OOTS #1107 - The Discussion Thread

[Mr. Pants]

Hilgya thinks Durkon likes blondes? Well, I know that he likes Elan.

[Mr. Pants]

Which sort of implies that mom says those words often.

Considering that his mom is a cleric of Loki, maybe he should be saying "Burn Undead".

[Rogar Demonblud]

Edit: Wow, I'm a pixie in the playground? I haven't posted here in four years.

No big, just keep making nice insightful comments and eventually you'll earn a polymorph.

[Manty5]

So if evil people can die with honor why not somebody who's committed adultery a few times? They only need to die in combat. If the dwarf Redaxe had died in the middle of his assassination attempt on the "King of Nowhere" he presumably would have died with "honor" despite the fact that there aren't many things more dishonorable than, say, committing murder.

Two things:

First, living honorably increases the chance that you'll die with honor, since you don't know exactly when you'll go.

Second, war is murder on a mass scale. So obviously committing murder isn't in and of itself dishonorable, or all warriors would go to Hel. Perhaps the reason matters: dying while trying to commit an assassination for blood money might be considered dishonorable, but we don't have information to confirm or deny that.

[Dovetail]

Well, I was under the impression that a dwarf needed to die in combat, or in the process of saving another dwarf's life. So in #947, had Durkon's mom and the man who fell from the ladder both died, she would have gone to the plane that matched her alignment, because that would have been an honorable death. However, the man who fell from the ladder might have ended up with Hel, since he died because he fell from a ladder, in a way not considered particularly honorable. (A quote from Burlew is mentioned a few posts up as saying that some dwarves lived lives of pure saintliness and honor, yet ended up in Hel because of the particular way in which they died i.e. choking on a chiken bone). I think the dwarven system of honor is kind of like how we've imagined the Vikings or Asgardians to be - death in combat above all else secures you the avoidance of Hel. So a CE dwarf could maximize his chances of avoiding Hel by picking murderous fights all the time, because if he died in one of them, it would count as a death by honor. I don't think the dwarven system of honor is something that we, as humans, would recognize as a system of honor. It's very "blue and orangeish."

[8BitNinja]

They do have better hats though.

That is a good point.

But dwarves are an entire society of folk metal fans. I mean, I'm more of a power metal guy myself, but the two genres practically cousins.

I probably deeply offended a diehard metalhead by saying that.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Well, I was under the impression that a dwarf needed to die in combat, or in the process of saving another dwarf's life. So in #947, had Durkon's mom and the man who fell from the ladder both died, she would have gone to the plane that matched her alignment, because that would have been an honorable death. However, the man who fell from the ladder might have ended up with Hel, since he died because he fell from a ladder, in a way not considered particularly honorable. (A quote from Burlew is mentioned a few posts up as saying that some dwarves lived lives of pure saintliness and honor, yet ended up in Hel because of the particular way in which they died i.e. choking on a chiken bone). I think the dwarven system of honor is kind of like how we've imagined the Vikings or Asgardians to be - death in combat above all else secures you the avoidance of Hel. So a CE dwarf could maximize his chances of avoiding Hel by picking murderous fights all the time, because if he died in one of them, it would count as a death by honor. I don't think the dwarven system of honor is something that we, as humans, would recognize as a system of honor. It's very "blue and orangeish."

The dwarves that died of exposure while delivering supplies in winter were not "in the process of saving another dwarf's life*" except in very vague terms. Even more removed from saving someone's life is the politician assassinated for his political views (an example of a potentially Evil dwarf avoiding Hel). From these examples, we see that "in combat" is a very relative term. Combating the elements and political combating both count, it seems, neither of which I think was specially prized by mythical vikings or Asgardians. In fact, nothing about the dwarven honor system comes across to me as "blue and orangish".

Speaking of, the dwarven assassin that after killing the above politician got killed by a guard probably would also avoid Hel, since he was honorably fulfilling his contracted duty. I suspect everyone in the Lawful end that stick to a honorable code of conduct (Evil, Neutral or Good) are relatively safe, as are Good dwarves that, code of conduct or not, will sacrifice themselves for others. It is only the CE dwarves - those stifled by the codes of conduct and unwilling to put others before themselves - that are really in constant danger of going to Hel. Hilgya, in other words.

GW

*In fact, we know from what Rich's said that achieving the desired result is not required, just that you die trying. That if Sigdi had been dragged off the cliff, she'd still would have avoided Hel, even though the dwarf she intended to save also died.

[Ruck]

I'm not sure about this whole "die with honor" thing, but if dwarves that die with honor/ in combat just go to the plane that matches their alignment (with no alignment specified, not even LG) it could theoretically be possible for a Chaotic Evil dwarf to "die with honor," avoid Hel and then go to the plane matching his alignment. So if evil people can die with honor why not somebody who's committed adultery a few times? They only need to die in combat. If the dwarf Redaxe had died in the middle of his assassination attempt on the "King of Nowhere" he presumably would have died with "honor" despite the fact that there aren't many things more dishonorable than, say, committing murder.

Yeah, certainly. I was writing something similar in the redemption thread. In combat, in attempting to protect or save another, in performing your duty to the greater good (or neutral, or evil, as the case may be)... I think that's the general gist of the circumstances that matter for dying "with honor," the way I see it.

[Nomen]

Yeah, certainly. I was writing something similar in the redemption thread. In combat, in attempting to protect or save another, in performing your duty to the greater good (or neutral, or evil, as the case may be)... I think that's the general gist of the circumstances that matter for dying "with honor," the way I see it.

I think your duty to the greater neutral would essentially mean in helping out a friend, or following through on some life duty you have accepted for yourself.
I think you could also die serving the order (lawful) or freedom (chaotic).

[brian 333]

Once again it seems to be devolving to what the dead guy believes. Honor to one guy may mean dying on the end of a spear in a hopeless defense of an untenable position, while to another guy it means escaping to rally new soldiers to the cause.

Thus, on death, it matters what the dead guy believes.

[Keltest]

Once again it seems to be devolving to what the dead guy believes. Honor to one guy may mean dying on the end of a spear in a hopeless defense of an untenable position, while to another guy it means escaping to rally new soldiers to the cause.

Thus, on death, it matters what the dead guy believes.

The difference is, the former guarantees you don't go to Hel, while the latter does not.

Per Rich, the Dwarves don't necessarily have to live every moment with honor, but a Dwarf is going to look at that situation and think "I can die with honor here or lice with uncertainty." And maybe whatever cause theyre dying for is worth risking that they get away and then die of a heart attack or something, but a given dwarf isn't going to avoid death for its own sake.

[Ruck]

Once again it seems to be devolving to what the dead guy believes. Honor to one guy may mean dying on the end of a spear in a hopeless defense of an untenable position, while to another guy it means escaping to rally new soldiers to the cause.

Thus, on death, it matters what the dead guy believes.

What are you basing that on? You keep making assertions like this. It's clear that it does not, in fact, depend simply on "what the dead guy believes," else a dwarf could choose to believe anything he does is with honor, and upon death, they'd ask him, not have Hel and Thor fight over his soul.

[factotum]

If anything, it's what the *gods* believe to be an honourable death that's important here, not whatever the dead dwarf believes. I'm sure a dwarf crime boss who spends his life extorting money from his fellow dwarves and who dies in the company of prostitutes while taking drugs could believe his death to be an honourable one, but I would find it hard to believe that he would actually avoid going to Hel because of that.

[Goblin_Priest]

If anything, it's what the *gods* believe to be an honourable death that's important here, not whatever the dead dwarf believes. I'm sure a dwarf crime boss who spends his life extorting money from his fellow dwarves and who dies in the company of prostitutes while taking drugs could believe his death to be an honourable one, but I would find it hard to believe that he would actually avoid going to Hel because of that.

My understanding is, if he dies fighting a fellow drug lord, then he's not going to Hel.

[Nomen]

My understanding is, if he dies fighting a fellow drug lord, then he's not going to Hel.

My understanding is if he confused a high level paladin for a low level commoner and picked a fight with them and didn't realize his mistake until he was dead he would not be going to Hel. Unless he worshiped Hel for some reason.

[skaddix]

Seems like going down in a fight is always a good idea as a Dwarf....assuming Durkon is not joking going down against a tree does the job.

I more interested if Children have the same rules. If you are a baby and cant fight do you auto go to Hel?

[Rogar Demonblud]

Apparently, yes. As Rich has repeatedly said, the universe isn't fair.

[The_Weirdo]

It is only the CE dwarves - those stifled by the codes of conduct and unwilling to put others before themselves - that are really in constant danger of going to Hel. Hilgya, in other words.

Okay, even assuming trying to murder Insanely Moronic Dwarf was an Evil act, it doesn't necessarily mean she was Evil then. And even assuming she was Evil then, it doesn't necessarily mean without further evidence that she is Evil now.

Edit: And no, taking her baby into combat when you believe it's the safest option isn't an Evil act (though it may well be a very Chaotic and even very DUMB one). Even assuming she is a bad mother, which is debatable, that doesn't make her Evil. She clearly believes the baby is safer with her. The belief being right or wrong is irrelevant for her moral quality as a mother OR as a person. She knows there are vampires (in droves) around, she doesn't know about the security measures at the Church of Thor (and even if she did it makes sense that she won't trust them) and she figures - and may well be very wrong - that Little Kudzu is safer with her, what with her being powerful and all. Also of notice, the insane system to which the dwarves are subjected means Kudzu's immortal soul is safer if she takes him into combat than, say, if a vampire enters the temple of Thor and eats him. As for revenge, she didn't know about the vampires before and she just heard Roy going basically "Hello, powerful Cleric. We lack one and Durkon became a vampire and is trying to destroy the world"...

[The_Weirdo]

As towards bringing Kudzu into battle with her ... what it tells us is that she has no one to trust but herself. There is no one and no place she can trust to leave Kudzu with. So in that regard her decision is probably sound. It still doesn't speak well for her life choices, though, that she's surrounded herself with untrustworthy, unscrupulous people who would use a child as a gambling chip.

Not exactly.

It tells us that she doesn't trust the Church of Thor, who is Loki's rival, after all. But, then again, it would make sense for her not to trust, say, the clans. Hers did try to pawn her off to Ivan Moronforge, after all...

[Jasdoif]

And no, taking her baby into combat when you believe it's the safest option isn't an Evil act (though it may well be a very Chaotic and even very DUMB one). Even assuming she is a bad mother, which is debatable, that doesn't make her Evil. She clearly believes the baby is safer with her.

The safest option would be Hilgya not heading out on a vengeance quest against a spellcaster in the first place.

[hamishspence]

Okay, even assuming trying to murder Insanely Moronic Dwarf was an Evil act, it doesn't necessarily mean she was Evil then. And even assuming she was Evil then, it doesn't necessarily mean without further evidence that she is Evil now.

Murder is normally an Evil act - it requires special circumstances (that usually change it away from Murder in the first place) for it to qualify as non-Evil.

Plus, we have The Giant's word for it (War & XPs commentary):

Author comment for Round 3:

"The first time around Durkon's opposite had been Hilgya, who, while evil, was not particularly opposed to Durkon himself."

[KorvinStarmast]

The safest option would be Hilgya not heading out on a vengeance quest against a spellcaster in the first place.

You'll have to convince Hilgya of that. Good luck in those endeavours.

[Fyraltari]

You'll have to convince Hilgya of that. Good luck in those endeavours.

Those potions of glibness sure are handy.

[Jasdoif]

The safest option would be Hilgya not heading out on a vengeance quest against a spellcaster in the first place.

You'll have to convince Hilgya of that. Good luck in those endeavours.

Actually, I think convincing Hilgya to care would be the trick.

[Kantaki]

Those potions of glibness sure are handy.

There aren't enough of those potions that Loki could pull that one off.

[Keltest]

There aren't enough of those potions that Loki could pull that one off.

Well sure. Bluff doesn't work on things that are true.

[Kantaki]

Well sure. Bluff doesn't work on things that are true.

Maybe. But does it work on things neither the bluffer nor the bluffed believe to be true?
Cause „Leaving your brat with Thor's little pets is a great idea” certainly would qualify, coming from Loki at least.

[The_Weirdo]

Author comment for Round 3:

"The first time around Durkon's opposite had been Hilgya, who, while evil, was not particularly opposed to Durkon himself."

Okay, fair enough. So she was Evil back then. Doesn't mean she's Evil now...

[Keltest]

Okay, fair enough. So she was Evil back then. Doesn't mean she's Evil now...

Alignment changes don't occur at the drop of a hat, and theres no evidence that she isn't evil now besides her turning undead instead of rebuking it. Since she still wants to murder a guy for an imagined slight, id say shes still evil.

[Erys]

Also of notice, the insane system to which the dwarves are subjected means Kudzu's immortal soul is safer if she takes him into combat than, say, if a vampire enters the temple of Thor and eats him.

Very true.