Why is V constantly benched?

[DiamondHooHaMan]

Animals who are perfectly sapient. Animals who, despite their evil alignment, have been shown to be capable of emotions up to and including love. And, while I'm at it, I'd like to point out that humans are technically animals as well.

I'm getting off topic again, sorry.

ah wouldn't worry about it, this things been off topic for a while.

but you are exactly right. Dragons are as sapient as any other race, but the fact that they are listed as always evil is the reason the Order attacked. Red Cloaks entire motivation is pretty much explaining why this is a bad thing.

[Liliet]

You know, I don't like the idea of some powers being labeled as story-breaking. Ever since I got introduced to the concept, I had in mind a good counter for it.

One of my favorite books has all major characters, including the protagonist,
1) being able to fly as easily as walk;
2) never needing money because they can create anything they need out of thin air, except for food, but it's not hard to get it;
3) having very high positions in their societies;
4) being quite capable Reality Warpers, albeit in different ways;
5) being able to communicate telepatically with emphatical images, not words;
6) having teleport powers.
Oh, and resurrection is avaliable in that universe too, restrictions on its use are mostly ethical/cultural.

It's a trilogy (not just one book!), and it's very, very interesting. NEITHER of these powers is story-breaking. No, not even reality warping and resurrection. Seriously. There is story to tell even with them.



Yes, V is constantly getting benched. Yes, on meta-level one of the reasons is that ve is too powerful. But in-universe there are other good reasons for this: vir arrogance and over-reliance on arcane powers, for one. Ve still has vir powers, they still are important to the story, but there is a story because ve cannot use them to full extent because of personal reasons.

That's a different way of handling "story-breaking powers" than in the book I mentioned above. But it's no less valid. The story isn't broken in the end.

And however much I like V and would like to see more of vir, I accept that ve brought it all upon virself.

[The Giant]

You know, I don't like the idea of some powers being labeled as story-breaking. Ever since I got introduced to the concept, I had in mind a good counter for it.

One of my favorite books has all major characters, including the protagonist,
1) being able to fly as easily as walk;
2) never needing money because they can create anything they need out of thin air, except for food, but it's not hard to get it;
3) having very high positions in their societies;
4) being quite capable Reality Warpers, albeit in different ways;
5) being able to communicate telepatically with emphatical images, not words;
6) having teleport powers.
Oh, and resurrection is avaliable in that universe too, restrictions on its use are mostly ethical/cultural.

It's a trilogy (not just one book!), and it's very, very interesting. NEITHER of these powers is story-breaking. No, not even reality warping and resurrection. Seriously. There is story to tell even with them.

There is a huge difference between EVERY main character having such powers, and ONLY ONE main character in a group of supposed equals having such powers. There is no power—no power in the world—that is story-breaking all by itself, especially if the author has the freedom to detail the costs and drawbacks of that power (a luxury I don't have with OOTS).

Superman by himself is not a problem. Superman as part of the Justice League is not a problem. Superman as a member of an ensemble FBI team IS a problem, because sometimes Agent Fred is supposed to be the one to catch the serial killer. You end up resorting to a LOT of kryptonite.

That said, I'd ask that we please drop the, "Was the young black dragon morally justified in attacking the OOTS?" derail. It's off-topic in multiple ways.

[Liliet]

There is a huge difference between EVERY main character having such powers, and ONLY ONE main character in a group of supposed equals having such powers. There is no power—no power in the world—that is story-breaking all by itself, especially if the author has the freedom to detail the costs and drawbacks of that power (a luxury I don't have with OOTS).

Superman by himself is not a problem. Superman as part of the Justice League is not a problem. Superman as a member of an ensemble FBI team IS a problem, because sometimes Agent Fred is supposed to be the one to catch the serial killer. You end up resorting to a LOT of kryptonite.

Well, I did say that I appreciate the way you made V's power not story-breaking - as in, it hasn't broken the story yet and isn't going to in any foreseeable moment (=

My objection was more to generalisation... and probably a bit off-topic, for which I apologise ><

[The Giant]

Well, I did say that I appreciate the way you made V's power not story-breaking - as in, it hasn't broken the story yet and isn't going to in any foreseeable moment (=

My objection was more to generalisation... and probably a bit off-topic, for which I apologise ><

I didn't read the whole thread, I only came in to deal with reported derailment. Your comment was more on-topic than the previous twenty posts, so don't apologize.

[Psyren]

It's a trilogy (not just one book!), and it's very, very interesting. NEITHER of these powers is story-breaking. No, not even reality warping and resurrection. Seriously. There is story to tell even with them.

Which book series is that?

Superman by himself is not a problem. Superman as part of the Justice League is not a problem. Superman as a member of an ensemble FBI team IS a problem, because sometimes Agent Fred is supposed to be the one to catch the serial killer. You end up resorting to a LOT of kryptonite.

Heck, I would say that even in the League he's a problem. A lot of stories have him just plain absent, because not sidelining him would solve the plot in very short order. Not to mention what would happen if he started policing Gotham, Metro City etc.

[lio45]

Is it totally unthinkable that both sides were correct in their reactions, given their respective understandings of property rights?

That was exactly my point with the forest dwelling creature (moose with no deed attacking the property owner intruder) example...

The difference in intellect that zimmerwald thinks all important isn't actually such a major point -- a sentient moose who doesn't speak Common could very well be expected to behave the same way.




[Edited after reading the rest of the thread to remove the parts of the post that could've caused the off-topic conversation to continue.]

[Liliet]

Which book series is that?

It's in Russian and has never been translated into English... I think. Russian fantasy is very... different from American in prevalent tropes, I have noticed.
It's "Танцующая с Ауте" / "Tantsuyushchaia s Aute" / "Dancer with Aute" by Anastasia Parfenova (Анастасия Парфенова).

...why can not everyone know Russian like everyone knows English?

Heck, I would say that even in the League he's a problem. A lot of stories have him just plain absent, because not sidelining him would solve the plot in very short order. Not to mention what would happen if he started policing Gotham, Metro City etc.

Hah. I have never read Superman comics, but what little I know of him makes me wonder just how can there still be crime on Earth...

[Koo Rehtorb]

Look, marking the limits of one's property might be the smart thing to do, in that it will deter people from trespassing, but it is not an obligation incumbent upon anybody.

Hence the point of my analogy. Entering a cave is more similar to crossing an invisible boundary in the forest than entering a home because one of the defining features of a home is that it is clearly a home.

[Chantelune]

Don't see the point of discussing the black dragon stuff further. the Giant asked for it to stop and as much as zimmerwald1915 is saying people are "whitewashing" V and the order's action, he's "blackwashing" V and the order just as much.

This discussion is headed to a wall, full steam.

[zimmerwald1915]

Don't see the point of discussing the black dragon stuff further.

The point, originally, was to establish that V is more a liability than an asset to the Order, and thus ought not to be in it at all. Other facts, including V's outstanding debt to the IFCC, support this case better, but they're also rather obvious and were thus never contested.

[Liliet]

The point, originally, was to establish that V is more a liability than an asset to the Order, and thus ought not to be in it at all. Other facts, including V's outstanding debt to the IFCC, support this case better, but they're also rather obvious and were thus never contested.

Khm.
Spiked Tentacles of Doom and other on-screen and off-screen moments of fighting in Dungeon Crawlin' Fools.
Namely, defeating Zz'dtri and aiding Elan with illusions against Thog.
Fireball at the ogres.
Azure city siege and holding the breach until out of spells.
Directing Elan's illusions again.
Teleporting the Azure city refugees to the island.
Saving O-Chul.

And that's only on-screen.

[lio45]

The point, originally, was to establish that V is more a liability than an asset to the Order, and thus ought not to be in it at all.

If that's the point, then I don't believe you'll find many to agree with you on that. V is one of the more powerful PCs, and definitely an asset.

In fact the reason V is "constantly benched" is that V is so much of an asset, it makes for a more interesting story when the Order is stripped of that too-strong-an-asset character.

To recycle the Giant's words and analogy, you're trying to argue that Superman in an ensemble FBI team would be more a liability than an asset to the FBI team, and that Agent Fred and his buddies would be better off without Superman as a teammate... Sorry to disagree, but I do.

[zimmerwald1915]

Khm.
Spiked Tentacles of Doom and other on-screen and off-screen moments of fighting in Dungeon Crawlin' Fools.
Namely, defeating Zz'dtri and aiding Elan with illusions against Thog.
Fireball at the ogres.
Azure city siege and holding the breach until out of spells.
Directing Elan's illusions again.
Teleporting the Azure city refugees to the island.
Saving O-Chul.

And that's only on-screen.

Key words being "more liability than asset". Balance those actions against owing time to the IFCC that the Directors can claim at any given moment and the practical consequences of familicide with respect to the Gate quest (setting aside discussion with respect to any other aspect of that action) and you end up with a substantial deficit.

[Chantelune]

yeah, and owing time to the IFCC is not a convenient and reasonable way to get V out of the action without having her get "lost on the way" or incapacitated over and over again ?

Fact is, V is at a level were she can deal with most encounter by herself if she actually stayed in action. It has nothing to do with her personality, just the way D&D is. Wizard sucks the first level, but after that, they're just that powerful.

You can argue all you want, but most of the occurences where V was a liability was because if she was given free reign, she would have cast a few choice spells and ruined the plot by getting rid of the obstacles within a few rounds.

[zimmerwald1915]

You can argue all you want, but most of the occurences where V was a liability was because if she was given free reign, she would have cast a few choice spells and ruined the plot by getting rid of the obstacles within a few rounds.

I think we're talking past each other. I've already taken it as a given that V is "benched" when she ought to be useful, and am speculating as to what the other characters might do when they realize that.

[Imgran]

I have no comment on what the Order should or shouldn't have done. My problem is with how the audience lauds or excuses their actions.

It takes a special, strange type of insanity, or an utter inability either to compartmentalize or to suspend disbelief, to apply Western postmodern morality to a roughly medieval era fantasy RPG.

[Scow2]

It takes a special, strange type of insanity, or an utter inability either to compartmentalize or to suspend disbelief, to apply Western postmodern morality to a roughly medieval era fantasy RPG.

And yet, D&D is largely written with that Western Postmodern Morality in mind with the sole exception of "Killing things is Fun!"

[Imgran]

And as I point out in my post above, to go armed is also to court reasonable violence in self-defense. This is also a fact of the world.

Holy hell, no, it is NOT. BEING armed does not constitute a direct threat, and without a direct threat, there is no responsibility for the perception of danger in the other person's mind.

If I have a weapon that I am legally entitled to and allowed to carry, and am in a place I have a reasonable expectation that I am allowed to be, and you blow me away because the fact that I am armed presents a threat to you, guess what? YOU JUST MURDERED ME!!!!

Law after law, case after case, virtually regardless of jurisdiction or predominate religion throughout the civilized world you will find that the law agrees with that premise. Anywhere where an armed populace is possible the presence of a weapon constitutes no threat at all, and even in places where being armed is illegal by statute, more than possession is required to invoke self defense laws.

The CAPABILITY for damage does not AND CANNOT, under any concievable legal or moral structure, constitute a threat on its own. Otherwise you might as well arrest the dragon for having fangs and claws!

[Imgran]

And yet, D&D is largely written with that Western Postmodern Morality in mind with the sole exception of "Killing things is Fun!"

Written with it in mind? Perhaps, at least to the point that it's a source of inspiration and a way we instinctively fill in the gaps in worldbuilding. That still doesn't entitle anyone to apply the entire postmodern cultural mindset into a world in which it is a horrible fit, point blank, without even thinking about the implications.

[Bulldog Psion]

V is an asset and a liability, just like the rest of the Order. Sure, they might have less problems without Familicide killing off the Draketooths. But then again, they also would have had less problems if Roy hadn't jumped on a zombie dragon and then gotten killed, if Elan didn't have an identical evil twin brother, if Haley didn't get aphasia...

[sarez]

I like V as a character very much, s/he's got a lot of depth and is actually dealing with the aftermath of several layers of 'not good/powerful enough'

1. being defeated in arcane power by Xkyon even after being buffed beyond belief.

2. being intellectually defeated by the IFCC

3. being morally/spiritually defeated by own worst desires and being all evil when spliced.

4. being functionally defeated by being wrenched off by the IFCC whist the rest of the gang are in it deep.

And basically Xykon and Redcloak are of a power level that surely will require the OotS to have V back in before the end?
..but for now I think benched is fine considering how much spotlight s/he has had recently.

[AKA_Bait]

It takes a special, strange type of insanity, or an utter inability either to compartmentalize or to suspend disbelief, to apply Western postmodern morality to a roughly medieval era fantasy RPG.

Shouldn't anyone reading this comic (or any work of fiction) be allowed to bring whatever moral system they like to it? D&D, and works based on it, has an alignment system that is arguably medieval for game play but I don't see how that leads to the conclusion that a reader or player analyzing the world in a different manner is somehow wrong. Relatedly, you may wish to review the flaming section of this post.

[Liliet]

Well, murdering the Draketooths was a major screw-up, but isn't it sort of balanced out (from the "liability-asset", not moral point of view) by teleporting the fleet and rescuing O-Chul?

And I don't know how "being less useful than ve could be" makes V a liability. Ve's still useful, just less useful. Owing to IFCC just makes vir not do something ve might, but if ve weren't there in the first place, ve wouldn't do it anyway!

[Bulldog Psion]

Well, murdering the Draketooths was a major screw-up, but isn't it sort of balanced out (from the "liability-asset", not moral point of view) by teleporting the fleet and rescuing O-Chul?

And I don't know how "being less useful than ve could be" makes V a liability. Ve's still useful, just less useful. Owing to IFCC just makes vir not do something ve might, but if ve weren't there in the first place, ve wouldn't do it anyway!

Yes, this was pretty much my point. Everyone in the comic has done "liability" things, yet they're also assets to the party. Kind of how things work out generally, isn't it?

[AKA_Bait]

Yes, this was pretty much my point. Everyone in the comic has done "liability" things, yet they're also assets to the party. Kind of how things work out generally, isn't it?

While true, I think there is an argument to be made regarding proportionality of liability things to positive things. Haley's getting aphasia, for example, was certainly inconvenient for the party but it didn't have a significant effect on the quest to destroy Xykon. V's familicide spell, on the other hand, had the effect of leaving one of the gates entirely undefended.

[zimmerwald1915]

The CAPABILITY for damage does not AND CANNOT, under any concievable legal or moral structure, constitute a threat on its own. Otherwise you might as well arrest the dragon for having fangs and claws!

Good thing I established further elements that would let the dragon suspect a threat to itself then

But apparently this discussion is over.

[Liliet]

Good thing I established further elements that would let the dragon suspect a threat to itself then

But apparently this discussion is over.

Well, this is offtopic and morally justified topics are banned. I would say yes, it is over.

And by the way, now is V's big chance to prove virself an asset. Especially if ve has the guts to tell Roy and Haley all of vir Familicide story and its consequences.

I hope ve does.

[zimmerwald1915]

And by the way, now is V's big chance to prove virself an asset. Especially if ve has the guts to tell Roy and Haley all of vir Familicide story and its consequences.

I hope ve does.

I don't think those are helpful terms for V to be thinking in. She was thinking in terms of proving herself an [the?] asset throughout the last book, and we saw where that led. Roy can think in such terms about his subordinatesn though he tends not to because he considers them friends.

[Psyren]

Did anyone find that War & XPs quote? *waits impatiently for books to arrive*

It's in Russian and has never been translated into English... I think. Russian fantasy is very... different from American in prevalent tropes, I have noticed.
It's "Танцующая с Ауте" / "Tantsuyushchaia s Aute" / "Dancer with Aute" by Anastasia Parfenova (Анастасия Парфенова).

...why can not everyone know Russian like everyone knows English?

It sounds awesome and I wish I spoke Russian now!