OOTS #1232 - The Discussion Thread

[danielxcutter]

I also think that part of the problem is that the gods didn't think this could have happened at all, and considering how long they went through the contrary I don't exactly blame them. As large as the gap is between gods and mortals, billions if not trillions of years spent having the Snarl wreck their stuff's worn them down.

[bunsen_h]

I agree - and I suspect that in the period while waiting for The Snarl to calm down the gods have little to do except talk about future plans (and past glories, maybe some boardgames etc.)

Blind Io took up the dice-box, which was a skull whose various orifices had been stoppered with rubies, and with several of his eyes on the Lady he rolled three fives. She smiled. This was the nature of the Lady's eyes: they were bright green, lacking iris or pupil, and they glowed from within.

The room was silent as she scrabbled in her box of pieces and, from the very bottom, produced a couple that she set down on the board with two decisive clicks. The rest of the players, as one God, craned forward to peer at them.

"A wenegade wiffard and fome fort of clerk," said Offler the Crocodile God, hindered as usual by his tusks. "Well, weally!" With one claw he pushed a pile of bone-white tokens into the centre of the table.

The Lady nodded slightly. She picked up the dice-cup and held it as steady as a rock, yet all the Gods could hear the three cubes rattling about inside. And then she sent them bouncing across the table.

A six. A three. A five.

Something was happening to the five, however. Battered by the chance collision of several billion molecules, the die flipped onto a point, spun gently and came down a seven. Blind Io picked up the cube and counted the sides.

"Come on," he said wearily, "Play fair."

-- Terry Pratchett, The Colour of Magic

And of course there's the "roll 3d6 six times for your stats, in order" option.

[Squire Doodad]

I can't imagine Hinjo would be willing to put the past aside so long it includes abandoning all the citizens that got captured during Azure City's invasion and made into slaves.

One recurring part of my imagined endings involves New Azure City being founded on the island the Azurites are at, old Azure City staying Gobbotopia but with there being a not-insubstantial "Azuretown" section populated by the former slaves. Gobbotopia has more land than they can farm without slaves, so you could probably give the Azurites farms for that area and free rein of the waterfront and artisanship supplies and whatnot.
In other words, the site of Azure City goes from being the location of the greatest clash between human and goblinoid forces to the location of human and goblin reconciliation.

[CountDVB]

I also think that part of the problem is that the gods didn't think this could have happened at all, and considering how long they went through the contrary I don't exactly blame them. As large as the gap is between gods and mortals, billions if not trillions of years spent having the Snarl wreck their stuff's worn them down.

There's also the fact about contractual obligations. If another god tried taking in the goblinoids, would Fenris have been okay with it? I mean, here, it was more a goblin ascended into the position to be the god of his people, but didn't make a fuss because they figured he wasn't gonna last more than a world. If another god, either in the Northern Pantheon or out got invested, that could've caused a debacle.

[Ionathus]

Beautifully said.

Thank you!

A final point: Sure, you can establish that the trolls in your world are actually peaceful and misunderstood, not the raving fearless carnivores they are in regular D&D. But if your goal is to make commentary on how trolls are treated in a typical D&D game, you should have typical D&D trolls, shouldn't you?

Or, you can split the difference: they are fearless carnivores who are also misunderstood. You're not required to have "typical" D&D trolls in order to make a commentary on the treatment of D&D trolls -- because the portrayal of the trolls is also part of the commentary.

Yes, I agree that if you're commenting on the treatment of a "misunderstood" fantasy race, you shouldn't make them all-loving perfect pacifists. That's saccharine and didactic. But there's a middle ground here, where you can start from the actual situation – "trying to survive & prosper, same as everyone else" – and examine how that gets Rashomon'd into two different narratives:

1. "The vile monsters keep encroaching on our land! Slay the trolls and make the world safe again!"
2. "Every year, more humans! They come deeper and deeper into our swamp and fight us, kill us, burn us! Fight hard until we've scared them off for good!"

[danielxcutter]

That's a bit of a straw man, isn't it? I don't think anyone on this forum is arguing that goblins should be killed on sight just because they are evil. Some of us are arguing that the goblin victimhood narrative isn't up to snuff, and that there could be very good reasons for defending yourself against most goblin groups.

On the other hand, a few forum members seem to be on the border of arguing "the goblins are victims of an unjust system and therefore what they did to Azure City was justified, if it eventually leads to equality for them."

A final point: Sure, you can establish that the trolls in your world are actually peaceful and misunderstood, not the raving fearless carnivores they are in regular D&D. But if your goal is to make commentary on how trolls are treated in a typical D&D game, you should have typical D&D trolls, shouldn't you?

Nobody's actually arguing that what the goblins did is "justified", except maybe a few imaginary opponents who make poor arguments that are easier to refute.

And conversely, just because the hobgoblins destroyed Azure City and built a settlement on the ruins doesn't negate the fact that it was basically impossible for them to improve their standing with the PC races otherwise, or the fact that they were majorly shafted at the creation of the world even if most of it was unintentional.

I don't like the fact that the Azurites got boned, but I can't really condone magicking the status quo back to what it is considering what it was like.

[Ruck]

But then how do you keep track of my brilliance and wit?

Why cling to the past when new examples are just around the corner?

That's a bit of a straw man, isn't it?

Not really, no. Considering someone cited a comic from the first 100 where a goblin teenager said "Usually Neutral Evil" as a justification for killing goblins. And considering that multiple people have insisted that various species are Usually Evil in the Monster Manual which means they do Evil things in OOTS which means killing them is fine.

On the other hand, a few forum members seem to be on the border of arguing "the goblins are victims of an unjust system and therefore what they did to Azure City was justified, if it eventually leads to equality for them."

Now who's strawmanning?

[danielxcutter]

If the MM exists in the OotSverse for people to read, I'd bet my left arsecheek that it was written by either someone from a PC race or a god who hated Fennel's guts.

[CountDVB]

If the MM exists in the OotSverse for people to read, I'd bet my left arsecheek that it was written by either someone from a PC race or a god who hated Fennel's guts.

V mentioned the Monster Manual and noted elves were in it. Celia I think noted humans aren't in the monster manual. So obviously it was made by a human XD

[Krakius]

So I'm going to try something new for me where I don't try to read through the whole thread before making a reply. Because that hardly ever works for me. So if I'm making a point that somebody's already made, I'm sorry, but at this point I don't really care.

First, I'm starting to think less that I'm not completely onboard with this revelation because it goes against the idea that goblins are oppressed (and regardless of what you think, I think it's pretty obvious that the portrayal of goblins in this comic leans more towards being oppressed than not being oppressed or being the oppressors) than the notion that their take on events is unreliable and that they're too biased, and that the more reliable and unbiased take comes from the white guy who helped make the whole unjust system in the first place, upholds it, and benefits from it. If what Redcloak said it the single least charitable way to describe it, then this is the single most charitable way to describe it.

Second, the argument Thor makes on panel six is kind of uncomfortable. Part of it is that it definitely feels reminiscent of Social Darwinism as applied to race. That conflict between different racial or ethnic groups is just how the world works and how it's supposed to work. Adventurers are just goblin's natural predators~. Hey, here's an idea, Thor. Maybe the problem isn't just that the playing field isn't level, it's that different races shouldn't be fighting and killing each other on the basis of race. And they shouldn't be doing it just because you and the rest of the gods stand to benefit from it. Yeah, yeah, I know that people fighting each other and gaining xp is how you get the best souls to nom, circle of life and all that, but it's not really an antelope's concern if a lion is going hungry.

[bunsen_h]

V mentioned the Monster Manual and noted elves were in it. Celia I think noted humans aren't in the monster manual. So obviously it was made by a human XD

This and this. Also this and this, and Redcloak is working from a book of monsters labelled "MM2" here.

[Jason]

And conversely, just because the hobgoblins destroyed Azure City and built a settlement on the ruins doesn't negate the fact that it was basically impossible for them to improve their standing with the PC races otherwise, or the fact that they were majorly shafted at the creation of the world even if most of it was unintentional.

But is it a fact that it was impossible to improve their standing otherwise?
HtPGHS features hobgoblins and humans basically at peace with each other at the end. Start of Darkness features goblins living in peace with humans, and apparently content with their lot, until Xykon shows up.

And were the goblins shafted at the creation, or when Fenris abandoned them some indeterminate time later?

[Vikenlugaid]

Durkon did not talk about the BIG point: if a party of humans/dwarves/elfs , even lawful good people, totally massacre an entire village of goblins, kids included... Nothing happens, even a paladin can kill a goblin kid without losing his paladin mojo, and gods are the ones who decide that, so yes, gods, the good ones, think of goblins as XP.

[Nomen]

There is no obvious solution to the delema.
The most basic step is if you could get most major powers to agree on paper that goblins should be treated as indiviguals and killing or otherwise harming a goblin should be treated with the same weight as doing the same to a human.
Of course how your supposed to do that and if people will actually follow through is another question.
Also that won't fix the no good land thing.
You could offer land reparations but whose land goes to which goblins?
But how would they even get this far? Who has the ability to do that much.
What could the gods do? Argue all you want if they are responsible or not. They presumably will want help from the dark one, what can they offer in return?
At least the major good gods could tell their priests that hurting a goblin or taking a goblins life should be treated with the same weight as doing the same to a human. Whether their priests, followers, non-followers listen is another question.
The gods could presumably offer material aid which would normally be off the table like a fertility goddess making it bloom in the desert just for them.
The gods could also agree to terms like no priest can cast third+ level spells until they give goblins so much aid.

[Jason]

Now who's strawmanning?

Maybe a little, but some people seem pretty close to that view.

[Thermophille]

There seem to be two separate threads happening at the same time.

1) people trying to figure out the *reason* for the goblins being abandoned by the gods

I think it's closer to people trying to figure out who's fault it is that goblins are in their current situation. Fenris' abandonment, Goblin's natural aggression making them more likely to attack neighbors, and self-defense mashed together with racial stereotyping have all been cited, but a lot of people seem to want to have a single group or person that they can point to and have it be (at least mostly) their fault.

I mentioned this earlier, but I think it's detractive to try to blame anyone. Each person who's hung up on finding someone to blame is actively holding back the ability for the situation to progress constructively.

2) people trying to figure out *solutions* for the goblins being abandoned by the gods

I think a lot of people are talking about what the solution could have been if the attack on Azure city never happened. That's definitely tricky, but fortunately we don't have to worry about that for now. The best solution is for a peace treaty between the azurites and goblins where the azurites get their people back who are slaves in exchange for the goblins getting undisputed rights to the land. Enough people champion that goblins should have as many rights as anyone, and soon enough, we get to the point where we just have to wait a couple generations for racial intolerance to die down.

The elves will take a while, but they'll have their hands tied if everyone else is on board.

[Yirggzmb]

If what Redcloak said it the single least charitable way to describe it, then this is the single most charitable way to describe it.

*nods* With many things, the truth is often somewhere in the middle. This is highly likely one of them.

[arimareiji]

Decades ago, Frank Herbert wrote about how some groups are unable to tolerate any reduction in their power over others, and because they allow no outlet it's like they've dammed up a river that builds up more and more force. There's nowhere for the water to go, but they can't imagine a world in which it's allowed to do anything other than what they want. That's the way it is, so that's the way it should always be.

I suspect some of the more "righteous" pro-humans in the Stickverse will still be quibbling over how they're the rightful owners of their back yard and how dare the water trespass on their property, as their house gets washed away.

(Oh wait, we already did that.)

Spoiler: Bonus content (preface to SoD)

Show

I know, personally, that the good and caring impulses of the human heart will always win out over any evil tendencies. You need only look to myself, a paladin of unassailable virtue, to see a shining example of everything that is right in this wretched world in which we live.
This story [i.e. the comic], however, takes the simple and undeniably true premise that all evil creatures are uniformly and irredeemably evil and deliberately confuses the issue by showing us that some villains might perform evil actions for purportedly noble reasons. Do not be swayed by this rhetoric, however: we all know that every being of the same alignment is indistinguishable from one another... to ascribe “motivations” to evil creatures is merely giving comfort to the enemy.

He'd hate the comparison to Miko, but at least Belkar is honest about his motivations (panel 2).

Well I just figured we'd wander around, kill some sentient creatures just 'cause they have green skin and fangs and we don't, and then take their stuff.

[WanderingMist]

Only if society really does consider trolls and goblins to be equivalent. Trolls in the monster manual are generally described as more monstrous than goblins (being often described as having no society as such and eating anything they come across). They are also larger (and therefore appear more dangerous), usually Chaotic Evil and less intelligent than a goblin.

But until OotS proves that trolls in this world deviate greatly from the standard I'd say it's pretty fair to assume they simply don't and that the standard... stands.
Otherwise this logic could be applied to literally every entry in the Monster Manual that hasn't been consistently shown, even Xykon's.

You know what, you've given me an idea. I've decided Redcloak is wrong on two fronts. He shouldn't be using threats to coerce the other races and even gods to agreeing to his demands. But the scope of his idea is too narrow anyway. He shouldn't be fighting for only goblins, he should be fighting for equality for all (sentient) monster races.

EDIT: As for Xykon, there are exceptions to his kind as well. Most liches are evil, but according to the Forgotten Realms wiki, Archliches were Good by default, and Baelnorn chose lichdom solely to defend their families and lands and could be any alignment.

[Ikuryo]

The problem ultimately lies with Fenris' behavior.

He created a species with a short max lifespan:

Less time for an individual to gain knowledge and experience
Skills in crafting are slower to develop as you keep having to teach the basics to the next generation
The oldest of the race ends up with middling skill compared to other longer lived races
Race A lives 40 years, 20-30 years can be spent to advance a trade
Race B lives 2-300+ years, 1-200+ years can be spent experimenting and advancing a trade
Result of that should be obvious

He created a species with a high birth rate:

Many children means you need more food and such
All your time is spent trying to keep people fed and sheltered
Little time left available to dedicate to advancing a trade (Blacksmithing, tailoring, etc)

Combined with the first point their ability to make strong advanced weapons and armor is limited, leads to them being plentiful but weak, leads to them being perfect XP fodder.

He abandoned them after creation for other more interesting projects:
They don't have divine protection or guidance
They don't have someone to speak up for them at the godsmoots

They end up in a position similar to animals but they have high resource requirements because of their high breeding rate so they are forced to expand and end up in conflict with the other races that are already there. After raiding the other races a couple of times to try and survive the other races would start to take it personally and hit them back, over time this would lead to the other races adopting a "kill on sight" view and treating the Goblins the same way you would treat a cockroach. If you see one there are dozens nearby and if you don't exterminate the nest they will breed out of control and make a mess of your area.

The various species are being treated equally by the system but their traits are leading to advantages and disadvantages that are not actually inherit in the design.

Only one the goblins can really blame for their lot in life is their creator god and his irresponsibility.

[Vikenlugaid]

But is it a fact that it was impossible to improve their standing otherwise?
HtPGHS features hobgoblins and humans basically at peace with each other at the end. Start of Darkness features goblins living in peace with humans, and apparently content with their lot, until Xykon shows up.

And were the goblins shafted at the creation, or when Fenris abandoned them some indeterminate time later?

Like i just said, a paladin can kill a harmless kid without losing his paladin's powers, and that means the gods, good gods who gave that paladin his powers, think that killing a harmless kid is a good thing if that kid's skin is green.

Of course, afrer How the paladin got his scar, if some random goos adventurers shows at that hobgoblin village and massacre all the goblins, none would punish them, they would be heroes. Same with Righteye family (actually, some adventurers killed them).

No, it is a fact, goblins are screwed by the system.

[bunsen_h]

Like i just said, a paladin can kill a harmless kid without losing his paladin's powers, and that means the gods, good gods who gave that paladin his powers, think that killing a harmless kid is a good thing if that kid's skin is green.

Rich did say that some of the paladins who participated in the raid on Redcloak's village would probably have lost their paladinhood for their actions. "Off-screen", since that wasn't a factor he wanted to focus on at that point in the story-telling.

[Vikenlugaid]

Rich did say that some of the paladins who participated in the raid on Redcloak's village would probably have lost their paladinhood for their actions. "Off-screen", since that wasn't a factor he wanted to focus on at that point in the story-telling.

If Rich said that, ok... But it is kind of... Inconsistent, i mean, obviously the Saphire Guard kept doing that raids for decades. I think they would had changed their modus operandi if they saw paladins falling for that.

PD: sorry about my english btw.

[Ikuryo]

They are free to try and fix it and they are working to do just that.

The issue is more with their blaming the other gods and claiming they were created to be nothing more then an XP farm for the other races. After taking the Azurite city they are trying to set up relations with various other races to elevate themselves from fodder to foe. Time will tell if they manage to stabilize as a society or if they keep increasing in number to the point where their current kingdom is insufficient for their needs and they need to start raiding once more to keep their people fed. Assuming the world last long enough for that point to be reached. It is difficult to make predictions without knowing the amount of land they currently have control of, the productivity of said land, the population of the goblinoids in the kinddom as well as the average birth rate.

Edit: hmm posts I was replying to were deleted.. whatever.

[elros]

Imagine Frensir was a neglectful father who ignored or even abandoned his children (the goblins) when they didn't "succeed" the way he wanted them to.

I could understand it if his brother (Thor) was too busy raising his own kids (dwarves, humans, etc) to intervene or even look into the situation very much. But he acknowledges in this comic that the kids are, effectively, being abandoned, and the oldest child (TDO) has had to pick up the slack and try to keep everyone fed and alive. Unfortunately the oldest child is a bit emotionally screwed up (can't imagine why) and is not exactly doing a bang-up job as a parent.

The fact that Fernsi is a bad parent is a reason for his children's abandonment...but it doesn't provide a solution. The kids are still abandoned, and have been for some time, and continuing to shift the blame around isn't going to convince Fenirs to come back and take care of everyone, so they've got to figure out something else. That's what many of us have been trying to argue.

As for the afterlife argument...this comic has pretty frequently made the point that just because you think an afterlife is waiting for you doesn't mean you shouldn't live the best life you can, right now. Plus, following that train of thought, it's pretty easy for an oppressor to say "sure, your life is bad now, and I just happen to be profiting off your exploitation, but just think of the wonderful afterlife you'll have! As long as you don't upset my status quo, right now."

edit:ninja


Not many, I'm sure, but then there are more Neutral and Evil gods than Good ones. That's never been an excuse for Good characters to not do the Good thing before. God politics are complicated, I'm sure, but just wringing that "okay yeah we kinda maybe sorta didn't 100% treat them fairly" half-apology from Thor was a step in the right direction.

I'm still so impressed with Durkon for directly challenging his own god's actions and motives.

You are assuming that the goblins were peacefully sitting around when every other oppressor race came and attacked them, which is not what is said in the comic. Everything that was created in the world was put in competition, and the goblins were created by a god who thought they would win. They entered into a fight and then cried oppression when they were not winning.

Also remember that the entire goblin race has had opportunities for peaceful living (the bugbears up north, the large hobglobin fort, and the goblin village in SoD), and Redcloak killed many of them in his pursuit of the Dark One's plan.

My prediction is that the Dark One has been lying to Redcloak, and that the Dark One does not want to use control of the gate to better the goblin race, but instead to destroy the other gods because he is vengeful. When Redcloak realizes that he has been lied to, I think Serini will be the one to convince him that he has other options that are better for the goblin race. I also predict Redcloak will remove the artifact of the dark one and fade away like someone else we know.

[Rrmcklin]

If Rich said that, ok... But it is kind of... Inconsistent, i mean, obviously the Saphire Guard kept doing that raids for decades. I think they would had changed their modus operandi if they saw paladins falling for that.

PD: sorry about my english btw.

It's only inconsistent if you assume that employing bad methods means the mission itself is bad or unimportant. The Bearer of the Crimson Mantle is a threat to all of creation, that's just a fact so that doesn't mean the Sapphire Guard's mission was wrong. It just meant certain methods (indiscriminate murder) were. But there's nothing say all members of Sapphire Guard indiscriminately murdered.

But the larger point is that we didn't see any of those paladins fall because it wasn't important for the story; it would mean nothing to Redcloak. That is not the same thing as saying all of those paladins definitely did not fall.

[Squire Doodad]

Also that won't fix the no good land thing.

That's mostly fixed given that the Hobgoblins and Gobbotopia own a stretch of land so big they need slaves to farm it all. Bugbears are happy as is, and odds are there's a fair few villages. Hinjo's a surprisingly open-minded guy; once Redcloak helps seal the Snarl (thus eliminating its threat for the future for hopefully centuries on end), he'd probably be willing to negotiate a treaty that lets the goblins stay in Azure City in exchange for freeing the slaves, maybe a memorial or something, etc.

The gods could presumably offer material aid which would normally be off the table like a fertility goddess making it bloom in the desert just for them.
The gods could also agree to terms like no priest can cast third+ level spells until they give goblins so much aid.

We just had a comic that explained the gods are physically incapable of doing the former, and the latter is...very problematic. I think a cleaner solution would be Thor offering to send some of his high level clergy to assist the goblins for a short span of time?

===

At the end of the day, this world already has the means and connections in place to solve the majority of the issues Redcloak is arguing about. However, it is Redcloak's mindset that holds it all back. The Order has connections enough with Thor and Azure City to fix the Snarl and establish treaties respectively.
Which is why the OotS's plan is "end Xykon and hit Redcloak with a hammer until he agrees to help"

[Ganbatte]

This is what I really don't get-- no matter how often Rich goes out of his way to rail against the stereotyping of entire races of sentient beings, no matter how often he portrays groups of those people as living peacefully in the comic, people are still like "Okay but the Monster Manual says they're Evil so it's fine to kill them on sight." (I don't see much distinction between that and "they're usually stereotypically portrayed as doing Evil so it's fine to kill them on sight.")

Who said it's fine to kill them on sight because on the Monster Manual they're Evil?
Just asking, I don't remember a single user claiming this.

How you portray them in your D&D game is your business, but as often as Rich has said he is challenging this idea and how the game is usually played, I do not think making the same assumptions about OOTS "monstrous races" will lead you to accurate conclusions about the comic.

In the absence of contradictory evidence assuming the norm stands is the fair thing to do, after all we've seen our fair share of monsters who behave exactly as expected.

Not really, no. Considering someone cited a comic from the first 100 where a goblin teenager said "Usually Neutral Evil" as a justification for killing goblins. And considering that multiple people have insisted that various species are Usually Evil in the Monster Manual which means they do Evil things in OOTS which means killing them is fine.

Aaah, I see. No, this isn't what happened at all.
The strip where the goblin confirms they're "Usually Evil" was cited to show how based on their alignment the historical enmity with other "usually good" races is probably not unwarranted, and that their current situation maybe is not because they're the helpless victims that Redcloak pretends them to be.

And multiple people insisted that if you do evil smacking you in the face with a Hammer is justified, and if X is "Usually Evil" the chance of said group taking evil solutions and deserving said smacking is probable.

Nobody ever said you should "murder anyone under the Evil alignment on sight". It just didn't happen.

Of all the possible hypothetical results for the hypothetical situation, we’ve seen no direct evidence that this isn’t one of the possibilities.

Look, do you remember how Tiamat stood up for the dragons in the comic? And do you remember how Odin gave advice to dwarves in the comic? And do you remember how the 12 gods punished a paladin for harming a human in the comic? Amd do you remember how Thor fought for the souls of the dwarves in the comic?

Those are all things the gods have (apparently) not bothered to do for goblins.

Because they're not part of their portfolio.
Tiamat is directly related to dragons, makes sense she stands for them. Same for Odin and Thor looking after dwarves. Same for the 12 gods punishing one of their own.
Everyone has a niche they're filling based on symbolism that equates to faith.
Messing with another deity's creation might be an overreach of their confines - maybe Fenris doesn't care much about goblins but that doesn't mean other deities are allowed to meddle with his area, especially given how belief literally shapes them.

Because it wasn't Thor's ball, and if he tried to take the Fenris's ball he could have started a deity fight.

Pretty much this. People seems to assume these fantasy gods can do whatever the hell they want to "correct" the mortal world, yet we know they're extremely bound by rules and regulations.

And if you've seen someone being punched and don't do anything to stop it, no matter your reason it doesn't change the actual fact that you didn't do anything to stop someone getting punched.

It also doesn't make you guilty of anything.
Plenty of valid reasons why you wouldn't or couldn't or shouldn't meddle with a stranger's fistfight.

[hungrycrow]

You are assuming that the goblins were peacefully sitting around when every other oppressor race came and attacked them, which is not what is said in the comic. Everything that was created in the world was put in competition, and the goblins were created by a god who thought they would win. They entered into a fight and then cried oppression when they were not winning.

This is kind of looking at what happened like the goblin race was one player in a strategy game. But they're people. Maybe it was fair for the first goblin nation to lose a war and pay for it, but that meant that subsequent goblin generations also got put in horrible conditions without choosing anything.

[danielxcutter]

Also, war is inherently unfair to the people who actually suffer for it. Most people who benefit from war aren't the people who fight in it, though in a world where a single being can defeat dozens if not hundreds of foot soldiers on their own that might get a bit muddled I suppose.