-
OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Huh. So I guess we can write out "dramatic alignment shift."
Though it remains an open question as to why she wanted to know Durkon's location, whether for reconciliation or for revenge -- possible she asked for it and Loki told her how to find him with the instructions "go kill him".
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
OK, so she's still a cleric of Loki, but no explanation as to how she Turned rather than Rebuked Undead.
Edit: also, not outright stated, but I think this page bolsters the case that she's unaware of Durkon's vampirization.
I love the baby just grabbing for the helmet.
GW
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Heh. I was excited when the calendar post went up, and my prayers were answered a few minutes later!
As I suspected, Hilgya is here for some sort of revenge on Durkon, not to save the world-- and, as I correctly surmised, Loki nudged her in that direction because of her own vengeance trip, not to stop the Godsmoot, which might be a violation of the rules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
AstralFire
Though it remains an open question as to why she wanted to know Durkon's location -- possible she asked for it and Loki told her where to find him with the instructions "go kill him".
I think it's pretty clear why she wanted Durkon's location, or have you not noticed the baby she's been carrying?
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
I just love V's comment.
Also who is this guardian Belkar talks about, or is that slang ?
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Now, I was very sure that the Baby was Durkon's, but, now, after this in-universe lampshading of how sure it was that it was so, I'm actually starting to consider that it might turn out to not be so...
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
She seems awfully calm about running into the Order again. I guess someone's in for a surprise.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fyraltari
Also who is this guardian Belkar talks about, or is that slang ?
It feels like an euphemism for sex, given that it is Belkar. In any case, I've never heard of it before, if it is indeed slang.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Felius
this in-universe lampshading
All lampshades are in-universe. That's what makes them lampshades.
GW
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Hmm. Durkula isn't protected by the Godsmoot rules, but I assume the gods have their own sets of rules. These probably include restrictions on interference using clerics, but Loki can get away with this as a standard "answering a prayer for knowledge".
Curious though that the rules that made Loki act in a roundabout way such as this did not affect Hel's sending Durkula to invade the Dwarves' place and slaughter their cleric. Or perhaps they did, allowing Loki to send a cleric in response, and he chose her because he thought it would be funny.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ruck
I think it's pretty clear why she wanted Durkon's location, or have you not noticed the baby she's been carrying?
'Why' meaning 'what did she want from him that made her pray to Loki every night to know his location'?
She could be the one who wants to kill him, or she could have simply been instructed to do so. I suspect the former, but we'll see.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Grey_Wolf_c
OK, so she's still a cleric of Loki, but no explanation as to how she Turned rather than Rebuked Undead.
GW
Are we now sure that Loki is evil? Maybe he is the one neutral...
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Yeah, belkar said durkon got laid, which was a bit unlikely. Short, bearded, smelly men are not so hot.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Synesthesy
Are we now sure that Loki is evil? Maybe he is the one neutral...
Again: SoD talks about Evil gods defending the Dark One, and shows Loki defending the Dark One. At this point, I would say it is more likely that Loki is an Evil god who hates undead and therefore grants turning rather than rebuking. Lots of gods, even Evil ones, are known to have issues with undead and thus do not allow their clergy to command them - and I can easily imagine that Hel might have had a bit of a hand in ensuring she was the only undead deity of the northern pantheon.
Grey Wolf
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
AstralFire
Huh. So I guess we can write out "dramatic alignment shift."
Though it remains an open question as to why she wanted to know Durkon's location, whether for reconciliation or for revenge -- possible she asked for it and Loki told her how to find him with the instructions "go kill him".
Count me in the "kill him" as a turn of phrase camp.
Also, I think I may have just started my own camp,
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
"Slipped one past the guardian"
This made me laugh for 45 seconds straight.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fyraltari
I just love V's comment.
Also who is this guardian Belkar talks about, or is that slang ?
It's not slang, surprisingly, but a reference to any number of old tales where the knight has to get past the guardian to get the girl. Most famous example currently would be the subversion in the first Shrek movie, which ends up going straight (so, a double subversion, I guess).
And yes, V knows how reality works rather well.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Peelee
Count me in the "kill him" as a turn of phrase camp.
Also, I think I may have just started my own camp,
What kind of turn of phrase would that be?
...Not including the French one.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
I always thought of Hilgya as chaotic neutral--committed to personal freedom. Not sure if Loki would be Chaotic Neutral of Chaotic Evil in this world, but clerics are allowed to be one "step" apart in alignment from their god so either way a non-evil cleric of Loki is perfectly legit.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fyraltari
I just love V's comment.
Also who is this guardian Belkar talks about, or is that slang ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Grey_Wolf_c
It feels like an euphemism for sex, given that it is Belkar. In any case, I've never heard of it before, if it is indeed slang.
"Slipping one past the goalie" is a euphemism for impregnating a woman. (I think it maybe originated from Seinfeld?) I'm assuming hockey doesn't exist in OOTS-world, so "guardian" is the universe-appropriate substitute.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
AstralFire
'Why' meaning 'what did she want from him that made her pray to Loki every night to know his location'?
She could be the one who wants to kill him, or she could have simply been instructed to do so. I suspect the former, but we'll see.
Well, if he's her baby-daddy, as all evidence seems to suggest, she could want a lot of things from him-- although killing him for knocking her up and then sending her away certainly seems more than plausible to me.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2.5 cats
I always thought of Hilgya as chaotic neutral--committed to personal freedom. Not sure if Loki would be Chaotic Neutral of Chaotic Evil in this world, but clerics are allowed to be one "step" apart in alignment from their god so either way a non-evil cleric of Loki is perfectly legit.
Sure, but an Evil god doesn't grant turning by default, not even to its non-Evil clerics. Only Neutral gods allow their clerics to pick.
GW
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
I'm sure she's here for revenge at this point.
Which is funny, because I'm sure if she were to ask Durkon to help raise the baby he would, Cause duty.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2.5 cats
I always thought of Hilgya as chaotic neutral--committed to personal freedom. Not sure if Loki would be Chaotic Neutral of Chaotic Evil in this world, but clerics are allowed to be one "step" apart in alignment from their god so either way a non-evil cleric of Loki is perfectly legit.
D&D metaphysics says Loki has to be Neutral or Good for one of his clerics to Turn Undead. As yet, we don't know if the Giant is using that rule or decided to do something different.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
AstralFire
What kind of turn of phrase would that be?
...Not including the French one.
I take it you've never been married.:smalltongue:
Maybe "hyperbole" would have been better?
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
I love how many punchlines are basically direct jabs at forum users.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fyraltari
Also who is this guardian Belkar talks about, or is that slang ?
It's a reference to "slipped one past the goalie," which is slang for "impregnated your girl despite using protection." Well, in Canada, anyway.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Something something...probability...drama...alley...copper-piece harlot...something something. Ah, poor V. Logic so rarely triumphs in the world of storytelling.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
I still think Hilgya is CN, but that doesn't preclude revenge.
I think what this strip does tell us is that Rich doesn't intend to clear up the mystery of Hilgya's motivations at this time - it's a deliberate ambiguity.
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
I am loving this vampire arc!
-
Re: OOTS #1106 - The Discussion Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ruck
Well, if he's her baby-daddy, as all evidence seems to suggest, she could want a lot of things from him-- although killing him for knocking her up and then sending her away certainly seems more than plausible to me.
Or, for the hypocrisy of lecturing her on duty, while not doing his duty to either A) avoid impregnating her or B) check to see if he has and then do his duty to his child...