|
If you want to read Rich's own words about the "Paladins falling"-issue, you can do so here.
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 10:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 16:04 |
|
|
The Giant's position has been that it doesn't really matter if the paladins Fell or not, because we see those events through the eyes of somebody who doesn't give a poo poo if the people who slaughtered his family lost some class features.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 10:55
|
|
|
Gnoman posted:The Giant's position has been that it doesn't really matter if the paladins Fell or not, because we see those events through the eyes of somebody who doesn't give a poo poo if the people who slaughtered his family lost some class features. Sure, Redcloak would want those humans dead whether they're paladins or not. The position of the gods was less relevant - for SoD's narrative. But now Redcloak is dealing with the gods themselves, so now it makes a difference if they could prove that they literally punished the paladins as harshly as they were able (short of breaking the creation pact by personally smiting the humans, starting a divine civil war / apocalypse / new snarl in the process). If the goblins being given poo poo lands turned out to indeed be solely due to their creator's "hard times create strong men / Darwin rules" idea, and the other gods turn out to have been punishing their followers for indiscriminate goblin-murder... well, that's a very different story from one where the gods created the goblins as XP piñatas for the lulz.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 11:28
|
|
|
I don't think redcloak would give a poo poo at this point, he'd be like "oh some murderers lost their class abilities? Cry me a river, you can do it on the graves of my slaughtered tribe oh wait no you can't because you burned their corpses like garbage"
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 11:40
|
|
|
sebmojo posted:I don't think redcloak would give a poo poo at this point, he'd be like "oh some murderers lost their class abilities? Cry me a river, you can do it on the graves of my slaughtered tribe oh wait no you can't because you burned their corpses like garbage" Sure, Redcloak might be past reasoning and unable to draw a distinction between paladins, humans as a whole, and the human gods. But it still matters to the story. Suppose that he ends up releasing the Snarl and it kills some or all of the gods. If the gods had been happily empowering paladins to slaughter goblins all along for the sake of XP, you have a neat tale of uncaring villainous gods being justly punished for their cruelty. Whereas, if the human gods did not approve of the goblins being created as a r-selected race by their rear end in a top hat Darwinist maker, and they had been cutting all ties with any of their followers who they found abusing goblins, and they couldn't do much more than that because it would risk creating another Snarl, then their death becomes a tragic consequence of Redcloak's thirst for vengeance escalating far beyond justice. I really don't think Rich wants to leave it ambiguous which kind of story he is trying to tell.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 12:08
|
|
|
W.T. Fits posted:According to Rich, they didn't. They didn't get the whole dramatic "the Twelve Gods appear in the sky and blast away your paladin levels with a bolt of divine retribution" splash page treatment that Miko got, but the ones who participated in the massacre of Redcloak's village absolutely fell from grace. Rich's answer (posted earlier) was that maybe some of them did. Like if you want to imagine the ones who gleefully struck down unarmed fleeing children fell from grace, sure, nothing textually says otherwise. But the good gods absolutely condone the slaughter of goblins as long as one doesn't grossly violate the paladin code of conduct; Thor's "not my responsibility" attitude seen much later on makes this clear. Plus, in How the Paladin got his Scar, the villain is one of the paladins who killed Redcloak's mentor, who is still a paladin in good standing until he gives O-Chul his scar and subsequently does fall, without the bells and whistles Miko got. At best, the goblin massacre paladins all eventually fell, either because of poo poo they did later on or because they got the boot after Hinjo took the reins. E: NihilCredo posted:I really don't think Rich wants to leave it ambiguous which kind of story he is trying to tell. I think it's pretty clear that it's the former, but that the gods' crime is indifference, rather than active malice as Redcloak purports. In the author commentaries for War and XPs and/or Don't Split the Party, Rich makes it explicit that the fall of Azure City is karmic retribution for the massacres visited on goblins in its name. Zulily Zoetrope fucked around with this message at 12:27 on Jul 22, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 12:18
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:If the gods had been happily empowering paladins to slaughter goblins all along for the sake of XP, you have a neat tale of uncaring villainous gods being justly punished for their cruelty. Isn't that's pretty much exactly the case? The fact that the god who created the goblins and the gods profiting from their deaths are from different pantheons is a technical detail. Schwarzwald fucked around with this message at 15:16 on Jul 22, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 15:13
|
|
|
The subtext of that whole dialogue is "if a race doesn't have a divine patron who is willing to complain on their behalf, they're open season". Even the good-aligned gods don't think of their creations as people; they're livestock, pets at best.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 15:20
|
|
|
Isn't it just an explicit part of "this universe" that Good and Evil are open season on each other? The Paladins have a Good tag, the Goblins have an Evil tag. Stay in those bounds and nobody falls. Its gross to us, but to them it's just how it is. If "having a god advocate for them" mattered then Evil Dragons would be protected by Tiamat, but there's no evidence of that. (Tiamat being angry at the IFCC is an 'internal matter'.) Advocacy is probably important when deciding those tags, and other features of the race at creation time, like starting lands, but not any more.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 16:56
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:The subtext of that whole dialogue is "if a race doesn't have a divine patron who is willing to complain on their behalf, they're open season". Even the good-aligned gods don't think of their creations as people; they're livestock, pets at best. I'd say less than livestock: Crops. Life exists to turn tiny seeds of soul stuff into big bushels of soul stuff. That's why they keep creating worlds. The good gods try to be nice about it, but ultimately living conditions only matter as the "weather" that determines if your crop is bountiful or withers. Life can be easy or hard, it doesn't matter because you're alive for a moment and then you're in the afterlife. They aren't going to waste any juice trying to improve the crop of souls that are definitely going elsewhere. Literally none of their business. You don't irrigate your neighbour's field. You might cluck your tongue that his cabbages are wilting because he doesn't take proper care of them and he's gonna get a lovely crop, but you won't interfere.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 16:58
|
|
|
some gods may be Good, but they're all not good
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 17:18
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:If the goblins being given poo poo lands turned out to indeed be solely due to their creator's "hard times create strong men / Darwin rules" idea, and the other gods turn out to have been punishing their followers for indiscriminate goblin-murder... well, that's a very different story from one where the gods created the goblins as XP piñatas for the lulz. Well the Gods explictly did not create them as XP piñatas at least not any more than they did for everyone else. They had a hard time because their creator gave them nothing after making them, and the other gods wanted to focus on their own stuff over them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 17:49
|
|
|
Tinyn posted:Isn't it just an explicit part of "this universe" that Good and Evil are open season on each other? The Paladins have a Good tag, the Goblins have an Evil tag. Stay in those bounds and nobody falls. Its gross to us, but to them it's just how it is. Having a god looking out for you matters a lot. The reason the goblins are in such a bad state is because Fenrir created them and then lost interest, hosed off and never bothered to do anything else for them. The dwarven gods on the other hand made sure the dwarves were well taken care of and had more resources, etc. The good gods look at this disparity, shrug and say thems the breaks. So goblins suffer disproportionately even though it wasn't "intentional". The only reason Thor actually cares at all about the Goblin's plight now is because it's relevant in helping with the Snarl. Before the dark one arrived, Thor was more than happy to smite them with impunity without caring about their plight. The problem is that mortals are just toys/fodder/food for the gods and they are ostensibly expendable. Even for the good gods. The Good/Evil thing is pretty much just a game and is almost an arbitrary distinction (the rules of the next world might be completely different after all). But no matter the world, mortals are always going to be playthings of the gods and have no say in anything. So the gods are very much the reason for why everything is messed up. The interesting thing about the Snarl is it's potentially the only bargaining chip the mortals have to put pressure on the gods. So I don't think the ending will be simply them sealing the Snarl away and then that's the end of it. Because in that case there's no incentive for the gods to change their behavior at all. That would be a pretty depressing ending if that's the ultimate outcome. JuniperCake fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Jul 22, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 18:14
|
|
|
Bargaining? Feh. It's time to use redcloak's ritual to eliminate the three remaining pantheons and the dark one, thereby creating a truly level playing field for all races.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 18:37
|
|
|
I think there's been an implication that even though good and evil in this world are absolute objectives that are compelled to destroy eachother, the forces of Good are still compelled to be nice when possible, just as how the forces of evil are seemingly compelled to be cruel and hurt others regardless of being aligned together. Also presumably most political states in the world of Order of the Stick aren't so directly connected with their religious obligations, but it's just a coincidence that we've seen so many that are. The dwarves are an exception because their souls are more on the line, the Azure Empire was explicitly an exception that everyone said was weird being run by paladins. Of the other states we've seen, Hobgoblins weren't actually directly serving The Dark One until Redcloak forcibly took over by assassinating who he thought was the leader. Greysky City seemingly was run by the thieves' guild. Tarquin's Empire, the puppet kingdoms he ran his shell game with, and the subject kingdoms of the desert didn't seem particularly motivated by religion (and part of Tarquin's mercenary advisor deal was providing a high priest). I assume that a lot of parts of the world are a lot more secular. JuniperCake posted:Having a god looking out for you matters a lot. A lot of that is speculation based on thirdhand reports from unreliable narrators. We only really know the deal with how Thor saved the Dwarves from damnation by teaching them to be honorable, and after that it gets pretty hazy. Maybe Fenrir was negligent, or maybe just everything he did for Goblinoids sucked, he seems pretty dumb in general. SlothfulCobra fucked around with this message at 19:19 on Jul 22, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 19:09
|
|
|
Maybe another god distracted him with a really good stick whenever he thought about making things better for goblins. I wonder if it'll all end with them using the snarl to lock the gods out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 19:34
|
|
|
The gods are already mostly locked out. There's no getting out from the gods' influence because it was mainly done at the start from the creation of the world.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 20:08
|
|
|
Yeah there's no deus ex machina to magically fix the goblins' problems overnight, the whole point and moral is that it has to be fixed by mortals
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 20:17
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Also presumably most political states in the world of Order of the Stick aren't so directly connected with their religious obligations, but it's just a coincidence that we've seen so many that are. The dwarves are an exception because their souls are more on the line, the Azure Empire was explicitly an exception that everyone said was weird being run by paladins. Of the other states we've seen, Hobgoblins weren't actually directly serving The Dark One until Redcloak forcibly took over by assassinating who he thought was the leader. Greysky City seemingly was run by the thieves' guild. Tarquin's Empire, the puppet kingdoms he ran his shell game with, and the subject kingdoms of the desert didn't seem particularly motivated by religion (and part of Tarquin's mercenary advisor deal was providing a high priest). Can you even have 'secular' in a D&D world?
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 20:49
|
|
|
Parahexavoctal posted:Can you even have 'secular' in a D&D world? Yes? Even if the gods objectively exist and everyone believes in one in particular or gets The Wall, you don't have found every major organisation based on one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 20:57
|
|
|
Taciturn Tactician posted:Yes? Even if the gods objectively exist and everyone believes in one in particular or gets The Wall, you don't have found every major organisation based on one. Lords and Ladies posted:“I don't hold with paddlin' with the occult," said Granny firmly. "Once you start paddlin' with the occult you start believing in spirits, and when you start believing in spirits you start believing in demons, and then before you know where you are you're believing in gods. And then you're in trouble."
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 21:19
|
|
|
Parahexavoctal posted:Can you even have 'secular' in a D&D world? Gods can be killed, and the Athar are a thing that exists.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 21:37
|
|
|
Tinyn posted:Isn't it just an explicit part of "this universe" that Good and Evil are open season on each other? The Paladins have a Good tag, the Goblins have an Evil tag. Stay in those bounds and nobody falls. Its gross to us, but to them it's just how it is. The evil dragons thing is a good example of how that advocacy does - and doesn't - make a difference for various creatures. Tiamat didn't protect the young black dragon from being killed by the Order way back in the day. Moreover, that young black dragon didn't have the kinds of social protection that could stop the Order from openly bragging about how they'd killed a black dragon. Though it's worth noting that even Miko was willing to stop them and say "wait, did you actually check to make sure it was an evil dragon that was okay to kill and not a good dragon whose death would be super tragic". However, Tiamat had empowered an oracle who was willing to serve evil dragons with info like, say, exactly who they should hunt down and kill in revenge. And Tiamat had created her species with considerable physical might and magical potential which allowed her to be more than a match for Vaarsuvius. Though on the other hand, she had also created the black dragons with the kinds of small numbers and isolated dwellings that meant V only needed one lucky spell to save them all from being killed by the young black dragon in the first place. It's not as simple as just "having a god that advocates for you", but rather a question of thousands of years of physical and material differences and cultural forces which largely originate from the gods' decisions way back when the world was first created. It's more a matter of the fact that none of the gods was interested in making sure all the races were treated equally in the first place. When it came time to parcel out the finite amounts of arable land and natural resources, some of the gods pushed for the creatures they'd created to get chunks of it, and some didn't, and nobody really bothered to care whether the outcomes of those negotiations meant some creatures got screwed. Sometimes a god created lots of creatures and didn't bother to care equally about all of them. And then once the mortals started doing their own thing, those differences snowballed, with the richer and better-fed races doing better in wars and being able to gain even more of the best land and resources, until you end up with situations like this: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 21:40
|
|
|
Vizuyos posted:The evil dragons thing is a good example of how that advocacy does - and doesn't - make a difference for various creatures. Ooh good catch
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2022 23:03
|
|
|
JuniperCake posted:So I don't think the ending will be simply them sealing the Snarl away and then that's the end of it. Because in that case there's no incentive for the gods to change their behavior at all. That would be a pretty depressing ending if that's the ultimate outcome. "Will this story have a happy ending?" "Yes...for you."
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2022 05:54
|
|
|
TheAceOfLungs posted:"Will this story have a happy ending?" Except that happy ending has already happened, in Girard's pyramid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2022 14:12
|
|
|
Gwyneth Palpate posted:Except that happy ending has already happened, in Girard's pyramid. that would be a stupid copout and i don’t think it counts as a happy ending for Elan from either his OR the audience’s point of view dmboogie fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Jul 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2022 18:34
|
|
|
Gwyneth Palpate posted:Except that happy ending has already happened, in Girard's pyramid. The story kept going after that so it's not the ending.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2022 18:37
|
|
|
ultrafilter posted:The story kept going after that so it's not the ending. Oh this? It’s just all been epilogue ever since the pyramid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2022 19:19
|
|
|
oobey posted:Oh this? It’s just all been epilogue ever since they threw xylon into the gate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2022 21:43
|
|
|
dmboogie posted:that would be a stupid copout and i don’t think it counts as a happy ending for Elan from either his OR the audience’s point of view Though to be fair, it wouldn't be the first time the Oracle tried to pull a stupid cop-out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2022 23:33
|
|
|
Gwyneth Palpate posted:Except that happy ending has already happened, in Girard's pyramid. Not even the oracle would count an illusion as the end of "this story". That's not even a loophole, that's just straight up lying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2022 23:37
|
|
|
The previous stupid cop-out was because he knew full well the conversation was going to end with a dagger in the kidney. He got no reason to bullshit Elan like that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2022 23:39
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:The previous stupid cop-out was because he knew full well the conversation was going to end with a dagger in the kidney. He got no reason to bullshit Elan like that. Yeah, the prophecy was absolutely true. The person Belkar was going to "cause the death of" out of that list was always going to be the oracle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2022 00:22
|
|
|
What? The illusion was absolutely a happy ending and it was what the Oracle was talking about. Classic prophecy bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2022 00:31
|
|
|
Wittgen posted:What? The illusion was absolutely a happy ending and it was what the Oracle was talking about. Classic prophecy bullshit. It would be intensely lame, but if you think burlew is planning an intensely lame ending to his lifes work to date, maybe you are right
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2022 00:36
|
|
|
sebmojo posted:It would be intensely lame, but if you think burlew is planning an intensely lame ending to his lifes work to date, maybe you are right One thing doesn't imply the other at all. Rich can have a solid, serious bittersweet ending for the real story, while closing the prophecy "plot" with a loophole which is about as serious as a comic, 4th-wall-breaking character like the oracle deserves. I mean, ALL of the oracle's prophecies so far have been either misleading (Durkon, Roy, Belkar) or very, very convoluted (Hailey, V). It's perfectly fitting that Elan's prophecy gets fulfilled in a less than literal way, leaving it a mystery whether or not he will earn a real happy ending as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2022 01:01
|
|
|
Wittgen posted:What? The illusion was absolutely a happy ending and it was what the Oracle was talking about. Classic prophecy bullshit. Belkar has a poor Will save. He would probably have stayed in the illusion until he died of dehydration. Which... honestly, isn't a bad way to go, subjectively speaking?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2022 01:01
|
|
|
Haley has given Elan a few happy endings.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2022 01:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 16:04 |
|
|
NihilCredo posted:One thing doesn't imply the other at all. A serious, bittersweet ending where things don't all turn out perfectly but Elan gets to marry Haley and live happily with his family completely fits "For you, anyway". A serious, bittersweet ending for Elan where he dies saving the world fits "For you, anyway". Elan personally not dying sad really does not restrict how OotS ends very much at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2022 01:24
|
|