloak couldn't even cast Implosion at the time. Else it wouldn't have been a new spell level when he crushed the resistance.

2. Implosion is not a death effect. It's a save or die, but it lacks the [Death] descriptor, Death Ward will do nothing against it. This is actually one of the more compelling reasons to use it.

Bit of a side point, but the cleric actually had a 22 on his save. But whether that means he failed anyway on a 22 or he would have succeeded if he was better with numbers is up in the air.

[Gurgeh]

There are a bunch of perfectly valid reasons to use Implosion; I have no idea why anyone would fixate on it being "not the best tool for the job" as a reason for it to not be used to kill Durkon.

1) As a ninth-level spell, its save DC is higher than any other directly harmful effect that Redcloak can employ. If you're going to turn on someone, then you want to maximise your chances of utterly destroying them right away; anything with a lower DC is going to make it more likely that Durkon will be able to survive the initial attack and retaliate or escape.
2) It doesn't require any attack rolls and it's not restricted to melee range. Fewer moving parts than Harm or Disintegrate.
3) As a (probable) domain spell, it's a less flexible option to burn; he wouldn't have been able to convert it to a spontaneous infliction spell (though spontaneous infliction is probably less valuable than spontaneous healing).
4) If Durkon has any hidden allies ready to spring into action once hostilities commence, Redcloak's got a powerful spell to squash them with.

The only real argument against using Implosion is that the target doesn't suffer any adverse consequences if they make their save - though the damage from a successful save against Disintegrate (5d6) or Destruction (10d6) is going to be unremarkable for an adventurer of Durkon's level, anyway.

[Yirggzmb]

Honestly, from a meta perspective, being presented with a better option here and rejecting it violently (if perhaps a bit conflicted) serves a similar narrative role as the related scene in SoD. It gets the audience up to speed on how set in his plan Redcloak is without having to have read the prequel. Perhaps we'll even get a scene of Redcloak monologuing to himself about it, assuming Durkon actually dies again here.

[Cracklord]

“I am in blood stepped in so far that should I wade no more, Returning were as tedious as go o’er,”

All there really is to be said.

[Wizard_Lizard]

Kind of unrelated note but I just checked and turns out the OOTS comic is older than I am... not sure how I feel about that...

[RMS Oceanic]

Kind of unrelated note but I just checked and turns out the OOTS comic is older than I am... not sure how I feel about that...

I know how I feel about it: Old.