V's changed

[Jasdoif]

He resolved to take his team's statements more seriously after not listening to Belkar about Durkula. And then was immediately faced with Elan inquiring about Banjo's lack of attendance at the Godsmoot.

He did do a better job taking his team's statements seriously; he wouldn't have even bothered coming up with those first two points otherwise.

Not saying he's a problem - I'm saying that setting aside your convictions due to Elan's silliness is not, in fact, a refutation of said convictions.

Insofar as there was very little conviction to begin with, I agree.

[Psyren]

And V began changing several hundred strips ago. Glad we're on the same page!

[Jasdoif]

And V began changing several hundred strips ago. Glad we're on the same page!

Exactly! It's not fair to Vaarsuvius to ignore any of the steps Vaarsuvius has made on the several hundred strips this journey has taken so far. The intention is the easy part, while the conviction is far harder; but the intention has to come first.

[Psyren]

Exactly! It's not fair to Vaarsuvius to ignore any of the steps Vaarsuvius has made on the several hundred strips this journey has taken so far. The intention is the easy part, while the conviction is far harder; but the intention has to come first.

Oh I know, that's why I highlighted it in the first place. Trying matters, or so I'm told.

[Peelee]

Oh wait, we have a common factor - Elan. Prosecution rests.

*psst* Mr. Rodriguez! It appears to me that you're currently representing the defense.

Well, you know what they say - the best defense is a good offense.

[Kish]

Vaarsuvius' expressed desire to stop being a blaster wizard was a number of strips before their actual remorse for the mass murder. Thus, I'm inclined to think of it as a false path. That is, they recognized that they had failed to destroy Xykon and lost their mate, but thought the problem with their behavior was that they were being insufficiently effective--that they should be Batman like a proper wizard. The thought that they shouldn't use their spells to accomplish the deaths of as many "monsters" as they could without regard for whether those "monsters" deserved death didn't enter their psyche until later. Thus, to what (very small) extent it says anything morally significant about Vaarsuvius that they quickly dismissed "I'm going to stand back and not use my blasting spells," what it says is positive.

Buffing Haley rather than casting a maximized fireball at the frost giants is, similarly, a tactical decision, not a moral one, and looking for morality in it strikes me as a distraction from the whole "repenting for mass murder" thing.

[Jasdoif]

Vaarsuvius' expressed desire to stop being a blaster wizard was a number of strips before their actual remorse for the mass murder. Thus, I'm inclined to think of it as a false path. That is, they recognized that they had failed to destroy Xykon and lost their mate, but thought the problem with their behavior was that they were being insufficiently effective--that they should be Batman like a proper wizard. The thought that they shouldn't use their spells to accomplish the deaths of as many "monsters" as they could without regard for whether those "monsters" deserved death didn't enter their psyche until later. Thus, to what (very small) extent it says anything morally significant about Vaarsuvius that they quickly dismissed "I'm going to stand back and not use my blasting spells," what it says is positive.

I think it ended up as a parallel path, myself. I mean, Vaarsuvius cast Familicide out of a desire to cause suffering and an utter disregard for the consequences, so "don't jump straight to multiple-target damage dealing spells" transitions easily enough to "don't jump to mass murder spells".

That Vaarsuvius dropped the attempt after flimsy resistance in 684 before the Draketooth reveal, and stuck with it in regards to the much-more-threatening Laurin in 935 after the Draketooth reveal; says how much more Vaarsuvius is concerned with consequences than with efficiency...which is as it should be.

[Emanick]

Vaarsuvius' expressed desire to stop being a blaster wizard was a number of strips before their actual remorse for the mass murder. Thus, I'm inclined to think of it as a false path. That is, they recognized that they had failed to destroy Xykon and lost their mate, but thought the problem with their behavior was that they were being insufficiently effective--that they should be Batman like a proper wizard. The thought that they shouldn't use their spells to accomplish the deaths of as many "monsters" as they could without regard for whether those "monsters" deserved death didn't enter their psyche until later. Thus, to what (very small) extent it says anything morally significant about Vaarsuvius that they quickly dismissed "I'm going to stand back and not use my blasting spells," what it says is positive.

Buffing Haley rather than casting a maximized fireball at the frost giants is, similarly, a tactical decision, not a moral one, and looking for morality in it strikes me as a distraction from the whole "repenting for mass murder" thing.

Personally, I saw V's desire to "stop being a blaster wizard" as an expression of a deeper desire to avoid the kind of hubris and power-crazedness that s/he had come to realize was a serious personal and moral flaw. It was an inward-looking rather than an outward-looking kind of repentance, and failed to take into account hir greatest crime, but it was nonetheless a genuine and laudable attempt to change the person s/he was, for good (and, I would argue, Good) reasons.

[arrowed]

Do people think V can become full-on NG by the end of the comic? How significantly can they atone for Familicide in that time?

[hroþila]

I don't think V ever had a problem with blasting enemies in itself. It was always about using magic to show off, for ostentation purposes, to overshadow everyone else and to be acknowledged by the others as the most powerful and thus most important member of the Order. And that still applies when tactical considerations dictate that blasting the Order's enemies is what needs to be done, like when fighting against Tarquin's army. It was a laudable change of heart even if V relapsed here and there - to say V wasn't serious about it because Elan made them snap once is as dubious as to say someone who relapses when trying to quit smoking never meant to quit in the first place.

[TerrickTerran]

Out of the OOTS characters, only Roy and Elan haven't really changed at all. V is not so magic obsessed, Durkon of course is having vampire issues, but still it's a change, Belkar's not quite the rampaging maniac he once was and Haley is both less greedy and more of a leader. It's pretty cool.

[Ceaon]

Out of the OOTS characters, only Roy and Elan haven't really changed at all.

I'd say Roy and Elan have had the most character development of all the members of the OotS.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Do people think V can become full-on NG by the end of the comic? How significantly can they atone for Familicide in that time?

I don't think that atonement automatically means that they would go from TN to NG, or that their goal is that. But I do think that Vaarsuvius' atonement will be dealt with before the end of the comic, hopefully with a happy resolution.

Separately, I think that now that Durkon has become a vampire, all characters have gone through some form of character growth or development.

[Psyren]

Vaarsuvius' expressed desire to stop being a blaster wizard was a number of strips before their actual remorse for the mass murder. Thus, I'm inclined to think of it as a false path. That is, they recognized that they had failed to destroy Xykon and lost their mate, but thought the problem with their behavior was that they were being insufficiently effective--that they should be Batman like a proper wizard. The thought that they shouldn't use their spells to accomplish the deaths of as many "monsters" as they could without regard for whether those "monsters" deserved death didn't enter their psyche until later. Thus, to what (very small) extent it says anything morally significant about Vaarsuvius that they quickly dismissed "I'm going to stand back and not use my blasting spells," what it says is positive.

Buffing Haley rather than casting a maximized fireball at the frost giants is, similarly, a tactical decision, not a moral one, and looking for morality in it strikes me as a distraction from the whole "repenting for mass murder" thing.

Though the OP used the phrase "genocidal rampage," I don't actually think this thread was meant to be about Familicide, but about the evolution of V's tactics. (Nor, for that matter, does every single V thread have to turn into a discussion of Familicide either.)

[zimmerwald1915]

Though the OP used the phrase "genocidal rampage," I don't actually think this thread was meant to be about Familicide, but about the evolution of V's tactics. (Nor, for that matter, does every single V thread have to turn into a discussion of Familicide either.)

It is a rather character-defining moment

But I think Jadisof and Emanick have the right of it. V got into blasting in the first place because it was a showy way to shove her arcane power in everyone's faces. Blasting fed her ego. Getting away from blasting is therefore part of rejecting her egoism, and perhaps her ego itself. This is a good thing; it was V's need for dominance that led her to deal with the IFCC and indulge in familicide. In stark contrast, she shoves away any opportunity to big herself up in this strip (even though her contribution hasn't amounted to blasting yet).

[KorvinStarmast]

What is wrong with TN for V? OoTS' "big tent" alignment mode is a feature, not a bug.

[Kish]

Good is good and bad is bad and neutral is less good than good. Part of the definitions of all those words.

That said, I don't think Vaarsuvius is going to ever even flirt with being better than neutral. Not by my definition, anyway; Rich consistently estimates characters' alignments north of where I do, including my stubbornly having Vaarsuvius down as "currently Neutral Evil, wants redemption."

[Emanick]

Good is good and bad is bad and neutral is less good than good. Part of the definitions of all those words.

That said, I don't think Vaarsuvius is going to ever even flirt with being better than neutral. Not by my definition, anyway; Rich consistently estimates characters' alignments north of where I do, including my stubbornly having Vaarsuvius down as "currently Neutral Evil, wants redemption."

I think V is currently *trying* to be Good, not Neutral. Trying helps, famously. Whether or not it's enough remains to be seen.

That being said, I don't think the story will end with V's literal alignment being a plot point, so it might be a moot point.

[TheNecrocomicon]

Obviously character development is not a perfectly straight line or even a regular curve. There are bumps, zig-zags and regressions along the way. Of course Vaarsuvius was going to go through a less-resolved and less-sincere phase along the way instead of just jumping from point A to point B.

Everything else aside, no it wouldn't. Nothing indicates that more than a few of the giants are related for the purpose of the spell.

There's also the problem of Vaarsuvius not having the epic-level spell slot(s) with which to cast it again. V was only able to do so because of the necromancer who was Soul-Spliced to them, who then promptly escaped. So it's not even a tactical option here in the first place.