-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
"Such a powerful magic user"? Is this "despite the fact that Redcloak was prepared to cast his half of the ritual at Lirian's Gate when he didn't have sixth level spells yet, I'm declaring that you need to be epic-level to cast the arcane half of the ritual" again?
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jasdoif
Consider that Redcloak, foremost agent of the Dark One, is widely held responsible for turning the tables on the Azurites. That under his guidance the hobgoblins went from being pinned in the mountains where they'd been the past thirty years, to conquering the capital city of those who'd been pinning them there. And held on to it for a year.
That's the legacy Gobbotopia was founded on: The Dark One sent a single goblin, which was enough to turn the long-oppressed hobgoblins into conquerors.
I suspect you'd have an extremely difficult time finding a powerful magic user willing to refuse the Dark One (or his visionary Redcloak), who's still in Gobbotopia after all this time.
Emphasis mine, and that's sort of the crux of the issue in my mind. In the stickverse, you don't become a powerful character by sitting around and studying or whatever, you go out and do things. You see the world, participate in events, and otherwise earn your power. Redcloak is a cleric, which means loyalty to his god is literally a job requirement, but a magic user is perfectly capable of saying "screw you, we already have what we need in Gobbotopia, why are we risking blowing up the world?" after traveling around and seeing the world.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Keltest
Redcloak is a cleric, which means loyalty to his god is literally a job requirement, but a magic user is perfectly capable of saying "screw you, we already have what we need in Gobbotopia, why are we risking blowing up the world?" after traveling around and seeing the world.
An arcane caster is also perfectly capable of saying "oh hey, we can get something even better than you already got us? Sign me up!". Redcloak only needs one arcane caster to pull off the Ritual....and I'm reasonably sure Gobbotopia is the best place for him to start looking.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
zimmerwald1915
Because we're not talking about "bad things," we're talking about "blunders," that is, stupid, careless mistakes. And the genocide was completely intentional. The only blunder about it was all the unintended targets.
I'd say that was a pretty big blunder. If V hadn't cast that spell, Girard's gate would have it's full array of defenses, and would have easily kept Tarquin and Co at bay. Then Xykon would've have to take on the full force of it's defenses (Or maybe a bit less, it would've taken some damage from Tarquin), which so far has been the best bet to taking him out. And they likely wouldn't have lost Durkon, which means the whole Godsmoot thing would already be resolved.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kish
"Such a powerful magic user"? Is this "despite the fact that Redcloak was prepared to cast his half of the ritual at Lirian's Gate when he didn't have sixth level spells yet, I'm declaring that you need to be epic-level to cast the arcane half of the ritual" again?
I think so, yeah. I always assumed the Crimson Mantle itself gave Redcloak the divine half in and of itself regardless of his level. And even if you don't consider that, in the same scene with the "Pork!" wizard you cite earlier, Right-Eye says to Redcloak "Besides, you told me we need a high-level arcane spellcaster to fully complete the plan, right?"
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Yeah, it's hard to argue anything BUT V's soul splice deal. It has directly screwed over their chances of defending Girard's gate (leading to Roy destroying it, which may very well be a blunder in itself) and has not one, but TWO more chances to screw them by taking V out of the action at key moments going into the future.
And what do they have to show for the deal? V's marriage was ruined by it and nothing of real value was accomplished while they had the power. The sides are all all down, no up, and it's really BIG downsides.
Arguing that it wasn't a mistake because it was intentional is really weird logic. If I deliberately slice off my own head because it seemed like a good idea at the time, it is still a mistake.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
V's Soul Splice deal ranks pretty highly. I'd say "going off to fight Xykon" too, but if V had played it a bit smarter then a Xykon defeat is not out of the question. So I'm going with "getting the soul splice, then going off to fight Xykon in a stupid manner".
Roy leaving Elan and the gang behind is also up there, as is claiming to be the king of Nowhere. But really, his most stupid moment is fighting Xykon alone.
For Haley I'm tempted to say not checking the bags of treasure; but really not sending the Slyph paralegal away as soon as she was summoned might count; actually, getting in such a bad situation on her hometurf kinda clinches it, however you slice it.
Durkon - maybe trusting Malack? Durkon doesn't make many huge mistakes.
Belkar - picking the fight with the Oracle. Not only is it stupid he's become completely insufferable at this point, it just rises above all previous and future moments of stupidity.
Elan - pushing the rune. Is there really a contest?
For the entire party, it's a toss-up between not knowing Liches have Phylacteries (how does V not know?) and not listening to Belkar about Darkon.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spellbreaker26
For the entire party, it's a toss-up between not knowing Liches have Phylacteries (how does V not know?)
Because undead run off Knowledge (Religion), which we have yet to see any evidence that V put a single skill point into?
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Peelee
Because undead run off Knowledge (Religion), which we have yet to see any evidence that V put a single skill point into?
I'd have thought that was like knowing that dragons breathe fire; phylacteries are the distinctive element of liches. But even if it were otherwise, why didn't at least Durkon know? One of the party being ignorant I could understand. But all six just strained credulity a little bit, which is why I'm putting it as a blunder - insufficient research.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spellbreaker26
I'd have thought that was like knowing that dragons breathe fire; phylacteries are the distinctive element of liches. But even if it were otherwise, why didn't at least Durkon know? One of the party being ignorant I could understand. But all six just strained credulity a little bit, which is why I'm putting it as a blunder - insufficient research.
But not all dragons do breathe fire. I do think its certainly a blunder on Roy's part to go into a fight without knowing anything about his opponent though.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rynjin
Yeah, it's hard to argue anything BUT V's soul splice deal. It has directly screwed over their chances of defending Girard's gate (leading to Roy destroying it, which may very well be a blunder in itself) and has not one, but TWO more chances to screw them by taking V out of the action at key moments going into the future.
And what do they have to show for the deal? V's marriage was ruined by it and nothing of real value was accomplished while they had the power. The sides are all all down, no up, and it's really BIG downsides.
Arguing that it wasn't a mistake because it was intentional is really weird logic. If I deliberately slice off my own head because it seemed like a good idea at the time, it is still a mistake.
Well, they did teleport the Azure city fleet to a livable location and get the party back together, that's something at least.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ruck
I think so, yeah. I always assumed the Crimson Mantle itself gave Redcloak the divine half in and of itself regardless of his level. And even if you don't consider that, in the same scene with the "Pork!" wizard you cite earlier, Right-Eye says to Redcloak "Besides, you told me we need a high-level arcane spellcaster to fully complete the plan, right?"
I think it would be a fairly massive oversight on proto-Redcloak's part if he had said "we need a high-level arcane spellcaster" when he meant "we need an EPIC-level arcane spellcaster." And I would wonder how, in his arguments with his brother, it never occurred to him to say, "We already found an epic-level sorcerer willing to help with the Plan when all the odds said we would live out our lives without ever even meeting one epic-level character! You want to throw him away and look for another one? That's like shredding a winning grand prize lottery ticket in the expectation that you'll buy another one next week!"
That leaves the question of what the subjective term "high-level" means. I think "it means epic-level" is right out, for the reasons I just stated. Qarr pointed out that few wizards make it past 10th level, so I see no reason not to take proto-Redcloak's established level prior to Lirian's Gate being destroyed (able to cast fifth-level spells like Break Enchantment, not able to cast sixth-level spells like Heal) as unambiguously "high-level."
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
V's deal with the devil was made to protect his family from the dragon, and it did precisely that, so I don't see how we can call that a blunder.
Familicide, and trying to tackle Xykon alone, definitely count. For that matter, so does leaving the Azure fleet on a tantrum to live on an island by yourself. Wisdom is not V's strong point, now is it?
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kurald Galain
V's deal with the devil was made to protect his family from the dragon, and it did precisely that, so I don't see how we can call that a blunder.
Familicide, and trying to tackle Xykon alone, definitely count. For that matter, so does leaving the Azure fleet on a tantrum to live on an island by yourself. Wisdom is not V's strong point, now is it?
Ironically I disagree nearly totally.
V was presented with an alternative to personally avenging his family. http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0634.html
He did it the way he did purely for the sake of his ego.
The familicide was a total disproportionate retribution, I agree.
But as for tackling Xykon, that was actually doing the right thing. Loads of arcane power - kill big bad. Had V brought along some of the gang and done it a bit more strategically he might have actually won.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spellbreaker26
Ironically I disagree nearly totally.
V was presented with an alternative to personally avenging his family.
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0634.html
He did it the way he did purely for the sake of his ego.
The familicide was a total disproportionate retribution, I agree.
But as for tackling Xykon, that was actually doing the right thing. Loads of arcane power - kill big bad. Had V brought along some of the gang and done it a bit more strategically he might have actually won.
V did it for ego, yes, but that doesn't change that it was the only way he could have saved his family (even if he didn't know).
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Peelee
V did it for ego, yes, but that doesn't change that it was the only way he could have saved his family (even if he didn't know).
It was - emphatically - not the only way he could have saved his family. He could have taken the other suggestion to mail his head to Durkon and get him to send a message to V's master.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spellbreaker26
It was - emphatically - not the only way he could have saved his family. He could have taken the other suggestion to mail his head to Durkon and get him to send a message to V's master.
Which certainly wouldn't have happened in time given that resurrection has a significant time requirement. I want to say there was also some logistical issue of Durkon not actually being there at the time, but I could be misremembering.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spellbreaker26
It was - emphatically - not the only way he could have saved his family. He could have taken the other suggestion to mail his head to Durkon and get him to send a message to V's master.
Indeed. Look into the casting time for the required spell, and look into where Durkon was at the time.
The alternative plan only needed to sound like it would work. It didn't need to actually work. Which is good, because it wouldn't have.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Peelee
Indeed. Look into the casting time for the required spell, and look into where Durkon was at the time.
The alternative plan only needed to sound like it would work. It didn't need to actually work. Which is good, because it wouldn't have.
It's worth noting that Durkon was stated to have a scroll of resurrection. Apparently, scrolls take the same amount of time to cast as the spell does normally, but being only a standard action seems to be a common idea. That, and the comic has deviated from strict rules interpretations before (See: Shrink Item used on statue-fied Haley, when such might be impossible given a strict reading of the spells in question.)
Spoiler: Shrink Item Reasoning
Show
Flesh to Stone targets a creature, and specifically states that the creature does not die as a result of its effects. If the creature is not dead, they are not a corpse and thus are not an object that can be targeted by Shrink Item. That, and the fact that Shrink Item has a clause about the object in question being "nonmagical" which might cause issues.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RatElemental
It's worth noting that Durkon was stated to have a scroll of resurrection. Apparently, scrolls take the same amount of time to cast as the spell does normally, but being only a standard action seems to be a common idea. That, and the comic has deviated from strict rules interpretations before (See: Shrink Item used on statue-fied Haley, when such might be impossible given a strict reading of the spells in question.)
Spoiler: Shrink Item Reasoning
Show
Flesh to Stone targets a creature, and specifically states that the creature does not die as a result of its effects. If the creature is not dead, they are not a corpse and thus are not an object that can be targeted by Shrink Item. That, and the fact that Shrink Item has a clause about the object in question being "nonmagical" which might cause issues.
True, but we can also surmise that Durkon didn't have a scroll of Resurrection, since a scroll requires no material components, and when Roy was rez'd, Durkon needed the diamond. So there's also that.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RatElemental
It's worth noting that Durkon was stated to have a scroll of resurrection. [/SPOILER]
Actually, look again. The fiend stated that Durkon (who, again, wasn't at the fleet at all at the time) had a scroll of Unspecified-Ten-Minute-Casting-Time-Spell. The fiends' proposed plan involved two spells with ten-minute casting times, Sending and Resurrection. Vaarsuvius did not know Resurrection had a ten-minute casting time and was angered when they learned that later, so presumably the ten-minute casting time spell under discussion was Sending.
And even if you handwave that they meant he had scrolls of both spells even though they unambiguously said "a scroll," he still wasn't at the fleet.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spellbreaker26
It was - emphatically - not the only way he could have saved his family. He could have taken the other suggestion to mail his head to Durkon and get him to send a message to V's master.
Mailing hir head was a much too convoluted plan that was extremely likely to end up with his family's souls trapped for eons and V dead. The plan could fail for many reasons, such as Durkon not being precisely where V would guess he was, which so happened to be the case.
The IFCC mentioned that plan as a way of needling V's already eroding sanity, not because anyone but a fool would believe such advice. It is almost as if one should ask if the devil might ever lie.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Well, I think there was more to it than just needling Vaarsuvius' sanity. They made the choice, in good (er, bad) faith, that they'd rather pact with fiends than hand off the problem to someone else; the important thing about the alternate plan is that they didn't realize it wouldn't work when they made their decision.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kish
Well, I think there was more to it than just needling Vaarsuvius' sanity. They made the choice, in good (er, bad) faith, that they'd rather pact with fiends than hand off the problem to someone else; the important thing about the alternate plan is that they didn't realize it wouldn't work when they made their decision.
Let's be precise: V did not know at the time the proposed plan was exactly 100% likely to fail.
When it comes to accepting a plan as plausible, it is a necessary but not sufficient condition to be unable to instantly prove it would not work.
The bottom line is that V was unassailably correct that s/he "had no choice" in terms of saving hir children from a terrible fate. Whether V came to the correct conclusion due to good or bad reasoning or both is a rich topic for speculation.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Familicide.
For a more group-wide mistake, I'll say "Ever trusting Malack". Dude was a LIZARD VAMPIRE WORKING WITH YOUR ENEMY. Just WHY!?!
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Snails
Let's be precise: V did not know at the time the proposed plan was exactly 100% likely to fail.
When it comes to accepting a plan as plausible, it is a necessary but not sufficient condition to be unable to instantly prove it would not work.
The bottom line is that V was unassailably correct that s/he "had no choice" in terms of saving hir children from a terrible fate. Whether V came to the correct conclusion due to good or bad reasoning or both is a rich topic for speculation.
"For all the wrong reasons". It's right there in the prophecy (and in the name of #634).
In my opinion it's very clear that V took the deal ultimately for the power, not to save their children. V's rationalization didn't stand up to scrutiny - not when the archfiends presented what V thought was a viable alternative, and much less in the later scene where Inkyrius tells them to drop the soul splice now that their children are safe, and V refuses. Note also that when the archfiends tell V the alternative plan and point out that, if V took the deal, it would be entirely for selfish reasons, V doesn't contradict them. V doesn't even frown. V's been figured out.
Note also that Qarr later points out that V was too tired and shaken to think straight and to notice that the archfiends had been observing them and specifically trying to get them, so it's perfectly logical to extend that to V's appraisal of the plan and to conclude that V was indeed fooled and believed there *was* an alternative.
But even if V managed to realize the plan wouldn't work, in my mind it's made clear that V had also come to realize that it didn't matter: they would have turned down any alternatives that didn't result in their wielding ultimate arcane power personally.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hroşila
...so it's perfectly logical to extend that to V's appraisal of the plan and to conclude that V was indeed fooled and believed there *was* an alternative.
Citation, please.
I do not disagree that V was sufficiently seduced by the wrong reasons, that other questions were probably secondary. I see not an iota of evidence that V believed that the stupid plan was something other than stupid.
IMO, the stupidity of the plan is simply a way of further humiliating V. As I see it, V is not going to agree or disagree with any plan. Whether it is a brilliant plan that would likely work or a crazy plan that would likely fail, V's probable response would be the same.
The Giant could have arranged for a plan to be put forth that would actually work, and would seem to be likely to work to both V and the audience. Do you all think he did not consider doing so? IMO, the Giant chose otherwise because the quality of the plan was not important.
If you accept that the quality of the alternative plan is not very important to V's decision, then the choice of the quality of the plan is purely a matter of inflicting a psychological effect on V, from the POV of the fiends.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
It did seem likely to work to the audience, as demonstrated by people regularly stating emphatically that it would have worked (most recently, in this thread). And whether it seemed likely to work to Vaarsuvius, well...clearly, they thought it was at least plausible.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kish
It
did seem likely to work to the audience, as demonstrated by people regularly stating emphatically that it would have worked (most recently, in this thread). And whether it seemed likely to work to Vaarsuvius, well...
clearly, they thought it was at least plausible.
Members of the audience often post "insightful" things like Malack and Tarquin are probably not evil because they are so likable and their lies almost make a little bit of sense so those lies are not really lies. (Yes, I exaggerate. But only a little.)
Perhaps I am just in the minority here, because I never thought the plan was plausible. At least I saw the fiends offer as a solid choice that would very very likely save hir children from a terrible fate (even if there were surely future negative repercussions). In the context of having a bird in the hand, where I would put the bar for plausible is higher than a "well maybe it could work, if I start with the winning assumption that the devil would not lie to me about any important detail in a very crazy sounding plan".
Furthermore, I believe you are quoting the Giant in a misleading fashion. The Giant is referring to Aarindarius (V's mentor), with respect to his sufficient arcane competence to successfully intervene against the ABG. I always accepted at face value that V could accurately enough judge whether that specific fact fell within the realm of plausible. For purposes of this discussion, I think that point is unimportant because I was always okay with assuming Aarindarius might succeed if communicated to effectively. My doubts about the plan stem mainly from doubts whether "communicated to effectively" would be achieved within the necessary time frame.
-
Re: The Stick's worst blunder: vote now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Snails
Furthermore, I believe you are quoting the Giant in a misleading fashion. The Giant is referring to Aarindarius (V's mentor), with respect to his sufficient arcane competence to successfully intervene against the ABG. I always accepted at face value that V could accurately enough judge whether that specific fact fell within the realm of plausible. For purposes of this discussion, I think that point is unimportant because I was always okay with assuming Aarindarius might succeed if communicated to effectively. My doubts about the plan stem mainly from doubts whether "communicated to effectively" would be achieved within the necessary time frame.
Question - The Giant says in there that V thinking it was plausible was all that mattered. If V knew he had no way to communicate to Aarindarius, then why would it matter?