No matter how many people he/she kills, the people still loves him/her

[AutomatedTeller]

Even Elan is smarter than Thog!!

[Lacuna Caster]

In Thog's case that usually came as "he's not smart enough to be Evil, this is just Nale's influence". For other characters, the rationalizations are different and often more bewildering.

There's the official giant word that sufficiently young children should be assumed non-evil (at least in his comic strip they always default good unless the author goes out of the way to specify the child is evil*). The question is if Thog's childish traits include innocence: read enough strips and this should be obvious, but the giant doesn't appear to feel the need to make this explicit often.

People tend to see Thog as not-evil for reasons that I see as totally understandable, insofar as he apparently has the intellect of either an infant or intellectually handicapped person and we don't generally hold either infants or the intellectually handicapped as responsible for criminal behaviour. Quoting D&D rules about minimum int scores doesn't really counter this intuitive real-world standard.

He is also, within the context of in-group interactions, unfailingly positive and obliging, and much more evidently loyal to his 'friends' than, say, early-strip Belkar. (Noticeably, the number of people he randomly butchers during his time spent with Elan is zero.) I'll allow that under the rules he probably racks up plenty of 'evil points', but I think one can make an entirely plausible case that Thog, if transplanted to a different peer group, would turn around relatively quickly.

[woweedd]

People tend to see Thog as not-evil for reasons that I see as totally understandable, insofar as he apparently has the intellect of either an infant or intellectually handicapped person and we don't generally hold either infants or the intellectually handicapped as responsible for criminal behaviour. Quoting D&D rules about minimum int scores doesn't really counter this intuitive real-world standard.

He is also, within the context of in-group interactions, unfailingly positive and obliging, and much more evidently loyal to his 'friends' than, say, early-strip Belkar. (Noticeably, the number of people he randomly butchers during his time spent with Elan is zero.) I'll allow that under the rules he probably racks up plenty of 'evil points', but I think one can make an entirely plausible case that Thog, if transplanted to a different peer group, would turn around relatively quickly.

I mean...I know you explicitly told me not to do this, but, by definition, a creature with an INT above 3 is able to comprehend morality enough to have an alignment, period.

[hamishspence]

People tend to see Thog as not-evil for reasons that I see as totally understandable, insofar as he apparently has the intellect of either an infant or intellectually handicapped person and we don't generally hold either infants or the intellectually handicapped as responsible for criminal behaviour.

The Giant has made it clear that Thog is not "intellectually handicapped" - just "fantasy dumb" - low intelligence, but not to the point of disability:

I don't consider any of the characters in the entire comic to be "mentally handicapped." Thog is not smart compared to Roy, but he does not have an atypical neurology. He is capable of determining right from wrong, and chooses wrong consistently. I know people like to project this idea onto Thog that he's not responsible for his actions because he's dumb, but…he is responsible. We know he is because the orcs on the island are the same as him and don't murder people just for fun.

In D&D terms, anyone who has an Intelligence of 3 or higher is capable of determining right from wrong (because they have an alignment); speak, read, and write a language fluently; and generally looking after themselves on a daily basis while adventuring in a dangerous dungeon. This does not describe most real-world people with mental handicaps (to my knowledge). Which means the bulk of the spectrum of mental handicaps probably sits somewhere below 3 and above 2, because it's a system designed for action-adventure and it doesn't need more granularity than that. It doesn't want to have the conversation, and honestly, in this case, I'm inclined to agree. D&D is a system that only describes people within a certain range of mental ability, and OOTS follows suit.

If I was depicting Thog (or anyone else) as displaying behaviors and attitudes common among actual mentally disabled people and then mocking them, you would certainly have a point. I don't think I am. Thog is "fantasy dumb." It's a trope of the genre that I'm using, not a reflection of the real world. I know everyone loves to repeat that line I said about the only worthwhile part of fantasy being what it tells us about the real world, but that doesn't need to apply to every single part of the entire story. Sometimes, you have to sell the rest of the fantasy world straight in order to highlight the things you want to talk about. The "barbarians are stupid" cliché falls into that category for me.

[Fyraltari]

Noticeably, the number of people he randomly butchers during his time spent with Elan is zero.

It was neither random nor successful, but I think this makes it pretty clear that Thog is evil.

I'll allow that under the rules he probably racks up plenty of 'evil points', but I think one can make an entirely plausible case that Thog, if transplanted to a different peer group, would turn around relatively quickly.

But he isn't in a different group. He might become good under some circumstances but this is true of most evil characters in this comic.

[Lacuna Caster]

The Giant has made it clear that Thog is not "intellectually handicapped" - just "fantasy dumb" - low intelligence, but not to the point of disability:

I mean...I know you explicitly told me not to do this, but, by definition, a creature with an INT above 3 is able to comprehend morality enough to have an alignment, period.

My point is that from the perspective of a casual observer who associates a particular use of language and lack of foresight with mental disability, identifying Thog as mentally disabled is a completely understandable impression, and it's not fair to blame readers for that.

I know what the rules say, and I know what the author has said on the subject. You know what else D&D rules have to say? All black dragons are chaotic evil, and so are most goblin toddlers. Have fun with your selective ethical standards.

It was neither random nor successful, but I think this makes it pretty clear that Thog is evil.

I'm not disputing that Thog is evil-by-the-rules, but he gives the impression of essentially being a huge angry baby that just wants the other kids to play with him. Basically, if the author is gonna go out of his way to make Belkar into a potential fixer-upper, it is not unreasonable to look at other characters with a certain amount of empathy, given their relative starting points.

[Fyraltari]

I'm not disputing that Thog is evil-by-the-rules, but he gives the impression of essentially being a huge angry baby that just wants the other kids to play with him. Basically, if the author is gonna go out of his way to make Belkar into a potential fixer-upper, it is not unreasonable to look at other characters with a certain amount of empathy, given their relative starting points.

He wants friends, true. But he clearly understands that people don't enjoy suffering an it amuses him to inflict it on them (except on his friends). Of all the evil characters in the comics he is one of the most redeemable, but that doesn't make him something else than evil.

Nobody said you couldn't empathize with him. Empathy isn't reserved to some people and not others that's kind of the point.

[hamishspence]

You know what else D&D rules have to say? All black dragons are chaotic evil, and so are most goblin toddlers.

Nope to both of those. The MM specifically makes it clear that beings that are "born evil" have "Always Evil" in their statblock. Similar for "born (some other alignment)".

Goblins have "usually X alignment" in their statblock (X, in this case, being NE).

Nowhere in "D&D rules" is it stated "Most goblin toddlers are evil".

The MM also states that even "Always Evil" creatures have rare exceptions, so, not all black dragons are CE.

My point is that from the perspective of a casual observer who associates a particular use of language and lack of foresight with mental disability, identifying Thog as mentally disabled is a completely understandable impression, and it's not fair to blame readers for that.

A case could be made that these "casual observers" jump to conclusions - assuming disability when the assumption is unwarranted, and where stupidity (or just lack of education) is a valid explanation.

As pointed out, the island orcs also talk like Thog:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0552.html

And the strip where Thog commits his first on-screen murder, is called "Stupid isn't always Cute" not "Disabled isn't always Cute" or "Childish isn't always Cute"

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0051.html

[hroþila]

Of all possible descriptors for Thog that come to mind, "angry" wouldn't come to mind at all is what I'm trying to say with questionable eloquence here.

[Peelee]

People tend to see Thog as not-evil for reasons that I see as totally understandable, insofar as he apparently has the intellect of either an infant or intellectually handicapped person and we don't generally hold either infants or the intellectually handicapped as responsible for criminal behaviour.

Even if you want to go with this argument, if an infant or intellectually handicapped person kept murdering people with an axe, said person would not be free to keep on keeping on, regardless of culpability. Such a person would be moved to a facility capable of restraining them, because something would clearly be not right.

[hamishspence]

Thog's fear of "cooties" might be an indication of him having "the mindset of a 12 year old" but not of an infant.

[Emanick]

Thog's fear of "cooties" might be an indication of him having "the mindset of a 12 year old" but not of an infant.

More like an 8 year old, really.

[hamishspence]

More like an 8 year old, really.

Any age slightly before adolescence works, though the trope is associated with age 10 or less - "under 11". The point being that it's not "infancy" - Thog is no overgrown baby or overgrown toddler.

[Kish]

I've been, for a while, somewhat puzzled by the implication that Thog is responsible for the people he kills unthinkingly, but Elan is not responsible for killing everyone left in the dungeon.

(I think Elan would happily confirm, if you asked him, that he understands that no one enjoys being blown up. If you then tried to connect it to anything he ever did, he'd call you a meanie-face.

In fairness, may not apply to post-Empire-of-Blood Elan, a mere 900 strips after Elan was introduced.)

[Rrmcklin]

I've been, for a while, somewhat puzzled by the implication that Thog is responsible for the people he kills unthinkingly, but Elan is not responsible for killing everyone left in the dungeon.

(I think Elan would happily confirm, if you asked him, that he understands that no one enjoys being blown up. If you then tried to connect it to anything he ever did, he'd call you a meanie-face.

In fairness, may not apply to post-Empire-of-Blood Elan, a mere 900 strips after Elan was introduced.)

Well, to me, the distinction isn't about responsibility, it's about intention and potential for growth.

Thog is an idiot who legitimately enjoys killing and hurting people. His idiocy is irrelevant to his sadism and malice. Elan is an idiot whose actions frequently endangered others, though often not intentionally or he expressed remorse afterwards.

So, yes, Elan is responsible for the things he's done that have gotten people hurt or killed. But I'm sure he's done a lot less of them than Thog, and he's certainly never malicious about it. Now that might reasonably not make a difference to you, but it does to me (and I'd assume many other people).

Also, probably some handwave about how the Dungeon was only filled with monsters or evil people. Which has some unfortunate implications, but basically everything in the dungeon had been trying to kill them so...

[hamishspence]

I've been, for a while, somewhat puzzled by the implication that Thog is responsible for the people he kills unthinkingly, but Elan is not responsible for killing everyone left in the dungeon.

Roy does say "You're lucky no-one got hurt" (in the explosion)

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0120.html

which may imply that, at least at the time, he didn't see any remaining dungeon monsters as "people".

Even during the trial, nobody's arguing that a bunch of creatures in the dungeon died unnecessarily - only that the gate destruction is dangerous to the universe as a whole.


During the trial, their main defence is "Had the gate not been destroyed, Redcloak might have come back and seized it".

basically everything in the dungeon had been trying to kill them so...

And the most notable exception, the flumphs - leave once it's possible to do so - and as a result, don't die - though they do get a bit squashed by Roy and Elan.

[zimmerwald1915]

basically everything in the dungeon had been trying to kill them so...

Welcome, righteous warriors. . .

Edit: it seems Hamishspence and I have different ideas about the "most notable exception." Which is good, because it means there is more than one.

[hamishspence]

Edit: it seems Hamishspence and I have different ideas about the "most notable exception." Which is good, because it means there is more than one.

One of those "other exceptions" turned out to be Evil (with Good being "just a phase he was going through"), betrayed them, and then probably died after that fall when informing Xykon of the Order's plans:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0112.html

The other guy, we don't know his fate.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0101.html

He may have realised that by helping the Order against Xykon, he'd made things extremely dangerous for himself - and gotten out.

Welcome, righteous warriors. . .

"Most notable exceptions still alive and in the dungeon shortly before the fight with Xykon" was what I was thinking of. The Earth and Fire fey were both dead, and Celia had left, by then.

[Mightymosy]

I think Elan would feel pretty bad if he came to know that he accidentally killed people by blowing up the dungeon. It's just that this was never seriously discussed, I think. Logically, there ought to be someone else in the dungeon when it collapsed. I don't think the Giant discussed this, or did he? Maybe everyone - including the characters - just never thought this through?

[martianmister]

Belkar basically massacred these surrendered goblins and no one said or do anything about it.

[woweedd]

I've been, for a while, somewhat puzzled by the implication that Thog is responsible for the people he kills unthinkingly, but Elan is not responsible for killing everyone left in the dungeon.

(I think Elan would happily confirm, if you asked him, that he understands that no one enjoys being blown up. If you then tried to connect it to anything he ever did, he'd call you a meanie-face.

In fairness, may not apply to post-Empire-of-Blood Elan, a mere 900 strips after Elan was introduced.)

I mean, it's not like they didn't murder a lot of those monsters anyway.

[Kish]

There's a difference between "Oh look, another room full of hostile goblins! Attack!" and "I have no idea what's on the several levels of this dungeon I never even set foot on, but I'm going to assume it's chock-full of legitimate targets, with no more random nonevil creatures like the flumphs, and no more of Dorukan's employees still around. Boom!"

[woweedd]

There's a difference between "Oh look, another room full of hostile goblins! Attack!" and "I have no idea what's on the several levels of this dungeon I never even set foot on, but I'm going to assume it's chock-full of legitimate targets, with no more random nonevil creatures like the flumphs, and no more of Dorukan's employees still around. Boom!"

Fair point. Still, while that would probably cause a blip on the Malv-o-Meter, given Elan's generally behavior otherwise, I don't think it'd be enough for an Alignment shift.

[KorvinStarmast]

I think Elan would feel pretty bad if he came to know that he accidentally killed people by blowing up the dungeon. It's just that this was never seriously discussed, I think. Logically, there ought to be someone else in the dungeon when it collapsed. I don't think the Giant discussed this, or did he? Maybe everyone - including the characters - just never thought this through?

Given that they took a shortcut to get to Xykon's room by the gate (what gate? ) it is fair to assume that a variety of sentient creatures were still stumbling around in the areas of the dungeon that the Order had bypassed.

Belkar basically massacred these surrendered goblins and no one said or do anything about it.

Belkar killing things is his MO. For over 600 strips. It's what he does, it's all he does. (Terminator reference). There is nothing ambiguous about the blood on his hands. In one of the commentaries (OoTPC I think) Rich remarked that he was not going to delve into Belkar's childhood/troubled childhood/how he got that way since he wasn't interested in trying to open the door to a justification of Belkar's generic murderhobo persona. He needed that lead sheet vs Miko's Detect Evil attempts for a good and sufficient reason.

[Doug Lampert]

While large numbers of lower CR creatures can be turned into a high CR encounter, 8 is the maximum level difference accounted for in the XP chart.

No! Large numbers of low CR creatures can make a single high EL encounter. You don't add or combine CRs to make a CR. Encounters have an "Encounter Level" (EL) not a CR.

Claiming that you combine CRs is exactly how people miss the reason that Belkar gets no XP for the hobgoblins.

I presume you're referring to Belkar and Azure City here? He surely got XP for that encounter. The individual goblins and hobgoblins were below his XP threshold, but the encounter as a whole was threatening - look how beaten-up he was at the end.

And he got RP XP for declaring himself a Sexy Shoe-less God of War!

The encounter as a whole only gives RP XP, because the individual creatures are what you check on the XP chart. The XP chart uses CR, not EL. If he got any XP, it was EXACTLY the RP XP for declaring himself a Sexy Shoe-less God of War.

In the usual case, you would usually get similar results by giving XP for EL rather than CR. But hordes of low level opponents are one of the exceptions, and they specifically call that one out as not worth any XP unless something makes it worth a Role-playing Reward due to special circumstances.

Seriously, there's this long section in the rules discussing CR and EL, and they never combine lots of low CR to make a high CR, and the XP table uses CR not EL. There are (non-core) rules for combining lots of creatures into a single horde using that as a high CR monster, but there's never any requirement to use those rules, they're not core or SRD, and AFAIK they've never been mentioned in the comic and there's no sign that Rich was using them in that scene.

[martianmister]

Belkar killing things is his MO. For over 600 strips. It's what he does, it's all he does. (Terminator reference). There is nothing ambiguous about the blood on his hands.

I was talking about how no one did anything to prevent him from killing those goblins and said nothing to him.

[Lacuna Caster]

Thog is an idiot who legitimately enjoys killing and hurting people. His idiocy is irrelevant to his sadism and malice. Elan is an idiot whose actions frequently endangered others, though often not intentionally or he expressed remorse afterwards.

There's a difference between "Oh look, another room full of hostile goblins! Attack!" and "I have no idea what's on the several levels of this dungeon I never even set foot on, but I'm going to assume it's chock-full of legitimate targets, with no more random nonevil creatures like the flumphs, and no more of Dorukan's employees still around. Boom!"

Roy does say "You're lucky no-one got hurt" (in the explosion)... ...And the most notable exception, the flumphs - leave once it's possible to do so - and as a result, don't die - though they do get a bit squashed by Roy and Elan.

The intro pages to Paladin Blues describe Redcloak as 'the lone goblin who survived the dungeon of dorukan'. If no non-evil creatures died as a result of blowing up the gate it would frankly be such a miracle of contrivance that it hardly counts in Elan's favour anyway.

I'm not 100% clear that Thog does show clear signs of proactive sadism? I mean, you can see him smiling with satisfaction after/during hurting folk in various panels, but so do roy and haley.

Even if you want to go with this argument, if an infant or intellectually handicapped person kept murdering people with an axe, said person would not be free to keep on keeping on, regardless of culpability. Such a person would be moved to a facility capable of restraining them, because something would clearly be not right.

Oh, I agree completely. Whether Thog (or Elan) is malicious is quite secondary to the question of whether they're dangerous, and I am firmly of the opinion that you don't try to rehabilitate someone in the middle of a potentially lethal dungeon while trying to fight world-ending threats. That, you leave to the grown-ups.


Another case that probably bears inspection here is the MitD. He doesn't seem obviously stupider than Thog, and while he doesn't do much to help Xykon/Redcloak, he also did very little to stop them engaging in all manner of awful crimes for a number of years. Is he supposed to be 'a good man' or not?

[wumpus]

In one of the commentaries (OoTPC I think) Rich remarked that he was not going to delve into Belkar's childhood/troubled childhood/how he got that way since he wasn't interested in trying to open the door to a justification of Belkar's generic murderhobo persona. He needed that lead sheet vs Miko's Detect Evil attempts for a good and sufficient reason.

I don't have the commentaries but read (possibly quoted/misquoted) that Rich wasn't interested in telling Belkar's origin story in that it would be entirely unfunny, depressing, and could possibly make Belkar a sympathetic figure, which wasn't what he was supposed to be at all.

[woweedd]

The intro pages to Paladin Blues describe Redcloak as 'the lone goblin who survived the dungeon of dorukan'. If no non-evil creatures died as a result of blowing up the gate it would frankly be such a miracle of contrivance that it hardly counts in Elan's favour anyway.

I'm not 100% clear that Thog does show clear signs of proactive sadism? I mean, you can see him smiling with satisfaction after/during hurting folk in various panels, but so do roy and haley.


Oh, I agree completely. Whether Thog (or Elan) is malicious is quite secondary to the question of whether they're dangerous, and I am firmly of the opinion that you don't try to rehabilitate someone in the middle of a potentially lethal dungeon while trying to fight world-ending threats. That, you leave to the grown-ups.


Another case that probably bears inspection here is the MitD. He doesn't seem obviously stupider than Thog, and while he doesn't do much to help Xykon/Redcloak, he also did very little to stop them engaging in all manner of awful crimes for a number of years. Is he supposed to be 'a good man' or not?

A. Thog has actively stated his love of boredom-driven rampages and went along with Nale's plan to kill a massive amount of people solely as bait.
B. The MITD is a fundamentally good being, just one who has had the misfortune of being surrounded by bad influences since he was, functionally, a child. If I had to peg his alignment, i'd put him as True Neutral. He's not done anything particular Good, yet, but neither has he done much Evl so far as we can tell. If he is guilty, it is only of inaction. As far as I believe, in D&D, you need to actually DO Good/Evil things to tip the scales.

[Lacuna Caster]

A. Thog has actively stated his love of boredom-driven rampages and went along with Nale's plan to kill a massive amount of people solely as bait.

Look at those poor little fellas! They're all tuckered out. :P

If [the MitD] is guilty, it is only of inaction.

Now hang on a second. Is the MitD or is the MitD not intelligent enough to realise that what Xykon and Redcloak regularly do is very wrong? And if he does know this, is doing little or nothing to stop them particularly consistent with caring what happens to other people?