Final Book Speculation: The Fate of Goblinoids and the Journey to the Pole

[zimmerwald1915]

Wordless montages are a thing.

We had one of those. It managed to cover a few months despite a non-traditional spiraling panel layout.

[Fyraltari]

We had one of those. It managed to cover a few months despite a non-traditional spiraling panel layout.

So? A montage is limited by the number of snippets it can fit into its length not the duration. I mean that's the entirepoint of having a montage.

Just show Vaarsuvius in different situations where they help people like teaching, doing labour work, protecting a Black Dragon baby from adventurers, etc with different people (some of them might be an adult Kudzu and/or people who looks suspiciously like Elan/Haley or Roy/Celia crosses) with V' hair becoming progressively whiter and V's skin wrinklier ending with a grave with V's name on it.

You can even have a panel showing V reuniting with their family/Kyrie driving V away.

If you really want to expand on that you can make a short scene after his death where V's two children discuss wether they forgive V for their treatment in infancy.

There's not even a need to include an afterlife scene.

[Ionathus]

Ergo, there is no actual story left for Vaarusivus. She is a prop in the hands of other characters, and of the plot, for the remainder of the others' story.

I disagree. There's an entire book left, and in every book so far (sans perhaps DCF) we've seen each of the 6 Order members grow or change in some way. Some in smaller ways than others, but everyone always has some development. The story is about the 6 of them, and always will be. I definitely don't think we're done talking about Vaarsuvius.

[Thurulian]

So the oracle said that Elan would have a happy ending and the way he said it made it sound like the other members would not so i think the end game of this story is going to kill off at least 3 of the OG characters not including Hailey and Elan.

[ThePhantasm]

Anything else is beyond the scope of this story. There is no way in the infinite layers of the Abyss that there will be an epilogue actually following Vaarsuvius through her "long elven life of atonement," and a good chance there will be no epilogue at all. We don't see it, it might as well never happen. Ergo, there is no actual story left for Vaarusivus. She is a prop in the hands of other characters, and of the plot, for the remainder of the others' story.

This is as it should be. Giving up your own moral agency to someone more trustworthy than yourself is both a fitting start and a fitting end to someone like Vaarsuvius.

No, V is not just a prop. V's story is going somewhere, even if we don't immediately understand where.

I also don't think an epilogue that contains a time jump of some sort is really all that inconceivable.

[zimmerwald1915]

No, V is not just a prop. V's story is going somewhere, even if we don't immediately understand where.

Oh, that's not analysis. That is blind faith.

[godsflunky]

So the oracle said that Elan would have a happy ending and the way he said it made it sound like the other members would not so i think the end game of this story is going to kill off at least 3 of the OG characters not including Hailey and Elan.

Not including Haley, Elan, and Roy. I don't see Elan calling a Roy-less ending a happy ending.

Besides, Roy's been dead before, it would be redundant in terms of the storytelling.




One thing few people have commented on: the MitD's role. It seems pretty clear and near-universally accepted that he will switch sides, since he practically did it already at Girard's Gate. He did that just for O-Chul's friends, whom he barely knew, so if O-Chul himself is in the mix in the Final Fight, the MitD's bound to take a stand for Good.

But what I think we may be forgetting is that the MitD is somewhat familiar with Redcloak's plan -- including the aspects Redcloak generally keeps hidden, since the MitD spotted that Tsukiko's ritual was only a piece. And he is the only character positioned to be a bridge between the two sides. Xykon wouldn't listen to him, of course, but Xykon can be dealt with. Redcloak might listen to the MitD, especially if MitD revealed his intelligence. And O-Chul would certainly listen, and the Order would listen to O-Chul.

So the MitD could be the one who brokers (and enforces!) a truce between the two teams. Indeed, he's the only one who could.

[Kish]

So the oracle said that Elan would have a happy ending and the way he said it made it sound like the other members would not so i think the end game of this story is going to kill off at least 3 of the OG characters not including Hailey and Elan.

Hypothetically speaking, imagine that there was going to be a happy ending for 1) Roy, 2) Durkon, 3) Elan, 4) Haley, and 5) the world at large (in other words, the most complete accurate answer would be the most positive one possible). You're the author, writing a snarky oracle who doesn't like any of them, doesn't wish to volunteer extra useful information, and answered Belkar's question with, "Yes. Next!" You also don't want to annihilate all tension in the remaining four and three-quarters books of your seven-book series.

How would you have the Oracle answer Elan's question?

[Jannoire]

Everyone speculating on the MitD to save the day should remember the one time in SoD...

Spoiler

Show

where Xykon magically commands MitD to devour Redcloak, if he ever betrays Xykon

[Fish]

I don’t think you can predict a plot point in isolation like that. We have a number of threads left unresolved, and although we may argue about what that list of threads looks like, we’d probably find it easier to predict the ending if you took them all at once.

[godsflunky]

Everyone speculating on the MitD to save the day should remember the one time in SoD...

Spoiler

Show

where Xykon magically commands MitD to devour Redcloak, if he ever betrays Xykon

I haven't forgotten. There are ways around that.

Spoiler

Show

For instance, Xykon could already be dead by then. The Order might take him out before they get to Redcloak; if I recall the desert fight, that's actually their agreed-upon strategy.

And I think even a creature as easygoing as the Monster can break such domination, even from Xykon.

[zimmerwald1915]

I haven't forgotten. There are ways around that.

Spoiler

Show

For instance, Xykon could already be dead by then. The Order might take him out before they get to Redcloak; if I recall the desert fight, that's actually their agreed-upon strategy.

And I think even a creature as easygoing as the Monster can break such domination, even from Xykon.

Spoiler

Show

You don't get a save against geas, but a wish could free you. That's a truly exceptional event, but then, Mr. Burlew's does have a special Providence for fools, idiots, and Elan. Why not the Monster in the Darkness?

Not that even a Good MitD would really have much of a principled objection to eating Redcloak. The man has regarded him as nothing but a tool since the day they met, has belittled and dismissed hin to his face, and is well within the circle O-Chul would have MitD disclaim as "friends." The only principled objection left would be one against killing, and MitD has never had one of those. Celia, he ain't.

[ThePhantasm]

Oh, that's not analysis. That is blind faith.

And here I thought it was common sense.

An author isn't going to introduce such a dramatic arc for one of his main characters with the intent to reduce them to prop-status for the remainder of the plot. Rich is a very character-driven storyteller.

[hroþila]

Spoiler

Show

You don't get a save against geas, but a wish could free you. That's a truly exceptional event, but then, Mr. Burlew's does have a special Providence for fools, idiots, and Elan. Why not the Monster in the Darkness?

Not that even a Good MitD would really have much of a principled objection to eating Redcloak. The man has regarded him as nothing but a tool since the day they met, has belittled and dismissed hin to his face, and is well within the circle O-Chul would have MitD disclaim as "friends." The only principled objection left would be one against killing, and MitD has never had one of those. Celia, he ain't.

Has the MitD ever actually killed anyone? While he doesn't seem to comprehend that it is (normally) Evil, he thinks even fighting his way out of captivity would be "rude". I don't think any growth that led to his being able to reliably tell Good from Evil and his real friends from his foes is likely to make him more willing to kill.

[zimmerwald1915]

And here I thought it was common sense.

An author isn't going to introduce such a dramatic arc for one of his main characters with the intent to reduce them to prop-status for the remainder of the plot. Rich is a very character-driven storyteller.

The arc isn't dramatic, the character isn't a main one, and they have been a prop for the plot through the last book and this one so far.

Has the MitD ever actually killed anyone?

He attempted to devour Haley and Belkar, without any qualms.

[hamishspence]

But he argued with himself for so long over whether or not he should, that they got away:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0477.html

[zimmerwald1915]

But he argued with himself for so long over whether or not he should, that they got away:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0477.html

None of his objections were moral ones.

[Kish]

What is a moral argument? I would venture that every time the creature uses the word "should" or "supposed to," he's making a moral argument. The absurdity of suggesting he is morally obligated to obey Xykon or Redcloak from any perspective but his doesn't change his perspective.

[zimmerwald1915]

What is a moral argument? I would venture that every time the creature uses the word "should" or "supposed to," he's making a moral argument. The absurdity of suggesting he is morally obligated to obey Xykon or Redcloak from any perspective but his doesn't change his perspective.

If that's the argument, then MitD's morality suggests to him that it is right to devour the Order of the Stick, but that right action conflicts with the equally-right action of keeping himself concealed. The question for him is which right action should take precedence. At no point does the thought enter his mind that it might be wrong in itself to devour the Order of the Stick. Certainly it never enters his mind that the Order of the Stick has an entitlement to life.

But the whole argument is baseless anyway. MitD doesn't keep his promises to Xykon or Redcloak because he thinks it is moral to keep promises,¹ or because he thinks they know better than him what is right and that people who know best ought to be making decisions. He does so because it's easier than thinking for himself. As the scene outside Azure City demonstrates; he only starts thinking about whether to keep his promises because he has two conflicting promises to keep in mind.

¹ This, by the way, is pure ideology. Most of the time, in the real world, we keep our promises because when we make them they come with consequences/punishment for breaking them (as in a contract), or because we think we might hurt someone's feelings or hurt them materially by breaking them.

[Jannoire]

The arc isn't dramatic, the character isn't a main one, and they have been a prop for the plot through the last book and this one so.

Okay... Then who are the main characters in a story called "The Order Of The Stick", if the members of "The Order Of The Stick" aren't main characters?

[Kish]

Larry Gardener, of course. Nale even explicitly called him a protagonist.

[zimmerwald1915]

Okay... Then who are the main characters in a story called "The Order Of The Stick", if the members of "The Order Of The Stick" aren't main characters?

Roy Greenhilt.

[Keltest]

Roy Greenhilt.

Hey, remember how we had an entire book where he didn't participate in events in any meaningful way? Stories can have multiple main characters.

[hroþila]

None of his objections were moral ones.

Hence the part of my post you didn't quote earlier.

[zimmerwald1915]

Hey, remember how we had an entire book where he didn't participate in events in any meaningful way?

No, but I do remember a book where Roy got oodles of character development while his team futzed around for hundreds of pages.

[Kish]

No, but I do remember a book where Roy got oodles of character development while his team futzed around for hundreds of pages.

So wait, you're saying that character development is a thing?

[zimmerwald1915]

So wait, you're saying that character development is a thing?

In the sense of revealing character aspects that were always present, rather than changing a character outright, sure.

(Don't play games. You know my position. Try not to twist it.)

[Kish]

It appears to me that you've twisted yourself up quite efficiently already, between different goofy premises: There was supposedly a book dedicated to the "development" of a single character who didn't change in it.

[CJG]

Everyone speculating on the MitD to save the day should remember the one time in SoD...

Spoiler

Show

where Xykon magically commands MitD to devour Redcloak, if he ever betrays Xykon

Is there any reason to believe that MitD is already subverting this? We pretty much catch Redcloack in the act and there has been no action on MitD’s part. Or would Xykon have to know about it?

[Kish]

The creature in the darkness would need to perceive the situation as "Redcloak has betrayed Xykon" before he would be compelled to act.

At one time, I thought it entirely likely that this would form the punchline of a joke: Redcloak would betray Xykon right in front of the creature, offer him a ridiculously false excuse, and have the creature just say "Oh, okay then," as the prospect of the spell's effect being tripped faded away.

I no longer think that's likely.