So, Malack...

[Domino Quartz]

Here are The Giant's personal definitions of Neutral (or at least what they were 8 years ago).

In order to be Neutral you need to either a.) commit no Good or Evil acts at all, or b.) commit a more-or-less equal number of Good and Evil acts.

I would say that Gannji and Enor fit somewhere between definitions (a) and (b).
However, we don't have any evidence that Malack fits either of those definitions, because we haven't seen him commit any Good acts, and there have already been some good arguments for his being evil (more or less actively participating in the administration of an Evil empire without objecting, drinking the blood of "technically legally guilty" people who may or may not actually be morally guilty, etc.).

[The_Tentacle]

I used to think that Malack was neutral, but since he started doing all this stuff, he became evil in my eyes. Maybe not Evil, but at least evil.

If he were neutral, he would probably just retreat back to Tarquin and friends in gaseous form instead of doing this "war of attrition".

Also, I wouldn't be that surprised if something like Malack haven eaten his tribe comes out, and that he has carried the guilt everywhere. He may even be building the Empire in their memory.

[Incom]

I'm sure someone could write a fairly lengthy post about the parallels between T+M, and Xykon and RC.

[Paseo H]

I'm sure someone could write a fairly lengthy post about the parallels between T+M, and Xykon and RC.

And when you consider that Malack is over 200 years old, while Tarquin has lived a normal lifespan, perhaps this is a case of an undead secretly masterminding a powerful dupe, reversing Redcloak secretly masterminding Xykon (at least in his mind).

Similarly, Tarquin and Xykon have no qualms about displays of pure, sickening evil (again, I put the 'light show' up their with the 'bouncy ball'), while Malack and Redcloak seem more restrained and pragmatic in their evil acts.

[Warren Dew]

We've discussed killing and resurrecting Malak. Durkon offered that.

Malack's reply:

"I had a different name when I was alive -- 200 years ago. I was the ignorant barbarian shaman of a tribe that no longer exists.

Bringing me back to life is a complicated way of annihilating the person I am today. Save your diamond dust and stake me instead."

===

I'm not sure what to think of that response. What do you, fellow readers, think of his response to the desire, expressed by many here and by Durkon, to return him to the world of the living?

I think it's difficult to interpret within the strict confines of the D&D alignment system.

Early in this arc, Tarquin talked about being outside the confines of the artificial alignment system. While that was unconvincing coming from Tarquin, I think Malack may be a good example.

"Hey guys, I know you all love oppressing the masses, but I think it's going to come back to bite us. We should tone it down, like, a lot."
"Huh. Well, he is the one with the gigantic Wisdom score."

He has not done this ...

I don't think we know that Malack has not done this.

[Paseo H]

I don't think we know that Malack has not done this.

Even if he did, toned back oppression is still oppression.

[Math_Mage]

I don't think we know that Malack has not done this.

We don't know for certain that Malack has not previously protested the cruel policies of Tarquin's empire, but his placid acceptance of them, and use of them as self-justification, suggest otherwise. Just because one position is not absolutely certain, and the other is not absolutely disproven, does not mean they are equally likely; it is very unlikely that Malack has ever been dismayed by Tarquin's 'justice', let alone expressed or acted on said dismay.

[Guancyto]

I don't think we know that Malack has not done this.

Consider what would have resulted had he done so.

He would have

a) been listened to, in which case things wouldn't be so bad as they are now
b) not been listened to, in which case there would be more friction between him and the other five

Empire is brutal as ****, and Malack gets along swimmingly with his allies.

I realize there's a long and cherished tradition in D&D of writing Neutral on the character sheets of very-clearly-Evil characters just because people don't like writing that four-letter word on their sheets. Something about the long and cherished tradition of Evil characters being goofy caricatures that you could do bad things to and remain Good, as opposed to the clearly more nuanced Chaotic Neutral character who really does all the same things.

But really, this is frigging absurd.

[hamishspence]

I was under the impression that the two alignment focused books were propaganda. And "maligned intelligence" leaves a lot open to interpretation.

That came from Complete Divine, not BoVD or BoED.

"Malign intelligence" might leave a little less, but I really don't think Rich is going with the "you die and a demon sets up shop in your old house" concept of vampirism.

Maybe not. Still, there's a certain amount of precedent for it in D&D. That said, some vampires are portrayed as being without souls, yet seeking to get them back- Ravinder Darkmantle, in the Crimson Death quest in Book of Lairs, a 2nd ed book.

[Feddlefew]

That came from Complete Divine, not BoVD or BoED.

Okay. Does it actually define what a the intelligence is?

[hamishspence]

Nope- but Libris Mortis does mention "dark spirits" that can enter dead bodies and turn them into undead. Still doesn't explain their precise nature.

[0datdude0]

Random question but what is this guys level? Lizardfolk are supposed to be 2 levels of humanoid and a +1 level adjustment. Add on the +8 from being a vampire and the fact he can cast harm he should be like on the lines of level 22.

[Tragak]

Consider what would have resulted had he done so.

He would have

a) been listened to, in which case things wouldn't be so bad as they are now
b) not been listened to, in which case there would be more friction between him and the other five

Empire is brutal as ****, and Malack gets along swimmingly with his allies.

I realize there's a long and cherished tradition in D&D of writing Neutral on the character sheets of very-clearly-Evil characters just because people don't like writing that four-letter word on their sheets. Something about the long and cherished tradition of Evil characters being goofy caricatures that you could do bad things to and remain Good, as opposed to the clearly more nuanced Chaotic Neutral character who really does all the same things.

But really, this is frigging absurd.

+1 +1 +1 +1 +1

[Warren Dew]

We don't know for certain that Malack has not previously protested the cruel policies of Tarquin's empire, but his placid acceptance of them, and use of them as self-justification, suggest otherwise.

I don't agree. His acceptance of the current conditions could equally well suggest that the current policies are in fact the toned down ones from after Tarquin accepted Malack's suggestions, and Tarquin's original policy plans were even worse.

[pendell]

I propose that for the sake of judging Malack's alignment, we should go off of in-comic evidence on the assumption that Rich Burlew will provide us all significant information for the purpose. He's not done revealing information yet, of course.

What I have seen is as follows:
1) Associates with Tarquin (evil)
2) Is certainly complicit in Tarquin's schemes, which no doubt meant the death of the original Tyrinar (evil)
2) Attempted to feed innocent Elan to a dragon (evil)
3) Attempted to vamp Belkar (evil)
4) Drinks only the blood of condemned criminals (not-evil)
5) Refused to assault Mister Scruffy as he has no quarrel with him (not evil)
6) Has not initiated any of Tarquin's gratuitously evil acts on panel (such as the light show) nor has he assisted Tarquin in them. He has not , however, attempted to stop Tarquin from doing so (evil).
7) Has explained to Durkon that he finds certain things distasteful (not evil).
8) Assisted an LG cleric with spell research specifically useful against the undead (not evil).

On the basis of on-panel evidence, I believe the strongest argument is for a low-end evil in the <10 kilonazi range. The second strongest argument is for a dark gray neutral.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Barsoom]

I propose that for the sake of judging Malack's alignment, we should go off of in-comic evidence on the assumption that Rich Burlew will provide us all significant information for the purpose. He's not done revealing information yet, of course.

What I have seen is as follows:
1) Associates with Tarquin (evil)
2) Is certainly complicit in Tarquin's schemes, which no doubt meant the death of the original Tyrinar (evil)
2) Attempted to feed innocent Elan to a dragon (evil)
3) Attempted to vamp Belkar (evil)
4) Drinks only the blood of condemned criminals (not-evil) Actually, this is Lawful, and provides no evidence on the good-evil scale
5) Refused to assault Mister Scruffy as he has no quarrel with him (not evil) Pragmatic. Again, no evidence on the good-evil scale. Merely not murdering someone at random doesn't make one non-evil
6) Has not initiated any of Tarquin's gratuitously evil acts on panel (such as the light show) nor has he assisted Tarquin in them. He has not , however, attempted to stop Tarquin from doing so (evil).
7) Has explained to Durkon that he finds certain things distasteful (not evil).
8) Assisted an LG cleric with spell research specifically useful against the undead (not evil).

On the basis of on-panel evidence, I believe the strongest argument is for a low-end evil in the <10 kilonazi range. The second strongest argument is for a dark gray neutral.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Comments inline. I believe Malack is evil, and the few non-evil things he does (not even good things, just non-evil!) are not nearly enough to push him into Neutral.

[pendell]

Thinking about this ... maybe non-evil acts really aren't that useful for judging alignment. After all, even the most reprehensible villain must do a number of non-evil acts during the day. That's especially true if they are not society's rulers -- they must at least pretend to be good or they'll be murdered, punished , or otherwise booted from the "game" of life.

So what is the true measure of a character? Perhaps it is a question of what they do when A) a "good" or non-evil act is against their own best interest and B) there is no prospect of being caught and punished.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Math_Mage]

I don't agree. His acceptance of the current conditions could equally well suggest that the current policies are in fact the toned down ones from after Tarquin accepted Malack's suggestions, and Tarquin's original policy plans were even worse.

That would still indicate that Malack is fine with the current regime, which is not acceptable. Also, your use of the descriptor "equally well" is absurd.

[Zmeoaice]

That would still indicate that Malack is fine with the current regime, which is not acceptable. Also, your use of the descriptor "equally well" is absurd.

Perhaps if he wants to keep it that way, but what's the alternative? If he rebels against the regime, he'll be killed, and if he sits out nothing will change. If the Empire of Blood does fall, the Western Continent will just fall into chaos and bloodshed. The EoB provides stability and order in an otherwise unstable environment.

[hamishspence]

Now we know just what Malack's long term plans are (and they involve sacrificing a thousand people every day he's in power) I guess that settles that.

[pendell]

DING DING DING! This debate is OVAH! Malack is confirmed as lawful evil -- and not just a little lawful evil. If anything, he's more evil than Tarquin, since he plans to sacrifice a thousand victims a day to Nergal. Inventing something more efficient than the arena -- like a gas chamber?

At any rate, Malack is now a greater evil than Tarquin and must be stopped if at all possible. He's also revealed as a very long-range planner. Which you would expect from an immortal.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Barsoom]

"thousand will be sacrificed to Nergal's glory each day in an orderly regime of destruction ... developing some sort of special chamber to make the process more efficient"

That's all-caps EVIL in the mega-Nazi range.

[Gift Jeraff]

No, guys, the sacrifices would totally be morally justi*shot*

[CoffeeIncluded]

Oh god, can you imagine if he met Xykon?! Or rather, will quite possibly meet...

But yeah, that was a pretty fast leap across the evil line.

[Guancyto]

Perhaps if he wants to keep it that way, but what's the alternative? If he rebels against the regime, he'll be killed, and if he sits out nothing will change. If the Empire of Blood does fall, the Western Continent will just fall into chaos and bloodshed. The EoB provides stability and order in an otherwise unstable environment.

Even if that were true (it isn't), that would not make it anything but Evil. (If you want to say that makes it Lawful Evil, oh good, that's supported by every description of Lawful Evil that has ever been written. But I don't feel like quibbling about Law and Chaos because they're so tangential to reality and poorly defined that such a discussion would be pointless and uninteresting.)

There's a certain point at which you have enough influence and power that even inaction becomes complicity. Malack has been there for thirty years; he got in on the ground floor, he's been involved all the way. He is the Inner Circle. If he wants to say "I want to be the power behind the throne in a more benevolent kingdom that the people rebel to join," he's got enough pull that he could totally swing that, and we'd be having a very lively and interesting discussion as to whether he were Neutral or Evil because he'd still be helping the other five in their distinctly-Evil plan.

But that's not what he does. At very best he doesn't seem to care. He's not going to eat a baby on-panel for you just so you can know for certain because it's not his style, but that doesn't make him any less Evil.

(Also, I would say that only drinking the blood of condemned criminals in a justice system with a 100% conviction rate that you helped set up is just as Evil as draining them dry yourself. It's the sort of technicality that is textbook, textbook Lawful Evil.)

Edit: Ninja'd by the Giant, of all people! I'll be.

I guess... that's about the closest thing to eating a baby on-panel that we can hope for.

[Kish]

Perhaps if he wants to keep it that way, but what's the alternative? If he rebels against the regime, he'll be killed, and if he sits out nothing will change. If the Empire of Blood does fall, the Western Continent will just fall into chaos and bloodshed. The EoB provides stability and order in an otherwise unstable environment.

Not only are you reading a different Malack and Tarquin relationship than I am (and was even before the latest comic went up), you're reading a different Western Continent than I am.

The Empire of Blood provides chaos and bloodshed, on a massive scale.

[Zmeoaice]

DING DING DING! This debate is OVAH! Malack is confirmed as lawful evil -- and not just a little lawful evil. If anything, he's more evil than Tarquin, since he plans to sacrifice a thousand victims a day to Nergal. Inventing something more efficient than the arena -- like a gas chamber?

Probably not as evil as Tarquin. Tarquin's kills are slow and painful (burning people to death, making them fight as gladiators) while Malack views killing people as merely sending to another plane of existence.

But yeah, the only way he could not be evil at this point is if the sacrifices were willing. He probably isn't going to achieve "willing" participants without brainwashing the next generation after Tarquin's death, which doesn't really count.

Not only are you reading a different Malack and Tarquin relationship than I am (and was even before the latest comic went up), you're reading a different Western Continent than I am.

The Empire of Blood provides chaos and bloodshed, on a massive scale.

Bloodshed yes, chaos, no. This was written before 875, so yea. Without the EoB there would be a power vacuum and other warlords would be fighting for control, causing as much destruction if not more.

[pendell]

Given Malack's intent to build an orderly realm of destruction and Tarquin's willing participation in this scheme, I would seriously consider banding together with Nale against Tarquin. Problem: Can't trust Nale, as he's literally a backstabber.

Maybe there's some way to get Xykon to kill them all for us...?

Not only are you reading a different Malack and Tarquin relationship than I am (and was even before the latest comic went up), you're reading a different Western Continent than I am.

The Empire of Blood provides chaos and bloodshed, on a massive scale.

Agree with Kish. It's plausible for an LG character to willingly participate in an all-caps LAWFUL small font evil regime, because a society which allows most of its people to get on with ordinary lives while ruthlessly punishing offenders is far better than chaos.

But the ultimate plan of the EOB isn't that. It's a literal evil empire of the sort .. well ... Malack sounds a lot like Moloch and the city of Carthage, which was reputed* to practice child sacrifice on an industrial scale.

If so... the world cannot bear the weight of such evil. Such a regime must be destroyed even if it brings Dark Ages to the world lasting ten thousand years. Many Conan the Barbarian tales had just such stories.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

* The history of those tales is debatable. But I'm comparing the EOB to the Carthage and Moloch of myth, not the Carthage of history. -- BDP.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[CoffeeIncluded]

Given Malack's intent to build an orderly realm of destruction and Tarquin's willing participation in this scheme, I would seriously consider banding together with Nale against Tarquin. Problem: Can't trust Nale, as he's literally a backstabber.

Maybe there's some way to get Xykon to kill them all for us...?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Careful what you wish for, Pendell--you just might get it.

[Math_Mage]

Probably not as evil as Tarquin. Tarquin's kills are slow and painful (burning people to death, making them fight as gladiators) while Malack views killing people as merely sending to another plane of existence.

But yeah, the only way he could not be evil at this point is if the sacrifices were willing. He probably isn't going to achieve willing participants without brainwashing the next generation after Tarquin's death.

Which would be even more Evil...