Are ALL the Azurite humans enslaved?

[The Pale King]

Something's been bugging me. Did Redcloak enslave all of the humans in Azure City? Or was it just prisoners of wars and such. Because, if it's the former, it'll be a lot harder for me to sympathize with Redcloak.

[TriForce]

it would be smarter not to imprison any prisoners of war, they have been trained for battle and thus are more dangerous when they escape, logically, everyone who isnt evacuated would be enslaved (i mean, what the hell are you supposed to do with them otherwise? hes not gonna let them go) and the ones protesting will have their family murdered before their eyes and that kinda stuff, you know, the normal WAR routine

[Fawkes]

It's explicitly stated here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0528.html) that a number of the freed slaves were non-combatants.

[Thanatosia]

I don't see how anyone could have any doubts at all as to how team Evil will treat anyone who falls under their dominion given how well they treat their own minions (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0192.html). Seriously, they throw Acid-spitting beetles (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0416.html) in the eyes of their own hobgoblins just for kicks, why would you think they would have any mercy on humans that got captured, civilian or otherwise. Make no mistakes, Redcloak is one of the bad guys, and even if for some reason he did feel any inclination to go light on the humans, Xykon would surely overrule him.

[Sky-Moon]

RedCloak sees 3 uses for humans:

1. Corpses
2. Slaves
3. Zombie Slaves

[slayerx]

Something's been bugging me. Did Redcloak enslave all of the humans in Azure City? Or was it just prisoners of wars and such. Because, if it's the former, it'll be a lot harder for me to sympathize with Redcloak.

Redcloak is a self-proclaimed "speciest", what made you think he had even a shred of mercy for innocent humans?

[Maximum Zersk]

Something's been bugging me. Did Redcloak enslave all of the humans in Azure City? Or was it just prisoners of wars and such. Because, if it's the former, it'll be a lot harder for me to sympathize with Redcloak.

Who said you have to sympathize with (for? with? I hove no idea.) Redcloak? Sure, he's noble and all, but he's still Lawful Evil. Their motto is basically "The ends justify the means". He's willing to do anything to reach his goal of acceptance for gobbos everywhere. He'll do anything-anything-to reach his goal.

And now watch as this gets scathing remarks from Redcloak-sympathizers.

But, back on-topic, yes I believe that he enslaved everyone.

[Darius1020]

To be fair, he only hates them because they murdered goblin innocents, in that respect it's kinda hard to sympathize with the Sapphire Guard

[Conuly]

Slavery has been, worldwide, a method for dealing with conquered populations since... well, forever. Back in the day, people no doubt reasoned that it was less cruel and more economic than just slaughtering them wholesale. (This doesn't mean they were *right*, just that they justified it in this way.)

So really, I wouldn't expect Redcloak and all to treat the captured Azurites any differently than that... and if the situation were reversed, I wouldn't expect the Azurites to treat any conquered goblin city differently either (even if I hadn't read SoD).

I mean, really, what else are they gonna do? Grant a general amnesty and let them all live in their own old homes eating bonbons?

[Green Bean]

To be fair, he only hates them because they murdered goblin innocents, in that respect it's kinda hard to sympathize with the Sapphire Guard

What does the Sapphire Guard have to do with anything? Heck, most of Azure City doesn't even know they exist.

[veti]

What Conuly said. In ancient times, slavery was the usual way of dealing with the losers. Not because it's any less cruel than killing them, it's just more useful to have someone else to do all the hard work. Back in the good ol' days, acquiring slaves was a major motivation for going to war. The Spartans used to periodically declare war on the Helots for that reason.

In medieval times things grew marginally more humane, but again for sound economic reasons. Once you'd conquered land, you needed people to work it. So the same peasants who'd previously worked it would carry on exactly as before, but paying taxes and service to you instead of the previous landlord.

What's unusual in the case of Azure City is that the hobgoblins have moved in to the city en masse, rather than just plonking a small garrison there to keep people in line. That means there's now an entire caste of new residents who think of themselves as overlords, and who, quite frankly, don't have enough work of their own to do - so they spend more time making the humans' lives miserable.

[NerfTW]

Something's been bugging me. Did Redcloak enslave all of the humans in Azure City? Or was it just prisoners of wars and such. Because, if it's the former, it'll be a lot harder for me to sympathize with Redcloak.

Yeahhh....... You're not supposed to be completely sympathetic to Red Cloak. he may have SOME good reasons for what he does, but what ever gave you the idea his methods were just?

[JoseB]

<...> Did Redcloak enslave all of the humans in Azure City? <...>

Of course not! Some of them, as comic #700 clearly shows, are used as food for the undead army......

[Roderick_BR]

To be fair, he only hates them because they murdered goblin innocents, in that respect it's kinda hard to sympathize with the Sapphire Guard
And because of a militar group, they think they have the right to attack, destroy and kill civilians that had nothing to do with it. Yeah, that's what we call terrorism.

[Dr.Epic]

Something's been bugging me. Did Redcloak enslave all of the humans in Azure City? Or was it just prisoners of wars and such. Because, if it's the former, it'll be a lot harder for me to sympathize with Redcloak.

The Resistance anyone? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0524.html)

[Conuly]

And because of a military group, they think they have the right to attack, destroy and kill civilians that had nothing to do with it. Yeah, that's what we call terrorism.

Actually, we only call it terrorism when it doesn't involve a big army occupying a country. In this case, we call it *war*.

[MReav]

Something's been bugging me. Did Redcloak enslave all of the humans in Azure City? Or was it just prisoners of wars and such. Because, if it's the former, it'll be a lot harder for me to sympathize with Redcloak.

I think the total free Azure City human population currently living in Azure City is: The Resistance and Tsukikio.

[Yanti]

At least Redcloak didn't butcher the noncombatants, like the Sapphire Guard did to his village.

[Optimystik]

At least Redcloak didn't butcher the noncombatants, like the Sapphire Guard did to his village.

You seem all set to debate the relative superiority of indefinite slavery vs. swift death, but I'll just content myself with "they're both horrible." Redcloak has no moral high ground here.

[The Pale King]

Whatever. In retrospect, the question seems kinda silly, but I was just wondering.

[TheSummoner]

Ok, everybody take a deep breath and repeat after me.

Redcloak is evil. Redcloak is the bad guy. Redcloak, while a sympathetic villain, is still a villain.

We can debate to the death whether its worse to be dead or enslaved... I'm sure Redcloak would have no problems with killing anyone who prefers the former and turning them into zombie slaves... but it really isn't the kind of thing we would be able to come to an agreement over, nor does it really matter.

In the end, Team Evil won the battle... they lost the gate, but they won Azure City. The majority of the Azurite military force was wiped out. Some (civilians and military) managed to escape to the sea. A large chunk (mostly civilian) were captured with the city. What are are team evil's options?

1) Let them go, perhaps give them a sack lunch and a pat on the back.

Not going to happen - They're evil, remember? Even in this case, how many of these untrained civilians do you think would survive to reach the closest city that would take the refugees?

2) Slaughter them all, raise them as zombies to fight for you! The Xykon method.

This doesn't strike me as the kind of thing Redcloak would do... he wasn't willing to throw them into the Snarl (even though thats quite a bit worse). I would think he tries to be better than what his vision of humanity is... not much better, but marginally better. If he slaughtered them all, he would be no better than the paladins.

3) Slavery and forced labor. The chosen method.

Redcloak is trying to turn Azure city into a Hobgoblin nation. To do this, he needs a good work force. Slavery is certainly the most efficient thing to do with the prisoners. Cruel as it seems, its also their best chance for survival.

[The MunchKING]

Actually, we only call it terrorism when it doesn't involve a big army occupying a country. In this case, we call it *war*.

I think he meant the Saphire Guards...

[Conuly]

I think he meant the Sapphire Guards...

I don't think he did. If he did, what's the "because of a military group"?

[TriForce]

I don't think he did. If he did, what's the "because of a military group"?

it means that becouse the saph guard killed goblins, ( the militairy group) the goblins dont have the right to kill people who hardly even know they exist

[Conuly]

it means that because the saph guard killed goblins, (the military group) the goblins dont have the right to kill people who hardly even know they exist

And I never said they did. However, I do say that what the goblins did is *not* "terrorism", and that I do believe the person I was quoting was saying that the goblins (not the SG) were terrorists.

[salinan]

Redcloak is evil. Redcloak is the bad guy. Redcloak, while a sympathetic villain, is still a villain.
Redcloak? Sympathetic? Nope. He may have had a legitimate grievance at one stage, but SoD in particular shows that he is as bad or worse than the sapphire guard.

[Zevox]

Redcloak? Sympathetic? Nope. He may have had a legitimate grievance at one stage, but SoD in particular shows that he is as bad or worse than the sapphire guard.
I'd say it's his treatment of Azure City's people that shows that, not Start of Darkness. Nothing he did in SoD was as bad as slaughtering innocents because of their race.

Zevox

[salinan]

No? Not his willingness to kill a few gods and gamble the fate of the world itself on their little plan? His cold blooded murder of his own brother? I'll take those as reasons to be unsympathetic. :smalltongue:

[Optimystik]

I'd say it's his treatment of Azure City's people that shows that, not Start of Darkness. Nothing he did in SoD was as bad as slaughtering innocents because of their race.

Zevox

Well, he did use excessive force against the circusfolk, including Robin's parents.

[Zevox]

Well, he did use excessive force against the circusfolk, including Robin's parents.
True, but as I'd not call that nearly as bad as the slaughter of largely defenseless innocents the Sapphire Guard engaged in, I'd say my point still stands.

Zevox

[Optimystik]

Yet he did the same thing they did - needless slaughter and orphaning children, just so he could secure the target and obey his god's directives. Just on a smaller scale.

It's only "not as bad" because there were less actors involved, not because the action itself was somehow more acceptable.

[TheSummoner]

Theres a term that fits what Redcloak and the hobgoblins did at Azure city... its not "terrorism" though.

Total war is a much more fitting way to describe it... using everything available to completly destroy Azure City. Considering the things Azure City has done to goblins... for no reason other than they are goblins... it might have been the only way to stop them... Fire with fire and all that.

[Mystic Muse]

Redcloak is evil. Redcloak is the bad guy. Redcloak, while a sympathetic villain, is still a villain.
.

Redcloak is evil. Redcloak is A badguy (Xykon and Tsukiko count too). Redcloak, while he may be sympathetic is still a villain.

meh, close enough.:smalltongue:

[Zevox]

Yet he did the same thing they did - needless slaughter and orphaning children, just so he could secure the target and obey his god's directives. Just on a smaller scale.

It's only "not as bad" because there were less actors involved, not because the action itself was somehow more acceptable.
Not quite. Redcloak can at least claim some measure of self-defense, since the Circus folk were attacking him. For thievery, granted, but they still attacked first. As such, his killing was not an unprovoked attack on defenseless individuals, the way the Sapphire Guard's was. And he didn't kill most of his attackers, just Robin's parents.

And yes, quantity does matter too. Redcloak killed two people. The Sapphire Guard killed an entire village of Goblins, save only Redcloak and Right-Eye, whom they surely would have killed if they could. Mass murder is still a lot worse than plain old murder, particularly given the differing circumstances in which they occurred.

Zevox

[Ridureyu]

Redcloak is slaughtering people because of their race. He's blamed all humanity for the Sapphire Guards' actions, so he's doing his thing. Some azurite citizens are ensslaved, others are catapulted into the rift, and the rest are food for the zombies.

But hey, he's all justified because a few humans did something BAD in the past! I need ot go kill a human right now.

[TriForce]

And I never said they did. However, I do say that what the goblins did is *not* "terrorism", and that I do believe the person I was quoting was saying that the goblins (not the SG) were terrorists.

well in the real world, the difference between terrorism and war is usually who is talking about it, for instance, americans ar the terrorists if you ask most people in irak, the people in the sea shephard ( who try to stop the killing of whales) are considered terrorist in japan and the people who try to bomb amerikan/european militairy bases in places where alqaida are, are considered terrorists in the western lands, while the first say they are there the help the place, the second are using non-fatal means to protect whales and the 3rd are simply attacking a militairy base. none of wich qualify as terrorism.

now in the OOTS things might be different, but i believe the entire point rich tried to make was that things are not so easy to label as evil or good

[Optimystik]

Not quite. Redcloak can at least claim some measure of self-defense, since the Circus folk were attacking him. For thievery, granted, but they still attacked first. As such, his killing was not an unprovoked attack on defenseless individuals, the way the Sapphire Guard's was. And he didn't kill most of his attackers, just Robin's parents.

Also over a dozen poodles, and we don't really know what happened to the elephant, bear and giraffe.


And yes, quantity does matter too. Redcloak killed two people. The Sapphire Guard killed an entire village of Goblins, save only Redcloak and Right-Eye, whom they surely would have killed if they could. Mass murder is still a lot worse than plain old murder, particularly given the differing circumstances in which they occurred.

Zevox

Quantity matters with comparable scale. Were there a squadron of Redcloaks and a village of circusfolk, two victims each would add up, just as his village did. How many goblins were slain per paladin? That's the trouble with quantitative morality.

[TheSummoner]

Redcloak is slaughtering people because of their race. He's blamed all humanity for the Sapphire Guards' actions, so he's doing his thing. Some azurite citizens are ensslaved, others are catapulted into the rift, and the rest are food for the zombies.

But hey, he's all justified because a few humans did something BAD in the past! I need ot go kill a human right now.

When did any of them get thrown into the rift? Oh, sure, he was threatening to do it in an attempt to get O-Chul to speak, but he never followed through on it. DStP goes into detail on this actually... Its not the kind of thing Redcloak would do.

Furthermore, when did he feed any of them to the zombies? 700 shows WFKaI chomping on one, but thats Tsukiko's doing, not Redcloak's.

[veti]

Furthermore, when did he feed any of them to the zombies? 700 shows WFKaI chomping on one, but thats Tsukiko's doing, not Redcloak's.

That's a very Redcloak sort of rationalisation: "I'm not doing it myself, so I'm not responsible." Even if he couldn't stop Tsukiko (which I think he probably could, if he put his mind to the problem), he doesn't have to keep helping Xykon. That's his own choice, and that means he has to share in the responsibility for what he and Tsukiko do.

[Mystic Muse]

Tell me. How do you propose Redcloak stops helping Xykon while managing to live?

Also, no. Redcloak telling Tsukiko to stop feeding humans to the wights won't do anything. they don't like each other and Xykon isn't going to help or have any objections.

[veti]

Tell me. How do you propose Redcloak stops helping Xykon while managing to live?

He'd have a fighting chance - he's got a lot of cleric levels, to say nothing of the cloak, and the hobgoblin army answers to him, not Xykon. But living is certainly not guaranteed. A clear conscience sometimes doesn't come cheap.

Also, I didn't say anything about telling Tsukiko what to do. Just kill her already. I'm pretty sure Reddy could manage that.

[Mystic Muse]

He'd have a fighting chance - he's got a lot of cleric levels, to say nothing of the cloak, and the hobgoblin army answers to him, not Xykon. But living is certainly not guaranteed. A clear conscience sometimes doesn't come cheap.

wouldn't clear his consience and he wouldn't stand a chance. According to the levels and geekery thread Xykon is at least level 27+ and recloak is 15+ Assuming those two number were correct (15 and 27) Xykon has TWELVE levels on Redcloak. Redcloak doesn't have a ghost of a chance. Lets assume though Redcloak is level 19. That's still 8 levels and Xykon has epic spells. Redcloak would probably have to be at least epic level to stand a chance.



Also, I didn't say anything about telling Tsukiko what to do. Just kill her already. I'm pretty sure Reddy could manage that.

I'm pretty sure Xykon wouldn't be happy about the death of a valuable ally at the hands of somebody he's already pretty close to killing.

[DukeGod]

He'd have a fighting chance - he's got a lot of cleric levels, to say nothing of the cloak, and the hobgoblin army answers to him, not Xykon. But living is certainly not guaranteed. A clear conscience sometimes doesn't come cheap.

Also, I didn't say anything about telling Tsukiko what to do. Just kill her already. I'm pretty sure Reddy could manage that.

what makes you think his conscience is not clear?just because he killed some people,enslaved a few hundred humans and ordered a army to wipe out some city's guard it doesn't mean he actually cares about that

[Thanatosia]

For some of the more rabid Redcloak haters in here (and I am not denying that he is evil) need to remember is that despite his hatred of Azurites and having every reason to kill them in revenge for what happened to his people, he did not in fact shove the lot of them into the Rift when O-chul refused to break. He had a very personal reason for wanting to see them dead or worse, but he did not slaughter them when confronted with an opportunity to do so.

I'm not saying Redcloak is not evil, he diffinately is.... but I think if you were to put an Azurite child at the mercy of Redcloak and a Goblin child at the mercy of a member of the Sapphire Guard, I think we all know wich one has the better chances of survival.

[The MunchKING]

wouldn't clear his consience and he wouldn't stand a chance. According to the levels and geekery thread Xykon is at least level 27+ and recloak is 15+ Assuming those two number were correct (15 and 27) Xykon has TWELVE levels on Redcloak. Redcloak doesn't have a ghost of a chance. Lets assume though Redcloak is level 19. That's still 8 levels and Xykon has epic spells. Redcloak would probably have to be at least epic level to stand a chance.

Plus what exactly could he do to an equal (to him) level lich with Xykon's gear? Clerics aren't exactly known for their nuke-spells (although IIRC he was a Destruction Domain Cleric, so he could do a little better). Xykon is Immune to pretty much all the elements, mind controlling affects, +4 levels to turnings, Immune to positive energy, is healed by negative energy and redcloak doesn't seem to use a weapon (much less a Magic blugeoning one).

[Mystic Muse]

Plus what exactly could he do to an equal (to him) level lich with Xykon's gear? Clerics aren't exactly known for their nuke-spells (although IIRC he was a Destruction Domain Cleric, so he could do a little better). Xykon is Immune to pretty much all the elements, mind controlling affects, +4 levels to turnings, Immune to positive energy, is healed by negative energy and redcloak doesn't seem to use a weapon (much less a Magic blugeoning one).

This too.

and If redcloak tries to get any decent items to kill Xykon with?

Oh look! another dead goblin!

[veti]

wouldn't clear his consience and he wouldn't stand a chance. According to the levels and geekery thread Xykon is at least level 27+ and recloak is 15+ Assuming those two number were correct (15 and 27) Xykon has TWELVE levels on Redcloak. Redcloak doesn't have a ghost of a chance. Lets assume though Redcloak is level 19. That's still 8 levels and Xykon has epic spells. Redcloak would probably have to be at least epic level to stand a chance.

Once again, you're making some weird assumptions. When I say "stop working for Xykon", I'm not intending that to be parsed as "challenge him personally to a fight", or even "walk up and tell him to his face that you're quitting". More like:

find the phylactery, and don't tell Xykon about it. (Or alternatively, create a fake one that's good enough to fool Xykon, and either destroy the real one or put it somewhere Xykon won't enjoy regenerating.)
kill Tsukiko
smash the TiVo
use the hobgoblins to set up a smokescreen story about a particularly daring resistance raid
don't show up to work next day.



I'm pretty sure Xykon wouldn't be happy about the death of a valuable ally at the hands of somebody he's already pretty close to killing.

Even assuming Reddy doesn't want to go the whole hog and bail completely on Xykon, he's still got plenty options there. Off the top of my head:

hobbo patrol puts up Red alert
black squadron bamfs in
black squadron fans out to find resistance
black squadron ambushed by elite hobgoblin force, with Redcloak seeing to Tsukiko personally
blame whole thing on Resistance


How hard is that?

[Kish]

what makes you think his conscience is not clear?
Start of Darkness makes this a question roughly on par with, "What makes you think the sun is a source of heat?"

[Mystic Muse]

Once again, you're making some weird assumptions. When I say "stop working for Xykon", I'm not intending that to be parsed as "challenge him personally to a fight", or even "walk up and tell him to his face that you're quitting". More like:

find the phylactery, and don't tell Xykon about it. (Or alternatively, create a fake one that's good enough to fool Xykon, and either destroy the real one or put it somewhere Xykon won't enjoy regenerating.)
kill Tsukiko
smash the TiVo
use the hobgoblins to set up a smokescreen story about a particularly daring resistance raid
don't show up to work next day.




Even assuming Reddy doesn't want to go the whole hog and bail completely on Xykon, he's still got plenty options there. Off the top of my head:

hobbo patrol puts up Red alert
black squadron bamfs in
black squadron fans out to find resistance
black squadron ambushed by elite hobgoblin force, with Redcloak seeing to Tsukiko personally
blame whole thing on Resistance


How hard is that?

let's see. First of all he can't pull off what all you're suggesting. Xykon will be able to tell the difference between his phylactery and a fake, Tsukiko would destroy the resistance, Xykon would just get another teevo or something else to spy with.

The second solution also wouldn't work. I think Xykon know the difference between sword wounds and a pile of dust. Plus, even if the resistance were capable of killing Tsukiko there'd be at least a few bodies.

[Raging Gene Ray]

veti and Kyuubi are sounding like Redcloak's own internal dialogue. Reddy probably has considered betraying Xykon, freeing himself from him...but knows that he has trapped himself.

This is all in addition, of course, to needing him for the ritual.

[veti]

let's see. First of all he can't pull off what all you're suggesting. Xykon will be able to tell the difference between his phylactery and a fake, Tsukiko would destroy the resistance, Xykon would just get another teevo or something else to spy with.

Xykon's phylactery is Redcloak's holy symbol. You think he couldn't create another one that looks exactly the same? Or perhaps that he couldn't replicate the aura of magic and/or evil on it? Maybe he couldn't, but I wouldn't say that's established fact.

Tsukiko vs the resistance is a match that doesn't even happen - the resistance aren't allies, they're just fall guys. In both these plans, all the actual work is done by Redcloak and the hobgoblins. If the resistance really do turn up - so much the better, but we're not relying on it.

And Xykon can get another scrying device, sure. But it'll take time to arrive. Time I'd be using to lay false leads and build my lead-lined defences.


The second solution also wouldn't work. I think Xykon know the difference between sword wounds and a pile of dust. Plus, even if the resistance were capable of killing Tsukiko there'd be at least a few bodies.

Come off it. Red signal means "probable PCs". For all Team Evil knows, not only Haley and Belkar, but also quite possibly some PC spellcasters are still inside the city. In fact Team Peregrine really is inside the city, and they've got at least one wizard of at least 9th level. If the charred, chopped, perforated and faceless remains of Tsukiko turn up, how is Xykon going to tell whether she was finished off by a Fireball or a Flame Strike? He's not exactly CSI.

[Mystic Muse]

Xykon's phylactery is Redcloak's holy symbol. You think he couldn't create another one that looks exactly the same? Or perhaps that he couldn't replicate the aura of magic and/or evil on it? Maybe he couldn't, but I wouldn't say that's established fact.

Tsukiko vs the resistance is a match that doesn't even happen - the resistance aren't allies, they're just fall guys. In both these plans, all the actual work is done by Redcloak and the hobgoblins. If the resistance really do turn up - so much the better, but we're not relying on it.

And Xykon can get another scrying device, sure. But it'll take time to arrive. Time I'd be using to lay false leads and build my lead-lined defences.


It's not an established fact looking at libris mortis. However, I think Xykon would have defenses against a betrayal like that considering it's his freaking phylactery

I'm aware that it's a match that doesn't happen. However, Xykon probably knows that the resistance doesn't have high level enough spellcasters to kill Tsukiko who is a minimum of level twelve according to the class and level geekery thread.

Also, the question isn't whether or not Redcloak COULD lay false leads. it's whether Xykon would fall for those false leads. I think not but maybe somebody else has a different opinion on that.


Come off it. Red signal means "probable PCs". For all Team Evil knows, not only Haley and Belkar, but also quite possibly some PC spellcasters are still inside the city. In fact Team Peregrine really is inside the city, and they've got at least one wizard of at least 9th level. If the charred, chopped, perforated and faceless remains of Tsukiko turn up, how is Xykon going to tell whether she was finished off by a Fireball or a Flame Strike? He's not exactly CSI.

okay. Maybe somebody else can help me here. isn't there a spell in 3.5 that allows you to see past events that happened in a specific place?

[deuxhero]

No they aren't. Tsukiko and the resistances are very much free.

[veti]

veti and Kyuubi are sounding like Redcloak's own internal dialogue. Reddy probably has considered betraying Xykon, freeing himself from him...but knows that he has trapped himself.

This is all in addition, of course, to needing him for the ritual.

I think you're right. The main reason none of these scenarios are going to happen is because they'd require some real courage from Redcloak, and that's a trait he's yet to show the slightest sign of.

And yeah, they'd set the plan back by years - he'd need to start from scratch looking for another arcane caster. On the other hand, Reddy now knows that Xykon is hardly a trustworthy ally. So that might not be as big a setback as all that. Still, I'm sure this is Reddy's own rationalisation for his cowardice.

[Kish]

No they aren't. Tsukiko and the resistances are very much free.
That's what Tsukiko thinks. If she wanted to leave Xykon's service (perish the thought), she might learn otherwise.

[Zevox]

Also over a dozen poodles, and we don't really know what happened to the elephant, bear and giraffe.
...so? Would you really argue that a few animal deaths is equivalent to what the Sapphire Guard did to Redcloak's village? I know I sure wouldn't.


Quantity matters with comparable scale. Were there a squadron of Redcloaks and a village of circusfolk, two victims each would add up, just as his village did. How many goblins were slain per paladin? That's the trouble with quantitative morality.
I disagree, I see no reason why the difference in the number of perpetrators would matter. The Sapphire Guard's larger size merely means that the blame falls on more people.

Zevox

[Optimystik]

...so? Would you really argue that a few animal deaths is equivalent to what the Sapphire Guard did to Redcloak's village? I know I sure wouldn't.

He was at least as heartless in killing those animals (and people) as the paladins were in killing his village. Both for religious reasons. You don't see the parallel?


I disagree, I see no reason why the difference in the number of perpetrators would matter. The Sapphire Guard's larger size merely means that the blame falls on more people.

The number of perpetrators doesn't matter. The number of victims is what matters.

But more perpetrators = more victims, thus there is a correlation.

[Larkspur]

I think you're right. The main reason none of these scenarios are going to happen is because they'd require some real courage from Redcloak, and that's a trait he's yet to show the slightest sign of.

Er, no, they'd require him thinking it's a good idea, which is something he's not shown the slightest sign of.

They've defeated the guardians of 3 of the 5 gates and sacked Azure City. The Plan is going awesome, despite a few setbacks due to gate destruction, and the reason for that success is Xykon. Why would he betray him?

Other than the fact that Xykon is a psychopath, obviously, but he reconciled himself to that when they joined up. When your backup plan involves annihilating your entire planet, a little collateral damage at the hands of your douchebag ally probably doesn't seem like such a big deal.

[Zevox]

He was at least as heartless in killing those animals (and people) as the paladins were in killing his village. Both for religious reasons. You don't see the parallel?
Not especially, no. Again, there's a big difference between the events, particularly insofar as Redcloak's victims were attacking him, so his actions were not unprovoked, nor were they helpless.

Heck, I don't think the Sapphire Guard's actions can be considered religious, either. They thought they were defending the gate first and foremost, and were killing inherent evil secondly, and while the latter may sound religious, it's more a generic D&D attitude about goblins. Hell, there were jokes about that when the Order was going through Dorukon's dungeon back at the start of the strip. (Granted, we don't really know anything about the Twelve Gods' religion, so I guess they may have had religious reasons too, but that's an unknown.)


The number of perpetrators doesn't matter. The number of victims is what matters.

But more perpetrators = more victims, thus there is a correlation.
We agree on the first, not on the second. More perpetrators does not inherently mean more victims. It may, but it depends on the situation. And I truly can't agree with you if you actually believe that Redcloak killing two people and possibly a handful of animals is comparable to the Sapphire Guard slaughtering an entire village of civilians, regardless of how many people were involved in each.

Zevox

[Optimystik]

Not especially, no. Again, there's a big difference between the events, particularly insofar as Redcloak's victims were attacking him, so his actions were not unprovoked, nor were they helpless.[/QUPTE]

His actions were unprovoked. And he immediately resorted to lethal force when it wasn't certain that the circusfolk were doing the same.

[QUOTE=Zevox;7739605]Heck, I don't think the Sapphire Guard's actions can be considered religious, either.

"The Twelve Gods have judged your hearts and found them to be evil" sounds pretty religious to me.


We agree on the first, not on the second. More perpetrators does not inherently mean more victims. It may, but it depends on the situation. And I truly can't agree with you if you actually believe that Redcloak killing two people and possibly a handful of animals is comparable to the Sapphire Guard slaughtering an entire village of civilians, regardless of how many people were involved in each.

Zevox

The lesser casualties in Redcloak's case were due to his diminished capacity for destruction, due to being alone. Had there been 5 of him tossing out flamestrikes, the body count would have been higher.

[Zevox]

His actions were unprovoked. And he immediately resorted to lethal force when it wasn't certain that the circusfolk were doing the same.
The theft, sure. The fighting? Not so much. Also, he mostly didn't use lethal force. Only against those poodles did he do that. Even the two humans he killed, Robin's parents, simply weren't lucky enough to survive the fall his shatter spell caused. He never actually cast any spell that directly kills except a single fire spell of some sort, and that was directed solely at the poodles.


"The Twelve Gods have judged your hearts and found them to be evil" sounds pretty religious to me.
Sounds more like religious rheteoric for "you pinged on our detect-evil-o-meters" to me.


The lesser casualties in Redcloak's case were due to his diminished capacity for destruction, due to being alone. Had there been 5 of him tossing out flamestrikes, the body count would have been higher.
One of him wasn't tossing out flamestrikes (that fire spell he used on the poodles doesn't seem to have been a flamestrike, given it shot out of his hand rather than fell from the sky). And it's not possible for there to have been five of him, and even if it were, I'd question the assumption that it would lead to a higher body count, as it requires the assumption that he'd deliberately have done more killing given the chance. On the contrary, five of him may simply have meant more Hold Monster spells to throw around so he could get away without killing anything. And again, I cannot agree that him being one person while the Guard was many makes their actions comparable, regardless of how you try to spin it.

Furthermore, he wasn't there with the explicit intention of slaughtering people. Two people got killed incidentally during the theft, but it was the theft, not the killing, that was his goal. Again, big difference from the Guard showing up specifically to slaughter the whole village, at least from where I'm sitting.

Zevox

[Thanatosia]

For all the people judging Redcloak on his killing of circus folk, let me remind you that the circus people were the agressors. He was helping liberate a sentient creature being held by the circus against its will (the MitD wanted to leave with them), and if the circus people (who were using lethal force themselves) had simply stoped giving pursuit and let them go none of them would have been harmed.

[Spiky]

You guys are arguing over the wrong events. Redcloak's most heinous act was killing his brother.
His reasoning was beneath his supposed honorable quest for the Dark One. Definition of hypocrisy. This one act is why he gets no respect from me, other than as a major villain.

Unfortunately, my eldest has currently lost my SoD, I can't remember enough details of other events to comment. Other than: Poodles deserve to die. Yes, including YOURS.

[Zevox]

You guys are arguing over the wrong events. Redcloak's most heinous act was killing his brother.
You'd call that more heinous than enslaving the populace of Azure City? :smallconfused:

Zevox

[Spiky]

Apparently. That was disgusting even if I am on his side, agreeing with his motives.

AC's (or other humans') view of his acts against AC are hardly the best source of unbiased reporting.

[Zevox]

Apparently. That was disgusting even if I am on his side, agreeing with his motives.

AC's (or other humans') view of his acts against AC are hardly the best source of unbiased reporting.
"Reporting?" We saw what the Hobgoblins, under Redcloak's command, were doing to their human slaves first-hand in the comic, when Haley and the Resistance went to rescue some of them. Not to mention Redcloak personally using them to try and interrogate O-Chul.

Zevox

[Zxo]

Some posters seem to think that only personal kills count. There are many ways of being guilty of someone's death without getting your own hands dirty, from giving orders to creating liches. True, we didn't see Redcloak enjoying killing/torturing for its own sake (except maybe for Miko when she was in the forcecage, but there was a personal reason for that), but he is responsible for the existence of Xykon the lich and the Plan which resulted in loss of very many lives.

I agree Redcloak has some opportunities for sabotage with a chance of success (and we may see him doing it the future), but the reason he's not doing it is not lack of courage, it is his genuine dedication to the Plan and the rewards it would bring him (or his deity). Xykon is necessary for the Plan, so Redcloak is resigned to suffering Xykon's (and his other minions') actions, and while he does not kill when not necessary, he doesn't care much about others doing it as long as it does not hurt the Plan.

[Optimystik]

The theft, sure. The fighting? Not so much. Also, he mostly didn't use lethal force. Only against those poodles did he do that. Even the two humans he killed, Robin's parents, simply weren't lucky enough to survive the fall his shatter spell caused. He never actually cast any spell that directly kills except a single fire spell of some sort, and that was directed solely at the poodles.

I wasn't aware murder had to be "direct" in order for it to still be murder.


Sounds more like religious rheteoric for "you pinged on our detect-evil-o-meters" to me.

Religious is religious. They both based their actions on divine mandate. He is a hypocrite.


Furthermore, he wasn't there with the explicit intention of slaughtering people. Two people got killed incidentally during the theft, but it was the theft, not the killing, that was his goal. Again, big difference from the Guard showing up specifically to slaughter the whole village, at least from where I'm sitting.

Zevox

While I agree that intended murder and murder in the progress of a theft are different levels of intent, the acts themselves do matter here.


For all the people judging Redcloak on his killing of circus folk, let me remind you that the circus people were the agressors. He was helping liberate a sentient creature being held by the circus against its will (the MitD wanted to leave with them), and if the circus people (who were using lethal force themselves) had simply stoped giving pursuit and let them go none of them would have been harmed.

a) He very clearly tricked the MitD into going with him;

b) How do you know what level of force the Circus Folk were using? They didn't get the chance to do anything!

[Larkspur]

SoDI should point out that Redcloak deliberately spared the clowns.

Also, a) it wasn't theft because you can't steal a sentient being, on account of how no one has a right to own another person and b) the fact that the MitD didn't understand it was being abused didn't make it okay for the circus-folk to abuse it. Liberating it was clearly the right thing to do, even if Redcloak was doing it for the wrong reasons (and Team Evil abused it almost as badly afterwards). It could have just as easily been Roy making that getaway, and the poodles and the acrobats would have wound up just as dead.

Why are we indicting Redcloak over poodles when he murdered his brother for no reason whatsoever, sent a bunch of hobogoblins to unnecessary deaths and led a brutal occupation? There are plenty of people he actually deliberately murdered that we can complain about.

[Optimystik]

You don't get to call it "liberating him" if your intent is to turn around and use him yourself.

And the circusfolk discussion is a parallel (albeit, a lesser one) to the SG slaughter.

[Ancalagon]

And the circusfolk discussion is a parallel (albeit, a lesser one) to the SG slaughter.

... one that should totally get dropped. The entire circusfolk-issue was a long joke, nothing else.

[Optimystik]

... one that should totally get dropped. The entire circusfolk-issue was a long joke, nothing else.

Oh I'm aware it was not a serious part of the book, but it still gave insight into Redcloak's character - like every other scene that featured him. I do agree that there are other parts of SoD that are more useful for this purpose.

(Besides, tangential discussion is a key part of any message board. :smalltongue:)

[Zevox]

I wasn't aware murder had to be "direct" in order for it to still be murder.
Of course not. But it still shows how his actions there differ completely from the Sapphire Guard's slaughter of his village. Rather than simply dropping a flame strike on them (as you put it earlier in your "if there were five of him" statement), he cast a spell that stopped their attack on him, but would not necessarily be lethal, merely shattering their trapeze. The fall did kill them, but it wasn't something that was definitely going to do that, the way a more offensive spell would.


Religious is religious. They both based their actions on divine mandate. He is a hypocrite.
Actually, I wouldn't be so sure that Redcloak cares so much about his actions having a "divine mandate" as he does about what they're aimed to do. And my point with the Sapphire Guard is that they seem to merely be using religious rheteoric to portray actions grounded in entirely non-religious rationale. But we're getting to the point of meaningless hair splitting on this part.


While I agree that intended murder and murder in the progress of a theft are different levels of intent, the acts themselves do matter here.
And the acts themselves are still very different, as I've said repeatedly. Yes, some people end up dead in each, but that's the only similarity they share. How they happened, why they happened, the circumstances surrounding them, the number and manner of deaths, everything else differs greatly. And from where I'm sitting, there's no real comparison - the Sapphire Guard's slaughter was by far the worse offense of the two. Redcloak's actions don't get that bad until the occupation of Azure City.

(Incidentally, I agree with you about the "liberating the MitD" excuse some other posters are using. Redcloak doesn't give a damn about the MitD outside of how he can use him to further his own Plan, so he was by no means performing some heroic, admirable action by getting him away from the Circus folk.)

Zevox

[Optimystik]

Of course not. But it still shows how his actions there differ completely from the Sapphire Guard's slaughter of his village. Rather than simply dropping a flame strike on them (as you put it earlier in your "if there were five of him" statement), he cast a spell that stopped their attack on him, but would not necessarily be lethal, merely shattering their trapeze. The fall did kill them, but it wasn't something that was definitely going to do that, the way a more offensive spell would.

That makes him no less reckless in his use of said magic. Nor does it imply that the presence of more of him would result in more concern for human welfare, when slinging said spells..


Actually, I wouldn't be so sure that Redcloak cares so much about his actions having a "divine mandate" as he does about what they're aimed to do. And my point with the Sapphire Guard is that they seem to merely be using religious rheteoric to portray actions grounded in entirely non-religious rationale. But we're getting to the point of meaningless hair splitting on this part.

As said before, the paladins themselves attribute the order to their gods when they show up. In addition, the fact that they did not fall suggests that their gods "agree with their analysis" as Shojo put it.


And the acts themselves are still very different, as I've said repeatedly. Yes, some people end up dead in each, but that's the only similarity they share. How they happened, why they happened, the circumstances surrounding them, the number and manner of deaths, everything else differs greatly. And from where I'm sitting, there's no real comparison - the Sapphire Guard's slaughter was by far the worse offense of the two. Redcloak's actions don't get that bad until the occupation of Azure City.

All right, I'll cede this point. It doesn't let Redcloak off the hook for what he did (and I doubt he'd be moved to apologize) but I wasn't intending on defending the SG anyway.

[Thanatosia]

a) He very clearly tricked the MitD into going with him;

b) How do you know what level of force the Circus Folk were using? They didn't get the chance to do anything!
SIGNIFICANT AND DETAILED SOD SPOILERS:

a) Redcloak did not 'trick' the MitD into leaving with him. The MitD clearly had a desire to leave the circus already, as per the exchange the day before Redcloak made his attempt to free him:

Redcloak: have you ever considered a different line of work?
MitD: <Clueless reference to how he could'nt be a trapeeze artist>
Redcloak: No, I mean have you ever considered leaving the circus?
Mitd: Oh no, I could never leave the circus
Redcloak: Then you DO like it.
Mitd: No, I mean I could never leave it, they have guards and stuff.

The MITD wanted to leave with redcloak, of its own free will. Although we will never know for certain, I'm pretty sure if MITD had indicated that he DID like the circus, i'm reasonably sure Redcloak would not have tried to force him to leave against its will (Xykon certainly would have, but Redcloak was not operating under Xykon at the time, he shows up later). Regaurdless of what you think Redcloaks ultimate motivations were in drafting the services of the MITD are, the fact is that the MITD wanted to go with him, but was being held against it's will by the Circus folk, so Liberation is a word I feel comfortable using.

b) Robins Parents were swinging in with a Crossbow, and Dumbo actualy fired multiple crossbow bolts at them, with trajectories that leave little doubt that they were aimed for Redcloak and Eriaxnikol's heads and only barely missed (they actualy grazed RC's forhead and cheek and left visable scars that lingered until RC cast Cure moderate wounds on himself). I dont think non-lethal attacks with crossbows aimed at the head is much of a credible theory, the circus folks were clearly employing lethal force.

[Optimystik]

SIGNIFICANT AND DETAILED SOD SPOILERS:

a) Redcloak did not 'trick' the MitD into leaving with him. The MitD clearly had a desire to leave the circus already, as per the exchange the day before Redcloak made his attempt to free him:

Redcloak: have you ever considered a different line of work?
MitD: <Clueless reference to how he could'nt be a trapeeze artist>
Redcloak: No, I mean have you ever considered leaving the circus?
Mitd: Oh no, I could never leave the circus
Redcloak: Then you DO like it.
Mitd: No, I mean I could never leave it, they have guards and stuff.

The MITD wanted to leave with redcloak, of its own free will. Although we will never know for certain, I'm pretty sure if MITD had indicated that he DID like the circus, i'm reasonably sure Redcloak would not have tried to force him to leave against its will (Xykon certainly would have, but Redcloak was not operating under Xykon at the time, he shows up later). Regaurdless of what you think Redcloaks ultimate motivations were in drafting the services of the MITD are, the fact is that the MITD wanted to go with him, but was being held against it's will by the Circus folk, so Liberation is a word I feel comfortable using.

b) Robins Parents were swinging in with a Crossbow, and Dumbo actualy fired multiple crossbow bolts at them, with trajectories that leave little doubt that they were aimed for Redcloak and Eriaxnikol's heads and only barely missed. I dont think non-lethal attacks with crossbows aimed at the head is much of a credible theory, the circus folks were clearly employing lethal force.

a) "Wanted to leave" and "wanted to leave with Redcloak" are not the same thing.

b) It's only "lethal force" if their intention was to outright kill the thieves, and not simply reduce them to low/zero HP and halt their escape. We don't know enough to be sure either way.

[Thanatosia]

a) "Wanted to leave" and "wanted to leave with Redcloak" are not the same thing.

b) It's only "lethal force" if their intention was to outright kill the thieves, and not simply reduce them to low/zero HP and halt their escape. We don't know enough to be sure either way.
a) I'm not exactly sure what your point is here, MitD wanted to leave, and was willing to accept RC's help in being snuck out. RC forced nothing upon the MitD and was facilitating its own desires - its ok for two people to have convergant motivations and help each other even if they ultimately have different end-goals in mind.

b) I realy don't know how to respond to that.... you are arguing head shots with cross bows to be non-lethal force. Well, I'm sure Redcloak had no desire to kill any of the circus folks either, he just wanted to reduce them to low/zero hp to make his escape. And ultimate, if someone was shooting crossbows aimed at my head, even if there was a possibility they would'nt finish me off if they merely managed to incapactiate me, I think I would be completely morally justified in using whatever forces I had available to defend myself, even if it ment possibly killing my attackers.

Edit: Also note that he did not attack the poodle lady after he dealt with her attacking poodles. Nor did he even aim his fire spell to catch her in its AOE, he was not actively seeking to kill circus Folk. He merely dealt with the threat she was presenting him with and moved on.

[Zevox]

All right, I'll cede this point. It doesn't let Redcloak off the hook for what he did (and I doubt he'd be moved to apologize) but I wasn't intending on defending the SG anyway.
Then we are in agreement, as that's the point I was trying to defend with the entire discussion to begin with.

Zevox

[Optimystik]

a) I'm not exactly sure what your point is here, MitD wanted to leave, and was willing to accept RC's help in being snuck out. RC forced nothing upon the MitD and was facilitating its own desires - its ok for two people to have convergant motivations and help each other even if they ultimately have different end-goals in mind.

"Forcing something on someone" isn't exactly necessary when you can trick them instead. But that doesn't make one option morally superior to the other.


b) I realy don't know how to respond to that.... you are arguing head shots with cross bows to be non-lethal force. Well, I'm sure Redcloak had no desire to kill any of the circus folks either, he just wanted to reduce them to low/zero hp to make his escape. And ultimate, if someone was shooting crossbows aimed at my head, even if there was a possibility they would'nt finish me off if they merely managed to incapactiate me, I think I would be completely morally justified in using whatever forces I had available to defend myself, even if it ment possibly killing my attackers.

When you're the one making off with their pet?

[Thanatosia]

"Forcing something on someone" isn't exactly necessary when you can trick them instead. But that doesn't make one option morally superior to the other.
How exactly is RC deceiving the MitD? You keep using the phrase tricking, but I see no lies or deception from RC - he told the MitD he could help him escape if he came to work for him, and that's prcisely what RC did and wanted, he freed him from the circus so the MitD could work for him. How is that trickery or deception? The fact that the MitD would be working for RC was on the table from the begining.

When you're the one making off with their pet?
The MitD is a sentient, speaking creature... the word is Slave, not Pet.

[Larkspur]

The MitD is a sentient, speaking creature... the word is Slave, not Pet.

Exactly. You can't "steal" a person. You can kidnap a person, but only if the person doesn't want to go with you. Which the MitD, you know, did. The fact that it's bad at math doesn't mean it didn't want to leave.