Number of Character Appearances V

[Fawkes]

Sorry for the wait, I was busy with school and work. About "dwarf tossers", I personally prefer simple and "straightforward" names, it's makes it easier to indexing them and finding them. So, that's all.

I accept your decision, though I disagree with it. Welcome back.

I'm still confused about what's actually being counted for Durkon and the vampire. Can you clear it up and add the explanation to the FAQ? When you have time.

[martianmister]

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/shows...&postcount=579

[martianmister]

Updated through 1011
Durkon (as vampire), Hel (as proxy), High Priestess of Freya, High Priestess of Odin, High Priestess of Skadi, High Priestess of Thor, High Priest of Balder, High Priest of Hel (as Durkon), High Priest of Sunna, Roy

[martianmister]

Updated through 1012
Bandana, Blackwing, Bloodfeast (as lizard), Bragi, Durkon (as vampire), Elan, Gontor (as vampire) (gaseous) (+1), Haley, Hel (as proxy) (+1), Hermod (+1), High Priestess of Freya, High Priestess of Frigg, High Priestess of Hermod (possessed) (+1), High Priestess of Odin (possessed) (+1), High Priestess of Sif, High Priestess of Thor, High Priest of Balder, High Priest of Hel (as Durkon), High Priest of Mani, Iounn, Little Whiskers, Loki (as proxy), Mr. Scruffy, Odin, Roy (+1), Sigrun, Surtur, Thrym, Vaarsuvius

[AGD]

So... do these comics count as appearances for Malack:
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0725.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0750.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0758.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0810.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0848.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0864.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0868.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0877.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0887.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0966.html

Because by your logic, they should only count as "barbarian shaman", since Malack is the name of the Vampire, that possesed the body of the barbarian shaman, who had a different name, when he was alive.

[rodneyAnonymous]

Unlike Durkon and the vampire spirit, we only ever see one "version" of Malack.

[137beth]

Hurray, Martianmister is back!

I do think I agree with ADG, though. But it isn't my thread.

[Cizak]

Unlike Durkon and the vampire spirit, we only ever see one "version" of Malack.

We do see the corpse of Barbarian Lizardmen Shaman.

[ti'esar]

I feel like that argument is striving for consistency at the expense of common sense.

...though it does occur to me that we have multiple Draketooth corpses whose "appearances" are only posthumous.

[AGD]

I feel like that argument is striving for consistency at the expense of common sense.

It isn't worse than not counting Strips like this as an appearance for HPoH. Martianmisters Argument was, that it was only Durkons body, that is controlled by HPoH and that would be, like counting a mind-controlled Belkar as an appearance for Nale. But this is a pretty different situation, since HPoH isn't only controlling Durkons body, but his consciousness is also IN that Body and that makes his body at the moment just as much his body in my opinion and as it seems also in the opinion of most other users. I used Malack to point the absurdity out.

I think, that sounded harsher, than it was meant. I thank MM for her work with this Thread, but I don't find her argument convincing.

[Emanick]

I feel like that argument is striving for consistency at the expense of common sense.

...though it does occur to me that we have multiple Draketooth corpses whose "appearances" are only posthumous.

I don't think common sense merits being called "common sense" if it requires you to be inconsistent.

[137beth]

I don't think common sense merits being called "common sense" if it requires you to be inconsistent.

Or if it isn't the same from person to person.

[ti'esar]

I don't agree with the way appearances for the High Priest of Hel are being determined either. But "Lizardfolk Barbarian Shaman" is not a character. He has no narrative presence, and I believed we have word of Giant that his personality went dormant a long time ago. We didn't even know how vampires worked until some time after Malack's destruction. I think it's silly to retroactively count all of Malack's appearances as appearances for this non-character just to be consistent with how the thread is approaching the HPoH and Durkon.

[Bird]

I am quite glad that you are well, martianmister! Welcome back.

Sorry for the wait, I was busy with school and work. About "dwarf tossers", I personally prefer simple and "straightforward" names, it's makes it easier to indexing them and finding them. So, that's all.

I'll readily concede that the naming of these bit characters isn't a big deal. However, out of curiosity--do you feel that this thread operates on a consensus basis, as with other curated threads? I feel that there may be misunderstandings because different posters have different expectations of how decisions are reached.

This may also have implications for the ongoing vampire discussion.

[AGD]

I don't agree with the way appearances for the High Priest of Hel are being determined either. But "Lizardfolk Barbarian Shaman" is not a character. He has no narrative presence, and I believed we have word of Giant that his personality went dormant a long time ago. We didn't even know how vampires worked until some time after Malack's destruction. I think it's silly to retroactively count all of Malack's appearances as appearances for this non-character just to be consistent with how the thread is approaching the HPoH and Durkon.

Why exactly are you arguing against including "Barbarian Shaman", when you know, that this isn't what I want.

My Point isn't "Barbarian Shaman should be included to be consistent", but "If we exclude this appearances for HPoH, we would also have to exclude this appearances for Malack. If you see, how silly that would be, than you must also see, how silly it is, to exclude this appearances as appearances for HPoH."

So could you stop arguing against a point, that I am not trying to make. Maybe I worded myself badly, but I thought it was obvious, that I never wanted to make a case for including "Barbarian Shaman" as a character. Okay I didn't really said that in my first post, but I thought it was obious. I apologize for not being clear enough.

[ti'esar]

I'm arguing against it because it's what you proposed. Don't set up strawman arguments if you don't want them to be discussed.

[rodneyAnonymous]

I do agree that most appearances of the vampire after Malack killed Durkon should count as HPOH appearances, and only "scenes inside his head" where we see Durkon restrained should count as Durkon appearances.

It's not the same as a mind control spell.

[AGD]

I want it discussed. I want to discuss, why we should treat one character different than another character in the same situation. I used that "strawmen argument" as a comparison to the HPoH-Situation, but you argue against it isolated from the HPoH-Situation.

[rodneyAnonymous]

It was not clear that you want to discuss the Durkon and vampire appearances, your post is 100% about Malack.

[Fawkes]

I do agree that most appearances of the vampire after Malack killed Durkon should count as HPOH appearances, and only "scenes inside his head" where we see Durkon restrained should count as Durkon appearances.

It's not the same as a mind control spell.

I'm also of a mind that the dwarf vampire who's been with the party since they left the Western Continent isn't Durkon anymore, it's the HPOH, and should be counted as such. However, he's taken on Durkon's form, and thus is a representation of Durkon. Following Wrecan's precedence of Nale's Elan disguise counting as an appearance of Elan, HPOH's Durkon form should be an appearance of Durkon.

[rodneyAnonymous]

I think that precedent is mistaken. It should be listed as a Nale appearance, possibly with a note about being in disguise as Elan.

(By the way, I agree that's perfectly analogous to the vampire being disguised as Durkon. It's currently listed the other way around.)

[Gift Jeraff]

Regardless of the Durkon act, it would still be counted as an appearance for Durkon because it's his corpse.

[rodneyAnonymous]

Nobody misunderstands that logic.

[Fawkes]

I think that precedent is mistaken. It should be listed as a Nale appearance, possibly with a note about being in disguise as Elan.

I don't disagree, but I think we're well past the statute of limitations on that one.

[ti'esar]

Comic 1013: Bandana Secundus, Blackwing, Bloodfeast the Extreme-inator, Durkon Thundershield, Gontor Hammerfel, Little Whiskers, Mr Scruffy, Vaarsuvius

[137beth]

That should be Bloodfeast the Extreme-inator (as Lizard). Also, I don't see Durkon in 1013

[ti'esar]

Huh. Even with full conscious awareness of who Gontor is, and despite not having been confused by the last strip, it looks like subconsciously I still thought Durkon must have been in there somewhere.

I didn't bother to list alterations, since they're pretty obvious - they would also include "Gontor (as vampire)".

[Emanick]

Since we list both High Priest of Hel and Durkon Thundershield whenever the HPoH appears, shouldn't we also count this as an appearance for a "Priest of Hel" character or something?

[Fawkes]

Since we list both High Priest of Hel and Durkon Thundershield whenever the HPoH appears, shouldn't we also count this as an appearance for a "Priest of Hel" character or something?

We should probably sort something out for this, but its not an independent vampire priest. It's a Thrall of HPoH (hence 'Master').

We still don't really know how vampire thralls work in OotS. We know it's not the original soul, but we don't know if the new vampire soul is inhabiting, or if they're simply puppets of the vampire who made them.

What did we count for Durkula when he was Malack's thrall?

[ti'esar]

What did we count for Durkula when he was Malack's thrall?

I believe we just counted him as Durkon, since we didn't know there was anybody else inside.

I don't think 'Gontor Hammerhel' is in mindless-thrall mode, though. He's acting too intelligent compared to the childlike thrall-"Durkon", and it's hard to see why he would even need to be in the first place, since the spirit inside him would have also come from Hel.