OOTS #265 - The Discussion Thread

[The Giant]

New comic is up.

So far, we seem to have normal lag, not the insane-no-one-can-access-the-site-at-all lag that we had on Friday. Here's hoping it stays that way.

[LurkerInPlayground]

Priceless.

[The_Sigil]

*laughs and laughs and laughs*

One of the funniest ones I've read.

PS: I don't suppose there's a OOTS shadow avatar thingy around anywhere at all? Normal, fiend, anything ok.

[Zherog]

New comic is up.

So far, we seem to have normal lag, not the insane-no-one-can-access-the-site-at-all lag that we had on Friday. Here's hoping it stays that way.


I think you spoke too soon. :( Poor Ray...

[Pester]

I suppose this could be taken as a shout-out to all the "Not all paladins are like that!" discussion we saw a while back, during the endless speculation on Miko's inner state.

I wonder which kind of Paladin Lord Shojo will be.

[DeathQuaker]

I suppose this could be taken as a shout-out to all the "Not all paladins are like that!" discussion we saw a while back, during the endless speculation on Miko's inner state.

I wonder which kind of Paladin Lord Shojo will be.

Well, given that Lord Shojo is the one who sends her on the long, long far away missions, it's probably reasonable to argue that he finds her as annoying as Hinjo and presumably the others do.

[Jothki]

So is that smeared blood? Nice.

[Tawkis]

Yes who new Belkar had such talent.

[soozenw]

is belkar available to do murals? ;D

[Nodles]

This was really unexpected ;D Great work Rich! Now im dying to know just what kind of guy this Lord Shojo is

[siobharek]

Personally I got a bit of a sinking feeling in my gut seeing that mural. One thing is getting hints that Belkar is psychotic - another is getting it like this.

Very good comic.

[Silivren]

Actually I'm impressed Belkar was able to write so legibly while using his ring of jumping. Even standing on the (deceased) guard he couldn't have reached that high ;)

[dragonfly83h]

Excellent story, Giant. Already can't wait for the next strip. :D

Though, I seemed to experience heavy lag, so I couldn't even log on all of friday. But then again I live in Denmark (GMT+1), so time's relative. ;)

[Winter_Wolf]

Yay! Did not notice any particular lag this time 'round. Well at least not the horrendous lag that was happening last week.

On another note, so let me get this straight: Miko is a paladin. Hinjo is a paladin. Miko has "stick up my butt" as a class feature, but Hinjo is a pretty amusing guy. Does this mean that he needs to gain a few more levels to get that particular class feature? ;D

I guess we know now that Belkar took some of those skill ranks he forgot to put into ranger skills towards Craft (Psychotic murals), hey?

[Mjoellnir]

Ohoh, I'm normally CG, but I hope Belkar has a very good plan. The dumbness to keep a dangerous psychotic in a dark pit must be punished. ;D

[Tanaar]

I have said it before, and will say it again.

Belkar is my absolute hero.

I usually play NG with lawful tendancies*, but Belkar tempts me to make a CE character.


*Legitimizing this claim-Currently playing an ex-royal guard (Fighter) who, while enthusiastic about enforcing the laws of the empire, couldnt care less about the more subtle aspects of Law, eg honor and honesty

[Cirin]

I think Belkar making a mural on the wall out of the blood of his slaugtered foe, taunting his captor to chase him down definitely counts as a use of his "Craft Disturbing Mental Image" feat :)

[Mjoellnir]

But that's dumb. Paladins are immune against fear. So it's only a provocation.... and hopefully part of his eeeeevil masterplan. ;)

[Darius Midnite]

*Snickers* Outstanding strip Giant...
Gotta love that Belkar and his bizzare behaviour..!

I get the felling that Miko is about to be drawn in to a nightmare.. ;)

[kerberos]

I think Belkar making a mural on the wall out of the blood of his slaugtered foe, taunting his captor to chase him down definitely counts as a use of his "Craft Disturbing Mental Image" feat :)

More like "craft disturbing physical image".

[Sebastian]

On another note, so let me get this straight: Miko is a paladin. Hinjo is a paladin. Miko has "stick up my butt" as a class feature, but Hinjo is a pretty amusing guy. Does this mean that he needs to gain a few more levels to get that particular class feature? ;D


I think Miko used some kind of sostitution levels for that..

[Electric_Monkey]

To paraphrase the bard (not Elan), who would have thought the poor guy had so much blood in him?

[Mordeus_Dire]

The problem is Belkar is wounded, unfamiliar with his surroundings and only armed with what he has at hand (ie: looted from the dead guard).

Sadly, Miko will probably kill him when she tracks him down in a fair fight... Of course, there's no way Belkar is going to allow a fair fight!

I'm sure he has some cunningly evil plan devised to turn Miko into an ex-paladin. As Miko said in an earlier strip "this will be the greatest test to my alignment yet".

And she knows not the awesome sadism of Belkar! ;D

[Karellen]

"What the hell d'you call that?"

"I call it blood, detective. I s'ppose you'll write it up as... graffiti."

[Alfryd]

Oh, Belkar. What have you done?
In seriousness, the way things are shaping up, I fear there's an excellent chance at least one of them is going to end up dead. And possibly so badly dismembered as to preclude all efforts at resurrection.
Can Miko see the body from there?
Does Belkar actually have a plan? The thought by itself is frightening. He probably won't otherwise stand a chance.

"Let's just say there's a reason Miko gets picked for long missions. In foreign countries. Which keep her away from home for months at a time."
I suppose that goes some way to justify the OotS' reaction. On the other hand, it's kinda sad.

[Caledonian]

Judging from the long slash across the dead guard's abdomen, it's clear Belkar got a +2 circumstance bonus from using human kidneys as a paintbrush.

[edit again] Having just read Giant's statement in the Spoiler thread, I'm deleting this speculation.

[Darius Midnite]

Whadya wanna bet Belkar is actually hiding just inside the entrance to the pit, waiting for Miko to go on a wild-kidney chase?

Could be...Could not..

But i think the chances are quite small since they properly made their spot check or somthing..
I mean i WOULD be pretty stupid not to check the cell first...

[Ebon_Drake]

Wow, that's quite a chamber of horrors Belkar's set up, solitary confinement must have made him go a bit wrong in the head (well, wrong-er, and only a tiny bit). Well, unless its just red pen (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=38) again. Please tell me its just red pen again.

minor prediction: will this be setting up for another #63 incident? If so who's head will be turned into a hat this time?

[Terrafire]

W00t! go Belkar!

(has anyone noticed yet that my posts usually consist of "w00t, go 'name'!", in an attempt to boost my post #? )
(ho hum hum ho) 8)

[Caledonian]

(edit) On second thought, I should confine all my speculation to the speculation thread, just-in-case.

I wonder what Belkar has up his sleeve?

[Eldhrin]

I like it. I hope Belkar has a cunning plan. I'm sure it will be a very unpleasant cunning plan, but I hope it's very cunning.

Miko of course will be very tough for him to take out, and I agree with an above poster that it's very likely one or both will end up dead.

[tis_tom]

Am I one of the few people who DOESN'T want Belkar to exact revenge on Miko? :(

I mean imagine if Belkar actually DID get the upper hand in a fight between the two of them! Miko was just doing her job in taking the OOTS to her country, it's not like it was a personal attack on just Belkar! (which is how he's going to see it)

Either way I'm worried for her, I don't wanna see her hurt!

[Mjoellnir]

Am I one of the few people who DOESN'T want Belkar to exact revenge on Miko? :(

I mean imagine if Belkar actually DID get the upper hand in a fight between the two of them! Miko was just doing her job in taking the OOTS to her country, it's not like it was a personal attack on just Belkar! (which is how he's going to see it)

Either way I'm worried for her, I don't wanna see her hurt!

At the moment it seems that you're the only one. ;D

It might have been her job, but that doesn't give her the right to treat the Order like a bunch of slaves. First she tried to simply assassinate them, without telling why, then, when the Order wanted to come with her in peace she acted like a slavedriver. Short: Miko FTK (for the kill)

[Gary_Schaper]

At the moment it seems that you're the only one. ;D
Nah, I'm another. Belkar has gone farther and farther from "lovably evil" to "absolute psychopath" as the strip has gone on, and I get less and less able to cheer for him.

(Can any Belkar fans put aside their Miko-hate and explain why the guard deserved to be slaughtered and used as paint?)

[bluewurm]

Yes who new Belkar had such talent.




well, he does have ranks in "craft disturbing mental image"

[Caledonian]

Worse: he has the feat Craft Disturbing Mental Image. Ranks aren't even needed.

[Mjoellnir]

Nah, I'm another. Belkar has gone farther and farther from "lovably evil" to "absolute psychopath" as the strip has gone on, and I get less and less able to cheer for him.

(Can any Belkar fans put aside their Miko-hate and explain why the guard deserved to be slaughtered and used as paint?)


First: I am no fan of Belkar! >:(
Second: I never said, that the guard deserved what Belkar did to him.
Third: Miko deserves it, for treating the Order like crap and keeping a dangerous psychopath in a dark pit, it's no wonder that he goes on a killing spree!

[Theo_Axner]

Am I one of the few people who DOESN'T want Belkar to exact revenge on Miko? :(

I don't really care much whether he gets Miko or not, but I really don't want Belkar dead. He's just too funny to do without.

[Lila]

I knew Miko had a stick up her rear I just knew it!

[Istielthia]

Poor Belkar. I think he's in for a serious butt-whoopin'.

[Flippy]

Yay go Belkar! His escape already was great, but I can't wait what he's going to do next

[Alfryd]

I was torn between Miko or Belkar in the party, but I don't want to see either dead. Miko has done nothing- no really, nothing, rudeness notwithstanding- to deserve an offhand disembowelment. But it's really hard to imagine the OotS without ol' Bitterleaf.

The suspense is killing me.

[Scorpi]

Belkar is evil (and downright grusome). Period.

And in my oppinion, Miko has stretched the Lawful Good alignment a bit too far.

-Insert Roy's rant here-

Great comic however! I give it... Five hearts!

[rosebud]

Comments: Well, the first 8 panels were great. YAY!!! I love Hinjo. :) What's the chance at this point the guard can be raised? Why is there a single tiny pit in a loooooooooooooooooooong corridor? Does Craft Disturbing Mental Image include Draw Disturbing Image, or was that a separate feat? Why does Miko insist on going alone? I'm reminded of the "If I can kill it here, I can kill it anywhere." (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=206) line. Ugh. :(Did you notice: The locks in panel 5 are missing in panel 8? Hinjo has a (seemingly non-evil) goatee? Belkar dragged the guard for easy access to his blood? Belkar drew a remarkably complete Miko and self-portrait? Belkar didn't draw Windstriker? The blood on the wall doesn't drip? Belkar found it necessary to draw no fewer than 7 arrows? Belkar still appears to be Chaotic Evil?Haley translation: (None)

[Darius Midnite]

I don't quite know why people still thinks that Belkar has a feat named " Craft Disturbing Mental Image"

It was mostly somthing he made up to annoy Roy...
Just guessing...

[rosebud]

But that's dumb.Belkar strikes me as the acting, not planning type. This is a handy strip for pushing the "no, really, he's chaotic neutral just, um, taunted as a child and will be rehabilitated" arguments to the fringes. Is there any way to keep him at this point?

[rosebud]

I don't quite know why people still thinks that Belkar has a feat named " Craft Disturbing Mental Image"Because we're not taking it too seriously, either? :D

[Eldred]

Haha, just read the strip. I can't help but love Belkar; I hope Miko gets what's coming for her ;D

[Antina]

Well, given that Lord Shojo is the one who sends her on the long, long far away missions, it's probably reasonable to argue that he finds her as annoying as Hinjo and presumably the others do.

Hmm - not sure.
It´s only the new Paladine-Guys opinion, that it is why Shojo sends Miko. Miko clearly outranks him and it is also quite possible, that she is the only one Shojo really trusts in those far-away-of-all-control-missions.

[Lorde]

I hope Miko survive, because being rude and annoying isn´t a capital punishment.

This, and I enjoy her char. Deep inside, I believe she try hard (maybe too hard) to do the right thing, and I value her honest intentions.

Now.. even if Belkar survive, how it will be the Order reaction to him after that?

[rosebud]

"Let's just say there's a reason Miko gets picked for long missions. (...) I suppose that goes some way to justify the OotS' reaction. On the other hand, it's kinda sad.You say tomato, I say one of the great lines in that strip and joy to read.


But it's really hard to imagine the OotS without ol' Bitterleaf.I'm sure there would be enough left to make a hat. Or a banjo head and strings.


Judging from the long slash across the dead guard's abdomen, it's clear Belkar got a +2 circumstance bonus from using human kidneys as a paintbrush.Wrong side. Kidneys are in the back.


Am I one of the few people who DOESN'T want Belkar to exact revenge on Miko?When has Belkar ever successfully exacted sworn revenge? The only thing that comes close to mind is the kobold, and that was a matched fight (and he didn't swear revenge previously).


Deep inside, I believe she try hard (maybe too hard) to do the right thing, and I value her honest intentions.The road to hell is paved with good intentions...

[Antina]

Nah, I'm another. Belkar has gone farther and farther from "lovably evil" to "absolute psychopath" as the strip has gone on, and I get less and less able to cheer for him.

(Can any Belkar fans put aside their Miko-hate and explain why the guard deserved to be slaughtered and used as paint?)


It´s just like Roy said: He has to keep an eye on Belkar and keep him in the group. Otherwise Roy would be responsible for a hell lot of damage and even more random killing.
Hey - there is at least a good ;) reason for the sheet Belkar was carrying around...
Now he got mad because of the treatment and same time loosend of his leach (know as the OOTS ;))

[Marller]

Great strip. It really looks right now as if one or both might end up dead but given the Giants habit to do something unexpected i still got hope that none of them will die. :)

I wonder why none of the Paladins would try to talk to her, if she is the only annoying paladin around. It's really kinda sad.

[Starbuck_II]

Nah, I'm another. Belkar has gone farther and farther from "lovably evil" to "absolute psychopath" as the strip has gone on, and I get less and less able to cheer for him.

(Can any Belkar fans put aside their Miko-hate and explain why the guard deserved to be slaughtered and used as paint?)


The guard was in his way. The guard would get Belkar caught/harmed had Belkar not killed him.

Belkar isn't exalted so he can't take Subduing Strike feat (no penalty for doing subdual damage).

It was kill or be killed.

Ojnce the guard was dead, Belkar had to devise a plan to save himself/friends (might find a use for them later).
The guard had no use for his bloodbeing dead. Belkar needed a tool to paint. The rest is elementary, my dear Mr. Watson.

No Miko hate needed.

[Antina]

Comments: Well, the first 8 panels were great. YAY!!! I love Hinjo. :) What's the chance at this point the guard can be raised? Why is there a single tiny pit in a loooooooooooooooooooong corridor? Does Craft Disturbing Mental Image include Draw Disturbing Image, or was that a separate feat? Why does Miko insist on going alone? I'm reminded of the "If I can kill it here, I can kill it anywhere." (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=206) line. Ugh. :(Did you notice: The locks in panel 5 are missing in panel 8? Hinjo has a (seemingly non-evil) goatee? Belkar dragged the guard for easy access to his blood? Belkar drew a remarkably complete Miko and self-portrait? Belkar didn't draw Windstriker? The blood on the wall doesn't drip? Belkar found it necessary to draw no fewer than 7 arrows? Belkar still appears to be Chaotic Evil?Haley translation: (None)

Oh PALEEZE!!!
Man - it´s a COMIC!
It´s supposed to be good and entertaining and in this case even telling a great story.
No need to try to be nitpicking, is there?

;)

And - to nitpick a little ;) - you don´t know how good this self-picture of Belkars really was, because it´s like everything in the comic: Stick-drawing ;)

[Lorde]

The road to hell is paved with good intentions...


I disagree with that, specially because pre-made answer add little to a discussion. I could rebate with another catchy phrase and we would ping-pong on that all day.

Maybe Miko end on the dark side (Linear gang?) but she have room to improvement too.

I see clearly she isn´t liked by the gang or by their colleagues, problaly by her Lord too. Is she bitter because no one like her, or no one like her because she is bitter?

I wish the Giant reendem her, but I doubt it will happen since there is no one left to save her of her own inner demons.

A pity.

[thatwolfguy]

do we know how good belkar's hide skill is?

[Caledonian]

Miko is a paladin, one whose personal conduct upholds all that is good and right. She is rather unpleasant to interact with.

Belkar is a murderous sociopath who kills without mercy. He makes us laugh on occasion.

There is far more talk of Miko's inner demons and redemption than Belkar's. Fascinating.

[Antina]

do we know how good belkar's hide skill is?

You have a REALLY GOOD point there, you know?!

BELKAR IS I N HIS CELL!!!

No need for the painted signs to tell the truth!
That´s the clue!

[rosebud]

Oh PALEEZE!!! Man - it´s a COMIC!And your point is? It's a great comic. I don't see the connection between the ALL CAPS comments and some "hey, did you notice some interesting things" comments. Seriously, he DRAGGED THE BODY for the sole purpose of making a gruesome mural. That adds, not detracts, from the story. Sure, one can be straightlaced and say, "Well, it makes the panel simpler." But the image of Belkar going out of his way to DRAG THE BODY and then do his bloody painting makes the deed that much more vile.


No need to try to be nitpicking, is there?I sense a disconnect. Reread my comments.


And - to nitpick a little ;) - you don´t know how good this self-picture of Belkars really was, because it´s like everything in the comic: Stick-drawing ;)That's the point, actually. Near perfect recreation of the world -- who knew Belkar was such a talented (though it a sick way) artist?

[aaronbourque]

Am I one of the few people who DOESN'T want Belkar to exact revenge on Miko? :(

No, you're not the only one. I'm mostly past sympathy for Belkar at this point. Yeah, killing a guard to escape is to be expected, but taunting the Paladin in this way is Just Not Done.

Either one will kill the other or one will shift their alignment.

It's the only possible way to get any closure from this.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque

[Coffee_Dragon]

Yay, we can post again!


Miko is a paladin, one whose personal conduct upholds all that is good and right. She is rather unpleasant to interact with.

Belkar is a murderous sociopath who kills without mercy. He makes us laugh on occasion.

There is far more talk of Miko's inner demons and redemption than Belkar's. Fascinating.

My thoughts exactly.

Part of the board's been turned into some kind of whisper game where speculations and conjectures are passed along and intermixed with relativistic sagacities until a large number of people seem convinced that Miko would like nothing better than to kill people arbitrarily given half a chance, and should either be made to atone for this pre-emptively or else be put out of our misery.

As for the question put to me in the previous strip thread:


Here's a question for you: who do you find funnier and laugh at (or with) more: Belkar or Miko?

Belkar, of course! I'm not demanding he get his comeuppance or anything (although recent events suggest he might be in for it anyway), but it would be comforting in a real world sense if the crowd who applaud, rationalize and excuse Belkar's action would expend a fraction of that energy acknowledging the merits of someone who is principled, impartial, honest, virtuous, accommodating, tenacious, unselfish, unflinchingly courageous, open to the prospect of romantic relationships, generally wonderful, and appreciated by her colleagues... what? Man, that Hinjo is so in for it now.


It's the only possible way to get any closure from this.

I'd be careful using the words "only possible". Writers can be crafty when it comes to putting off closure. ;)

[rosebud]

I disagree with that, specially because pre-made answer add little to a discussion.It comes from a context. Namely, Cromwell's England, McCarthy's era, Marxist ideology, Puritan witchcraft "trials" in colonial New England, the Khmer Rouge's Cambodia, and so forth. I made the "would you rather ... be burned at the stake" comment in an earlier thread for that reason. That type of attitude led to an ordered society, but damaged the society and killed numerous innocents and enriched numerous corrupt men in doing so as the side-effect. The blind-obedience that Miko illustrates has been the source of many great evils in history. The basic notion of a utopia is a place that does not exist.

Does adding a long paragraph make it more valid?


Is she bitter because no one like her, or no one like her because she is bitter?She doesn't strike me as bitter. She strikes me as doctrinaire.


I wish the Giant reendem her, but I doubt it will happen since there is no one left to save her of her own inner demons.Many do. I don't know about daemons, but I still hold out hope. It wouldn't be an easy path, but she still respects her elders.

[thegnome]

I just wonder how Miko is supposed to track down the halfling? ...or did I just fail a spot check?

It is quite clear that Hinjo has taken the locks! After all, he is the only one with a goatee, the paladin talk is just a successful bluff check.

[Darius Midnite]

Bad paladin! Very bad paladin! Don't take the locks!
I see your point..

[Gary_Schaper]

It´s just like Roy said: He has to keep an eye on Belkar and keep him in the group. Otherwise Roy would be responsible for a hell lot of damage and even more random killing.
There's a much more direct way to limit the amount of carnage Belkar causes.

Roy feels that he owes him, true, but at some point gratitude and loyalty get overwhelmed by the fact that the guy's too sick and evil to put up with.

[rosebud]

I just wonder how Miko is suppost to track down the halfling?She also has the track feat and, unlike Belkar, a skill rank in survival (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=213). A grisly trail of blood probably doesn't hurt, either. They both have strong motive. Methinks I'm feeling a bit uneasy at watching the ensuing trainwreck. I still don't understand why she's not taking backup, though.

[Lorde]

She also has the track feat and, unlike Belkar, a skill rank in survival (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=213). A grisly trail of blood probably doesn't hurt, either. They both have strong motive. Methinks I'm feeling a bit uneasy at watching the ensuing trainwreck. I still don't understand why she's not taking backup, though.

Well, first, she think she will be able to defeat him (again). This time he have subpar gear and is alone. Why she wouldn´t think she will be able to subdue him one more time? Yes, she is being overconfident, but I expected this from our harsh zealot.

If she wait for back up, the little madman would run rampant on the castle for more time, raising the kill count.

But I think she may have a very unpleasant surprise.

I hope she survive. GO MIKO!

[TheFallenOne]

Belkar awesomeness aside, did anyone get Hinjos anecdote?

[Corolinth]

The guard was in his way. The guard would get Belkar caught/harmed had Belkar not killed him.Belkar was initially unarmed. He succeeded in disarming the guard, and possibly knocking the guard out by slamming him into a wall. The guard need not be killed.


Belkar isn't exalted so he can't take Subduing Strike feat (no penalty for doing subdual damage).Subduing Strike is a general feat, not an exalted feat. However, given that Belkar is evil, we can pretty well assume that he doesn't care about dealing nonlethal damage. Furthermore, you automatically deal subdual damage with unarmed attacks. This is a level 1 or 2 guard we're talking about, the -4 penalty for dealing subdual damage with a weapon means jack to Belkar. Especially considering that by the time Belkar has a weapon, the guard is unarmed.


It was kill or be killed.The guard is a level 2 warrior (NPC class) or level 1 fighter at best, most likely a level 1 warrior. A level 9-12 PC against a level 1-2 NPC is most certainly not kill or be killed.


Ojnce the guard was dead, Belkar had to devise a plan to save himself/friends (might find a use for them later). The guard had no use for his bloodbeing dead. Belkar needed a tool to paint. The rest is elementary, my dear Mr. Watson.

No Miko hate needed.Respect for the dead is a hallmark of the good alignment, likewise desecration of the dead is traditionally evil. Belkar could have easily avoided killing the guard. Simply killing the guard and leaving it would have been "neutral", and even allowable to a good character. A neutral character is interested in self-preservation - they stop at killing the guard. Desecrating the corpse and vandalizing the hallway is undisputably evil. Belkar didn't kill the guard in self-defense, he killed the guard to antagonize a paladin.

A neutral character can commit evil acts, but Belkar flagrantly commits evil acts at every opportunity. At this point, people making the claim that Belkar is neutral are experiencing one of two things:

1) They have a hard-on for Belkar, but subscribe to contemporary morality that only villains may be evil; that all other characters must have redeeming qualities that make them good, or at worst, neutral. The assertation that Belkar is neutral is simple denial.

2) They have absolutely no concept of good and evil.

The possibility that Belkar may have some reason for commiting evil acts, a rough childhood or a low wisdom score that causes a lack of empathy for other living creatures, does not make him any less evil. A murdering psychopath is still evil, likewise so is a character suffering from a curse that compels him to commit various evil acts.

[Don Beegles]

TheFallenOne Belkar awesomeness aside, did anyone get Hinjos anecdote?

I thought that may have been the funniest part of the strip. It reminded of Waterman Episode #3, I think it was, and that's just an awesome flash cartoon.

The second funniest part was probably the last panel, not because of the mural in and of itself, but because of Hinjo's question of the panel before. When you factor in Miko's deadpan voice, that is the stuff comedy is made of. And the stuff of which comedy is made, if you want to get technical.

[Karellen]

Y'know, I still fail to see how murdering one human mook in partial self-defense - that is, escaping what is, essentially, unrightful imprisonment - and spraying the walls with his blood in what I hope is a very convoluted and brutal escape plan is more evil than coup-de-graceing half a dozen completely helpless, sleeping intelligent beings (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=11) for no reason at all other than minor convenience. :P

[Antina]

And your point is? It's a great comic. I don't see the connection between the ALL CAPS comments and some "hey, did you notice some interesting things" comments. Seriously, he DRAGGED THE BODY for the sole purpose of making a gruesome mural. That adds, not detracts, from the story. Sure, one can be straightlaced and say, "Well, it makes the panel simpler." But the image of Belkar going out of his way to DRAG THE BODY and then do his bloody painting makes the deed that much more vile.

I sense a disconnect. Reread my comments.

That's the point, actually. Near perfect recreation of the world -- who knew Belkar was such a talented (though it a sick way) artist?


Ooohkey ::) I DO apologize for misinterpretating! Anglaish ;) happens not to be my own tongue and sometimes the lack of pronounciation changes the written text even in german texts ;)

Keep an eye on what´s happening; it may be of some assistance to the giant :)

[Antina]

There's a much more direct way to limit the amount of carnage Belkar causes.

Roy feels that he owes him, true, but at some point gratitude and loyalty get overwhelmed by the fact that the guy's too sick and evil to put up with.


Yip - you DO have quite a point there! Really nicely put! :)

But speaking of Belkar being "sick":
Do you think, something like kind of "Heal"ing-Magic would do the trick and cure the "mind-disease", or is this complete an alinement-shifting to very very evil?

[Aidan305]

Am I the only person who found myself unable to laugh at the last panel. Not because it's not funny, but because it seems so serious and macabre.

[Karkadinn]

Y'know, I still fail to see how murdering one human mook in partial self-defense - that is, escaping what is, essentially, unrightful imprisonment - and spraying the walls with his blood in what I hope is a very convoluted and brutal escape plan is more evil than coup-de-graceing half a dozen completely helpless, sleeping intelligent beings (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=11) for no reason at all other than minor convenience. :P

They were evil, hostile goblins in a dungeon. Adventurers are allowed to show no mercy to such beings, because it's a D&D genre tradition. ;)
Although strictly realistically, it is, yes, a heinous act to kill 'em off like that, but strictly realistically, 99% of D&D style adventuring is equally heinous, because killing off random monsters is basically what it's all about.

[Scorpi]

Y'know, I still fail to see how murdering one human mook in partial self-defense - that is, escaping what is, essentially, unrightful imprisonment - and spraying the walls with his blood in what I hope is a very convoluted and brutal escape plan is more evil than coup-de-graceing half a dozen completely helpless, sleeping intelligent beings (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=11) for no reason at all other than minor convenience. :P

And XP! Don't forget the XP!

[VariaVespasa]

Again, I remind you that it was Miko's behaviour that both put Belkar in a rampage frame of mind all along, AND finally put him in a seperate cell away from his friends, for what seem to me to be purely petty and non-paladin reasons. Miko set this in motion with her damaged personality, not Belkar. Even her fellow paladins agree that her personality leaves something to be desired. She has an unpleasant and officious attitude, riddled with self-righteousness. She's a bad representative of her nation, and her class. I would not be the least bit surprised to learn during the Lord Shojo interview that she took liberties in "interpreting" her orders, so that "I need to talk to the OOTS about that gate" became in her mind "Go drag them here in chains to answer for their crimes". That seems perfectly in her character to me. And warping her lords wishes with her own personal damage isnt going to go down well.

So my predictions are these- Long prediction follows, posted in the spoiler predictions threads.

Time will tell. :)

*Hugs*
Varia

[VariaVespasa]

And XP! Don't forget the XP!

Thats true. Remember, the guard was getting exp for bringing Belkar his gruel, so it was clearly an encounter, and thus worth exp. So obviously Belkar HAD to kill him! :P

*Hugs*
Varia

[Caledonian]

I seem to remember Miko saying that she would "bathe her blades in the blood of those responsible [for destroying Dorukan's Gate]" in response to Shojo's statement, and he did not respond in any way that would lead me to think he thought this was inappropriate or inconsistent with his wishes.

I think it's likely Shojo assumed someone had maliciously destroyed the castle. After all, who would be foolish enough to activate the self-destruct rune for any other reason?

[Karellen]

Mm. So, how much roleplaying XP is really, really pissing off a mean paladin worth, do you think? ;)

[Gary_Schaper]

Am I the only person who found myself unable to laugh at the last panel. Not because it's not funny, but because it seems so serious and macabre.
Yes, it had a certain serial killer / slasher movie vibe to it. That's why I feel Belkar has stepped over the line. (Well, that and the debacle at the inn.) Until recently I've felt like he's brutal, selfish, and 'evil' but not eeevil.

[Gary_Schaper]

But speaking of Belkar being "sick":
Do you think, something like kind of "Heal"ing-Magic would do the trick and cure the "mind-disease", or is this complete an alinement-shifting to very very evil?

I have a theory about that, and how to preserve Belkar as a member of the Order, but it's pretty spoilerrific. So I think I'll hold onto it until I see the resolution of Miko's hunt, and the meeting with Shojo.

[Randomnesh]

I seem to remember Miko saying that she would "bathe her blades in the blood of those responsible [for destroying Dorukan's Gate]" in response to Shojo's statement, and he did not respond in any way that would lead me to think he thought this was inappropriate or inconsistent with his wishes.


Yeah, or the scene just cut away before they could continue their conversation. We never did see them say "Goodbye," after all.

[M.A.T.E.S5]

They were evil, hostile goblins in a dungeon. Adventurers are allowed to show no mercy to such beings, because it's a D&D genre tradition. ;)
Although strictly realistically, it is, yes, a heinous act to kill 'em off like that, but strictly realistically, 99% of D&D style adventuring is equally heinous, because killing off random monsters is basically what it's all about.

http://thunt.comicgen.com/ I think that the characters of that comic will disagree with you

[Miroku_Sumeragi]

Again, I remind you that it was Miko's behaviour that both put Belkar in a rampage frame of mind all along, AND finally put him in a seperate cell away from his friends, for what seem to me to be purely petty and non-paladin reasons. Miko set this in motion with her damaged personality, not Belkar. Even her fellow paladins agree that her personality leaves something to be desired. She has an unpleasant and officious attitude, riddled with self-righteousness. She's a bad representative of her nation, and her class. I would not be the least bit surprised to learn during the Lord Shojo interview that she took liberties in "interpreting" her orders, so that "I need to talk to the OOTS about that gate" became in her mind "Go drag them here in chains to answer for their crimes". That seems perfectly in her character to me. And warping her lords wishes with her own personal damage isnt going to go down well.

So my predictions are these- Long prediction follows, posted in the spoiler predictions threads.

Time will tell. :)

*Hugs*
Varia

Sorry, some actions, in real life, are inexcusable no matter what the "justification" is.

If the mural is in blood as opposed to red pen, then Belkar would have crossed that line. This activity is, after all, the stuff of serial killers.

Otherwise, I expect you to defend the Columbine killers because the jocks picked on them too much.

Course, this is all moot. Belkar is a fictional character, after all. But to claim someone else is responsible for his rampage is extremely silly.

[DOOM2099]

Oh God, please make it stop! I can't stop laughing. All the people in my house think I'm retarded. They don't get the joke because they don't know Belkar... I tried to explain, but... well, you know. They just smile and say "Oh, okay, I'll read it sometime." They don't get it, because they are lacking the awesomeness that is OotS.

What is it like to not have OotS in your life? I can't imagine what it was like in the before time. I vaguely recall watching Star Trek or something. Now I just wait for OotS.

I think the only time I ever laughed this hard was the similar strip with the dog saying "I eat you stinky Roy"... That was hysterical, too. I wish this strip was daily.

[Elurindel]

I loved this strip. it's great to know that Miko is not typical of all the paladins in the world of OOTS, although I should have known that, reading some of Rich's other work.

[Deuce]

. . .

I think the only time I ever laughed this hard was the similar strip with the dog saying "I eat you stinky Roy"... That was hysterical, too. I wish this strip was daily.

Indeed we have seen Belkar's fondness for writing on the wall before, when Roy was poisoned. Nice that he's consistant like that . . . :)

[VariaVespasa]

I seem to remember Miko saying that she would "bathe her blades in the blood of those responsible [for destroying Dorukan's Gate]" in response to Shojo's statement, and he did not respond in any way that would lead me to think he thought this was inappropriate or inconsistent with his wishes.

I think it's likely Shojo assumed someone had maliciously destroyed the castle. After all, who would be foolish enough to activate the self-destruct rune for any other reason?

I dont remember that line from her- do you remember which strip that was?

*Hugs*
Varia

[VariaVespasa]

Yes, it had a certain serial killer / slasher movie vibe to it. That's why I feel Belkar has stepped over the line. (Well, that and the debacle at the inn.) Until recently I've felt like he's brutal, selfish, and 'evil' but not eeevil.

Do bear in mind that Belkar is a barbarian, and they get a bit... gooey sometimes. Painting in blood to make a clear taunt to sucker an enemy into making a mistake is certainly not out of line. Killing someone just to get that blood would be, but using it since you happen to have it (and nothing else) available isnt.

*Hugs*
Varia

[DOOM2099]

Shojo and Miko



http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=120

[Sebastian]

Nah, I'm another. Belkar has gone farther and farther from "lovably evil" to "absolute psychopath" as the strip has gone on, and I get less and less able to cheer for him.

(Can any Belkar fans put aside their Miko-hate and explain why the guard deserved to be slaughtered and used as paint?)


Psssshh, just cast Raise Dead on the sucker and get over it. ;)

[Karellen]

Serial killer? I don't really see how making blood graffiti makes him any more a serial killer than the fact that he, um, kills people - which, incidentally, is what the OoTS has been doing all along. Seriously, I wouldn't start worrying until he starts eating somebody's liver. :P

...come to think of it, we never really learned just why he harvests those kidneys, did we? And he likes a quality meal...

[VariaVespasa]

Sorry, some actions, in real life, are inexcusable no matter what the "justification" is.

If the mural is in blood as opposed to red pen, then Belkar would have crossed that line. This activity is, after all, the stuff of serial killers.

Reeeeally? Writing in blood is evil, regardless of circumstances or justifications? What if its a warning about the trap or wild animal that just drew the blood in the first place? Still evil? How about cannibalism? Hannibal Lector and all that. Seems pretty evil to me. So should I tell the Donner Party that theyre all evil scum, cannibalising the dead to survive, even though it was that or die? And you can call the Uruguayan soccer team and tell them that theyre evil scum for chosing to eat the dead rather than starve. It has been known in some cultures to use cannibalism as part of certain spiritual ceremonies, sometimes to gain the strength of the deceased, which would be a form of respect (thinking that the dead had strength worthy of gaining). Plus, of course, Belkar is part barbarian, and barbarians often have different cultural practices from those you or I are used to. Sometimes, just sometimes, with all due respect to "The Silence of the Lambs" and "Seven", things are just a teensy bit more complicated and convolluted than Hollywood would suggest. Perhaps you'd like to rethink your position about "some things are always inexcuseable, regardless"?


Otherwise, I expect you to defend the Columbine killers because the jocks picked on them too much.

Straw man. On the subject however, who were your sympathies with at the end of the movie Carrie?


Course, this is all moot. Belkar is a fictional character, after all. But to claim someone else is responsible for his rampage is extremely silly.

No, its a bit more esoteric than that. It revolves around the fact that in many chains of command the leader is often held responsible for the actions of their underlings. Feel free to PM me for the more detailed version if you want it.

*Hugs*
Varia

[humanpylon]

I'm of the mind that if he wrote on the walls as part of a cunning plan, fair enough. If he wrote just to taunt Miko, he's a sick little man.

And for the record my sympathies at the end of Carrie were with the innocent people she slaughtered when she lost control of herself. Admittedly some of the people who died were not nice people, but chances are the majority of them did not deserve what they got. Especially the Gym teacher and Carrie's date.

[Miroku_Sumeragi]

Reeeeally? Writing in blood is evil, regardless of circumstances or justifications? What if its a warning about the trap or wild animal that just drew the blood in the first place? Still evil? How about cannibalism? Hannibal Lector and all that. Seems pretty evil to me. So should I tell the Donner Party that theyre all evil scum, cannibalising the dead to survive, even though it was that or die? And you can call the Uruguayan soccer team and tell them that theyre evil scum for chosing to eat the dead rather than starve. It has been known in some cultures to use cannibalism as part of certain spiritual ceremonies, sometimes to gain the strength of the deceased, which would be a form of respect (thinking that the dead had strength worthy of gaining). Plus, of course, Belkar is part barbarian, and barbarians often have different cultural practices from those you or I are used to. Sometimes, just sometimes, with all due respect to "The Silence of the Lambs" and "Seven", things are just a teensy bit more complicated and convolluted than Hollywood would suggest. Perhaps you'd like to rethink your position about "some things are always inexcuseable, regardless"?



Yep, let's just say that we agree to disagree there. There are inherently evil acts. Now, whether someone is made irredeemably evil, that's a different question. Honestly, Belkar, while he amuses me, also disgusts me, so it colors my thinking. Also, I don't think your examples are relevant to what I was saying. I will be more specific, for Belkar to do this in the manner he did, and given the culture he is from, then, it crosses the line.

His "barbarian" culture consists of him taking the class level and has in no way been demonstrated as anything of significance he even pays attention to, aside from the culinary aspects.




Straw man. On the subject however, who were your sympathies with at the end of the movie Carrie?


Honestly, I had sympathy for no one there. While it is understandable for Carrie to do what she did, it does not justify it. I will have to read up on straw man arguments, just what are they? Also, I heard the term ad hominem attacks, and I wonder if this is one, if so, I apologize.




No, its a bit more esoteric than that. It revolves around the fact that in many chains of command the leader is often held responsible for the actions of their underlings. Feel free to PM me for the more detailed version if you want it.

*Hugs*
Varia

Well, I am going to have to PM on this one because I don't see Belkar as being part of the chain of command there, unless if it is part of the argument that the criminal justice system is at fault when criminals become hardened. Don't really buy that. Let me know if that is a straw man, cuz honestly, I don't understand the term, apparently we are not allowed to bring up a similiar situation when making a point?

I guess the part I am hanging up on is who is more responsible. I think that Miko is responsible for the mess because she did not take sufficient precautions to prevent it from happening, knowing Belkar as she does.

However, the impression that I got, and that may be just me, is that Belkar is therefore blameless, or has less blame for what happens, and I cannot agree with that. We are ultimately responsible for our own actions, no one else is. Otherwise, we are just drones following pretermined stimuli with no will of our own.

[VariaVespasa]

Shinjo and Miko



http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=120

Ahh, thankee muchly! :)

Hmm, he doesnt correct her saying that, but she is shown from a different angle in the second panel, suggesting that she may not be in front of Lord Shojo anymore when she says that. I guess we'll find out more in the next week or two. :)

*Hugs*
Varia

[VariaVespasa]

I'm of the mind that if he wrote on the walls as part of a cunning plan, fair enough. If he wrote just to taunt Miko, he's a sick little man.

Cant he be both? :P

*Hugs*
Varia

[Nightfall]

It is quite clear that Hinjo has taken the locks! After all, he is the only one with a goatee, the paladin talk is just a successful bluff check.



And why would Hinjo's sporting a goatee automatically make you suspect anything underhanded? If you're hinting that he could be Nale, I seriously doubt it. Hinjo is known by Miko, and has apparently been known by her for some time. Hinjo most probably took the locks so they could be used on something else. It's a perfectly normal thing to do.

Also, with respect to Miko going after Belkar alone, the answer to me was obvious. She doesn't want witnesses. She wants to be able to say she killed him in self-defense when he wouldn't come quietly. Witnesses would require some 'splainin' on her part.

[Irie]

For months, my husband has been bugging me to read this odd comic strip called OOTS. Last night I finally caved in and started reading...and reading...and reading. One dazed and bleary day later I arrived at the LAST strip. It was like the world suddenly came to a crashing halt. My shaking hand kept clicking that next button over and over in disbelief.

How do you all stand the emptyness!!!

[thegnome]

... did anyone get Hinjos anecdote?

...that sounds like a great new topic to me. I am definitely sure, that there will be much more variations than the "What Haley said..." topic offers. ;)

[humanpylon]

Cant he be both? :P

*Hugs*
Varia


;D Point taken.

[theKOT]

...How do you all stand the emptyness!!!

You hang out on the message boards picking apart every delightfully irrelevant detail.

[VariaVespasa]

If I have my stuff right-

Straw Man- is providing an example, proposal or arguement (that is NOT analogous to the opponents position) just to demolish it with your rebuttal, while trying to imply that your opponent is the one who provided the example/proposal/arguement, not yourself, and that you have thus just demolished your opponents original example/proposal/arguement. Hmm, this paste probably explains it better-

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed."

Ad Hominem is attacking the person who made the arguement rather than the arguement itself. To steal the format of the previous paste-

"Person A has position X.
Person B says "person A is a poopiehead".
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed."

*Hugs*
Varia

[Miroku_Sumeragi]

If I have my stuff right-

Straw Man- is providing an example, proposal or arguement (that is NOT analogous to the opponents position) just to demolish it with your rebuttal, while trying to imply that your opponent is the one who provided the example/proposal/arguement, not yourself, and that you have thus just demolished your opponents original example/proposal/arguement. Hmm, this paste probably explains it better-

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed."

Ad Hominem is attacking the person who made the arguement rather than the arguement itself. To steal the format of the previous paste-

"Person A has position X.
Person B says "person A is a poopiehead".
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed."

*Hugs*
Varia

Ah cool. Thanks for the explanation. Yeah, straw man arguments are stupid. They prove nothing. I actually whinced when I reread my Columbine statement an hour later. I got to stop using them.

[Hawkeye]

How do you all stand the emptyness!!!


Simple, between OOTS fixes we write meaningless statements and random tangents relating to OOTS on yonder message boards.

Well, it works for me.

[thegnome]

And why would Hinjo's sporting a goatee automatically make you suspect anything underhanded? ... Hinjo most probably took the locks so they could be used on something else. It's a perfectly normal thing to do..

Well, "could be used on something else" with a [dwarven chant] major technical defect [/dwarven chant]?! You see, the halfling escaped, so the pit did not work properly.

The goatee is STILL a profound evidence!
:P (I wear it myself. At least on the pic at the left side)

[rosebud]

I don't know which side is irritating me more now: the strident anti-Belkar fanactics who go far beyond the need to attack someone who is clearly sick or the pro-Belkar fanactics who try to justify him at this point.

To the anti-Belkarians, consider him to be insane. Exacerbating circumstances include a documented history of childhood abuse (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=125), mental handicaps (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=58), untreated Attention Disorder Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=155), and torture (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=261).

To the pro-Belkarians, you're sick.

Go Nobody! :) ;) :D ;D >:( :o 8) ??? ::) :P :-[ :-X :-/ :-* :'(

[Karellen]

Wait a second - is it really being suggested here people that killing is a-okay in the right context, but writing on the wall in a dead person's blood is inherently evil and damning, no matter what? :o Oh, the humanity.

[Dagaz]

Am I the only person who found myself unable to laugh at the last panel. Not because it's not funny, but because it seems so serious and macabre.
...
You're not the only one.

[Silivren]

Hinjo most probably took the locks so they could be used on something else. It's a perfectly normal thing to do.


Or perhaps to examine them for clues as to how the prisoner escaped. (were they tampered with? damaged?). Of course, he doesn't seem to be doing alot of that on camera...

[Ilaun_Undil]

not to sound stupid, but how do we even know it was blood. knowing Belkar and the fact that there was no paint seen, it probably is. Anyway, Belkar would have to be a Ninja to win in such a circumstance.

[Duskrider_Moogle]

Miko is a paladin, one whose personal conduct upholds all that is good and right. She is rather unpleasant to interact with.

Belkar is a murderous sociopath who kills without mercy. He makes us laugh on occasion.

There is far more talk of Miko's inner demons and redemption than Belkar's. Fascinating.

Quoted For Truth.

[rosebud]

Ooohkey ::) I DO apologize for misinterpretating!Thanks. No, problem, then. :) It was just frustrating to see the harsh reaction. :( I made a list of comments, questions, and observations. I thought the observations were kinda fun and added to the appreciation. The number of arrows, for example, was just plain obsessive of Belkar. :)

And, I'm still curious about my quesitons. I buy the argument that Miko was over-confident in going off by herself. I'm still curious if the rules make raising and healing the guard possible at this point.

[evileeyore]

Regardless of how it ends... It will not end well.

Belkar has committed iredeemable acts. If he remains with the Order it will be a sham and travesty.

If nothing else, Roy knows and will take it upon his own head if the little murderer escapes. As well he is likely to question his own judgement in having allowed him to live this long.


That said... beautifully done. That very neatly exemplifies Belkar's absolute depravity and sets up for the Miko-Belkar show down. Kudos Rich!


And, I'm still curious about my quesitons. I buy the argument that Miko was over-confident in going off by herself. I'm still curious if the rules make raising and healing the guard possible at this point.

Very overconfident, but then she doesn't know how competent Belkar is in the Stealth Assassin style of comabt.

The guard is theoretically 'raiseable', depending on the Giant's world. In base D&D there is nothing preventing the spell from working aside from the target not wanting to come back.

One of D&D's greatest flaws IMO.

[Ilaun_Undil]

I'm going to through this out there cause it is also wrong. Hinjo is actually Nale!!!!! they both have a Goatee!!! ok I'll be quiet.

[msquared]

Has anyone else considered the possibility that perhaps it wasn't Belkar who painted on the wall?

[Sebastian]

How do you all stand the emptyness!!!

There, there. it goes better every two days.

Well, except in the week-ends, Week-ends are horrible.

[theKOT]

There, there. it goes better every two days.

Well, except in the week-ends, Week-ends are horrible.

Yeah, now I look forward to monday with the same passion I once had for friday. Although, maybe that's because I am coming off of vacation... hmmmm

[Coffee_Dragon]

Hinjo clearly took the locks because he's a compulsive lock collector. The goatee kind of gives it away.

As for raising, any world where staying dead is not the normal thing is a bit too high-concept for most people. However, in D&D this feature is balanced by the need for a quite accomplished divine spellcaster and a costly material component. After a few visits to the Character Optimization board where people only contemplate 20-level builds and crazy power tricks, you lose sight of the fact that a 9th-level character is actually supposed to be among the more powerful characters in his or her part of the world.

[Flak_Razorwill]

Ack, I could've sworn I posted here last night. If I messed up, where was my warning? I thought I was somewhere on page 2.

Anyway, I love the crazy art. Just saying the showdown's gonna be great. It reminds me of Throne of Blood.

[rosebud]

Writing in blood is evil, regardless of circumstances or justifications? What ifNo what ifs, here. We have a specific situation here. Please stop being cute. I understand a justification under which the scuffle and death could be justified. But this goes far beyond that.

Do you feel his latest actions are Justified? Evil? Insane? Deserving punishment? Deserving death?By the way, keep in mind: he had no friends. They were his adventure companions, not his friends.

[Maharrg]

Thanks Giant for the great comic!

[RBloom0566]

Belkar is funny BECAUSE it is only a comic. Go imposing real-life standards on his actions and of course it's not funny.

I'll bet people who are expounding on Belkar's real-life psychosis are the same people who sit there watching Cartoon Network saying, "Now how do you explain THAT?!"

Uh...hello...cartoon?!

My only hope is ... [?Spoiler?]

... that Belkar makes it to the stables and that damned horse before Miko catches up to him!!! Death to the Paladin's Warhorse!!!

[Athalos]

Am i the only one who laughed at the last panel?

[rwald]

Miko is a paladin, one whose personal conduct upholds all that is good and right. She is rather unpleasant to interact with.

Belkar is a murderous sociopath who kills without mercy. He makes us laugh on occasion.

There is far more talk of Miko's inner demons and redemption than Belkar's. Fascinating.

Quoted For Truth.
This quote probably should be reposted once per four pages, just to give some perspective...

[RBloom0566]

Anatomically speaking, that would be "Liver used as a paint brush" for those of you wondering which blood-filled organ would work best for the grafitti given the location of the wound on the body.

[RBloom0566]

Nay Athalos! I threw a sinister laugh at the last frame as well. Let's hope Belkar's prognostication d'art comes true!!!

[VariaVespasa]

No what ifs, here. We have a specific situation here. Please stop being cute. I understand a justification under which the scuffle and death could be justified. But this goes far beyond that.

Do you feel his latest actions are Justified? Evil? Insane? Deserving punishment? Deserving death?By the way, keep in mind: he had no friends. They were his adventure companions, not his friends.

Out of context- the bit you quoted was SPECIFICALLY directed at Miroku and her use of absolutes, and SPECIFICALLY with regards to writing on walls in blood, and NOT in any way to do with the death of the guard who provided the blood in the first place. She did not say this particular example of blood write was inexcusable, she said ALL blood writing was inexcusable, regardless of circumstances. I took her to task for that. And I take YOU to task for accusing me of trying to be cute while in the same breath quoting me out of context...

As for THIS example of blood writing, assuming it IS blood (no extra blood on or around the guard, which is odd if someone had been using him as an inkwell), how do I feel?

Justified- probably, pending what his intent turns out to be. Yes, if he's intending misdirection, yes with reservations if he's trying to provoke her to fall or mortal combat (given that I dont like Miko as a person as so far presented. As a foil for OOTS, is a different matter... Belkar is somehow more human). Alone, in hostile territory, any enemy combatant is fair game, inside(s) or out, and Belkar certainly has reason to believe he's in hostile territory thanks to Mikos behaviour.

Evil- No, not under these circumstances. Distasteful and possibly unneccesary. yes, but not evil. Chaotic, yes.

Insane- depends why he did it. If, as I believe, he has a plan that requires misdirecting or provoking Miko then no. Its an effective part of such a plan and therefore sane. Whether or not you agree with his plan is another matter. And whether or not Belkar is, overall, at least mildly derranged (which seems obvious enough :P), it doesnt make this specific instance of blood writing as part of a plan insane. Ruthless or nasty or unpleasant, yes, but not insane.

Deserving punishment- Wall writing, no. Desecrating a corpse to get the ink, maybe. Yes inside the country he did the writing in, no outside most other countries. Thats based on this being a D+D world, where corpses are rather more common, and a lot less "sacred". How many groups bury the sentient critters they kill? Did the OOTS bury any of the goblins or ogres they killed? Did Miko bury the bandit chief and his daughter after she killed them? Nope. There's a lot less reverence or respect for other peoples dead in D+D. Thats the way it is.

Deserving death- for scribbling on a wall? Um, NO. Sheesh.

If you were intending to ask the above about killing the guard in the first place then, based on being falsely arrested in the first place, and not having other obvious recourse, my answers are more or less the same. Given that escape from false imprisonment is acceptable, it has already been established that Belkar, for obvious reasons, is not suited to non-lethal combat/grappling, so lethal is his only real option. The only real change in answers is a yes to deserving death in the country the guard belonged to, if we're talking about killing the guard, not the writing.

Anything else?

*Hugs*
Varia

[TheFallenOne]

Miko is a paladin, one whose personal conduct upholds all that is good and right. She is rather unpleasant to interact with.

Belkar is a murderous sociopath who kills without mercy. He makes us laugh on occasion.

There is far more talk of Miko's inner demons and redemption than Belkar's. Fascinating.

We know Belkar is evil and got many hints why he is, so there's nothing to discuss.

Miko, as you pointed out, SHOULD uphold all that's good and right, but she doesn't and there's the question if her samurai code allows her to commit non-good or even evil acts(like attacking an unarmed Elan - he's totally harmless and almost like a child and she knows it - who tries to save the life of a companion and accepting the possibility to kill him - one critical and he'd been dead) without loosing her powers. So yeah there is far more to discuss on Mikos behalf

[Athalos]

Out of context- the bit you quoted was SPECIFICALLY directed at Miroku and her use of absolutes, and SPECIFICALLY with regards to writing on walls in blood,


Someone been watching to much inuyasha? =P

[Coffee_Dragon]

it has already been established that Belkar, for obvious reasons, is not suited to non-lethal combat/grappling, so lethal is his only real option.

I thought it had been established that for a 12th-level character with full BAB, inflicting enough nonlethal damage on what is probably a 1st-level warrior is not going to be a problem.

[evileeyore]

Evil- No, not under these circumstances. Distasteful and possibly unneccesary. yes, but not evil. Chaotic, yes.Now see I get Evil out this and not Chaotic. Corpse desecration is Evil (it tends to lead to the Dead rising) and although is often against the law... this is realy not so much on the Law-Chaos Axis as it is the Good-Evil one.


Thats based on this being a D+D world, where corpses are rather more common, and a lot less "sacred". How many groups bury the sentient critters they kill? Did the OOTS bury any of the goblins or ogres they killed? Did Miko bury the bandit chief and his daughter after she killed them? Nope. There's a lot less reverence or respect for other peoples dead in D+D. Thats the way it is.I don't see where you get this crazed notion. Depending on the group we either always prepare teh dead (to stop rising) or prepare the dead (to aid rising0. Very rarely are potential Undead left to go off willy-nilly.



If you were intending to ask the above about killing the guard in the first place then, based on being falsely arrested in the first place, and not having other obvious recourse, my answers are more or less the same.There is no false imprisonment. The OotS are there under power of Law.


Given that escape from false imprisonment is acceptable, it has already been established that Belkar, for obvious reasons, is not suited to non-lethal combat/grappling, so lethal is his only real option.Escape is not acceptable, nor is his preference for lethal damage. the guard had yet to draw, thus Belkar could easily have used Unarmed attacks which are always Subdual. Or have you forgotten this in your haste to join Kadi in the 'Authority is False" camp?


The only real change in answers is a yes to deserving death in the country the guard belonged to, if we're talking about killing the guard, not the writing.I'm glad you agree murder is wrong and deserving of the death penalty. Gratefully Belkar is still in the country the guard belongs to, hey look, its the same country that legally arrested him in first place.


Anything else?Don't know about him, but I'm cool thanks.

;D

[VariaVespasa]

I thought it had been established that for a 12th-level character with full BAB, inflicting enough nonlethal damage on what is probably a 1st-level warrior is not going to be a problem.

Somebody said it, yes, but that doesnt actually make it true. But even if it is, and it may well be, it doesnt make it a good idea- non-lethal takes longer, which gives the guard more time to hurt Belkar (which may be critical later on) and gives him more chances to try grappling Belkar, which he will almost certainly lose, yes? But just the "I need to get rid of him as fast as possible to stop him hurting me or sounding an alarm" reason is basically all it takes to doom the guard, quite apart from Belkars natural tendencies. Thats why they kill the guards in nearly every movie that has an escape in it, rather than trying to knock them out.

*Hugs*
Varia

[Solara]

Man, some of you guys need to chill out. :D

Is Belkar twisted and evil? Well, yes. Duh. That's why we love him!

I have a hard time believing how serious a few of the people here are getting about how he deserves to die and Roy shouldn't have anything to do with him, etc. He's always been like this...why is it suddenly such a big deal now? And why are we bringing so much real-world morality into this? Honestly, sometimes you just gotta stop thinking of a nameless guard from a D&D setting as a real person and just kick back and enjoy the funny.

For instance, if he had merely subdued the guy like so many have suggested, wouldn't that have been kind of a lame punchline? And then Roy's priceless 'It's not like we're escaping so we can go on a killing spree' never would have existed.

Anyway, Belkar is always as sick and depraved as the latest joke requires. I don't understand how anyone could want him to be any other way...am I the only one who thinks he's a necessary foil to group full of good adventurers? If Belkar stopped being Belkar his inclusion in the strip would be pointless and boring...in that case I really wouldn't mind if the Giant decided to kill him off.

[Hydro]

Ah!

What a little psycho!

*loves Belkar now*




I think that we see more discussion of Miko than Belkar because most of us "get" Belkar. He's a chaotic evil 'hellraiser' character, the sort that people usually play when they get kinda burnt out on heroism and just want to run around killing things and doing whatever they feel like.

Miko, on the other hand, isn't that simple but is also somehow more believable. When Belkar suggests slitting the theives' throats rather than leaving them tied up there, you just sort of figure "eh, that's Belkar being Belkar". When Miko comes along and executes those same two theives, one is less inclined to attribute that to the unjustified whims of the player (or dm, as it were) and more likely to wonder if there is some discernable IC reason for such behavior. And so the Miko discussions continue.




As for the other paladin avoiding the "stick up the ass" class feature: substitution levels.

[rosebud]

she said ALL blood writing was inexcusable, regardless of circumstances. I took her to task for that.The profile says "Male". And he never said "ALL blood writing was inexcusable", so please don't put false claims into his mouth. He said:

Sorry, some actions, in real life, are inexcusable no matter what the "justification" is.
If the mural is in blood as opposed to red pen, then Belkar would have crossed that line..Do you see any mention of "ALL blood writing"? Please, don't take people to task for something they didn't do. He (as do all of us) also recognize that this is fiction, not reality.

And I take YOU to task for accusing me of trying to be cute while in the same breath quoting me out of context...Quoting you was the "what if..." part, which you said. Discussions of cannibalism are irrelvant to that conversation. The discussion was about Belkar's actions, not unrelated tangents.

As for THIS example of blood writing (...) Justified- probably, pending what his intent turns out to be.Then we have different moral viewpoints. Especially when it is known that he is chaotic evil. But, sure, we'll sit back and watch the horror unveil. We don't yet know all the facts, what happened, or what will happen. As Belkar says, Do you think I have time to get popcorn??

[VariaVespasa]

Evileeyore-

Ok, IF desecrating a corpse tends to lead to it rising as undead then you could indeed make a reasonable arguement for it being an evil act. However, IT DOES NOT. It is the circumstances that created the corpse that may lead to it rising, not what happens to it afterwards, except in very rare cases when what happens to the corpse afterwards is part of a long and unpleasant cycle of indignity. By and large the dead dont care, once theyre dead. Your premise is flawed. If you wish to use it as the cornerstone of several of your remaining arguements, and you did, then you must back that up with evidence. Show me a rule that says that such a mild, non-magical, non-prepared, non intent-filled desecration of a corpse can lead to it rising. Show me.

Your group buries its kills? Your group is unusual. Yes, I've done it sometimes, under certain circumstances, but its not a standard thing. And in terms of the OOTS world, the OOTS havent been seen doing it, and nor has Miko. Show of hands among the readers- does YOUR group habitually bury its kills?

"There is no false imprisonment. The OotS are there under power of Law." The law of land A does not apply in land B. They were in land B, therefore any attempt by land A to imprison them is not legal. This is why you need extradition treaties. There is no indication that Land A has one with land B, or that it was followed even if they do. Therefore the imprisonment is false. This lack of lawful authority on the part of Lord Shojo to arrest the OOTS has been commented on often on these boards.

Escape from non-lawful imprisonment, especially when there is no other recourse, is always acceptable. I'd do it myself if I were ever wrongfully imprisoned without recourse, and had the guts to put my life on the line.

Cute line with the "join the authority is false camp" thing. But its irrelevant, and a blatant straw man and ad hominem into the bargain. Amateurish.

"I'm glad you agree murder..." Condescending tone. I merely meant that naturally the point of view of each side is bound to be different.

Still cool?

*Hugs*
Varia

[Hyrael]

Now see I get Evil out this and not Chaotic. Corpse desecration is Evil (it tends to lead to the Dead rising) and although is often against the law... this is realy not so much on the Law-Chaos Axis as it is the Good-Evil one.

I don't see where you get this crazed notion. Depending on the group we either always prepare teh dead (to stop rising) or prepare the dead (to aid rising0. Very rarely are potential Undead left to go off willy-nilly.

Don't know about him, but I'm cool thanks.

;D
and, why exactly is 'desecration of a corpse' morraly wrong? if thats the case, then every animal in the history if the universe is in hell. why do people care so much about corpses? It like that thing with post-mortem organ donation. YOU DONT LIVE THERE ANYMORE! why should anyone care?

[theKOT]

Evileeyore-
Cute line with the "join the authority is false camp" thing. But its irrelevant, and a blatant straw man and ad hominem into the bargain. Amateurish.

"I'm glad you agree murder..." Condescending tone. I merely meant that naturally the point of view of each side is bound to be different.


Calling what he said cute and amateurish is condescension in and of itself, even if it is true.

[VariaVespasa]

Rosebud-

Ok, HE. Japanese names throw me sometimes and while I was aware of the possibility of error I was too lazy to check. :P

"Sorry, some actions, in real life, are inexcusable no matter what the "justification" is.

If the mural is in blood as opposed to red pen, then Belkar would have crossed that line. This activity is, after all, the stuff of serial killers."

Putting words into his mouth? Then have the following quote from him-

"Yep, let's just say that we agree to disagree there. There are inherently evil acts. Now, whether someone is made irredeemably evil, that's a different question"

He does indeed think certain things are evil, regardless of circumstances. The phrasing of the original clearly suggests that drawing on walls in blood is one of them. Words in his mouth? I think not.

Now, granted that the very next lines after that second quote is him saying "I will be more specific, for Belkar to do this in the manner he did, and given the culture he is from, then, it crosses the line" which is obviously not an "all blood writing" kinda statement, but I also addressed this specific incident also, and in any event since you missed it too I'm not gonna take grief from you over it. Trolls gotta do their own research.

The What If stuff was in response to Miroku's blanket statement about certain things being wrong regardless. The stuff about cannibalism was clearly to illustrate that something that is usually considered wrong is not always. I deemed it appropriate since its another form of body descration, which was the basic topic under discussion (blood writing being a form of body descration). It was NOT, as you would suggest, about Belkars current activities.

"Do you think I have time to get popcorn??" You have time to troll a message board, so, well, why yes, yes I do! :P

*Hugs*
Varia

[VariaVespasa]

Calling what he said cute and amateurish is condescension in and of itself, even if it is true.


Well he was trolling with that statement, and a good troll isnt supposed to be spotted doing it. His attempt was seriously obvious, hence amateurish.

Thats the mostly mature response.

What I *really* wanted to say was-

"Of course it was. Isnt condescension fun? But Rosebud started it, neener! *duck* :P"

Best of both worlds! :)

*Hugs*
Varia

[evileeyore]

Ok, IF desecrating a corpse tends to lead to it rising as undead then you could indeed make a reasonable arguement for it being an evil act. However, IT DOES NOT. It is the circumstances that created the corpse that may lead to it rising, not what happens to it afterwards, except in very rare cases when what happens to the corpse afterwards is part of a long and unpleasant cycle of indignity.Okay, if the circumstances that lead to a person's death actually cause them to become Undead... point me out a rule that says this. Baring special abilities that actually create Undead that is... As far as I'm concerned its all in how the DM runs it.


By and large the dead dont care, once theyre dead.Then circumstances wouldn't count would they. Your premise if flawed.


Your group buries its kills? Your group is unusual. Yes, I've done it sometimes, under certain circumstances, but its not a standard thing. And in terms of the OOTS world, the OOTS havent been seen doing it, and nor has Miko. Show of hands among the readers- does YOUR group habitually bury its kills?It is called respect for the dead, and when my group is primarily of a Lawful or Good nature, then yes.


The law of land A does not apply in land B.Who says? The Giant has already broadly hinted that Lord Shojo may not be a temporal leader...


They were in land B, therefore any attempt by land A to imprison them is not legal.They were in Lawless territory. Therefore the only law required was what they brought. Roy agreed to Miko's parole after the first battle. He then broke that parole, thus he is an honorless dog. Thus Miko recaptures him.


This is why you need extradition treaties. There is no indication that Land A has one with land B, or that it was followed even if they do.Extraditon Treaties are very modern concept. There is no need to drag 19th century territorial law into a fantasy world.


Therefore the imprisonment is false. This lack of lawful authority on the part of Lord Shojo to arrest the OOTS has been commented on often on these boards.Therefore the Imprisonment is Just. The authority of Lord Shojo has been commented on repeatedly and has yet to be settled... I await for next week.


Escape from non-lawful imprisonment, especially when there is no other recourse, is always acceptable. I'd do it myself if I were ever wrongfully imprisoned without recourse, and had the guts to put my life on the line.Not so. I know a few people who have been 'falsely imprisoned' and 'detained'. I was one of them. Had I murdered an American police officer and attempted to make my escape I would certianly be lambasted by you for my stupidity and culpablility.

I'll jump ahead to your arguement "Context is Key".

Yes context is key, Belkar was arrested after breaking parole, a parole he implicitly agreed to by not arguing it. Thus with a lack of 'extradition treaties' or territorial nonsense (I still grant Shojo the right of Law by Divine Mandate) he was imprisoned not only justly, but legally.

As well, he is a crazed little murderer. His escape was provoked by nothing other than his desire to be free and on a killing spree, not by any 'feelings of injustice' or a desire 'to set things right'. No, he was being stopped from killing and harvesting kidneys and the guard do not have the strenght of arms to impose his will upon Belkar. Which is the only way Belkar follows anyone elses rules anyway.


Cute line with the "join the authority is false camp" thing. But its irrelevant, and a blatant straw man and ad hominem into the bargain. Amateurish.Like it? I so do enjoy a good poke in the eye to mine enemies... Ad Hominem? Of course, appeal to emotional context is but a part of the process. Straw Man? No, a better example is my "and the unshriven dead shall rise" arguement...

Amateurish? You want to start paying me to assault people with my arguements? Than you get the top grade stuff...


"I'm glad you agree murder..." Condescending tone. I merely meant that naturally the point of view of each side is bound to be different.Condescending, of course. Gets the emotions flowing and makes the arguement more fun. Hate have the audience falling asleep after all. Granted each side has differing opinions, of which one side is wrong...


Still cool?Got my windows open and the cold air rolling in...

;)--EvilE



[/quote]

[Starbuck_II]

A neutral character can commit evil acts, but Belkar flagrantly commits evil acts at every opportunity. At this point, people making the claim that Belkar is neutral are experiencing one of two things:

Who said he wasn't evil: his actions weren't but the Belkar I know and love is evil. May be a little sadistic I think he is anyway.]


The possibility that Belkar may have some reason for commiting evil acts, a rough childhood or a low wisdom score that causes a lack of empathy for other living creatures, does not make him any less evil. A murdering psychopath is still evil, likewise so is a character suffering from a curse that compels him to commit various evil acts.

Belkar is the Anti-hero in the adventuring party. No one thinks him neutral (I don't think), but we can view his actions as nuetral if they are to us.

Animals kill not because they eish harm, but they need for food. Same for someone with a curse that causes them to kill.

Only when one gives in to the curse willingly are they evil: ala Werewolf.

[Istielthia]

I'd like to tell everyone to stop arguing, its a frickin' comic... but I'm assuming the majority of us are gamers/geeks, and well, frankly, this is what happens when any group of us gets together to discuss whatever it is that we're fanboyish about. That being said... I'm going to jump right into the fray.


The law of land A does not apply in land B. They were in land B, therefore any attempt by land A to imprison them is not legal. This is why you need extradition treaties. There is no indication that Land A has one with land B, or that it was followed even if they do.
There are a couple things I see wrong with this argument. First, is that you're applying 21st-century law to a time/space that clearly isn't. Second is that even if this was something that existed in this universe, there is absolutely no indications either way of what type of accord/agreement/alliance/covenant/pact/treaty may or may not exist between the two countries. You're making assumptions based on facts that simply aren't there, for either side of the argument.

Re: Subdual/lethal dmg argument: Again, this is an argument that has no evidence supporting either side. If the guard were lvl 1-2, Belkar could have easily defeated him without killing him, given is proposed lvl of approx. 12. If on the other hand, the guard was much closer to Belkar's own lvl, then perhaps a sudden and lethal attack was needed to insure his escape. The problem is, there is absolutely no way to know (at this point) which of those assumptions is true, therefore you cancel each other out and should argue about something else.



I had some other stuff, but I'm too tired to search through the thread for the relevant quotes right now. Maybe later. Have fun picking me apart!

[evileeyore]

and, why exactly is 'desecration of a corpse' morraly wrong? if thats the case, then every animal in the history if the universe is in hell. why do people care so much about corpses? It like that thing with post-mortem organ donation. YOU DONT LIVE THERE ANYMORE! why should anyone care?
This comes largerly from religion. It dates back centuries and really I am not in the mood to dig it all up.

Suffice to say some believe it stems from the body being not only the mortal shell for the immortal spirit, but an anchor or fetish that is still connect to it. Thus what the body suffers, so does the soul. Some cultures believe that the soul is bound until the body is finally destroyed and thus treat the dead with great reverence, some belive an unwhole or desecrated corpse will not have a good afterlife. At one point the Greeks believed it cost money to get into the afterlife, so the body was entombed or buried with coins, thus if you desecrate the corpse the soul would wander forever.

Some believe all this is just nonsense concocted by a few 'holy' men to ensure you give tham their 'dues' as they now control your spiritual happiness.

Whatever the case may be, corpse desecration dates back very far and is viewed differently by different people. Heck I think some cultures find it not only acceptable but recommended.

[theKOT]

Well he was trolling with that statement, and a good troll isnt supposed to be spotted doing it. His attempt was seriously obvious, hence amateurish.

Thats the mostly mature response.

What I *really* wanted to say was-

"Of course it was. Isnt condescension fun? But Rosebud started it, neener! *duck* :P"

Best of both worlds! :)

*Hugs*
Varia


There's always that inner battle, isn't there? But as for my views on the subject, I'd say belkar's line at the end of strip no. 261 is proof enough of his intent. However, I'm not a very good debater and would get walloped were we to exchange arguements.

[evileeyore]

I had some other stuff, but I'm too tired to search through the thread for the relevant quotes right now. Maybe later. Have fun picking me apart!
Nope i'd say your non-stance is pretty solidly in both camps... or more accurately neither. ;)

Actually you cover it pretty well. We have no real basis for arguement, but it is fun, and I am bored at the moment.

Any second now my game will finish installing and the boredom will evaporate...

[VariaVespasa]

There's always that inner battle, isn't there? But as for my views on the subject, I'd say belkar's line at the end of strip no. 261 is proof enough of his intent. However, I'm not a very good debater and would get walloped were we to exchange arguements.

You may or may not be a very good debater yet, but its like everything else- you just need practice. So jump in and practice here, and soon you too could be a master deb..... (Finish the punchline yourselves! :P )

Sorry, couldnt resist! :)

*Hugs*
Varia

[VariaVespasa]

Nope i'd say your non-stance is pretty solidly in both camps... or more accurately neither. ;)

Actually you cover it pretty well. We have no real basis for arguement, but it is fun, and I am bored at the moment.

Any second now my game will finish installing and the boredom will evaporate...

Will that be the five minute arguement, or the full half hour? :)

*Hugs*
Varia

[Warlord]

Now that a climactic sequence approaches, what's the money on? Belkar or Miko winning?

While one of the previous strips showed the entire team getting trounced by Miko, I think that Belkar should definitely give her a run for her money. He now has the chance to set traps and find ways to create a surprise attack. After all, he may be a bit dim, but not a complete moron. He should exhibit a really sneaky side of him to defeat his new prey.

I feel that Belkar is probably seriously outclassed - or more appropriately, outleveled. But I would still rather he win.

[VariaVespasa]

Evileeyore- Origin of undead- For most of the assorted undead that I've seen in my assorted monster manuals (1rst ed) that have an origin explained that is something other than deliberately created with magic or spawned by their slayer (like vampires create vampires etc) it almost always revolves around emotions or drives that they had when they die. Banshees are driven by grief and despair . Ghosts have some unfinished longing that they dont know how to resolve that doesnt allow them to rest easy in their graves. Spectres have usually died by violence in fear or magic. Revenants are just too driven by some goal left unfinished to die. Wraiths are sometimes the product of horrible deaths (tortured to death, walled up in an alcove and left to die, etc). The one that may be least understood may be wights, whose most common source seems to be properly buried corpses. You get the idea. I cant think of any for whom the time between physical death and final disposal of the corpse is formative.

The "do you bury your kills" question is for the board at large, not you or me.

"Do the laws of Lord Shojo apply to where OOTS was?" We'll have to agree to disagree on that. I say that it certainly has not been established that they do. Is it possible? Yes. But it has not been established, or even properly implied yet. In any event, we may or may not find out more soon.

"I've been falsely imprisoned" Maybe, maybe not. But YOU had recourse, didnt you? And you were unquestionably arrested inside the borders of the country that arrested you, so you dont have the benefit of that point of contention in the Belkar discussion. What were you falsely imprisoned for?

"Crazed little murderer"- Yes, but he's OUR crazed little murderer! And OOTS would be pretty boring without him.

"Unshriven" Thats a good word. Not as good as "cumquat", but good nontheless. :)

*Hugs*
Varia

[VariaVespasa]

Warlord- I'd rather Belkar won, but I think that their battle will be interrupted before it reaches a final blood-spattered conclusion as one of them dies.

*Hugs*
Varia

[OldFart]

Miko is a paladin, one whose personal conduct upholds all that is good and right. She is rather unpleasant to interact with.

Belkar is a murderous sociopath who kills without mercy. He makes us laugh on occasion.

There is far more talk of Miko's inner demons and redemption than Belkar's. Fascinating.

Belkar is evil. Miko is LG, and a paladin to boot. Of course most people on this list hold them to different standards of behavior.

Much the same as many would laugh at or applaud the actions of a movie gangster or western outlaw who is the protagonist, and find the same bevavior unacceptable in a protagionist who is a police officer or marshall.

Speaking of which, to use Nale's interpretation, when is comes to tagonists, Belkar is a "pro," Miko is an "an." So it's natural for the readers to view their actions with some bias.

[Devoured_Dude]

It occurred to me that Belkar's "Craft Disturbing Mental Image" and his blood mural are more along the lines of a Diablo II-style Barbarian, with his taunt and grim ward skills. Perhaps Belkar went in for the wrong kind of Barbarian training?

[Fanatic-Templar]

Though I could see the humour in the paladins' last exchange, I really couldn't bring myself to laugh. All this time, we've known that Belkar was evil, but we've been cheerfully ignoring it, as though by not admitting the fact, we'd never have to deal with it.

One should have foressen that something like this would happen. Personally, I never did like Belkar so I wouldn't be sad to see him go.

*Holds up blue giant foam finger.*

[Amalthea]

*sigh* I hate Belkar. I really really hate him. Which means he's a pretty dang good character if he can inspire such emotions.

However, I do want to know how much longer Roy's feeling of obligation to Belkar is going to keep him from turning Belkar over to authorities... especially when Belkar's participation in the defeat of Xykon wasn't that great. (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=107)

On the subject of Miko, I think Hinjo's attitude towards her, and the implied attitude of others in the Sapphire Guard, does a great deal to explaining her bitterness, and her unpleasant attitude. Rejection by your peers is a powerful thing, she has no family - it's very natural in those circumstances to define yourself by what you do, and Miko was a monk and is a paladin.

Her current attitude towards the Order, however, is simply a direct result of Roy's tirade on her personal flaws, a woman scorned. No more, no less.

[Maxymiuk]

"Do the laws of Lord Shojo apply to where OOTS was?" We'll have to agree to disagree on that. I say that it certainly has not been established that they do. Is it possible? Yes. But it has not been established, or even properly implied yet. In any event, we may or may not find out more soon.

Hi, first post.

I think Varia nailed it. I've seen this touched upon obliquely in the number of posts before, but the real question is "What exactly is Shojo lord of?" Of course any answer to that question is speculation, so I won't attempt it.

But what if his position does give him authority to issue the orders he did?

[evileeyore]

Evileeyore- Origin of undead- --snip--Okay I'll grant you that, Look there I go arguing my case when I never read the MMs... ah, see i hate to know whats coming so the less I know about the monsters, the more of a surprise they are. This way I can honestly react without knowing every weakness and power.

So a large portion of my 'knowledge' comes from encountering them and from running CoC... which is not a good basis for D&D arguements... I surrender!



"I've been falsely imprisoned" Maybe, maybe not. But YOU had recourse, didnt you? And you were unquestionably arrested inside the borders of the country that arrested you, so you dont have the benefit of that point of contention in the Belkar discussion. What were you falsely imprisoned for?Falsely detained both home and abroad (in Mexico no less, scary). I happened to 'fit the profile' of a white heavyset man with short-cropped dark hair, both times. I really should grow my hair long...

Anyway, no I had no recourse. I was kept up to the maximum 48 hours at home and for 3 days in Mexico, then they caught the guy red-handed. No apoligies, I was just set back on the street, not even the correct area of town. Was a nightmare.


"Crazed little murderer"- Yes, but he's OUR crazed little murderer! And OOTS would be pretty boring without him. Prepare yourself for boredom, I see no way for Belkar to survive this and be allowed back into the OotS...

In fact ... SPOILER:
Belkar may have to end up joining the Linear Guild as Miko's Evil opposite...


"Unshriven" Thats a good word. Not as good as "cumquat", but good nontheless. :)

*Hugs*
Varia
But far more appropriate for discussing the unprepared dead than cumquat. Now were we discussing weaponry, cumquat would have been a far better fit...

--EvilE

[the_belkarnator]

Your group buries its kills? Your group is unusual. Yes, I've done it sometimes, under certain circumstances, but its not a standard thing. And in terms of the OOTS world, the OOTS havent been seen doing it, and nor has Miko. Show of hands among the readers- does YOUR group habitually bury its kills?


Still cool?

*Hugs*
Varia

no i course not it would take time and as my group is being chased.... also it would deny animals of a meal

[the_belkarnator]

Who said he wasn't evil: his actions weren't but the Belkar I know and love is evil. May be a little sadistic I think he is anyway.]
Belkar is the Anti-hero in the adventuring party. No one thinks him neutral (I don't think), but we can view his actions as nuetral if they are to us.

Animals kill not because they eish harm, but they need for food. Same for someone with a curse that causes them to kill.

Only when one gives in to the curse willingly are they evil: ala Werewolf.
werewolfs arent evil the are forced to change every full moon and then act like a a rather mean wolf take lupin for exemple he a nice guy but he would kill some1 he met in werewolf form when a werewolf is evil is when he enjoy being a werewolf or try to make it easier for his werewolf form to attack

[Devils_Advocate]

The guard is theoretically 'raiseable', depending on the Giant's world. In base D&D there is nothing preventing the spell from working aside from the target not wanting to come back.

One of D&D's greatest flaws IMO.
Well, a Raise Dead spell can't bring back someone who's been dead for more than one day per caster level (exception: see Gentle Repose), or a 1 HD creature with only a 1 or 2 Constitution. And it doesn't regenerate body parts, so it wouldn't work if any vital organs had been, say, burnt. Resurrection, on the other hand, only requires some small portion of the creature’s body. The same character can be brought back an indefinite amount of times with these spells, but it requires sufficient leveling in between.

True Resurrection will bring back any willing deceased creature that hasn't had its soul trapped, died of old age, or been dead for more than a decade per caster level. You can get killed and True Resurrected any number of times and suffer no penalty for it. That's why it's a 9th-level spell with a costly material component.

I don't think that it's too uncommon to have house rules that make it more difficult to revive the dead. It allows for a greater sense of risk, if nothing else.


do we know how good belkar's hide skill is?
Belkar has successfully sneaked past a group of goblins. (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=107) He has a +4 to Hide from his size, and only light armor. It seems likely that his Dex is higher than any of his mental stats, and it's not like he spent any of his skill points on Spot or Survival.

It's safe to say that his Hide and Move Silently are both probably pretty good.

[VariaVespasa]

And he's not even wearing light armor at the moment. I just thank the gods he's wearing pants! :)

*Hugs*
Varia

[Istielthia]

werewolfs arent evil the are forced to change every full moon and then act like a a rather mean wolf take lupin for exemple he a nice guy but he would kill some1 he met in werewolf form when a werewolf is evil is when he enjoy being a werewolf or try to make it easier for his werewolf form to attack

That's a bit of a stretch though, isn't it? I mean, by their very natures, werewolves are cursed. And although they may be Mr. Rogers 28 days of the month, those few nights when the moon is full, it can almost be said that they are possessed of another entity, over which they have no control. The same cannot even be remotely said of Belkar. He is fully aware of what he's doing, and revels in it. Just because he's chaotic doesn't mean he's unaware of the law, just that he chooses to ignore it, and anything else that might hinder his idea of a "good time".

This is something that's been bothering me since... well, pretty much this whole thread. Don't get me wrong, I like Belkar... as much as anyone can love a stumpy psychopath in high bloodlust. And I understand the whole pro-/an- 'tagonist argument too. What I still can't seem to get my head around, is why people seem to think its ok for Belkar to commit the acts he has (splashing around in the blood of the slain and using it for fingerpaints) and call it acceptable because "he's Belkar". And in the same breath, calling for the head of Miko, who, while she isn't necessarily the most likable character, is really just a single woman, doing her job to the best of her knowledge and abilities.

While I don't really hope that Belkar dies, I do hope he gets soundly thrashed.... and maybe gets amnesia and has a change of personality.


Nope i'd say your non-stance is pretty solidly in both camps... or more accurately neither.
I prefer to think of myself as reserving judgement until at least a few of the facts are in. ;)


Edit for spelling mistakes.

[Lady_Orc]

First post from longtime lurker! Hi to the board!

Anyway, I naturally judge Belkar and Miko by different standards. She's a paladin, and I expect quite a lot more from a paladin than what I have seen her display. She's such an annoying character that I hope she dies a slow and painful death, and soon, though I doubt that's what will happen.

That, by the way, doesn't mean I condone murder in RL. It simply means that when it comes to fictional characters, I don't give a hoot what their 'alignment' or morality is - only whether I like them or not. So while in RL I would probably want to see Belkar in a padded cell, in the context of the comic it's 'Go Belkar!' all the way. ;D

[Evik]

Who da Halfling???
Belkar's da Halfling that's who!
I cant wait for whatever Belkar has set up for Miko!!!
Muah hahahahahahahaaaaa!
keeping my fingers crossed for another awesome strip!

[Vampire_Boy]

*chants*

Kill, kill, kill the b****!
Kill, kill, kill the b****!
Kill, kill, kill the b****!

Yay! Go, Belkar! Restore the good name of the paladin class by killing that horribly annoying black sheep, the brainless smiter paladunce must die!

[Winter_Wolf]

I leave for one day and already too many pages to read all the posts on this episode.

I think we dwell on Miko's "inner demons" instead of Belkar's because Belkar wears his demons right out there on his sleeve, so to speak. What's there to debate? You read the strip, you know exactly what a sick little man he is. That's why we like him (or hate him).

I think that so far Hinjo has done nothing to earn my doubts about his paladinhood. I'm willing to believe he is, but it's clearly a generation gap thing between him and Miko. Well maybe not clearly, but I think of it that way. Hinjo does seem pretty cavalier though. Probably the guy who did keg stands at paladin school parties. Reminds me of Detective Mills for some reason.

Belkar could have used kidneys to paint the mural, but just decided to go in through the front instead of the back. Honing his skills at human dissection a little, moving a liver here, a spleen there. For all we know he could have made a haggis out of human bits instead of sheep bits.

B is a sick little monkey, and he and Miko will probably have their reckoning presently. Or not, that's what I love about this strip, keeps me on my toes. I can't feel malice toward Miko if she mortalizes Belkar. I don't like her, but I wouldn't worry too much about her losing her paladinhood for it. Although it would be really funny if, wait never mind, that would be a prediction. (But it would still be funny.)

I did laugh at the last strip, but only after the third read through. Somehow horror just becomes absurdly funny if you look at it long enough. And for me, the insertion of the macabre scene heightens the comedy in the rest of the strip. Defining a thing by its opposite, or something like that.

[RBloom0566]

Well, it's Wednesday...granted, it's 5:45am EDT...but where's the next strip?!

*LOL* Just kidding. Just gotta see how things turn out for the gang.

[Alfryd]

Am I the only person who found myself unable to laugh at the last panel. Not because it's not funny, but because it seems so serious and macabre.
Likewise.
Theoretically speaking, he might just have done the mural in crayon. He did have one before. I can't think of any particular reason why it would be confiscated.

Is she bitter because no one like her, or no one like her because she is bitter?

She doesn't strike me as bitter. She strikes me as doctrinaire.
I'm leaning toward 'bitter' myself. It strikes me that her uncanny knack for alienating everyone she knows may be a defence mechanism rooted in fear of abandonment. The quack is IN!

Roy feels that he owes him, true, but at some point gratitude and loyalty get overwhelmed by the fact that the guy's too sick and evil to put up with.

By the way, keep in mind: he had no friends. They were his adventure companions, not his friends.
In fairness, Belkar has proven less of a liability than Elan. By a long shot. Also, he hasn't actually done anything overtly malevolent toward his own party (with minor exceptions no worse than V's explosive runes on Miko. Thanks goodness that never materialised.) I'm virtually certain his chasing Elan for XP was just a gag. He's been willing to help out Elan on other occasions, even at some risk to himself. One might almost say he was fond of him.

I still don't understand why she's not taking backup, though.
Think, 'Senator Palpatine versus Mace Windu and His Assorted Backup (deceased.)'

...more evil than coup-de-graceing half a dozen completely helpless, sleeping intelligent beings for no reason at all other than minor convenience.
Most of the goblins they'd encountered were fairly categorically evil, so slaying them would technically be in the interest of the greater good.

...put him in a seperate cell away from his friends, for what seem to me to be purely petty and non-paladin reasons.
Theoretically, the hole is harder to escape from.


And why would Hinjo's sporting a goatee automatically make you suspect anything underhanded? If you're hinting that he could be Nale, I seriously doubt it.
Oh, for heaven's sake. Make a Sense Motive check.


You hang out on the message boards picking apart every delightfully irrelevant detail.
Hi, my name is Alfryd and I have a problem.
*Hi, Alfryd...*


...attacking an unarmed Elan - he's totally harmless and almost like a child and she knows it...
Getting Belkar back in action was not harmless. Miko is accustomed to solo missions were you rarely have the luxury of mercy.

Escape is not acceptable...
That's debatable. If Miko's actions are justifiable based on her limited information, so too may the OotS attempts at escape.


...non-lethal takes longer, which gives the guard more time to hurt Belkar...
Given that he managed to disarm him fairly trivially in a single leap from a dark pit without any weapon of his own, I severely doubt that subdual damage would have imposed even slight difficulty.


He's always been like this...why is it suddenly such a big deal now?

Belkar has committed iredeemable acts.
He has commited (one) notably, unequivocally evil act. That should be possible to atone for, if he truly had the mind to. But you're right, I don't think Roy could really accept him back into the fold in the near future.
We always knew he was technically evil, but we hadn't seen him do anything grossly malevolent up to now.


IF desecrating a corpse tends to lead to it rising as undead then you could indeed make a reasonable arguement for it being an evil act... Your group buries its kills? Your group is unusual
No, desecrating a corpse by itself is pretty evil. Particularly when it's done simply so you can taunt someone else.
No-one's demanding Belkar stop to bury the guard. Hacking up someone else's body in the process of killing them is unavoidable.

This lack of lawful authority on the part of Lord Shojo to arrest the OOTS has been commented on often on these boards.
To which it has been repeatedly responded that Shojo may operate under Divine jurisdiction, or may function like a vigilante outside his own domain. Miko may well consider Shojo's edicts to have greater moral authority than those applying in foreign countries.


She's such an annoying character that I hope she dies a slow and painful death, and soon, though I doubt that's what will happen.
I'm going to start calling these people 'Lecterites', because like Hannibal they believe rudeness should be penalised through agonising death.

[Lasombra]

he could have hidden the crayon the same place he hid the ring...

:P sick puppies are the best kind of people, my office now believe me to be insane fromt eh amount of giggling i did earlier. :)

[Lady_Orc]

I'm going to start calling these people 'Lecterites', because like Hannibal they believe rudeness should be penalised through agonising death.

As it applies to *fictional characters*, absolutely. Or did you miss the part of my post where I said I don't condone murder in RL?

[Duraska]

I HATE Belkar with a passion now. Sure, it's not out of character for him to do what he did - but it's sick.

To anyone defending his actions cause he was an "abused little boy" or whatever, think about it like this. If your family member was a guard at that prison, and some little sick halfling punk slaughtered him, sliced open his chest cavity, and used his guts to write a taunt on a wall, how would you feel.

Belkar deserves death, and Miko's gonna give it to him.

[GypsyThorn]

Just picked up this thread, so I don't know if this was mentioned anywhere in the last 12 pages of posts. If it's a repeat, sorry.

Funny strip, but what made me LOL was the last pane, where the drawings Belkar drew in blood on the wall look remarkably like the real thing. I guess there's no way to make stick figures look crude.

[Aeek]

he could have hidden the crayon the same place he hid the ring...


Ooh, that would be horribly painful. There I was thinking his halfling fingers are too small and a big toe too exposed.

AND: that much blood from that little cut? I can believe a crayon.

[impgazer]

You know, it may not be blood at all.

I'm not sure they would've taken his red marker, which he clearly carries around with him while adventuring:

http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=29

http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=38

And if it's NOT blood, then we can all get along again :P

[Lady_Orc]

Well, blood is like all fluids, it looks more copious when spread out. Just think of the effect of spilling a glass of milk on the floor. So the wound wouldn't necessarily have to be all that big, I think you could still paint pretty well with the results.

[Karellen]

Most of the goblins they'd encountered were fairly categorically evil, so slaying them would technically be in the interest of the greater good.

You realize, of course, that the only reason such silly notions as "categorical evil" exist in D&D in the first place is so those of us with fainter hearts can feel good about genocidal massacre of intelligent humanoids on an inherently selfish quest to get their hands on some beautiful gold that for some reason happens to be found in high quantities where "categorical evils" happen to live. Which, incidentally, was the whole point of the strip - how the act figures according to D&D conventions in use with OoTS.

The guard was a nameless mook. He was expendable. It's a D&D game. He wasn't a person. Just about anybody short of Miko, Shojo and other OoTS members Belkar would run inside the fortress wouldn't be a person. They're a barely a step above random encounters. By D&D standards, he can kill them with approximately the same level of impunity as Roy can coup-de-grace goblinoids - that is, once he's out of the castle, it just won't matter, and the rest of the other OoTS will think, "well, okay".

[Amalthea]

You know, it may not be blood at all.

I'm not sure they would've taken his red marker, which he clearly carries around with him while adventuring:

http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=29

http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=38

And if it's NOT blood, then we can all get along again :P
1) The Red marker and the drawing in the current strip are different shades of red. #265 has a rustier shade of red.
2) The pattern of the drawing instrument is different from the marker drawings. The smeariness and ragged edges are indicative of finger painting in particular.
3) It is Belkar's nature to horrify his target with whatever means are available to him (i.e. hitting on Roy). Fingerpainting the message on the wall in blood would horrify any good-aligned person, and he knows it.
4) The dead guard has been moved from one side of the pit to the other. This implies in the OotS world that Belkar moved him. Artistically, the guard was moved to place him next to the drawing on the wall, and thereby associate the two.

I dont' think it's argueable that the drawing was done with anything other than blood.

[Amalthea]

You realize, of course, that the only reason such silly notions as "categorical evil" exist in D&D in the first place is so those of us with fainter hearts can feel good about genocidal massacre of intelligent humanoids on an inherently selfish quest to get their hands on some beautiful gold that for some reason happens to be found in high quantities where "categorical evils" happen to live.
I'd point out that these goblins were in service with the EVIL LICH that lived in the castle, and therefore it's a reasonable conclusion that the goblins are also evil. The OotS didn't kill the good-aligned goblin teenagers, after all, even after they were betrayed by one of them.

[SITB]

I am one of the people whom laughed at the last panel. What Belkar did was "supposedly" in real life sense wrong, but people still like him because he is a fictional character it doesn't border and passes through the macabre simply because the guards name is probably like "NPC 93: feeding guard".
To me,at least, the normal aspect of morality does not applay here.

Of course I am always willing to give in to the fact that I am dead wrong.

[nerve]

Hi there.

maybe there is no blood on the wall, and this "painting" is only a picture in Miko's head..?! just an idea.. ;D

[Alfryd]

I dont' think it's argueable that the drawing was done with anything other than blood.
That makes sense. Fair enough.

...did you miss the part of my post where I said I don't condone murder in RL?
The rudeness is just as fictional as the character.

[Karellen]

I'd point out that these goblins were in service with the EVIL LICH that lived in the castle, and therefore it's a reasonable conclusion that the goblins are also evil. The OotS didn't kill the good-aligned goblin teenagers, after all, even after they were betrayed by one of them.

In service, or as its slaves? You notice the Evil Lich in question considers them completely expendable, and there's no indication anywhere that the goblins were getting anything substantial out of the deal, which goes even further with the hobgoblins that Redcloak takes control of through completely arbitary means and proceeds to use as monster fodder. They're miscellaneous henchmen, but using the fact that they're under the control of a BBEG as proof that they're all evil is absurd by any logic other than the D&D they're-green-so-you-can-kill'em logic.

Incidentally, those "good-aligned" goblin teenagers - if I was playing a moral character who wasn't above some vigilante justice in a 'serious' campaign, as opposed to a slightly self-ironic dungeon crawling scenario like OoTS, I would have brutally killed them on general principle. I mean, they're essentially betraying their parents to certain death because of a teenage rebellion phase? That isn't just the complete antithesis of good on my moral compass, but also, the most despicable sort of betrayal at that. Using them as an example just further demonstrates how OoTS both follows and parodies the ridiculous D&D system of morality, which will most likely ultimately ignore Belkar killin' some poor unimportant human mooks.

[Lady_Orc]

[quote author=Alfryd The rudeness is just as fictional as the character.[/quote]

*shrugs* The rudeness is real enough to annoy me, and so I would still love to see Miko's crimson red lifefluid being used to paint another masterpiece signed 'Belkar'. I also used to hope that the coyote would get to eat the Roadrunner. Bad, bad me. ::)

[rosebud]

He does indeed think certain things are evil, regardless of circumstances. The phrasing of the original clearly suggests that drawing on walls in blood is one of them. Words in his mouth? I think not.Text lacks verbal cues. My read (I'm not him, of course) was that they were tied. Namely, killing and then desecrating crosses a line. That is a (seemingly more) reasonable way to read the comments. Of course, I didn't write them, so it's the author who has the final say. (On the other hand, this board is half about interpreting what one author/artist has to say three times a week. :))


The stuff about cannibalism was clearly to illustrate that something that is usually considered wrong is not always. I deemed it appropriate since its another form of body descration, which was the basic topic under discussionEvents like the Donner Party were not about murder and desecration. It was a desperate act by a group and within a group.

There's an absolutely hilarious South Park episode where the town and two reporters get stuck in a snowstorm. After about all of four hours, Mr. Garretson discusses the need to resort to cannibalism to survive. This, of course, horrifies the outsiders. They eat one, and, later, the second reporter. The storm subsides after a day. Why is that funny? (1) It's so absurd -- they can survive more than four hours without food, (2) The person who discusses cannibalism is a reasonably mild-mannered teacher (not a psychopathic killer), and (3) It was an action done by the group against a transient outsider.

Belkar's actions were done against an outsider but not within a group. It's qualitatively different from the above cases.


"Do you think I have time to get popcorn??" You have time to troll a message board, so, well, why yes, yes I do!I'm not trolling. Please don't dismiss comments as trolls. In fact, the popcorn comment and comments about uncertainty about what has and will happen were an attempt of reconcilliation and resolution. Having that then called a troll is unfair.

[rosebud]

Belkar's participation in the defeat of Xykon wasn't that great. (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=107)I don't think Ray was talking about a single battle, but the entire adventure in Durokan's castle. In that regard, some of Belkar's contributions (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=11) were key to the party's success.

[Marller]

*shrugs* The rudeness is real enough to annoy me, and so I would still love to see Miko's crimson red lifefluid being used to paint another masterpiece signed 'Belkar'. I also used to hope that the coyote would get to eat the Roadrunner. Bad, bad me. ::)

The rudeness is fictional. It's part of the story like everything else. So why does it bother you?

[Squeaky]

1) The Red marker and the drawing in the current strip are different shades of red. #265 has a rustier shade of red.

Couldn't this be caused by the different background color? Since #265 had that shade of blue and the other two are light grey that could explain the different shade of red.



2) The pattern of the drawing instrument is different from the marker drawings. The smeariness and ragged edges are indicative of finger painting in particular.
3) It is Belkar's nature to horrify his target with whatever means are available to him (i.e. hitting on Roy). Fingerpainting the message on the wall in blood would horrify any good-aligned person, and he knows it.

And we know Belkar has the "Craft Disturbing Mental Image" feat. It wouldn't be disturbing if it didn't look like blood.



4) The dead guard has been moved from one side of the pit to the other. This implies in the OotS world that Belkar moved him. Artistically, the guard was moved to place him next to the drawing on the wall, and thereby associate the two.

Why would there be a need to associate the two unless it was a ruse? In the strip Belkar could have done that to anger Miko. Remember, he stated that it would be cool if she lost her paladin powers. Angry vengeance doesn't seem very paladin-y to me.



I dont' think it's argueable that the drawing was done with anything other than blood.

Well, maybe. I can see it going either way.

[Chaos]

Hi there.

maybe there is no blood on the wall, and this "painting" is only a picture in Miko's head..?! just an idea.. ;D


You´ll notice in one of the early strips (the one right before ThorPrayer) that Elan and Belkar both have red crayons; the writing on the wall looks more like crayon than blood to me - blood has a tendency to drip when used as paint*.

*Not that I´d tried that myself, though ;)

[Squeaky]

Belkar awesomeness aside, did anyone get Hinjos anecdote?

Yes, I got it. One of my long time favorite punchlines.

[Lady_Orc]

The rudeness is fictional. It's part of the story like everything else. So why does it bother you?

Fictional or not, characters still provoke emotional response in me if they are written well enough. So, I do think Miko is a well-written character, and a horrible pain whom I hope to see die a painful death. An anvil falling on her head would be good. ;D I think a badly written character is one that doesn't make you feel anything but indifference, actually.

[Miroku_Sumeragi]

Out of context- the bit you quoted was SPECIFICALLY directed at Miroku and her use of absolutes, and SPECIFICALLY with regards to writing on walls in blood, and NOT in any way to do with the death of the guard who provided the blood in the first place. She did not say this particular example of blood write was inexcusable, she said ALL blood writing was inexcusable, regardless of circumstances. I took her to task for that. And I take YOU to task for accusing me of trying to be cute while in the same breath quoting me out of context...

As for THIS example of blood writing, assuming it IS blood (no extra blood on or around the guard, which is odd if someone had been using him as an inkwell), how do I feel?



Major quibble. I am a guy. My picture has a guy. My gender symbol is a guy. I have no idea why I am referred to as a she, and quite frankly, this mistake annoys me a lot. It's nitpicky but that seems to be the trend here.

[evileeyore]

In service, or as its slaves? You notice the Evil Lich in question considers them completely expendable, and there's no indication anywhere that the goblins were getting anything substantial out of the deal, which goes even further with the hobgoblins that Redcloak takes control of through completely arbitary means and proceeds to use as monster fodder. They're miscellaneous henchmen, but using the fact that they're under the control of a BBEG as proof that they're all evil is absurd by any logic other than the D&D they're-green-so-you-can-kill'em logicIn this case servants. They were being payed and had sent their Union Representative (Redcloak) to negotiate a Dental Plan. This feel through when Redcloak witnessed Xykon's 'negotiation tactics' that turned Orges asking for higher wages into Zombie Orges asking for brains...

Thus in one sense the Gobs were slaves and in another the were comedy.


Incidentally, those "good-aligned" goblin teenagers - if I was playing a moral character who wasn't above some vigilante justice in a 'serious' campaign, as opposed to a slightly self-ironic dungeon crawling scenario like OoTS, I would have brutally killed them on general principle. I mean, they're essentially betraying their parents to certain death because of a teenage rebellion phase? That isn't just the complete antithesis of good on my moral compass, but also, the most despicable sort of betrayal at that. Using them as an example just further demonstrates how OoTS both follows and parodies the ridiculous D&D system of morality, which will most likely ultimately ignore Belkar killin' some poor unimportant human mooks.I begin to find a general wrongness in you, but thats okay.

The teens were ironic comedy yes, but even in a more serious light, if the children of a murderous group come to your aid to help lead you past, around, and away from their group so that you can more readily get to the BBEG that has enslaved them (yes I'll turn your arguements against you! Haha, take that!) then they are being paragons of goodness and virtue, and to kill them exemplifies the darkest of Evils... for shame...

[evileeyore]

Major quibble. I am a guy. My picture has a guy. My gender symbol is a guy. I have no idea why I am referred to as a she, and quite frankly, this mistake annoys me a lot. It's nitpicky but that seems to be the trend here.This is the intraweb. Someone is likely to confuse you with rutabegga given enough time. Just chill and ignore it.

More than likely VV was unable to wrap its head around your name in any fashion other the feminine. Foriegn names are sometimes difficult for us English speakers.

[Dagaz]

You know, now I agree, I think it might just be crayon. Then later the ootsers will ask Belkar:
-So it wasn't really blood?
-No. Are you crazy? I'd have to be sick...

or

-So it wasn't really blood?
-No. But that's a good idea for next time! Thank you Roy, there may yet be hope for you!
(Roy makes a weird face remembering that's not the first time Belkar says that, and starts to wonder if he is turning into a Belkar)

[Amalthea]

Couldn't this be caused by the different background color? Since #265 had that shade of blue and the other two are light grey that could explain the different shade of red.
A blue background would logically result in a more purplish shade of red, and a gray background would result in a duller, possibly rusty, shade of red. However in these two situations,the two are reversed. The purpler shade is on the gray background and the rusty shade is on the blue background.


And we know Belkar has the "Craft Disturbing Mental Image" feat. It wouldn't be disturbing if it didn't look like blood.
Occam's Razor: The simplest cause is the most probable.
Futhermore, Belkar is very direct and very evil. Creating writing on the wall that looked like blood but wasn't is both too much effort and too subtle for him. Not to mention completely out of character for someone who's hobby is kidney harvesting.


Why would there be a need to associate the two unless it was a ruse?
You're thinking about Belkar's actions in the comic world, whereas I said artistically.
The body was moved by Mr. Burlew from one side of the pit to the other in order to associate the writing on the wall with the body. It's an artistic varient of Chekov's Rule.
The concept of Belkar dragging the body to its current location is merely the logical explanation for the artistic association between the body and the writing.

[Antina]

You know, now I agree, I think it might just be crayon. Then later the ootsers will ask Belkar:
-So it wasn't really blood?
-No. Are you crazy? I'd have to be sick...

or

-So it wasn't really blood?
-No. But that's a good idea for next time! Thank you Roy, there may yet be hope for you!
(Roy makes a weird face remembering that's not the first time Belkar says that, and starts to wonder if he is turning into a Belkar)

I really DO like THIS !!!

Nicely done :) !

[Antina]

1) The Red marker and the drawing in the current strip are different shades of red. #265 has a rustier shade of red.
.

Sorry - I don´t think so.
The colours of the wall differ - so does the outcome of the shade.

But either way - may it be blood or not - I don´t care - it is totally Belkar-style to do this ;)

[Vampire_Boy]

The rudeness is fictional. It's part of the story like everything else. So why does it bother you?

So, uh, you mean it's not normal to like or dislike a character based on their personality traits? I thought that provoking an emotional response towards the character was one of the main challenges in writing. Or perhaps you would like to insist that we are supposed to like and cheer only for the Good-aligned characters even when they are major jerks?

So yeah, Miko's certainly a successful character as far as I'm concerned. I'd love nothing better than to join my buddy Belkar and harvest her kidneys. ;)

[Lorde]

Major quibble. I am a guy. My picture has a guy. My gender symbol is a guy. I have no idea why I am referred to as a she, and quite frankly, this mistake annoys me a lot. It's nitpicky but that seems to be the trend here.

Your name is gender confusing, and so is your avatar. I didn´t even knew there was a gender symbol until you pointed it.

If it annoy you so much, change it.

[Amalthea]

blood has a tendency to drip when used as paint*.

*Not that I´d tried that myself, though ;)
...No it doesn't.
While I don't intend to either gross or creep anyone out, I can say from personal experience*, that blood smudged on a surface with fingers does not drip as much as horror movies protray it to.

*I cut myself pretty badly at Thanksgiving and left enough smears and fingerprints on the bathroom cabinets trying to get out the first aid kit to know. Plus, if blood dripped so much, forensic experts wouldn't be able to get fingerprints from blood smears on walls.


Sorry - I don´t think so.
The colours of the wall differ - so does the outcome of the shade.
I already addressed this two posts above yours. :-)

[Lorde]

I remenber when people had doubts about the (obvious) evil alignment of Belkar.

Only after the author said it, and said it was *obvious*, the rumors stopped.

Now the same thing arise with the blood x crayon thing.

People, Belkar is evil. He wore a kobold cranium as a trophy. He have "crafting disturbind mental image" as a feat.

Writing on blood would give +2 to his skill and would make a far better message.

And if you still have doubts about it being blood, follow this link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor

[Karellen]

In this case servants. They were being payed and had sent their Union Representative (Redcloak) to negotiate a Dental Plan. This feel through when Redcloak witnessed Xykon's 'negotiation tactics' that turned Orges asking for higher wages into Zombie Orges asking for brains...

Okay, so they were guards for an evil lich and being paid for it, and it's OK to kill them. The poor guard that Belkar gibbed was being a guard for the money too, I would presume. Being paid to guard something is pretty neutral. So the reason it's not okay to kill him is because he's not green, right?


The teens were ironic comedy yes, but even in a more serious light, if the children of a murderous group come to your aid to help lead you past, around, and away from their group so that you can more readily get to the BBEG that has enslaved them (yes I'll turn your arguements against you! Haha, take that!) then they are being paragons of goodness and virtue, and to kill them exemplifies the darkest of Evils... for shame...

Right, if that were the case. The motivation of the kids was clearly just annoying their parents and generally hogging for attention, which in this case lead to the parents, and the kids, I hope, dying untimely deaths, as all the goblins except for Redcloak kicked the bucket anyway - actually, it would appear the pimpled kid's dad is the cleric that Belkar stabbed to death in the final fight. Ah, the burning filial dedication. This is just one of those instances which clearly showcase that having "good" somewhere in your alignment doesn't make you good. At all.

[Greebo]

Major quibble. I am a guy. My picture has a guy. My gender symbol is a guy. I have no idea why I am referred to as a she, and quite frankly, this mistake annoys me a lot. It's nitpicky but that seems to be the trend here.
No disrespect, but I thought your picture looked feminine too...sorry.

And I am lousy at recognizing gender symbols.

[aaronbourque]

So, uh, you mean it's not normal to like or dislike a character based on their personality traits?

Wanting someone to die painfully, fictional or not, for rudeness is a little extreme.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque

[Lady_Orc]

Or so you think. Personally I have no trouble with it - it makes it all the more enjoyable when a character Ioathe *does* bite the dust. Hopefully that will happen to Miko soon.

Oh, and just in case anybody was meaning to ask - no, I'm not a serial killer in RL, nor do I kick puppies or slaughter orphans. I just don't happen to think there's anything morally wrong with wanting to see a stick figure kill another stick figure.

[aaronbourque]

Or so you think. Personally I have no trouble with it - it makes it all the more enjoyable when a character Ioathe *does* bite the dust. Hopefully that will happen to Miko soon.

For rudeness.

Contrast with the character Cersei Lannister from GRRM's (excellent, IMO) A Song of Ice and Fire series. She's small-minded, harmful to her children, over-proud, self-centered, cruel, mean, heartless, vindictive, stupid . . . I could go on and on.

Her, I wouldn't mind dying a painful death.

Miko? For *rudeness*?

Nah.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque

[Gary_Schaper]

I am one of the people whom laughed at the last panel. What Belkar did was "supposedly" in real life sense wrong, but people still like him because he is a fictional character it doesn't border and passes through the macabre simply because the guards name is probably like "NPC 93: feeding guard".
Oh, I thought it was funny. It's just that the funny doesn't change what I think the consequences for Belkar should be.

[McHarty]

Hey, can't you people read the comic strip for what it is... a comic strip ?

Arguing about if it's blood or not, if it's rude or not... leads nowhere. Analysing each and every moves of every character must make The Giant fells unconfortable at times ( or so I think, only him can tell )...

I know this thread is intended to discuss the actual strip, but I think it's not really the place to debate about how rude a fiction is to be perceived in real life.

Actually, I think the strip should be seen ( and read ) for what it is... an excellent work of imagination and great entertainment.

( For those who can be shocked with my grammar. I appologize, english is not my first language. )

PS.: I Love the strip and hate the lag ;)
And I really would see Dagaz idea fit in ( Belkar's answer to Roy's question about the blood ! )

[Lady_Orc]

For rudeness.

Contrast with the character Cersei Lannister from GRRM's (excellent, IMO) A Song of Ice and Fire series. She's small-minded, harmful to her children, over-proud, self-centered, cruel, mean, heartless, vindictive, stupid . . . I could go on and on.

Her, I wouldn't mind dying a painful death.

Miko? For *rudeness*?

Nah.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque


For not just rudness, but for being the exact type of Lawful Awful paladin that I have encountered in other places, and really hate.

Oh, and I wouldn't mind seeing Cersei dead either - and that I think is actually going to happen. Sadly, I doubt Miko will get killed, but a girl can hope.

[theKOT]

And if you still have doubts about it being blood, follow this link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor


The most probable answer isn't always the right one. You can't use Occam's Razor to prove something. That being said, it probably is blood, Especially with the guard being there, but the red chalk/marker is a possibility.

[The Glyphstone]

What I'm surprised nobody has pointed out is that, (I think) the last time we saw that crayon was waaaaay back, when Roy got poisoned (too lazy to look up the comic)...before the art upgrade. A lot of the other stuff had colors altered or changed (Roy's sword hilt comes to mind for a bit), so why not the crayon?

Of course, if someone points out a comic post-upgrade with the crayon, I'll be quiet. ;)

[Karon]

Belkar has committed iredeemable acts. If he remains with the Order it will be a sham and travesty.

I'm with a previous poster on this. Evil sadism is nothing new for Belkar; it's hillarious the way it has always been, why is it suddenly a big deal? No one was so horrified by Belkar murdering goblins trying to surrender, or selling teenage girls into slavery, harvesting the kidneys of a goblin who had just HELPED the Order, or

[Origin of PCs Spoiler]
the 15 person killing spree that led to his inclusion in the OoTS
[/Spoiler]

Of course this would all be horrific it it were real life; it's not, it's a comic, and it's funny. Keep it up Giant; don't let people who get way too worked up about fiction get you down. Belkar is by far the most fun character in OoTS; having everyone be Lawful Good would just be plain boring. Everybody needs a foil.

[Dark Knight Renee]

Did anyone else notice that aside from having a gotee, Hinjo has blue hair? :P

[Miroku_Sumeragi]

This is the intraweb. Someone is likely to confuse you with rutabegga given enough time. Just chill and ignore it.

More than likely VV was unable to wrap its head around your name in any fashion other the feminine. Foriegn names are sometimes difficult for us English speakers.

I have the absolute right to flip out over the stupidest things. It just means that people shouldn't take me seriously (and honestly, they shouldn't).

Let just say it's a hot button from real life due to what you mentioned, Asian names are hard for Americans to figure the gender out from. Course, since the first name is taken from a popular anime character, I figured the gender would be assumed.

And I am amused that my nonsensical rant as provoked more responses than my original post. I am beginning to think I post mindless nonsense (and given the feedback I get from my friends when I talk for a long time, it is probably true.)

Anyway, about the comic. It is odd. Belkar annoys and disgusts me, but I found the last panel very funny. He is becoming one of those characters I really love to hate.

[Miroku_Sumeragi]

Your name is gender confusing, and so is your avatar. I didn´t even knew there was a gender symbol until you pointed it.

If it annoy you so much, change it.

lol, I am annoyed enough to rant about it. I am not annoyed, enough cuz I am very lazy, to change the sig. Also, because of my personality, I will never change it because you suggested it. :)

[Solara]

Belkar is one of the main characters. He's not going to die, and he's not going to leave the OotS.

Miko probably won't die either - I'll be happy to see her finally get her comeuppance and maybe become slightly more human as a result, but it's equally likely she'll survive, learn nothing from the experience and be kept around for the purpose of being a preachy, officious annoyance in another storyline. (Kind of like Xykon, though he's a much more likeable antagonist for lacking the 'preachy and officious' part.)

Or maybe they'll all have to work together to do something about the next gate, but I might be getting too far into prediction territory here, so I'll stop.

Anyway, back on the original topic, who freakin' cares if it's the guard's blood? (I hope it is, actually, because it's funnier that way, but I'm not going to get all bent out of shape about it if it's not.)

To be honest, I find the act of chopping off a surrendering person's legs and then chasing down and murdering his comrades to be a hell of a lot more disturbing than killing some nameless NPC guard (or several nameless NPC guards) while escaping and leaving a message in blood that might or might not be part of a plan...but I'm willing to bet there wasn't half as much controversy on the boards when he did the former.

[Lady_Orc]

Did anyone else notice that aside from having a gotee, Hinjo has blue hair? :P

Yes - made me think if anime, it did. :)

[theKOT]

Yes - made me think if anime, it did. :)


Gotta have blue hair. Now if only he had a bean-shaped head......

[Eriol]

No one was so horrified by Belkar murdering goblins trying to surrender, or selling teenage girls into slavery, harvesting the kidneys of a goblin who had just HELPED the Order
Point of order: it's probably NOT the goblin who helped them that he harvested the kidneys of. In #104 you can clearly see that the goblin who Elan "intimidated" had on a white shirt, whereas in #107 where Belkar is harvesting, the goblin clearly has a black shirt.

Now Belkar did INTEND to go back and harvest at the end of #104, but Roy was clearly "pushing him along", and so I think the "cramping my style" comment means that he didn't in fact get to harvest that goblin.

[Tycho_Bloodbeard]

First post, long time lurker :)

As a long-ago (not current, though..) D&D player, I can't help but compare Miko to the paladin guy at the Dragon Mountain boxed set...both are LG, jerks, and in general impossible to like unless you have a chip on your shoulder, something to prove and esp. a stick up somewhere. Doesn't mean they are evil or about to lose their paladinhood. Just means they are jerks. Not even Miko's peers like her. Although her actions are in-character (promoting law and fighting evil), it is really hard to like her and her grimness. Has she smiled once on the strip?

Oh Belkar! Though thoroughly evil (as per the creator stated), it won't cease to amaze me the number of fans that try to chalk your antics to "neutralness" and justify you. He hardly needs any justifications other than being Belkar, does he?

I think I'm too old to exclusively like good characters. I wouldn't have allowed Belkar into my old campaign as a PC (too much trouble to have a CE player). However, he's funny as hell. Enough to justify his presence in the OoTS.

Tycho

[Lorde]

First post, long time lurker :)

As a long-ago (not current, though..) D&D player, I can't help but compare Miko to the paladin guy at the Dragon Mountain boxed set...both are LG, jerks, and in general impossible to like unless you have a chip on your shoulder, something to prove and esp. a stick up somewhere. Doesn't mean they are evil or about to lose their paladinhood. Just means they are jerks. Not even Miko's peers like her. Although her actions are in-character (promoting law and fighting evil), it is really hard to like her and her grimness. Has she smiled once on the strip?

Oh Belkar! Though thoroughly evil (as per the creator stated), it won't cease to amaze me the number of fans that try to chalk your antics to "neutralness" and justify you. He hardly needs any justifications other than being Belkar, does he?

I think I'm too old to exclusively like good characters. I wouldn't have allowed Belkar into my old campaign as a PC (too much trouble to have a CE player). However, he's funny as hell. Enough to justify his presence in the OoTS.

Tycho

Miko smiled when Roy apoligized to her, just after he dumped her good.

I imagine after being rejected by her peers, she really wanted some kinda of relationship. Her expression was really nice.

If this will make people better, I think Roy words hurted her more then the fight against the gang.

[Duraska]

For rudeness.

Contrast with the character Cersei Lannister from GRRM's (excellent, IMO) A Song of Ice and Fire series. She's small-minded, harmful to her children, over-proud, self-centered, cruel, mean, heartless, vindictive, stupid . . . I could go on and on.

Her, I wouldn't mind dying a painful death.

Miko? For *rudeness*?

Nah.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque


Silly you!

Don't you realize that when it comes to sin, being slightly rude to people is MASSIVELY more terrible than slaughtering a person, ripping out their guts and smearing them on a wall?

Besides, you're obviously still caught up in that whole "people should be held accountable for their actions" theory. That is soooo 1940's! :)

[sarcasm mode /off]

People will love Belkar until the day that little demon dies (which I hope isn't too far off).

[theKOT]

People will love Belkar until the day that little demon dies (which I hope isn't too far off).



Like many have said, Belkar is enjoyable because it is a comic strip. He balances out the OOTS and provides a good punchline once and again. I don't really care what happens to him, but I'm not hoping for him to die.

[Lady_Orc]

Silly you!

Don't you realize that when it comes to sin, being slightly rude to people is MASSIVELY more terrible than slaughtering a person, ripping out their guts and smearing them on a wall?

Besides, you're obviously still caught up in that whole "people should be held accountable for their actions" theory. That is soooo 1940's! :)

[sarcasm mode /off]

People will love Belkar until the day that little demon dies (which I hope isn't too far off).




Tsk. You fail to make the distinction between the sins/actions of actual people and fictional characters.

In RL, of course ripping somebody's guts out is the worst offence. In a work of fiction such as OOTS - Go Belkar, and death to all overbearing, nasty paladins with sicks up their butts.

In a similar vein, enjoying Tom and Jerry isn't really the same as condoning actual cruelty to animals, nor does enjoying South Park mean that you think it's actually funny when litlte kids get set on fire.

(Dare we hope for an 'Oh my God! They killed Miko!' moment soon, I wonder?

[Lady_Orc]

If this will make people better, I think Roy words hurted her more then the fight against the gang.

Did it ever! Wonderfully satisfying moment that was. *smiles fondly*

[Antina]

...No it doesn't.
While I don't intend to either gross or creep anyone out, I can say from personal experience*, that blood smudged on a surface with fingers does not drip as much as horror movies protray it to.

*I cut myself pretty badly at Thanksgiving and left enough smears and fingerprints on the bathroom cabinets trying to get out the first aid kit to know. Plus, if blood dripped so much, forensic experts wouldn't be able to get fingerprints from blood smears on walls.

I already addressed this two posts above yours. :-)


Hope the thanksgiving-thingy healed up well?

In case of the background-colours: Sorry - I missed that post;
I must have been Coulor-blind ;)

[Vampire_Boy]

Tsk. You fail to make the distinction between the sins/actions of actual people and fictional characters.

Oh, I'm sure there are plenty of people out here who seriously believe that there is no distinction between the two. Or they will simply fail to make the distinction when it suits them and then they can use this kind of reasoning to brand others as puppy-kicking evil.

Hey... actually, that would be Miko's way of reasoning, wouldn't it? ;)

[Lorde]

Did it ever! Wonderfully satisfying moment that was. *smiles fondly*



Lady Orc, I sure can understand your enjoyment of the situation, and your example of stick figures dying was very good (I bet you know the site stickdeath)

But I usually grow attached to whatever characters I see, be iton a cartoon, movie or book. Altought I know they doesn´t exist, I end suffering when they suffer, and being happy with their sucess, I think on psycology this is called projection.

When I see the nameless guard dead, I fell sad for his end. I don´t wander too deep on every disposable NPC I meet, but the feeling of loss, altough very small, is there.

This, of course, will make me always like Miko, because she, altough harsh, is a good person on my book.

Miko is a very valuable char for me because I am fascinated by her resolve. For me, thinking of what odd twists of fate made her end so blunt is a delight, and more I analyse her, more I grow attached.

Making a deep analysis of a strip char may look like a foolish thing to do, but I am sure enjoy doing it. Diferent tunes for diferent people, I guess.

[saraswati]

I think this whole argument about Belkar is pretty interesting.

Yes, we have these neat little boxes in D & D marked "good" and "evil", but PC's, just like real people, really fall along a spectrum of actions and attitudes.

I'm not trying to argue that Belkar is not in the evil category, he clearly is. But he also is many times just a little more exagerrated, a little more along the spectrum, of things that we all do, either as D & D players or in real life. I don't mean that we would all kill people. I mean that sometimes we just want to say "forget roleplaying! I want to level and get more powerful! Run my pretty little chunks of XP! Run!"

Belkar does some things that we would never ever do. But he also exemplifies some pretty basic human traits like selfishness that we all feel and sometimes act on to lesser degrees.

When people identify with Belkar and root for him, it's generally that part they are rooting for. It doesn't make them (me) sick psychopaths.

It's never a black and white world in D & D morality. FOr example, I think that the whole Coup de Grace manouever is pretty evil. Killing something while it is helpless strikes me as dishonorable as well as cruel. I've never allowed myself or any of my players when I am DM to use Coup de Grace without severe consequences (assuming we are playing good alignment). That's just my personal take on it. But I know that it's generally accepted in the D & D world, and clearly we have seen Roy, who is definitely a good aligned character, Coup de Grace.

Yes, killing an innocent guard and writing on the wall in his blood is definitely evil and sick and just plain nasty. But I think Belkar serves a definite purpose in the OOTS, I think he is part of the spectrum, and the world woud be poorer without him. Plus, he really makes me laugh!

I guess I have deep seated emotional issues.

Rock on Giant. This last comic was super fun!

[Duraska]

Lady Orc, I sure can understand your enjoyment of the situation, and your example of stick figures dying was very good (I bet you know the site stickdeath)

But I usually grow attached to whatever characters I see, be iton a cartoon, movie or book. Altought I know they doesn´t exist, I end suffering when they suffer, and being happy with their sucess, I think on psycology this is called projection.

When I see the nameless guard dead, I fell sad for his end. I don´t wander too deep on every disposable NPC I meet, but the feeling of loss, altough very small, is there.

This, of course, will make me always like Miko, because she, altough harsh, is a good person on my book.

Miko is a very valuable char for me because I am fascinated by her resolve. For me, thinking of what odd twists of fate made her end so blunt is a delight, and more I analyse her, more I grow attached.

Making a deep analysis of a strip char may look like a foolish thing to do, but I am sure enjoy doing it. Diferent tunes for diferent people, I guess.


I respect what you said a lot. I too get attached to "fictional" characters. The reason I like Miko so much is the fact that she reminds me of the uncompromising part of myself. The part that is pragmatic and driven towards a goal. Miko does not reflect me perfectly, but I can see a lot of myself in her (both in virtues and faults).

As for Belkar? Well he's just an evil little git! :)

[Lady_Orc]

Lorde, I fully respect it if you and others like Mikor, or hate Belkar, or whichever character you can name. :) The only thing I don't respect is when people try to implicate something about my RL moral values because of my feelings about the characters in a comic/book/movie. I've seen that happen a few times too many, you see.

[Amalthea]

Hope the thanksgiving-thingy healed up well?

In case of the background-colours: Sorry - I missed that post;
I must have been Coulor-blind ;)

No biggie :-)

Thanksgiving wounds are all healed, thanks. I was just nervous to be cooking thanksgiving dinner for my mother-in-law. However it gave me valuable "writing in blood on walls" experience ::)

[VariaVespasa]

Major quibble. I am a guy. My picture has a guy. My gender symbol is a guy. I have no idea why I am referred to as a she, and quite frankly, this mistake annoys me a lot. It's nitpicky but that seems to be the trend here.

Heh, sorry 'bout that. I was going on the name alone. I did so much reading and typing yesterday that I wasnt paying attention to anything other than text at the time. It did occur to me that it might be a mistake, but I was so zoned out on text that I couldnt really remember which symbol was which, and I didnt wanna look and THEN make a mistake, so I just went with the impression from the name. I was sufficiently zoned out that somehow it didnt even occur to me to check my own posts to figure out which sign was which, or to check your avatar for boobs. Anyways, it wasnt intentional. No offense meant.

*Hugs*
Varia

[VariaVespasa]

Incidentally, those "good-aligned" goblin teenagers - if I was playing a moral character who wasn't above some vigilante justice in a 'serious' campaign, as opposed to a slightly self-ironic dungeon crawling scenario like OoTS, I would have brutally killed them on general principle. I mean, they're essentially betraying their parents to certain death because of a teenage rebellion phase? That isn't just the complete antithesis of good on my moral compass, but also, the most despicable sort of betrayal at that.

The were doing the good and right thing, at risk to themselves, and against what they had been taught. But you see betrayal of their families and would kill them for that. So you're saying you rate loyalty to your family more highly than doing what is right, no matter what your family does or how worthless they may be? A mere accidental blood connection over a morale choice? Interesting....
The family version of "My country, right or wrong". It is true that there are worse philosophies. Most of them start with that. :(

*Hugs*
Varia

[evileeyore]

Belkar is one of the main characters. He's not going to die, and he's not going to leave the OotS.Never say never. Especially about a comic written by a crazed maniacal genius that changes the outcomes just keep from mirroring anyone predictions, declarations, or desires.

;) Poke, poke, Rich...


To be honest, I find the act of chopping off a surrendering person's legs and then chasing down and murdering his comrades to be a hell of a lot more disturbing than killing some nameless NPC guard (or several nameless NPC guards) while escaping and leaving a message in blood that might or might not be part of a plan...but I'm willing to bet there wasn't half as much controversy on the boards when he did the former.When did either of those two things happen?

But to whit, no, Belkar's killing of foes and the harvesting of kidneys has never sparked even a percentage of the heated debate the murdering and desecrating of this guard has caused.

However I would guess that the Miko Love-Hate War and the Miko is Better/Worse Than Belkar Political Factions have a lot to do with it. For instance had Miko not been involved, but had it been Hinjo that had apprehended them (and things led to Belkar escaping anyway) there would not be all this ready fuel for the fire.


For tag clearity

[Silivren]

in 115 (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=115)...

[xrestassuredx]

I'm coming into this a bit late (it took me a few days just to read up all the previous discussion), but I don't think this point has been made, unless in the previous comic discussion. Shouldn't the Order have earned some kind of respect from Miko by now? They're placed without guards in "defective" cells, which they never left, and were not trying to escape, yet they're still "filthy honorless criminals"? That's even notwithstanding everything that's gone on before this.

She may or may not be trying to uphold the "law" or the will of her master, but her sense of what is right or good seems limited to her "Detect Evil" skill -- which she still chooses to ignore. If anything, Miko is just plain Lawful Stupid..

[estradling]

I'm coming into this a bit late (it took me a few days just to read up all the previous discussion), but I don't think this point has been made, unless in the previous comic discussion. Shouldn't the Order have earned some kind of respect from Miko by now? They're placed without guards in "defective" cells, which they never left, and were not trying to escape, yet they're still "filthy honorless criminals"? That's even notwithstanding everything that's gone on before this.

She may or may not be trying to uphold the "law" or the will of her master, but her sense of what is right or good seems limited to her "Detect Evil" skill -- which she still chooses to ignore. If anything, Miko is just plain Lawful Stupid..

Miko is a stereotypical Samurai which mean honor is extraordinarily important to her...

Honor has many definitions but one thing that is most common his the power and importance of ones word.

The order gave their word to travel with her to the Azure city. Miko let them travel freely with her on the strength of that promise alone.

Then Roy and the Order changed their mind and rebelled. To Miko this showed that they were dishonorable people. They broke their word. (With the exception of Durkon)

From the time of the Orders smack down by Miko to the prison where she is calling them dishonorable pigs, there has been no chance for the Order to redeem themselves in her eyes. Assuming they even want to or could.

As for her ability to define good and evil, she is doing good as it is defined by her upbringing and culture. Which doesn't necessary mean its nice. I do think she feels that Honor = good and Dishonor = not good and that I don't agree with.

[xrestassuredx]

Miko is a stereotypical Samurai which mean honor is extraordinarily important to her...
I think it's pretty clear that Miko is anything but (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=209) a typical samurai.


I do think she feels that Honor = good and Dishonor = not good and that I don't agree with.
Well, she knows that the Order (sans Belkar) are Good, yes insists on calling them dishonorable, regardless of whatever integrity they show..

[estradling]

I think it's pretty clear that Miko is anything but (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=209) a typical samurai.

Well, she knows that the Order (sans Belkar) are Good, yes insists on calling them dishonorable, regardless of whatever integrity they show..

You missed my point... She has the mindset of a samurai. As the comic you quoted clearly shows is not the samurai class... But she calls herself a samurai and acts like one thus the problems she has with the Order.

And no she doesn't know that they are good... She know that they are non-evil.. A subtle but important difference

[Istielthia]

*snip*
Well, she knows that the Order (sans Belkar) are Good, yes insists on calling them dishonorable, regardless of whatever integrity they show..

Miko doesn't know any of the OoTSers are good, she just knows several of them are not evil. The only member of the party that she can say with any level of certainty is good, is Durkon, and that's only because he serves a good-aligned god, and has, thus far, kept his word to her. There's a pretty big distiction between being "good" and being "not-evil".


Just to reiterate what e said above, since I totally missed when I posted. ;D

[aaronbourque]

Well, she knows that the Order (sans Belkar) are Good, yes insists on calling them dishonorable, regardless of whatever integrity they show..
She knows that they are not Evil, there's a difference. And even if they're Good, they can be dishonorable. Honor is a subset of the ethical axis, not the moral axis.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque

[xrestassuredx]

I stand corrected; I was thinking for some reason that Miko's "Detect Evil" displayed "Good" or "Evil" but, as several people have been so eager to point out, it actually indicated "Not Evil." My mistake (and laziness in not double checking for myself)...



She knows that they are not Evil, there's a difference. And even if they're Good, they can be dishonorable. Honor is a subset of the ethical axis, not the moral axis.
However, to restore context, my comment was in response to the one by "e" that Miko "feels that Honor = good."

Conversely, you could say that Miko should then think not evil = not dishonorable, but let's not bother going there.

All I was trying to say is that the Order have proven themselves to be Good and honorable plenty of times, especially in just the previous strip where they remained in their unlocked, unguarded cells until she returned for them; yet the berating and name-calling continues.

Perhaps Miko also only "thinks" that she should have a certain class feature, and acts accordingly...

[estradling]

All I was trying to say is that the Order have proven themselves to be Good and honorable plenty of times, especially in just the previous strip where they remained in their unlocked, unguarded cells until she returned for them; yet the berating and name-calling continues.

Perhaps Miko also only "thinks" that she should have a certain class feature, and acts accordingly...

Name the good or honorable things that Miko has seen the Order do.

They have no shown any good tendances that aren't completely over run by the non-good as Miko is likely to see it.

They are confessed criminals of a horrible crime... (As Miko sees it)

They work closely with some one who talks about hurting the dirt farmers instead of helping... (Belkar)

After helping the dirt farmers she is given a build for services... Having to be paid to do good (V)

Then they demand that she pay for when they have cart loads of money...

Then the Inn is blown up. Something that the Order had a direct hand in even if Miko is unsure of the details.

Finally they break their word of honor to come and answer for their crime.

I think it is very clear that while the Order had understandable reasons for what they did, they clearly have not established by any means that they are good to Miko. Please remember anyone can do good acts without being a Good alignment. It's only when the majority of the acts are good does the alignment go toward good. So single act or small handful isn't enought to prove anything.

The last one (breaking their word) also shows that they are not honorable (again as Miko sees it)

[The Giant]

The Voice of Mod: The rules are that when the new comic is posted, the discussion from two comics before is locked. So looks like you guys will have to take this to one of the other 47,391 threads discussing Miko's alignment.