Will Julia return?

[Caractacus]

Well, the "express words" of the Oath are:

Spoiler

Show

I, Eugene Greenhilt, swear on the blood that flows from my wounds that I shall not rest, in this life or any other, until I or my heirs have enacted horrible vengeance on those that have slighted me, named here as Xykon the Sorcerer.

There is nothing there that implies that you only have to try to fulfill the Oath in order to get your afterlife.

What I find interesting is that the Cause->Effect element literally interpreted means that the consequences of the Oath not being fulfilled redound solely upon Eugene, not upon his heirs... At least, that is what this text we are given says. While there may be more to it than this, it is not made clear here.

Now, of course, as a separate issue from the Oath itself, any Lawful heir that does nothing to help their parent/relative in this situation will find themselves under heavy scrutiny, but surely there is 'wiggle room' here, too? I mean, if you are a Commoner with no class levels and yet Lawful, what are you supposed to do in order to avoid being excluded from the afterlife for 'not trying'?

I think that Eugene has not been entirely clear or fair to Roy when explaining how the Oath works - at least when we compare it to the spoilered text of the Oath above - as I seem to recall that he suggested or implied that the Oath would fall upon Roy and Julia in the sense of 'inherit the effects of the oath not being fulfilled', when in fact as I see it Roy has to help only because he is properly Lawful, and he cannot leave someone in such a situation without trying...especially a parent!

As far as I can see, according to the spoilered text (sorry about this, those of you not wanting to read it - I suggest you get a copy of SoD ASAP), Julia need not bother as she is not Lawful (okay, it isn't especially Good either, to leave dad in such a situation, but this is perhaps less important here - especially if doesn't do Evil stuff so her True Neutral status can continue), all it means is that Eugene would still continue to suffer the effects of the Oath not being fulfilled (assuming Roy failed or until Roy succeeded)...

How do others read this?

[Steward]

Now, of course, as a separate issue from the Oath itself, any Lawful heir that does nothing to help their parent/relative in this situation will find themselves under heavy scrutiny, but surely there is 'wiggle room' here, too? I mean, if you are a Commoner with no class levels and yet Lawful, what are you supposed to do in order to avoid being excluded from the afterlife for 'not trying'?

I would agree. As someone mentioned above, they didn't keep out Eugene's other son, and I'm not sure that Lawful Good afterlives would necessarily hold that the oath should punish not just Eugene but all of his descendants. (I mean, really, Xykon is not only immortal, his power will continue to grow (especially if he controls the Snarl). If Roy doesn't defeat him soon, it's quite possible that no one ever will. I'd like to think that Lawful Good deities would demonstrate some amount of compassion if you can't attack a being that may well be more powerful than the gods.

[Dr.Epic]

Wait... what? Did you seriously just call George Lucas a good storyteller?

I mean... compared to M. Night Shyamalan or Uwe Boll... ok... but in general?

Ha! I get it. Because he did the prequels and Crystal Skull.

I mean it's not like George Lucas did the original Star Wars trilogy, the first three Indiana Jones films or Willow. To hell with the past right.
Seriously, the guy was once a good storyteller, and jokes about the prequels stinking are in no short supply nowadays.

[Qwertystop]

I wonder about that. After all, Roy's little brother was unaffected by the Blood Oath. This may be because he was a child, but we have no proof of that.

Roy's little brother died before Eugene did. Therefore, the Oath had not yet gone from "Eugene" to "all descendants of Eugene".

[FujinAkari]

I mean it's not like George Lucas did the original Star Wars trilogy, the first three Indiana Jones films or Willow. To hell with the past right.
Seriously, the guy was once a good storyteller, and jokes about the prequels stinking are in no short supply nowadays.

See, thats the thing though. Lucas -isn't- a good story teller. He is good at pacing, and he has a great imagination for world-building, but the actual movies he makes are scattershot.

I never saw Willow, but the original trilogy isn't a shining example of storytelling. Characterization? Yeah, the characterization is beautiful, the settings are creative and inspired, but the actual plot is standard. Boy on a farm loses parents, joins army, becomes hero.

I mention Shamalyn because Lucas also seems to like the "What a twist!" design, with Leia and Vadar being related to Luke... and like M. Night, Lucas was amazing when he first came out, but his formulaic writing quickly began to wear on fans.

Also, while Lucas conceived of Indy, Spielberg was more responsible for its success, so I don't think you can point to it as an example of Lucas' great storytelling :P

[AgentofOdd]

This is only kind of related to the topic, but if Julia were to join the Order, how exactly would exp be divided? Would she get less for not doing as much, would she get more so that she could catch up to the party, or possibly an even split?

[The Pilgrim]

This is only kind of related to the topic, but if Julia were to join the Order, how exactly would exp be divided? Would she get less for not doing as much, would she get more so that she could catch up to the party, or possibly an even split?

If I'm not mistaken, in D&D, XP are always divided equally among everybody who contributed in the slaying of whatever creature yelded them (no matter how little said contribution was).

[Steward]

If I'm not mistaken, in D&D, XP are always divided equally among everybody who contributed in the slaying of whatever creature yelded them (no matter how little said contribution was).

Would that mean that if the Order fought an opponent that was too weak to give them decent exp, Julia would get very little points even though that enemy would ordinarily be very challenging to her?

[FujinAkari]

Would that mean that if the Order fought an opponent that was too weak to give them decent exp, Julia would get very little points even though that enemy would ordinarily be very challenging to her?

D&D uses ECL (Effective Class Level) if I remember correctly, and so it doesn't matter how difficult the enemy would be for Julia, it is cake for the party.

I don't believe Julia would get bonus experience, but since it takes 18,000 experience to go from lvl 17 to level 18, but only 4,000 to go from level 3 to level 4, she would still get levels faster than the others...

[KillianHawkeye]

If I'm not mistaken, in D&D, XP are always divided equally among everybody who contributed in the slaying of whatever creature yelded them (no matter how little said contribution was).

Actually, every person in the party gets an equal share of the XP, but the value of each share is determined by the individual level of the character compared to the Challenge Rating of the defeated monsters. Thus, lower level characters actually get more XP for defeating the same foes, allowing them to catch up.

Additionally, according to the XP charts in the DMG, you don't get any experience for defeating a monster that is 8 or more CR higher or lower than your level, so it's unlikely that Julia would get any experience at all if she suddenly begin traveling with the OOTS because she is too low of a level to meaningfully contribute.

[Steward]

So I guess it wouldn't be possible for Julia to show up at the final battle, throw a pebble or something at Xykon, and then run and hide, enabling her to gain hundreds of thousands of XP when Xykon is actually destroyed?

[MagusBloodsoak]

So I guess it wouldn't be possible for Julia to show up at the final battle, throw a pebble or something at Xykon, and then run and hide, enabling her to gain hundreds of thousands of XP when Xykon is actually destroyed?

Can't gain more than 1 level at a time, even with a billion XP

[Steward]

What? That's totally unreasonable. So if Julia gained 1 billion xp, she would only level up once and... what? Could she burn the rest making magic items? Or is it all just wasted effort?

[KillianHawkeye]

You'd stop 1 xp short of the next level.

[mrmcfatty]

its just a way to stop something like that from happening in a real game (granted a DM that power leveled like that might have some other issues)

it wouldnt be fair for player A to fight all these battles to get to level X while player B does one damage to one enemy one time, and reaches level X.

I dont think that shes coming back but if she did then they would need to level her pretty quick, if she joined and had a few battles like against the slavers then she might get enough levels to do something(most likely something small but hey, you live with what you get)

[Steward]

Oh, that seems fair now. Thanks for the explanation!

[AgentofOdd]

Ah, I see. Thanks for the explanation folks.

[Dr.Epic]

See, thats the thing though. Lucas -isn't- a good story teller. He is good at pacing, and he has a great imagination for world-building, but the actual movies he makes are scattershot.

I never saw Willow, but the original trilogy isn't a shining example of storytelling. Characterization? Yeah, the characterization is beautiful, the settings are creative and inspired, but the actual plot is standard. Boy on a farm loses parents, joins army, becomes hero.

I mention Shamalyn because Lucas also seems to like the "What a twist!" design, with Leia and Vadar being related to Luke... and like M. Night, Lucas was amazing when he first came out, but his formulaic writing quickly began to wear on fans.

Also, while Lucas conceived of Indy, Spielberg was more responsible for its success, so I don't think you can point to it as an example of Lucas' great storytelling :P

You realize those are all elements of a story: pace, setting, characters. There are other aspects to telling a story than just plot. You want to say he's not good with plot fine, but don't belittle him as a storyteller because of that. Your reason for him not being a great story teller is the plot is archetypal. Really, your breaking the first film down into a very basic story, and you can do that with anything: overgeneralize it to the bear essentials. Besides, if you really stand by the poor plot claim, Lucas must have told that story pretty well to make it what many people claim as one of the best sci-fi/fantasy stories of all time.

And as for Willow and Indiana Jones, Willow is amazing and shows how Lucas was at some point a great film maker. And your reason for Indiana Jones, you can't discredit the guy because someone else helped him with it.

[VanBuren]

It's worth noting that the movie was meant to be that way. Lucas was deliberately creating a Hero's Journey plot, and I think that's what the movie certainly called for.

[The Pilgrim]

The best that can be said about Lucas is that he was great at paying people to make films about ideas he had ripped from somewhere else; "Star Wars" is basically Hero's Journey in Space. The Star Wars Prequels makes me wonder how much I should thank God for all the Executive Meddling in the original triology, when Lucas lacked the money to force the filmmakers to shove it.

About Indiana Jones, to claim that Lucas had any positive influence in the franchise, beyond paying the bills, is laughable. Lucas conceived Indy as a James-Bond type of character and film. It was Spielberg who turned him into a proper adventurer of the pulp-era genre. Lucas finally managed to pull his own concept of the character in Indy 4 and we all know how that ended up.

So, basically, he had some great ideas (which is no little merit, I must concede), and was smart enough to let the grown ups develope them into great films. In the 90's, he got an attack of Narcissism and decided that he should show everybody how much a genius he is at storytelling and directing. And we all know the results.

[VanBuren]

The best that can be said about Lucas is that he was great at paying people to make films about ideas he had ripped from somewhere else; "Star Wars" is basically Hero's Journey in Space.

That might be the weakest accusation I've ever seen against Lucas. Taking points off for using the monomyth? Do you really want to go down that path? Because in that case, Ender's Game is a complete ripoff as well.

[The Pilgrim]

Well, George Lucas himself acknowleded to have ripped Joseph Campbell's work.

Anyway, despite the harshness of my initial statement, in my previous post I already conceded a big merit to Lucas: He was great at coming up with great concepts and ideas, and then in gathering the right team of people to turn them into great works. And, gosh, he was good at it! That's how his studio became the source of some of the most iconic fantasy/adventure films that all of us who were childs in the 80's treasure in a warm spot of our heart.

Then, in the 90's, he felt the necessity to prove what he was not: a great director and storyteller. With rather mediocre results.

Anyway, since I suppose we shouldn't hijack this thread into a Lucas' flame, I'll not speak any further, as I think I've made my position clear enough.

[Acero]

Well, if it's a non-lawful afterlife they might simply not care if she says "well yeah, I swore this once, but I think I will just break my word"

I'd assume blood oaths would prevent acceptance into an afterlife you'd want to be in. I don't see an Evil person swearing one on his deathbed to prevent becoming a lemur.

[Red XIV]

About Indiana Jones, to claim that Lucas had any positive influence in the franchise, beyond paying the bills, is laughable. Lucas conceived Indy as a James-Bond type of character and film. It was Spielberg who turned him into a proper adventurer of the pulp-era genre. Lucas finally managed to pull his own concept of the character in Indy 4 and we all know how that ended up.

Spielberg was the director of Indy 4, just like he was for the other three.

Also, in Raiders of the Lost Arc, Spielberg originally wanted the Gestapo agent to be a cyborg with transforming weapon arm. That's something so absurd it would've ruined the whole movie, and it was Lucas who talked him out of it.

[FujinAkari]

Also, in Raiders of the Lost Arc, Spielberg originally wanted the Gestapo agent to be a cyborg with transforming weapon arm. That's something so absurd it would've ruined the whole movie, and it was Lucas who talked him out of it.

Citation Needed.

The original screenplay DID have that in there, but Lawrence Kasdan wrote the original screenplay.