SOD spoilers: Would Right-Eye's way of life been any better than current Gobbotopia?

[Keltest]

The goblin village borders human civilization. Canada borders the United States.

Canada and the US are somewhat larger than villages.

[thereaper]

I was referring to nondescript locations in both countries near each other on the borders.

But again, it doesn't matter. The fact that the goblin village survived as long as it did makes the point for me.

[Reddish Mage]

Another example of typical adventurers:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0357.html

Again, the village was not defenseless. There's nothing to say Right-Eye, his family and his progeny could handle the random adventurer aspect of stick-world.

The existence of murder-happy adventuring groups of all alignments is surely a plague upon the stickverse. They exist to remind us players about that it is not uncommon to play D&D as flippant sadistic-psychopaths without much self-awareness, but they do exist to justify Redcloak's way nor his evil.

The cosmic joke is that goblins were literally created to provide chunks of xp for clerics. That itself provides a lot of sympathy for Redcloak choosing to rebel and force change. However, it is also clear (or Rich is trying to be at least without hammering it home like a Legend of Korra season finale) that Redcloak is evil. The narrative is clearly and purposely giving us a situation in which we see that Redcloaks choices are choices, they are not forced, the sacrifices he makes are not inevitable.

Right-Eye saw things right, Redcloak saw things wrong, they got their nicknames for a reason.

Right-Eyes village and his way could exist in the stick-verse because goblins have to have an option other than being evil or a story about making right and wrong moral-choices turns into a cynical story about a choice about doing what's necessary vs. dying for an idealistic fantasy.

[Keltest]

Something that has been nagging me a bit lately is that Redcloak is angry with the paladins for slaughtering goblins because they were evil. OK, that's well and reasonable, but in general, your alignment is not a card handed to you at birth that says whether or not people are allowed to go to your house and burn it down and kill you and take your stuff. You have to earn it. So if a group of paladins attack an evil goblin village (and I mean a legitimately evil one, not just a village of goblins that they assume to be evil, that's unquestionably wrong) then they have done, well, evil. They go out and kill for fun, or burn peoples houses because they feel like it, or become lawyers or something. So while im hardly condoning the idea of wandering around the countryside looking for evil people to smite, if a paladin squad comes to your village to kill everyone for being evil, how much of that is something they brought upon themselves?

[thereaper]

Not all forms of evil deserve death.

[Keltest]

Not all forms of evil deserve death.

Well no, but then not all forms of evil are going to bring down a paladin hunting party on you either.

[thereaper]

Doesn't matter to Redcloak. All he cares about is that a bunch of paladins came and murdered his family.

[Keltest]

Doesn't matter to Redcloak. All he cares about is that a bunch of paladins came and murdered his family.

Well sure, but Redcloak is pretty firmly established as not thinking objectively. But presumably people like Right-Eye or the Dark One are capable of figuring that out. And yet it seems like Redcloak's views are far more widespread amongst the goblins than "We do evil things, that's why they don't like us." is.

[thereaper]

Well, of course they are. That isn't news. Right-Eye's way of thinking is somewhat radical among Goblinoid culture.

[Keltest]

Well, of course they are. That isn't news. Right-Eye's way of thinking is somewhat radical among Goblinoid culture.

I guess that's my question. Why is it radical? Its hardly a great logical leap that actions that make you evil have a tendency to make people dislike you.

[Gray Mage]

I guess that's my question. Why is it radical? Its hardly a great logical leap that actions that make you evil have a tendency to make people dislike you.

I think part of it lays with the Dark One. If I'm not mistaken, Goblins are the only monotheistic race, all the others have a pantheon to worship, so even if it isn't the focus, they are exposed to multiple viewpoints. So, all their clerics worship an Evil god, all their viewpoint is of an Evil god. That has to warp/distort the point of view, IMO.

[Keltest]

I think part of it lays with the Dark One. If I'm not mistaken, Goblins are the only monotheistic race, all the others have a pantheon to worship, so even if it isn't the focus, they are exposed to multiple viewpoints. So, all their clerics worship an Evil god, all their viewpoint is of an Evil god. That has to warp/distort the point of view, IMO.

Don't elves also have their god of knowledge?

[Gray Mage]

Don't elves also have their god of knowledge?

Unless I'm mistaken the elves also have multiple gods. So they have a god of knowledge, but it isn't the only one.

Edit: In SoD, page 40 Tiamat said "the Elves", so I assume there's multiple Elven Gods.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Something that has been nagging me a bit lately is that Redcloak is angry with the paladins for slaughtering goblins because they were evil. OK, that's well and reasonable, but in general, your alignment is not a card handed to you at birth that says whether or not people are allowed to go to your house and burn it down and kill you and take your stuff. You have to earn it. So if a group of paladins attack an evil goblin village (and I mean a legitimately evil one, not just a village of goblins that they assume to be evil, that's unquestionably wrong) then they have done, well, evil. They go out and kill for fun, or burn peoples houses because they feel like it, or become lawyers or something. So while im hardly condoning the idea of wandering around the countryside looking for evil people to smite, if a paladin squad comes to your village to kill everyone for being evil, how much of that is something they brought upon themselves?

Being put in a ****ty position in the world by the gods may force you to be evil. For example, being put in terrain that pretty much requires you to raid other civilizations for survival because you can't support yourself in any other way.

[Keltest]

Being put in a ****ty position in the world by the gods may force you to be evil. For example, being put in terrain that pretty much requires you to raid other civilizations for survival because you can't support yourself in any other way.

Well, the hobgoblin city that Redcloak conscripted seemed to be pretty self-sufficient. Certainly you aren't going to be feeding a population that size for any significant length of time by stealing from your neighbors.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Well, the hobgoblin city that Redcloak conscripted seemed to be pretty self-sufficient. Certainly you aren't going to be feeding a population that size for any significant length of time by stealing from your neighbors.

Maybe the hobgoblin city wrested their land from another nation a while back. I think the strong implication, though, is that pretty much all racially evil humanoids were intentionally given circumstances that would strongly encourage evil behavior from them in order to encourage conflict in the world.

[thereaper]

Or so the Dark One claims, at any rate.

[Darth Paul]

Something that has been nagging me a bit lately is that Redcloak is angry with the paladins for slaughtering goblins because they were evil. OK, that's well and reasonable, but in general, your alignment is not a card handed to you at birth that says whether or not people are allowed to go to your house and burn it down and kill you and take your stuff. You have to earn it. So if a group of paladins attack an evil goblin village (and I mean a legitimately evil one, not just a village of goblins that they assume to be evil, that's unquestionably wrong) then they have done, well, evil. They go out and kill for fun, or burn peoples houses because they feel like it, or become lawyers or something. So while im hardly condoning the idea of wandering around the countryside looking for evil people to smite, if a paladin squad comes to your village to kill everyone for being evil, how much of that is something they brought upon themselves?

Just for Keltest, this is one to read at your own risk because you haven't read SoD, I am going to put it in an unneccesary spoiler line within an already spoilered thread; I can't remember if it is referenced in the main online comic or if it is a

Spoiler: Specific Start Of Darkness Spoiler:

Show

The Sapphire Guard's paladins didn't come to Redcloak's childhood village at random; they were specifically seeking the Bearer of the Crimson Mantle, as they did periodically when the Bearer grew strong enough to pose a threat.

So to sum up the spoiler without giving it away, there was a specific reason for the paladins to come to the village beyond "everyone there is evil".

[Keltest]

Just for Keltest, this is one to read at your own risk because you haven't read SoD, I am going to put it in an unneccesary spoiler line within an already spoilered thread; I can't remember if it is referenced in the main online comic or if it is a

Spoiler: Specific Start Of Darkness Spoiler:

Show

The Sapphire Guard's paladins didn't come to Redcloak's childhood village at random; they were specifically seeking the Bearer of the Crimson Mantle, as they did periodically when the Bearer grew strong enough to pose a threat.

So to sum up the spoiler without giving it away, there was a specific reason for the paladins to come to the village beyond "everyone there is evil".

Im actually aware of that too. You can pick up a lot of spoilers in a year of opening those.

[Darth Paul]

Well, I did say it was an "unneccesary' spoiler line...

[Quild]

Something that has been nagging me a bit lately is that Redcloak is angry with the paladins for slaughtering goblins because they were evil. OK, that's well and reasonable, but in general, your alignment is not a card handed to you at birth that says whether or not people are allowed to go to your house and burn it down and kill you and take your stuff. You have to earn it. So if a group of paladins attack an evil goblin village (and I mean a legitimately evil one, not just a village of goblins that they assume to be evil, that's unquestionably wrong) then they have done, well, evil. They go out and kill for fun, or burn peoples houses because they feel like it, or become lawyers or something. So while im hardly condoning the idea of wandering around the countryside looking for evil people to smite, if a paladin squad comes to your village to kill everyone for being evil, how much of that is something they brought upon themselves?

Don't know if this is in the index of Giant comments, but I remembered that the world CEO would easily help me to find this some four and a half years later. I wish I could chose what my selective memory selects...
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/shows...6&postcount=21



About the topic itself: I'm not even sure that Gobbotopia is much better than the two valleys the 88 legions were in:
- There have been lot of deaths in order to get Gobbotopia
- Sure, there is access to sea and commercial roads, but the two valleys were surely attracting less attention

edit : actually, it is in the index.