OOTS #1107 - The Discussion Thread

[georgie_leech]

Not necessarily, but I would definitely put not just the safety of my children but of all children above disproportionate revenge for quasi-imagined slights.

GW

I figured as much. Would it be fair to say then, that Hilgya's willingness to put her child in danger for the sake of revenge tells us something about her character? That her actions make logical sense (to her only) if her desire for vengeance leads her to viewing her child in danger as an acceptable trade off, that is. To be clear, it adds a little Capital E into her alignment?

[goodpeople25]

I think there could be some interesting abjuration effects used here. Is it ideal or foolproof for practicality (will save targeting on vamp clerics yikes) or morality purposes hell no, but an unnoticed, deathwarded, electricity (ect) immune, spell resistant, repulsive baby under a sanctuary is still kinda neat.

[schmunzel]

Delusional? She states facts.
He did, in fact, cast her aside after he had his fun, and left her to raise the child he had impregnated her with alone.

That's what he did, and you cannot argue it away, much as you'd like to.

Her judgement of him is therefore totally justified. Remember that this is everything she knows about him, that he is the sort of man who would have unprotected sex with a woman and then tell her to go back to her husband, knowing full well that the baby won't have the husband's skin colour, even.

Her assuming that he would therefore willingly become a vampire is a bit exaggerated, sure, but she's understandably bitter about the whole thing.

Her assumption that he would treat other women the same as he treated her is, however, quite justified.

Let's be realistic, she has no proof at all that his talk of duty and **** wasn't just a lame excuse on his side for not taking responsibility.


Edit: And the assumption that Hilgya hates little Kudzu is utterly idiotic. Why would she be carrying around a child she hates? Especially those of you who believe she is completely evil should have realized that yes, babies can be killed, ... assuming you live in a country with a misogynist government that won't let you have an abortion. An abortion being the preferable option that she would have taken FIRST if she didn't want a child by Durkon.
And even if you, more reasonably, assume that she would not kill a baby: it was stated that the Church of Loki does provide (bad) childcare, and that would have been the perfect way to rid herself of him without even committing a crime.

You do realize though, that Durkon

a) cannot possibly have known, that he got her with child
b) she is as guilty about sleeping with him as he he is about sleeping with her
c) she literaly *drags* him into bed
d) she *forgot* to tell him she has a husband (she tried to poison, no less) *before* dragging him to bed

He came to the conclusion, that she would not be a fitting partner for him, which I can accept. (In a perfect world he would have realized that before getting her with child).
That doesnt take away his responsibility for his son, however, it should be pointed out, that while he has to take responsibility, he should at least be allowed to KNOW about it.
I do not see him actively dodging his responsibility, I do see her being rather irrational though, which certainly is in line with her established character. While I grant her to be pissed at her situation, I do not see that as a reason to badmouth him in that way. It clearly shows that she has problems grasping reality.
And that is something that is not understandable. (At least not by me)

sch

[Matt620]

Uhhh, am I the only one who thinks Hilgya might be lying?

[schmunzel]

<snip>


Edit: And the assumption that Hilgya hates little Kudzu is utterly idiotic. Why would she be carrying around a child she hates? Especially those of you who believe she is completely evil should have realized that yes, babies can be killed, ... assuming you live in a country with a misogynist government that won't let you have an abortion. An abortion being the preferable option that she would have taken FIRST if she didn't want a child by Durkon.
And even if you, more reasonably, assume that she would not kill a baby: it was stated that the Church of Loki does provide (bad) childcare, and that would have been the perfect way to rid herself of him without even committing a crime.

And just to further that ...
What in gods great world makes you think that the misogynist dwarven government prevented her preferred abortion which she would have taken first if she didnt want the child ???
I grant you however that she very likely loves the child, which is clearly established by the way she talks to him.

<snip> child abuse has *nothing* whatsoever to do with this comic </snip>

Trying to pretend that I am the unreasonable one here will not help you, it is plain for all to see that all those nonsensical attempts to revile Hilgya are motivated by deepseated misogyny.

all critics of female persons is truly and utterly misogynistic as female people are surely perfect not only in appearance but certainly in morals, too and thus cannot possibly be critizised !!

Edit: And it shows how very misogynist many people here are that you are so very, very keen and willing to jump to assumptions of child abuse when a high-level cleric in a D&D based comic says that her child is safest if staying with her, but happily, willingly, and passionately deny that forcing a woman into marriage means to want her raped, and that telling a woman to return to a forced marriage is telling her to get raped again and again, and again.

Yes it cerainly shows that I am a misogynist, based alone on him talking about child abuse. Very aptly spotted.

You apply real world logics when it suits you (i.e. when a high level cleric wants to keep her child with her rather than leaving it among strangers) but ferociously deny them when they would make your beloved Durkon look bad.

You willingly, happily believe that Hilgya, a woman who FAILED to murder ONE husband she was FORCED to marry, would mistreat her child, when Tarquin, a multiple murderer of wives he himself had chosen, is at the very least implied to not have mistreated his son (beyond raising him to be evil).

Your misogyny is showing.

Thus it was irrefutable proven that illogical people are misogynistic.
Or only illogical people who do not agree with your opinion ???
I mean really come on. It was only one husband she tried to murder. Who in his right (nonmisogynistic) mind would call that evil? Just look at good alignment posterboy Tarquin and his nonmistreatment implications.
They clearly state ... what exactly ??? Im confused ...



sch

[atemu1234]

Quite the opposite, in fact: She outright refused to leave Kudzu out of harm's way. Does she think "a bunch of Thor flunkies" are a bigger threat to Kudzu than a bunch of vampires, or is she not trusting anyone but herself to protect him?

I feel like she actually has a point - the NPCs in the church of Thor aren't as high-level as her, and aren't shown to be all that reliable, and I can understand someone who is as high-leel as her, with all her clerical powers, thinking the child IS safer by her than by a rival church. It's less 'would you not let a protestant babysit your child if you're catholic' and more 'would you let the spanish inquisition babysit your child if you're jewish'.

[nocoolnamejim]

Going to toss something out there because it's an angle I still haven't seen anyone talk about re: Hilgya keeping the baby with her.

Maybe her desire to do so stems less from irrationality and being generally crazy but rather a fear of some flanking/surprise attack on the low level clerics of Thor she might leave the kid with?

Put another way, maybe she's afraid that leaving them with Thor isn't safe not because they're of a different religion but because she fears that they just aren't as powerful as her and they might be attacked while the big, bad PCs are off elsewhere?

It's probably not the case. I think it's more likely she's just cray cray. But it IS another possible line of thinking that would make her decision a bit more defensible.

[DaggerPen]

Me at the beginning of this thread, obsessively refreshing for new comments: Man, why did I ever stop reading the discussion threads for comics? This is great, I guess I just got busy.
Me after skimming the past several pages with growing horror: Ah, yes, that was why.

Like... no, thinking that the guy who you slept with once before telling him you were married and who then abandoned you after knocking you up is the Worst Person Ever is not reasonable. She's clearly just looking for any excuse to dislike the guy who emotionally devastated her and then left her, in a way that, if we're being honest, is completely in keeping with her characterization from when we first met her. Do forced marriages suck? 100%. Is resenting that situation reasonable? Yes. Is repeatedly trying to murder the guy whose misfortune it was was to be in an arranged marriage with you who was nice about it and, per Word of Giant, never consummated it because she refused, reasonable? No.

Likewise, does Hilgya have reasons to be upset here? Yeah. Is she taking it too far? Uh, yeah. To paraphrase what was said above, Hilgya's got a habit of taking legitimate wrongs and then reacting entirely out of proportion. To quote Vaarsuvius - "I find it entirely in keeping with what I know of her."

I'm not even touching the baby thing. I know we've gotten more serious and all but I'm honestly writing it off as Rule of Funny/Drama with a bit of lampshade-hanging.

[schmunzel]

Going to toss something out there because it's an angle I still haven't seen anyone talk about re: Hilgya keeping the baby with her.

Maybe her desire to do so stems less from irrationality and being generally crazy but rather a fear of some flanking/surprise attack on the low level clerics of Thor she might leave the kid with?

Put another way, maybe she's afraid that leaving them with Thor isn't safe not because they're of a different religion but because she fears that they just aren't as powerful as her and they might be attacked while the big, bad PCs are off elsewhere?

It's probably not the case. I think it's more likely she's just cray cray. But it IS another possible line of thinking that would make her decision a bit more defensible.

I am as convinced that it is her protective stance towards the little one that motivates her as I am certain that it is ... well ... dangerous. We might want to grant her that she probably does not know exactly how dangerous it is going to be AND that Rich of course wants Durkon to see his Baby !!

sch

[Kish]

While I suspect the chain of events that led to Hilgya being in a place which is under siege by vampires with a baby has several highly dubious decisions, in isolation, I find "no, I'm not going to leave my baby with a group of people who have already been attacked by vampires once and have demonstrated themselves substantially less able to deal with such an attack than I am, whatever their guarantees about the ward protecting the door" entirely defensible.

[georgie_leech]

While I suspect the chain of events that led to Hilgya being in a place which is under siege by vampires with a baby has several highly dubious decisions, in isolation, I find "no, I'm not going to leave my baby with a group of people who have already been attacked by vampires once and have demonstrated themselves substantially less able to deal with such an attack than I am, whatever their guarantees about the ward protecting the door" entirely defensible.

More or less where I am. That said, I'm less sympathetic to the fact that she brought the kid in the first place. I'd hope she'd have *some* allies she could leave him with.

[Fyraltari]

Uhhh, am I the only one who thinks Hilgya might be lying?

About what exactly?

While I suspect the chain of events that led to Hilgya being in a place which is under siege by vampires with a baby has several highly dubious decisions, in isolation, I find "no, I'm not going to leave my baby with a group of people who have already been attacked by vampires once and have demonstrated themselves substantially less able to deal with such an attack than I am, whatever their guarantees about the ward protecting the door" entirely defensible.

Except she doesn't know that, for all she knows Roggo could be as skilled as she is. And we know that the temple cannot be entered by Team Vamp making it literally the safest place in town until this is over one way or another.

[Kish]

Except she doesn't know that, for all she knows Roggo could be as skilled as she is. And we know that the temple cannot be entered by Team Vamp making it literally the safest place in town until this is over one way or another.

If we're switching to forum meta-knowledge, you better leave me out of that We. For all my We know, Greg already tricked some hapless priest into giving him an entry stone and is on his way back to Thor's temple, and all the low-level priests inside it are as good as dead; Durkon already brought up that strategy of getting an entry stone, as one Greg would surely have used successfully had he known that the stone wouldn't work if taken by force.

[Keltest]

If we're switching to forum meta-knowledge, you better leave me out of that We. For all my We know, Greg already tricked some hapless priest into giving him an entry stone and is on his way back to Thor's temple, and all the low-level priests inside it are as good as dead; Durkon already brought up that strategy of getting an entry stone, as one Greg would surely have used successfully had he known that the stone wouldn't work if taken by force.

Even if that's the case, the Order and Hilgya are currently between the vampires and the temple. The difference between "greg fights the order in the hallway" and "greg fights the order in the great hall" might matter to the order, but probably less to the people in the temple.

[KorvinStarmast]

confused by how heated the argument was getting.

I saw, and experienced, no overheated argument. I am also perplexed by the response, since I am not interested in argument but rather, as the title of the thread calls it, a discussion on the strip. Thanks for your points and thoughts.

I'd hope she'd have *some* allies she could leave him with.

Yeah, and why she doesn't would appear to be revealed in a future strip, and perhaps be related to the trust issues that a number of other posters have raised as being a current character trait.

[Fyraltari]

If we're switching to forum meta-knowledge, you better leave me out of that We. For all my We know, Greg already tricked some hapless priest into giving him an entry stone and is on his way back to Thor's temple, and all the low-level priests inside it are as good as dead; Durkon already brought up that strategy of getting an entry stone, as one Greg would surely have used successfully had he known that the stone wouldn't work if taken by force.

We've seen him giving up on entering the temple, remember?

[hroþila]

I agree that it is perfectly reasonable to refuse to leave the baby with some low-level characters who would be 100% unable to protect it if the vampires managed to get in somehow, but I find it very curious that Hilgya's first reaction was to say she's not leaving Kuzdu "with a bunch of Thor flunkies".

We'll see what precautions she takes in combat, though. She's talking of breaking some skulls, so I'm not sure she intends to hang back in relative safety while the Order fights for her.

[SaintRidley]

On a different subject, I really like how Belkar calls into question Hilgya's description of Durkon. He's grown quite a bit since Durkon's death, possibly even realizing that Durkon was a friend. I think half the reason he's been so violently Anti-Durkon* is that he finally appreciates who Durkon was, and is insulted by this thing squatting in his friend's body, pretending to be Durkon. I think Belkar is a little bit shocked to discover that he cares about more people than himself (and his pets).

Easily the best take of the entire thread.

[Scowling Dragon]

We'll see what precautions she takes in combat, though. She's talking of breaking some skulls, so I'm not sure she intends to hang back in relative safety while the Order fights for her.

Even if it where the case she would become a massive liability. Varsavius can even afford to take some hits. But a baby? They would be forced to protect her in ways that would be a serious disadvantage to them.

[Peelee]

Me at the beginning of this thread, obsessively refreshing for new comments: Man, why did I ever stop reading the discussion threads for comics? This is great, I guess I just got busy.
Me after skimming the past several pages with growing horror: Ah, yes, that was why.

On the one hand, awww. I like the DaggerPen. On the other hand, for the love of Freya, don't read the last two discussion threads.

[Slayer Lord]

I see Hilgya's favorite pastime is still blaming other people for her bad decisions. Why was I excited for her to come back, again?

[Nomen]

I do believe Hilgia's decision to take her baby with her is a bad one but her stated reasons for it are actually fairly reasonable she could arguably keep him safest with her. Leaving him with Loki worshiping babysitters wouldn't be recommended, and even if the followers of Thor would be more trustworthy she would naturally trust them less than her own group so fair enough. I think its most likely coming from a place of how dare you tell me someone else would be more suited to watch my kid but that could be because I already see her that way.
Being upset with Durken is natural in this situation she liked him and he dumped her she had raise their baby on her own. But she never contacted him about their baby and I'm pretty sure that would have been within her abilities, not that it wouldn't make fair minded women resentful and angry even if raising the baby on their own were their choice. However, its more that they both had sex before they both discovered that they weren't compatible, than him pretending to like her more than he did and leaving her when he got what he wanted. And even if she's going to blame him for his decision most people would be upset at him for what he actually did (he will never choose you over his job) not make up things wholesale.

[Kish]

We've seen him giving up on entering the temple, remember?

Right, I forgot that he wrote "don't come back to the temple whatever changes" on his schedule in ink.

(On a meta-level, I don't expect him to come back to the temple, but these meta-assumptions are the least logical way to explain the reasoning behind anything Hilgya does.)

[unbeliever536]

Me at the beginning of this thread, obsessively refreshing for new comments: Man, why did I ever stop reading the discussion threads for comics? This is great, I guess I just got busy.
Me after skimming the past several pages with growing horror: Ah, yes, that was why.

Prominent members of the cast introduced after strip 40 or so do seem to generate a lot of controversy. I mean, you've got Thog, Hilgya, Miko, Malack, Tarquin, Laurin, Therkla, Andi and Bandana, Celia, ...

[Dragonus45]

While I suspect the chain of events that led to Hilgya being in a place which is under siege by vampires with a baby has several highly dubious decisions, in isolation, I find "no, I'm not going to leave my baby with a group of people who have already been attacked by vampires once and have demonstrated themselves substantially less able to deal with such an attack than I am, whatever their guarantees about the ward protecting the door" entirely defensible.

Especially since people seem to forget that the Order's T1 characters are generally kinda inept from a power gaming perspective. A good cleric of their level could take a whole daycare into battle and likely keep it safe.

[Flying Turtle]

On a different subject, I really like how Belkar calls into question Hilgya's description of Durkon. He's grown quite a bit since Durkon's death, possibly even realizing that Durkon was a friend. I think half the reason he's been so violently Anti-Durkon* is that he finally appreciates who Durkon was, and is insulted by this thing squatting in his friend's body, pretending to be Durkon. I think Belkar is a little bit shocked to discover that he cares about more people than himself (and his pets).

At the risk of looking like an idiot the next time Belkar does something horrendous with zero regret, I'd actually go one step further and say Belkar feels a little guilty about Durkon since Durkon got vamped defending Belkar. The exchange with the gnome shopkeeper does prove that Belkar has recently developed some conception of guilt, and in 957 he seemed to put a lot of stock in Durkon having forgiven him which would be an odd thing to do if he didn't think he had something to be forgiven for. After all why care about forgiveness if you don't think you need it?

Or maybe I'm just inventing subtext.

[unbeliever536]

At the risk of looking like an idiot the next time Belkar does something horrendous with zero regret, I'd actually go one step further and say Belkar feels a little guilty about Durkon since Durkon got vamped defending Belkar. The exchange with the gnome shopkeeper does prove that Belkar has recently developed some conception of guilt, and in 957 he seemed to put a lot of stock in Durkon having forgiven him which would be an odd thing to do if he didn't think he had something to be forgiven for. After all why care about forgiveness if you don't think you need it?

Or maybe I'm just inventing subtext.

In #1098 Belkar pretty nearly says outright that he feels guilt over Durkon's death.

[Coolio Wolfus]

Hmm...
Kudzu (the plant reference) could potentially be another play on the invasive plant / tentacles gag.

[Gift Jeraff]

Is it just me or is there something up with Jenny's eyes? Anything in the bard spell list that can help with cheating at poker?

[ti'esar]

Is it just me or is there something up with Jenny's eyes? Anything in the bard spell list that can help with cheating at poker?

I can see a really subtle blueish outline, but I'd bet it's makeup rather than a spell.