Remember when Xykon killed a bunch of self-righteous Paladins...

[understatement]

Is he (from the presepctive of the Sapphire Guard at that time) - he decieved Shojo about his trip to Cliffport (indicating it was about Xykon where in fact it was about family business), his team drove Miko insane - one of them even having a plan of making her fall, his team claimed that they had destroyed Xykon when they had not etc.

...yes? Hinjo trusts Roy, because Roy was willing to risk his life to stop Miko. Hinjo does not know about the Cliffport business. As far as Hinjo knows, Roy's intel correlates with what the diviners scried.

Ironically, for once, the Sapphire Guard had clear, trustworthy intel, and the paladins are 'justified' in attacking because Xykon invaded their city with a massive army.

[Metastachydium]

Yeah, defending the gates from an evil undead Lich is definitely Evil. They should accept the peace of the grave, exactly.


The only reason the world isn't gone now is their founder helped save it, and they are devoted to keeping the mechanism by which it was saved from being used to destroy the world or slaughter the gods. Whatever you think of their methods, their goals are literally the most lawful good you can get.

Wait, what?
1. While destroying a Gate does indeed make the world more unstable,I wasn't entirely serious.
2. The Gate Ritual does not destroy the world (or has that as its goal) and it literally cannot „slaughter the gods.”

[Tvtyrant]

Wait, what?
1. While destroying a Gate does indeed make the world more unstable,I wasn't entirely serious.
2. The Gate Ritual does not destroy the world (or has that as its goal) and it literally cannot „slaughter the gods.”

1. Okay.
2. They don't actually know that. They do know Xykon, who is the strongest being on their planet, is trying to take control of a gate, the key to wiping out the world. They also know the Evil God of Goblins, who won't even talk to their Evil Gods, is helping him. That's an existential threat. We also know that it is an existential threat, Xykon as a kind of reality bomb to threaten the world with, Redcloak as a reality bomb to threaten the universe with.

[Metastachydium]

2. They don't actually know that. They do know Xykon, who is

(probably)

the strongest being on their planet

(that they know of)

, is trying to take control of a gate, the key to wiping out the world. They also know the Evil God of Goblins, who won't even talk to their Evil Gods, is helping him. That's an existential threat. We also know that it is an existential threat, Xykon as a kind of reality bomb to threaten the world with, Redcloak as a reality bomb to threaten the universe with.

Hm. I never got around to actually read Good Deeds. How much does did the Sapphire Guard really know about the Bearers and the Mantle?

[Jason]

Hm. I never got around to actually read Good Deeds. How much does did the Sapphire Guard really know about the Bearers and the Mantle?

Their leader laments that at the time of the attack on Redcloak's village they did not understand that the Crimson Mantle itself was an artifact that empowers the bearer. They thought it was merely the badge of office of the Dark One's high priest.

[Particle_Man]

I remember - think it was the last time he killed anyone.

I guess it depends what one means by “anyone”. He has certainly killed a lot of powerful monsters in the caves (albeit “off screen”) and it seems likely that at least some of those monsters had an int score of 3 or higher.

[Fyraltari]

(probably)
(that they know of)

Hm. I never got around to actually read Good Deeds. How much does did the Sapphire Guard really know about the Bearers and the Mantle?

Miko believed Redcloak was actually trying to destroy the world.

I think it's fair to say that if Shojo had known what Team Evil was trying to achieve by taking over a gate he'd have told Roy.

[dancrilis]

...yes? Hinjo trusts Roy, because Roy was willing to risk his life to stop Miko. Hinjo does not know about the Cliffport business. As far as Hinjo knows, Roy's intel correlates with what the diviners scried.

Hinjo also heard that Roy and Shojo rigged a trial involving the Gate - he placed a lot of trust on the fact that Roy saved his life if he had been mistaken and Roy was running a con he would have doomed his city and everyone in it (not any more doomed then it was I will admit but still).

Ironically, for once, the Sapphire Guard had clear, trustworthy intel, and the paladins are 'justified' in attacking because Xykon invaded their city with a massive army.

He might have been their discuss terms they don't know they never asked - they assumed that he was an evil lich seeking to conquer their city and sieze control of the Gate they had sworn to defend (and to an extent they were right) but they should perhaps have checked before taking their assumption as fact.

I guess it depends what one means by “anyone”. He has certainly killed a lot of powerful monsters in the caves (albeit “off screen”) and it seems likely that at least some of those monsters had an int score of 3 or higher.

More meant onscreen - I just find it a little odd that we have went closing on 800 strips since the main villain (a man known for killing on a whim) has actually killed anyone that we know about - not bad or good (actually I quite I have a theory which I quite like so maybe a little good) but somewhat odd.

Spoiler: Theory Time/SOD

Show

Xykon hates Redcloak - he holds Redcloak responsible for stealing one of the few simple pleasures he had from him, and so his casual slaughter of goblins was entirely to do with making Redcloak suffer.
Redcloak didn't really care about the Hobgoblins as people (not caring with Jirix died for instance) so Xykon saw no point in killing them or tormenting them.

As such Xykon's early characterization of murderer on a whim is not actually who he is really - he did a bit of that as a human, but I mean more recently.

As for monsters having INT 3 - that would be risky, INT 3 creatures are people and tasking people to defend your secret Gate which you don't want people to know about could backfire.

[understatement]

Hinjo also heard that Roy and Shojo rigged a trial involving the Gate - he placed a lot of trust on the fact that Roy saved his life if he had been mistaken and Roy was running a con he would have doomed his city and everyone in it (not any more doomed then it was I will admit but still).

It is not unreasonable for Hinjo to trust Roy for saving his life at a huge risk. Yes, Roy could be running a long con that bet the lives of thousands, but then that person would not be Roy.

He might have been their discuss terms they don't know they never asked - they assumed that he was an evil lich seeking to conquer their city and sieze control of the Gate they had sworn to defend (and to an extent they were right) but they should perhaps have checked before taking their assumption as fact.

If he wanted to discuss terms he wouldn't have brought a huge invading army right through the walls. He's a sorcerer, not a commoner. The paladins have every right to defend themselves and their city from, again, an invading army. Pretty much all bets are off when an army invades your homeland.

[Worldsong]

He might have been their discuss terms they don't know they never asked - they assumed that he was an evil lich seeking to conquer their city and sieze control of the Gate they had sworn to defend (and to an extent they were right) but they should perhaps have checked before taking their assumption as fact.

If you follow this line of reasoning too strictly you end up with the idea that you always have to let the enemy get the first strike in just in case every single clue you've received about their intentions has been wrong. On paper, very noble, in practice, a terrible idea.

When a humongous hobgoblin army is attacking the city and an Evil sorcerer lich enters your throne room by breaking through the window and all your intel states that the same hobgoblin army attacking your city is accompanied by an Evil sorcerer lich (which is a very rare creature indeed, so the odds of it being a different Evil sorcerer lich are close to zero)... you have enough reason to believe that if you don't attack immediately you're going to regret it dearly. 100% certainty is impossible but 99% certainty is good enough.

[WanderingMist]

Hinjo also heard that Roy and Shojo rigged a trial involving the Gate - he placed a lot of trust on the fact that Roy saved his life if he had been mistaken and Roy was running a con he would have doomed his city and everyone in it (not any more doomed then it was I will admit but still).


He might have been their discuss terms they don't know they never asked - they assumed that he was an evil lich seeking to conquer their city and sieze control of the Gate they had sworn to defend (and to an extent they were right) but they should perhaps have checked before taking their assumption as fact.



More meant onscreen - I just find it a little odd that we have went closing on 800 strips since the main villain (a man known for killing on a whim) has actually killed anyone that we know about - not bad or good (actually I quite I have a theory which I quite like so maybe a little good) but somewhat odd.

Spoiler: Theory Time/SOD

Show

Xykon hates Redcloak - he holds Redcloak responsible for stealing one of the few simple pleasures he had from him, and so his casual slaughter of goblins was entirely to do with making Redcloak suffer.
Redcloak didn't really care about the Hobgoblins as people (not caring with Jirix died for instance) so Xykon saw no point in killing them or tormenting them.

As such Xykon's early characterization of murderer on a whim is not actually who he is really - he did a bit of that as a human, but I mean more recently.

As for monsters having INT 3 - that would be risky, INT 3 creatures are people and tasking people to defend your secret Gate which you don't want people to know about could backfire.

Not that this discussion isn't entirely insane in trying to paint the paladins as in the wrong, but Xykon was literally leading an invading army and everyone in Azure City knew that. And he'd already killed Roy and the seer woman before he got to the throne room anyway.

To quote Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. (On thread OP's use of "self-righteous')

[dancrilis]

And he'd already killed Roy and the seer woman before he got to the throne room anyway.

To memory both of them were killed by gravity.

[WanderingMist]

To memory both of them were killed by gravity.

Roy may technically have been killed by gravity. Seer woman definitely got stabbed with zombie dragon claws first. Hard to tell if her eyes are Xs or not in the last panel as we see her being thrown off the tower.

[dancrilis]

Roy may technically have been killed by gravity. Seer woman definitely got stabbed with zombie dragon claws first. Hard to tell if her eyes are Xs or not in the last panel as we see her being thrown off the tower.

Spoiler: Spoiler Alert

Show

Her final moments were shown in this - she was alive on the way down.

[understatement]

To memory both of them were killed by gravity.

Spoiler

Show

Well, by that strand, then gravity killed Right-Eye.

[dancrilis]

Spoiler

Show

Well, by that strand, then gravity killed Right-Eye.

Gravity - it kills because it hates.

Edit:

Spoiler: SOD

Show

Although in that case Right-Eye survived and then died after - so he didn't really die from the fall so much as from the damage from either the fall or from the spell it would be uncertain which was more responsible.

[Peelee]

To memory both of them were killed by gravity.

In the same sense that it is a bullet and not a person that kills fatal shooting victims, yes.

[understatement]

Spoiler: SOD

Show

Although in that case Right-Eye survived and then died after - so he didn't really die from the fall so much as from the damage from either the fall or from the spell it would be uncertain which was more responsible.

Spoiler: sod

Show

He died from the fall, since if the spell did him in then he'd be a pile of dust.

But I mean, he didn't say "Goodbye...gravity" and made Redcloak have a perpetual expression.

In the same sense that it is a bullet and not a person that kills fatal shooting victims, yes.

Are you saying that it was the knife that did Nale in, and not Tarquin?
Or Malack's fangs?
Or Kubota's ring?
Or Redcloak's homebrewed implosion spell?

[dancrilis]

In the same sense that it is a bullet and not a person that kills fatal shooting victims, yes.

I disagree - to kill with a bullet you would need to roll to hit and then damage, benefiting from any feats or class abilities that you have etc, where if falling damage kills someone that is not really about you at all and the DM (representing gravity) likely rolls the damage for that.

Spoiler: sod

Show

He died from the fall, since if the spell did him in then he'd be a pile of dust.

But I mean, he didn't say "Goodbye...gravity" and made Redcloak have a perpetual expression.

The spell deals damage whether you make a save or not and that it knocked him out of the air might mean he was knocked to negative hitpoints by it.

[Worldsong]

Spoiler: sod

Show

He died from the fall, since if the spell did him in then he'd be a pile of dust.

But I mean, he didn't say "Goodbye...gravity" and made Redcloak have a perpetual expression.

A missed opportunity, really.

[Peelee]

I disagree - to kill with a bullet you would need to roll to hit and then damage, benefiting from any feats or class abilities that you have etc, where if falling damage kills someone that is not really about you at all and the DM (representing gravity) likely rolls the damage for that.

Ah, you want to keep it in game terms then. Fine, the force is what killed the person, not the wizard who cast Magic Missile at the person. Roy got torn up with the Meteor Swarm and Sangwaan got mauled by a dragon. The falling damage was the icing on the cake (a cake which the baker deliberately smashed the icing dispenser, flinging the icing through the air, and then claimed that it was gravity that made such messy icing and not the baker).

[dancrilis]

Ah, you want to keep it in game terms then. Fine, the force is what killed the person, not the wizard who cast Magic Missile at the person. Roy got torn up with the Meteor Swarm and Sangwaan got mauled by a dragon. The falling damage was the icing on the cake (a cake which the baker deliberately smashed the icing dispenser, flinging the icing through the air, and then claimed that it was gravity that made such messy icing and not the baker).

I almost got into a whole intent element piece in the last post.
i.e pushing someone off a building and letting falling damage kill them would count as you killing them with falling damage, but pushing someone out off a building because you are running past them and not paying attention would not could as you killing them. But wasn't able to formulate it in a way that seemed sane and reasonable to present (and still haven't).

Or in 241 I think if the Dwarf had lit the fuse he would be responsible for the fire, but I am dubious about passing responsibility to Belkar for effectively doing it by accident.

Xykon's case is more slippery (and the thinking is slippery enough already) - i.e if Roy or Sangwaan had survived then Xykon wouldn't have cared so I am dubious if he intended to kill them rather then merely get them out of his way but the actions he took to remove them were not accidental.

Meh I will either think about it some more or move on to something else.

On the topic of something else I quite like this topic - it has not even been two pages and already I have went through at least three pieces of oddness: Xykon might have bluffed the paladins into killing themselves, The paladins might have been wrong to attack him, He might not be responsible for the deaths of Roy and Sangwaan.
If it continues like this who knows what I might come up with.

[Peelee]

I almost got into a whole intent element piece in the last post.
i.e pushing someone off a building and letting falling damage kill them would count as you killing them with falling damage, but pushing someone out off a building because you are running past them and not paying attention would not could as you killing them. But wasn't able to formulate it in a way that seemed sane and reasonable to present (and still haven't).

I'm cutting off the rest of your post because I can address it all with this part. I think the reason you're having trouble is because of focus on the wrong word. Both of those examples are of one person killing another. One of them is murder, however, and one is not, and I suspect that is what you're trying to get at. Xykon definitely killed Roy and Sangwaan. I would even go so far as to say he definitely murdered them - he almost certainly had intent. Whether he cared or not about actually doing it successfully is irrelevant. Similarly, you can absolutely kill someone entirely by accident and with no actual blame.

But Xykon killed Roy and Sangwaan.

[Theshipening]

He might have been their discuss terms they don't know they never asked - they assumed that he was an evil lich seeking to conquer their city and sieze control of the Gate they had sworn to defend (and to an extent they were right) but they should perhaps have checked before taking their assumption as fact.

Why ? Xykon is a lich. Not a person, and not able to do good or be nice for the sake of being nice, like all undeads he’s “nothing but bits of skin and bone and dark energy, glued together by magic into the shape of a man.” He’s quite literally made of Evil, he doesn’t have the ability to do good. A lich, and any other undead, like Malack, is fundamentally a threat to everything alive and/or Good, whatever they may say.

[Kruploy]

Why ? Xykon is a lich. Not a person, and not able to do good or be nice for the sake of being nice, like all undeads he’s “nothing but bits of skin and bone and dark energy, glued together by magic into the shape of a man.” He’s quite literally made of Evil, he doesn’t have the ability to do good. A lich, and any other undead, like Malack, is fundamentally a threat to everything alive and/or Good, whatever they may say.

Can't Xykon become human again by using Shapechange?

[Metastachydium]

Their leader laments that at the time of the attack on Redcloak's village they did not understand that the Crimson Mantle itself was an artifact that empowers the bearer. They thought it was merely the badge of office of the Dark One's high priest.

Mhm, I see. Thanks.

Miko believed Redcloak was actually trying to destroy the world.

An idea which Redcloak basically dismissed on the same panel.

I think it's fair to say that if Shojo had known what Team Evil was trying to achieve by taking over a gate he'd have told Roy.

In all fairness, Shojo did tell Roy this was entirely possible (or, at the very least, Dorukan believed that it was). This idea formed the nominal basis of the Order's acquittal, after all.

[Fyraltari]

An idea which Redcloak basically dismissed on the same panel.

Yes I know, but this is evidence that the Guard had no clue what the Crimson Bearers were trying to achieve.

[dancrilis]

I think the reason you're having trouble is because of focus on the wrong word.

I don't think so - I think my problem is I mentioned that they were killed by gravity as half a joke, and now I am trying to logic my way into some sound arguement were the half that isn't a joke holds up ... and I am not sure that such a path exists.

Why ? Xykon is a lich. Not a person, and not able to do good or be nice for the sake of being nice, like all undeads he’s “nothing but bits of skin and bone and dark energy, glued together by magic into the shape of a man.” He’s quite literally made of Evil, he doesn’t have the ability to do good. A lich, and any other undead, like Malack, is fundamentally a threat to everything alive and/or Good, whatever they may say.

There is nothing that forces Xykon to be Evil - if he wanted he could change his ways and become perhaps the greatest force for good on the mortal plane.
He is very much a person.

[hroþila]

Why ? Xykon is a lich. Not a person, and not able to do good or be nice for the sake of being nice, like all undeads he’s “nothing but bits of skin and bone and dark energy, glued together by magic into the shape of a man.” He’s quite literally made of Evil, he doesn’t have the ability to do good. A lich, and any other undead, like Malack, is fundamentally a threat to everything alive and/or Good, whatever they may say.

Liches are explicitly free-willed. Xykon is a person who chooses to be Evil. Also, I wouldn't quote Redcloak on what undead are — he tries to convince himself that Xykon is just a tool that he controls, but that's mostly self-delusion. Redcloak can say anything he wants about using sentient undead as tools, but he's spent most of his life using living goblinoids exactly the same way.

[Theshipening]

Liches are explicitly free-willed. Xykon is a person who chooses to be Evil. Also, I wouldn't quote Redcloak on what undead are — he tries to convince himself that Xykon is just a tool that he controls, but that's mostly self-delusion. Redcloak can say anything he wants about using sentient undead as tools, but he's spent most of his life using living goblinoids exactly the same way.

Sure, but Vampires are explicitly free-willed too and yet they are inherently Evil. Because they, like Liches and other undeads, are quite literally made of Evil Stuff (Hell, when Good Durkon takes over Greg, he “c'n feel tha negative energy squrimin' around.” and knows it probably won’t last long).

I personally believe that vampires and liches are free-willed the same way a Fiend or Celestial (or a God even) is. They can make their own choices and all, but within certain limitations, because they’re still fundamentally Good or Evil or whatever, since they are made of Good/Evil/whatever stuff.