OOTS #1209 - The Discussion Thread

[Larsaan]

Man, this took a while to catch up on...

Anyway, personally I'm just waiting for a reveal that there's never been anything divine about the goblins' poor situation, that it was all a lie cooked up by TDO to make his followers more fanatical. We only have his word on the whole "XP fodder"-thing, after all, and it's the perfect kind of lie to tell if you're an ambitious deity who wants to turn a pantheon into monotheism. It's the classic lie told by many real-life dictators; "everyone but me is out to get you". Besides, we've seen plenty of non-PC races being clerics of the main three pantheons, like Malack, or the frost giants.

Obviously there's racial enmity towards goblins, but that's to be expected (if not condoned) after centuries of mutual, persistent warfare and clear alignment differences. We've seen little evidence that the gods themselves are particularly biased against them.

Also, this is a very, very, very late response, but I just want to point out...

Because Redcloack may be evil, but I've yet to see him killing a child in cold blood.
...
Damn, the hobgoblins and goblins actually behaved better than the azurites when they won, since they at least didn't exterminate the civilians.

The Gobbotopia regime would regularly (try to) feed babies to a monster.

[Dradougon]

You’re trying to tell me that a dwarf lost a fortitude save? Sounds like the butt end of a joke to me.

[pendell]

Man, this took a while to catch up on...

Anyway, personally I'm just waiting for a reveal that there's never been anything divine about the goblins' poor situation, that it was all a lie cooked up by TDO to make his followers more fanatical. We only have his word on the whole "XP fodder"-thing, after all, and it's the perfect kind of lie to tell if you're an ambitious deity who wants to turn a pantheon into monotheism. It's the classic lie told by many real-life dictators; "everyone but me is out to get you". Besides, we've seen plenty of non-PC races being clerics of the main three pantheons, like Malack, or the frost giants.

Obviously there's racial enmity towards goblins, but that's to be expected (if not condoned) after centuries of mutual, persistent warfare and clear alignment differences. We've seen little evidence that the gods themselves are particularly biased against them.

Also, this is a very, very, very late response, but I just want to point out...


The Gobbotopia regime would regularly (try to) feed babies to a monster.

When originally written, OOTS was a bit of spoof on D&D 3.5. It's been awhile since I've played 3.5 , but in the original rules there were the PC races (human, elf , dwarf, and so forth) and then there were all the creatures in the Monster Manual, also known as "volume of stuff we're going to kill in the course of our adventure".

Goblins fall solidly in that category, while it WAS possible to make a goblin PC under variant rules, it wasn't a fun experience. Goblins were not a PC race; they were created for the purpose of providing an obstacle for a low-level party, to be killed for their XP.

Ironically, this sort of thing was even more of an issue in early additions, where all non-human species had things like level caps or race-specific restrictions. There's a reason why "racism in D&D" is a discussion. Sure, we're dealing with fantasy creatures, but fantasy can shape how we think about the real world. If we truly believe all sapient beings in the real world are equal, maybe creating a fantasy world with "lesser races" isn't such a good idea?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[KorvinStarmast]

I bet RC has thought of (and planned for) this moment for a long time.

Thanks for your well thought out post, and I agree with your closer. (Strip 1205 supports your take on that).

A simple, "Your offer is serious, I wasn't expecting it. Call 48 hours truce, I need to prepare Commune." would have been a very effective answer to Durkon.

But it might have (1) disrupted narrative pacing, and (2) would have been a real problem to follow up on since RC, Xykon, MiTD, Oona and Greyview are soon to head back to Monster Hollow.
What's RC going to do with this stray dwarf in the meantime? Big time OPSEC leak if Xykon catches wind of RC 'negotiating with the enemy' right as they close in on the last gate. RC made it abundantly clear how tricky it was for him, and how important it was for him, to keep Xykon in the dark about his deep disloyalty during the exposition preceding Tsukiko's demise. (But I have seen a number of posts that point to Xykon being a bit suspicious of RC ... and having that back up play with MiTD (is that a SoD spoiler?) would appear to be part of Xykon's detailed contingency plans).

[Gray Mage]

Durkon wouldn't have found out about the Gates were it not for Roy, who took him along into Dorukan's dungeon, which he would not have done if Xykon weren't there, which would not have been the case if he wasn't Redcloak's arcane caster needed for performing the Ritual. Durkon knows about the Gates because of the Plan, albeit indirectly.

While true, by this same logic it could be said that this Odin is responsible, since without his prophecy Durkon would have never left the Dwarven lands. Or Malack, since without him Durkon would have never died and so would not have the knowledge necessary. Or if TDO hadn't left the God's group chat. There are so many moving parts involved that saying that The Plan worked (especially in RC's mind) isn't accurate, IMO.

Also, what made striking a deal with Big Purple so urgent for Thor and his allies is Redcloak's success in locating Gates to be used according to the Plan (because half of the Gates were destroyed to keep him from seizing them, and he had something to do with the destruction of the rest as well).

Yes. If not for The Plan the Gods would not have some of the reasons for pulling the plug on the world. I don't see how this is supposed to be a positive result of The Plan or that it's working as intended, as it's proof that it was kind of doomed from the start.

[mashlagoo1982]

Thanks for your well thought out post, and I agree with your closer. (Strip 1205 supports your take on that).
But it might have (1) disrupted narrative pacing, and (2) would have been a real problem to follow up on since RC, Xykon, MiTD, Oona and Greyview are soon to head back to Monster Hollow.
What's RC going to do with this stray dwarf in the meantime? Big time OPSEC leak if Xykon catches wind of RC 'negotiating with the enemy' right as they close in on the last gate. RC made it abundantly clear how tricky it was for him, and how important it was for him, to keep Xykon in the dark about his deep disloyalty during the exposition preceding Tsukiko's demise. (But I have seen a number of posts that point to Xykon being a bit suspicious of RC ... and having that back up play with MiTD (is that a SoD spoiler?) would appear to be part of Xykon's detailed contingency plans).

It would disrupt the narrative.

Also, how could RC realistically suggest this course of action to Durkon?

RC: You need to trust me on this... I need to kill you but I also want you to give me some time to think about your proposal. etc. etc.

It is just easier, faster, & more in-character if RC catches Durkon off guard with Implosion, tells Durkon just before he dies "I'll consider your proposal" or "Tell your gods they need to offer more", and continues with what he was doing.

I'm sure Durkon would have accepted the suggestion, but RC doesn't know Durkon like that. It is reasonable to expect most adventurers to have strong opposing opinions about being used as a messenger via death.

Disruption also gets Durkon out of RC's area in a relatively safe manner. Sure, Durkon went to the afterlife... but what would have happened if Xykon got hold of Durkon? RC can just play the event off (if Xykon even becomes aware of the incident) as executing some nobody dwarf.

I still want to believe that RC is testing Durkon... but that brings back the point of what RC needs to do afterward to avoid raising suspicion with Xykon. Hopefully Durkon thought of some exit strategy.

[Jetstream]

... Implosion?

... On a cleric?

... On a Dwarf cleric?

Yeah I don't think this is gonna go how Redcloak thinks it's gonna go.

(Using a Fort Negates spell on someone with a con boost and a good fort save, what the hell Redcloak? You should know better.)

[Larsaan]

When originally written, OOTS was a bit of spoof on D&D 3.5. It's been awhile since I've played 3.5 , but in the original rules there were the PC races (human, elf , dwarf, and so forth) and then there were all the creatures in the Monster Manual, also known as "volume of stuff we're going to kill in the course of our adventure".

Goblins fall solidly in that category, while it WAS possible to make a goblin PC under variant rules, it wasn't a fun experience. Goblins were not a PC race; they were created for the purpose of providing an obstacle for a low-level party, to be killed for their XP.

Ironically, this sort of thing was even more of an issue in early additions, where all non-human species had things like level caps or race-specific restrictions. There's a reason why "racism in D&D" is a discussion. Sure, we're dealing with fantasy creatures, but fantasy can shape how we think about the real world. If we truly believe all sapient beings in the real world are equal, maybe creating a fantasy world with "lesser races" isn't such a good idea?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Except, as V once pointed out, everyone is in the Monster Manual. Except for humans, and I'll give you that D&D has an annoying history of favouritism when it comes to human racial abilities (there are times I wish I could delete vumans from 5E by thinking about it hard enough).

And I don't know, I just think we've seen enough examples of "monster races" integrating with "PC races" to cast doubt on just how bad their lot in this world is. The only large-scale problem that we've seen goblins face is their long-running conflict with the Sapphire Guard - a conflict that's directly tied to TDO's schemes. The only version of pre-Mantle goblin history that we've seen came from TDO himself. People in this thread talk about how the gods shun goblins, but we've seen plenty of monster race clerics worshipping (and being empowered in turn) by the gods. We have no evidence that a goblin could never become a cleric of Loki, or Nergal, or Tiamat (or Thor, unlikely as it would be).



I dunno, maybe it's just a perspective thing. I always viewed the Monster Manual as "things the DM might throw at us, be informed and alert", rather than "things we'll get to kill, insert sadistic cackle". The only time I ever saw an NPC get murdered over "player logic", it was a dwarf.

[M. Arillius]

...I think Redcloak just "screwed it up".

He was taken aback at Durkon's offer, realized he hadn't actually prepared for that. Off-balance, he retreated out of gut instinct and fear of Xykon to previous plan.

A simple, "Your offer is serious, I wasn't expecting it. Call 48 hours truce, I need to prepare Commune." would have been a very effective answer to Durkon. It would have put Durkon on the spot as to whether to take Redcloak's offer or not. Redcloak could even have broken truce early if he received a negative answer or judged it in his advantage to conduct an alpha-strike scry-and-die.

Funny enough, it's also entirely possible he's killing Durkon so that Durkon can't back out. He'll rez him in a bit after he's spoken to the Dark One with commune.

[Ruck]

The Gobbotopia regime would regularly (try to) feed babies to a monster.

[citation needed]

[Jasdoif]

The Gobbotopia regime would regularly (try to) feed babies to a monster.

[citation needed]

This, perhaps.

[The MunchKING]

[citation needed]

They don't even bother to cook them properly!! What Monsters!!

[Lethologica]

If that's the example, then it shouldn't be attributed to Gobbotopia, but rather Xykon.

[Squire Doodad]

Funny enough, it's also entirely possible he's killing Durkon so that Durkon can't back out. He'll rez him in a bit after he's spoken to the Dark One with commune.

Given that Redcloak potentially has access to True Res and almost definitely has access to Resurrection, this is plausible, but this once again falls into the "there are easier ways to go about this". A paralysis spell followed by saying "I need to talk to my god in private, odds are I'll let you go once I'm done", and then either deafening Durkon or literally just dragging him into a room and going back outside would be just as effective and far cheaper in terms of spell slots. I'm pretty sure Redcloak would have some variant of "Hold-" or a more powerful paralysis ability prepared.

[Larsaan]

The baby eating example was admittedly played as a joke, but come on. You think Xykon conjures those kids out of nowhere? He'd take them from the azurite prisons, and do you think the hobgoblins care? You think Redcloak does?

There's a reason why Tsukiko was the only human in Gobbotopia who wasn't a slave being worked to death, and that's because she had Xykon's personal approval. And even then, Redcloak tried to have her killed long before she ever did anything to provoke him.

[Jacky720]

Given that Redcloak potentially has access to True Res and almost definitely has access to Resurrection, this is plausible, but this once again falls into the "there are easier ways to go about this". A paralysis spell followed by saying "I need to talk to my god in private, odds are I'll let you go once I'm done", and then either deafening Durkon or literally just dragging him into a room and going back outside would be just as effective and far cheaper in terms of spell slots. I'm pretty sure Redcloak would have some variant of "Hold-" or a more powerful paralysis ability prepared.

But Hold Person allows a new saving throw every round. Even if Redcloak is able to cast it such that the DC exceeds whatever Durkon could roll, a nat 20 autosucceeds and there's a better-than-60% chance for Durkon to break it within two minutes. And I couldn't find any "more powerful paralysis abilities".

[Squire Doodad]

But Hold Person allows a new saving throw every round. Even if Redcloak is able to cast it such that the DC exceeds whatever Durkon could roll, a nat 20 autosucceeds and there's a better-than-60% chance for Durkon to break it within two minutes. And I couldn't find any "more powerful paralysis abilities".

Huh, I didn't realize Hold Person lets a nat 20 break you free instantly.

[Lethologica]

The baby eating example was admittedly played as a joke, but come on. You think Xykon conjures those kids out of nowhere? He'd take them from the azurite prisons, and do you think the hobgoblins care? You think Redcloak does?

I think Xykon gets babies wherever the hell he wants.

There's a reason why Tsukiko was the only human in Gobbotopia who wasn't a slave being worked to death, and that's because she had Xykon's personal approval. And even then, Redcloak tried to have her killed long before she ever did anything to provoke him.

No one's arguing that Gobbotopia is a great place. The person you initially quoted was simply pointing out that the goblin children are not morally culpable and that the Azure City paladins hardly behaved better in victory than did the goblins.

[KorvinStarmast]

Except, as V once pointed out, everyone is in the Monster Manual. Except for humans

In the original game, humans were indeed in 'the monster manual.' (I'll go and get a page ref from Monsters and Treasures anon).
Bandits, Pilgrims, Dervishes, Berserkers, etc.
You found them under M for Men in the first monster manual, AD&D 1e, under M, for Men.

If you take a look at the AD&D 1e DMG, the explanation (you can choose to like it or not, up to you) is rational: the base world was by intent humano-centric, for the simple reason that players were / are human. Less difficult to try and imagine one's self as a human in a game based on irrational stuff like magic. Etc. A few generations later, not so hard to imagine, so maybe E.G.G. underestimated his audience a bit. (or more than a bit)

We find that humans are still in the MM in the Monster Manual in 5e, but you will find that what were formerly the "human/men" entries are now referred to as humanoids. And, we get a whole laundry list of NPCs who are
commoner, veteran, guard, gladiator, cultist, and so on. They are classed as any humanoid.

So I'll ask: in the MM in D&D 3/3.5, was there no entry for humans of any kind?

[The_Weirdo]

The Gobbotopia regime would regularly (try to) feed babies to a monster.

So, the Twelve Gods should consider it Lawful Good, right? Since their paladins slaughtered kids and all?

[KorvinStarmast]

So, the Twelve Gods should consider it Lawful Good, right? Since their paladins slaughtered kids and all?

You seem to me to be making a category or classification error: the twelve gods are a pantheon, apparently accommodating all alignments within their area of authority. So long as "activity x" is broadly in keeping with their interests as a pantheon, on a consensus basis, they'll likely stay out of it.

When something way out of whack is done in their name, such as Miko's screw up, we see them take an action on the mortal plane: the pull her paladin papers.

Do you have GDGU?

[The_Weirdo]

You seem to me to be making a category or classification error: the twelve gods are a pantheon, apparently accommodating all alignments within their area of authority. So long as "activity x" is broadly in keeping with their interests as a pantheon, on a consensus basis, they'll likely stay out of it.

When something way out of whack is done in their name, such as Miko's screw up, we see them take an action on the mortal plane: the pull her paladin papers.

Do you have GDGU?

I don't, but I do have SoD.

Spoiler

Show

It's sorta my point: the gods didn't bat an eye when paladins slaughtered goblin children. Ergo, slaughtering children is something the Twelve Gods see as worthy of a Paladin to do, namely something Lawful and Good. Ergo, the Twelve Gods need to, in order to preserve coherence, view Xykon's (monstrous, in my view, but clearly not in that of the Twelve Gods) attempt of feeding children to the MitD as Lawful Good.

[RatElemental]

I don't, but I do have SoD.

Spoiler

Show

It's sorta my point: the gods didn't bat an eye when paladins slaughtered goblin children. Ergo, slaughtering children is something the Twelve Gods see as worthy of a Paladin to do, namely something Lawful and Good. Ergo, the Twelve Gods need to, in order to preserve coherence, view Xykon's (monstrous, in my view, but clearly not in that of the Twelve Gods) attempt of feeding children to the MitD as Lawful Good.

Pretty sure someone's pointed this out to you before, but here it is from the author himself:

Spoiler: SoD Stuff

Show

Oooo! Oooo! I know this one!

The events of Start of Darkness are not a narrative being told by Redcloak, except for the crayon pages (which totally are). You are right, your friend is wrong. Everything you see happened.

However, everything that happened is not necessarily seen.

Suffice to say that the Twelve Gods are not beholden to put on the same visual display they did for Miko for every paladin who transgresses, and that all transgressions are not created equal. It is possible that some of the paladins who participated in the attack crossed the line. It is also possible that most did not. A paladin who slips up in the execution of their god-given orders does not warrant the same level of personal attention by the gods as one who executes the legal ruler of their nation on a glorified hunch. Think of Miko's Fall as being the equivalent of the CEO of your multinational company showing up in your cubicle to fire you, because you screwed up THAT much.

Of course, while Redcloak is not narrating the scene, it is shown mostly from his perspective; we don't see how many Detect Evils were used before the attack started, and we don't see how many paladins afterwards try to heal their wounds and can't, because these things are not important to Redcloak's story. Whether or not some of the paladins Fell does not bring Redcloak's family back to life. Indeed, if we transplant the scene to real life, he would think it cold comfort that some of the police officers who gunned down his family had to turn in their badge afterward (but were otherwise given no punishment by their bosses at City Hall).

Dramatically, showing no-name paladins Falling at that point in the story would confuse the narrative by making it unclear whether or not Redcloak had already earned a form of retribution against them. To be clear, he had not: Whether or not some of them lost a few class abilities does not change the fact that Redcloak suffered an injustice at their hands, one that shaped his entire adult life. That was the point of the scene. Showing them Fall or not simply was not important to Redcloak's story, so it was omitted.

Further, it would have cheapened Miko's fall to show the same thing over and over--and Miko, as a major character in the series, deserved the emotional weight that her Fall carried (or at least that I hope it carried).

I hope that clears this issue up. I hope in vain, largely, but there you have it.

(Oh, and I leave it up to the readers to form their own opinions on which paladins may have Fallen and which didn't.)

[The_Weirdo]

Pretty sure someone's pointed this out to you before, but here it is from the author himself:

Against which is the fact that they described the campaign as decades-long. It strains reason that the paladins only acted like monsters at that time, no? He didn't say that they did fall.

[The MunchKING]

So, the Twelve Gods should consider it Lawful Good, right? Since their paladins slaughtered kids and all?

Nah, Xykon didn't even kill the kids before trying to feed them to MitD.

[The_Weirdo]

Nah, Xykon didn't even kill the kids before trying to feed them to MitD.

And just like that the perfect retort.

[Jasdoif]

So I'll ask: in the MM in D&D 3/3.5, was there no entry for humans of any kind?

There was not. The MM, like the SRD's monster listings, goes directly from "howler" to "hydra".

[JonahFalcon]

Don't worry. Xykon will intervene, and save Durkon because he's interested in what Redcloak is doing chatting with a dwarf.

[Metastachydium]

While true, by this same logic it could be said that this Odin is responsible, since without his prophecy Durkon would have never left the Dwarven lands. Or Malack, since without him Durkon would have never died and so would not have the knowledge necessary. Or if TDO hadn't left the God's group chat. There are so many moving parts involved that saying that The Plan worked (especially in RC's mind) isn't accurate, IMO.

Wll, Malack killed Durkon because the Order and the Guild/Empire were fighting each other for the control of the Gate which the Order (let alone the Guild and especially the Empire) shouldn't have gotten involved in if Redcloak and Xykon hadn't been going around chasing Gates to capture them. As for Odin, if Thor is to be believed he just foresawthat someone they will potentially be able to talk to will have to know about the Gates so that he can talk to this other guy chasing them, so there's that.
There are many moving parts, but most of them are interconnected.

Yes. If not for The Plan the Gods would not have some of the reasons for pulling the plug on the world. I don't see how this is supposed to be a positive result of The Plan or that it's working as intended, as it's proof that it was kind of doomed from the start.

Maybe because the good guys and their allies among the bunch would still be sitting on their thumbs lamenting just how bad it is that the purple guy dropped out of their group chat? It forced them inton motion.

[Peelee]

Spoiler

Show

the gods didn't bat an eye when paladins slaughtered goblin children.

[citation needed]