OOTS #1151 - The Discussion Thread

[hroþila]

statistics about people's orientations are wack due to varying factors of how accepting different parts of the world are and how many people have to remain closeted or in denial

Adding to this, it's probably no coincidence that we're seeing surveys like this and this, with growing numbers of people who identify as queer especially in the population segment that is probably most likely to not be affected (or not be affected as much, rather) by the factors you list.

[Kish]

If we're going by statistical norms, then I guess it's just been proven that Vaarsuvius was born with a vulva.

[Nion]

Putting aside defaults, ... But in the absence of the Giant showing that Durkon is bi, all the indications are that he is not.

Well said.

[Fyraltari]

Does anyone else find it weird that, so far, the most manipulative, cunning, and roguish member of the party is...a dwarven cleric of thor? We're talking about a guy that knocked up the enemy before telling her off for disloyalty, half-truthed his way into gaining a hyperaggressive paladin's trust, and manipulated a vampire over the course of I think weeks or even months while trapped in its subconscious. All with a racial charisma penalty.

If Thor doesn't work out, I think Durkon could find good company with his brother.

Durkon is so honest he goes all the way round to deceptive.
Why do you think Thor trusts him with all this?

Making a mirrored statement for rhetorical effect, does not allow for that statement to be false.

If Gray Wolf wanted to exclusively make the case that we don't know the orientation of Durkon, then Gray Wolf's statement,

"Before saying Durkon is heterosexual, please find evidence for it. Until such evidence is found, you would be more likely correct to assume that he is not"

should not have been made, and Gray Wolf can retract it if desired.

"Good Gods, they can teach you how to detect evil but not sarcasm?"
Maybe I should put that in my sig.

[Nion]

Adding to this, it's probably no coincidence that we're seeing surveys like this and this, with growing numbers of people who identify as queer especially in the population segment that is probably most likely to not be affected (or not be affected as much, rather) by the factors you list.

That's why it helps to look at animal homosexuality activity rates. These stats vary from species to species, but most kinds of animals are less likely to participate in homosexual activity than humans are.

[Caerulea]

"Good Gods, they can teach you how to detect evil but not sarcasm?"

This is what I would have said if I were clever. It expresses my sentiments exactly.

That's why it helps to look at animal homosexuality activity rates. These stats vary from species to species, but most kinds of animals are less likely to participate in homosexual activity than humans are.

Were you the one who was arguing that we should look at human traits a few pages ago, because fantasy races were basically humans with a few things changed?

I don't think animals are a great baseline for what is the norm, especially when fictional races are created from a human perspective and base. Maybe the tiger swallowtail has homosexuality rates of 0%, but that doesn't say anything about Rich Burlew's dwarves.

[Doug Lampert]

On what basis do you think Hayley's player is smarter in terms of combat situations at all, let alone smart enough to overcome the advantages inherent to Belkar's character in this situation?

The only time we've seen Belkar employ any tactics at all it's in his hit and run vs. Miko, similar methods are suicide against Haley.

Meanwhile Haley has a wand of fly and a +5 icy burst bow, and with haste (which she gets from her boots) can fire 5 arrows a round....

Haley wins in a real fight outside of a small white room.

[Ironsmith]

The only time we've seen Belkar employ any tactics at all it's in his hit and run vs. Miko, similar methods are suicide against Haley.

Also worth noting that it was explicitly his goal not to kill Miko there; if there's something the Belkster wants dead, he'll leap at it with both daggers swinging.

[Fish]

I think your claim:

Assuming Durkon is heterosexual is most likely a false assumption.

is puzzling.

Agreed. Assuming Durkon is heterosexual is an unsupported assumption; we cannot say what is likely without more data. (We could assume that expressions of dwarven sexuality are proportionately similar to those of humans, but that too is an unsupported assumption.)

[Fyraltari]

What's this all about players? These characters have an Intelligence score, have they not?

[Doug Lampert]

What's this all about players? These characters have an Intelligence score, have they not?

Wolves have enough intelligence to employ quite effective small unit tactics. Their Int score is lower than Elan's. I conclude that the combat tactics shown by various characters are not determined by a number on a character sheet.

On the opposite end: V is the "smartest" member of the order, but fought dumb until he realized he needed to work as a member of a team. Again, tactical choices are not being dictated by numbers on a sheet somewhere.

In the scene you reference, the Giant did not make an Int roll for Roy to think of that method. It is the sort of thing a player would think of, not based on a number on a sheet.

You can pick your terms, but tactics are being determined by personality and personal tenancies which do not use the D&D intelligence score.

[Nion]

Were you the one who was arguing that we should look at human traits a few pages ago, because fantasy races were basically humans with a few things changed?

I don't think animals are a great baseline for what is the norm, especially when fictional races are created from a human perspective and base. Maybe the tiger swallowtail has homosexuality rates of 0%, but that doesn't say anything about Rich Burlew's dwarves.

Yes. I agree that human stats are more convincing for projecting dwarven tendencies than animal traits are. Some people argue that stats on non-heterosexuality are possibly inaccurate because people might lie on poles because of social pressure. I referenced animal behavior because it makes for a good check on the accuracy of human statistics.

If animals are more likely to be heterosexual than humans are, then that means the stats for human sexuality are more likely accurate. This is because animals are unlikely to behave in ways they don't want to behave in, and if a human was to lie on a poll because of social pressure, it would be more likely for them to lie by saying they are heterosexual when they aren't completely heterosexual.

But even the highest polls for non-heterosexuality rates in humans are 20% or less, and that is significantly less than half. Making the safest assumption about an individual that we know nothing about, to be the assumption in which that individual is heterosexual.

But we do know something about Durkon; he enjoyed heterosexual intercorse. Now some people are homosexual, and some people are bisexual. I know there are more iterations of orientations, but let's just consider these 2 for argument's sake. Let's say the true number of non-heterosexuals is 20%. And let's say that there are just as many homosexuals as there are bisexuals. This reduces the chance that Durkon is not heterosexual from 20%, (2 in 10) to 11.11% (1 in 9). So, not only can you say it is likely Durkon is heterosexual, but also, there is evidence making it more likely he is heterosexual than a random person we know nothing about.

[Peelee]

It is the sort of thing a player would think of

Uh, OK, but I thought they weren't actually representing a game campaign, they were just living in a world there the laws of-

[Caerulea]

[just look up two posts—Caerulea]

You may want to look at the quote by the giant in this post. Statistics for dwarves sex lives are hard to come by. I am not arguing that he is not heterosexual, I have no opinion one way or the other, but I am against this sort of argument. Dwarves != Humans

[Fyraltari]

Wolves have enough intelligence to employ quite effective small unit tactics. Their Int score is lower than Elan's. I conclude that the combat tactics shown by various characters are not determined by a number on a character sheet.

Ain't seen no wolves in the comic.

On the opposite end: V is the "smartest" member of the order, but fought dumb until he realized he needed to work as a member of a team. Again, tactical choices are not being dictated by numbers on a sheet somewhere.

In the scene you reference, the Giant did not make an Int roll for Roy to think of that method. It is the sort of thing a player would think of, not based on a number on a sheet.

Of course the Giant did not make any roll for roy's actions. What kind of writer leaves their writing to chance?
Surrealist poets. And Phil Dick.

V fights intelligently even before realizing they have to act as a teammate, see them taking out Red's golem or the dragon mother. Their problem was a deep-sated belief in magic's omnipotence, not any dumbness on their part. The characters "have" (pretty sure Rich hasn't bothered stating anyone beyond stuff like "low", "high" or "very high") intelligence score who reflects the personnalities Rich gave them. As such it makes sense to say that Haley or Roy would make better use of the terrain than Belkar's but not that their players would, because there are no players.

You can pick your terms, but tactics are being determined by personality and personal tenancies which do not use the D&D intelligence score.

Indeed, that's backward.

[Caerulea]

Ain't seen no wolves in the comic.

Ain't lookin' hard enough. Oona has a worg, which is basically a wolf. I've also seen some grey ones 'round tha forum, so watch out.

[Fyraltari]

Ain't lookin' hard enough. Oona has a worg, which is basically a wolf. I've also seen some grey ones 'round tha forum, so watch out.

Wolves don't talk (Also I think Greyview has more Int than Elan). Also the forum isn't the comic and I think we've established that particular wolf is definitively not hiding under that umbrella.

[Ruck]

Does anyone else find it weird that, so far, the most manipulative, cunning, and roguish member of the party is...a dwarven cleric of thor?

I might if that were, in fact, the case.

[Nion]

You may want to look at the quote by the giant in this post. Statistics for dwarves sex lives are hard to come by. I am not arguing that he is not heterosexual, I have no opinion one way or the other, but I am against this sort of argument. Dwarves != Humans

Perhaps I'm reading The Giant's post differently than you are, but he seems to be saying that statistics should not be used to tell an author how to diversify his story. I agree with The Giant in this. What we are trying to do here is determine an aspect of one of the Giant's characters. I am not saying he has to follow statistical data in his characters. Rather, I am saying that such data is our best indicator of the truth when the truth is not apparent.

[Kish]

Perhaps I'm reading The Giant's post differently than you are, but he seems to be saying that statistics should not be used to tell an author how to diversify his story. I agree with The Giant in this. What we are trying to do here is determine an aspect of one of the Giant's characters. I am not saying he has to follow statistical data in his characters. Rather, I am saying that such data is our best indicator of the truth when the truth is not apparent.

Again: So I guess you're on the side of "Vaarsuvius: definitely and unambiguously born with a vulva."

[Fyraltari]

I opine to the idea that until some kind of definitive statement is made, each character is Schrödinger-sexual: simultaneously of all and of none of the sexualities. Go forth, now, and write your fanfictions.

[Nion]

Again: So I guess you're on the side of "Vaarsuvius: definitely and unambiguously born with a vulva."

I'm sorry; I don't think I understand your question. I think there is great ambiguity of Vaarsuvius's gender. It's pretty clear that The Giant intended to write the character that way.

[Liquor Box]

The only time we've seen Belkar employ any tactics at all it's in his hit and run vs. Miko, similar methods are suicide against Haley.

Meanwhile Haley has a wand of fly and a +5 icy burst bow, and with haste (which she gets from her boots) can fire 5 arrows a round....

Haley wins in a real fight outside of a small white room.

Just concentrating on the issue of whether one has a smarter player than the other, your post demonstrates that Belkar employed tactics when it was to his advantage. What is it that makes you think that Hayley's player is smarter?

[Kish]

I'm sorry; I don't think I understand your question. I think there is great ambiguity of Vaarsuvius's gender. It's pretty clear that The Giant intended to write the character that way.

Women are slightly more common than men, statistically. So by the same logic you're using to declare Durkon heterosexual, Vaarsuvius must be female.

[Ironsmith]

Again: So I guess you're on the side of "Vaarsuvius: definitely and unambiguously born with a vulva."

Independent variables. Vaarsuvius's gender is a coin flip; four heads and one tails (or however you wanna distribute it) in the rest of the party doesn't really affect what Vaarsuvius has between the legs (and that's without getting into the possibility of elves having extra steps in reproduction, as has been hinted at elsewhere).

Similarly, the rough odds of Durkon having an interest in guys are about 1 in 5, according to the most generous statistics applied thus far. Given two pools of differing sizes, I'm inclined to say he's probably in the larger of the two until there is sufficient evidence to say otherwise.

(That being said, in the original context of "how would he rank marriage candidates", it's more or less irrelevant, since three of the five options presented are (definitely) male. About the only ranking it would really affect would be Haley's.

Incidentally as well, the disparity between men and women, population-wise, is slight; 49:51. That's nowhere near the statistical weight of 1:4, and it's in no way useful to compare them.)

[Liquor Box]

Again: So I guess you're on the side of "Vaarsuvius: definitely and unambiguously born with a vulva."

If we were trying to determine V's sex based on statistics, and not based on whatever hints the comic may or may not have given, then there would be about a 48.5% chance that V's sex is female, a 51.5% chance V's sex is male (and a small chance V is intersex). I think your suggestion that V would be more likely to be female comes from using US statistics (in USA, slightly more than half of all births are female) rather than world statistics (in the world, slightly more than half of all births are male). Unless you are referring to the number of females in the party, which I do not think is relevant to the chances of V being of female sex.

The disingenuous part of your post is where you say "definitely ad unambiguously". Nobody in this thread (and I have never seen anyone anywhere in this forum) argue that statistics are conclusive as to anything about a character, or in any way overrides the author's clear indication. The claim is just that, in the absence of any indications to the contrary, it is more likely that a character has the trait which is more prevelant in the real world.

For example, if there were a new poster on this forum, who listed their location as "USA", in the absence of any further information, it would be more likely that they were from New York, texas or California, than that they were from Alaska or Hawaii. If you were guessing the poster's specific location, statistics (percentage of US population that live in different states/cities) would probably give you the highest chance of guessing succesfully. Of course, as soon as you got a clear indication of their location (such as them telling you), then that would override the guess on the numbers.

In this case, I don't think we need to say that Durkon is statisitically more likely to be hetero than bi because we do have some (in my opinion pretty strong) in-comic indications that he is hetero.

[Caerulea]

Perhaps I'm reading The Giant's post differently than you are, but he seems to be saying that statistics should not be used to tell an author how to diversify his story. I agree with The Giant in this. What we are trying to do here is determine an aspect of one of the Giant's characters. I am not saying he has to follow statistical data in his characters. Rather, I am saying that such data is our best indicator of the truth when the truth is not apparent.

And I think that the statistical distributions of traits in humans on earth have little or no bearing on the statistical distributions of traits in dwarves, in whatever the world of The Order of the Stick is called. Their sexual orientation isn't defined.

[CriticalFailure]

I mean, while I am convinced V was intended to be male I prefer to imagine female as to me it brings greater balance to the sex of characters in the comic, not to mention the subcategories of amusingly prickly characters, power hungry characters, bad parent characters, etc; and adds more variation to the personality of the female characters.

But isn’t it not going to be revealed?

[Nion]

Women are slightly more common than men, statistically. So by the same logic you're using to declare Durkon heterosexual, Vaarsuvius must be female.

Oh, no. That's well within the margin of statistical error. And as I said, The Giant specifically writes Vaarsuvius as ambiguously gendered.

51% verses 49% is effectively "We don't know." Where something like 85% verses 15%, I think most readers would be surprised if it turned out to be the 15%, because it's just much less likely.

It seems to me like you're just trying to undermine my logic, by taking it further than a reasonable interpretation of it, would take it.

[Caerulea]

Oh, no. That's well within the margin of statistical error. And as I said, The Giant specifically writes Vaarsuvius as ambiguously gendered.

51% verses 49% is effectively "We don't know." Where something like 85% verses 15%, I think most readers would be surprised if it turned out to be the 15%, because it's just much less likely.

It seems to me like you're just trying to undermine my logic, by taking it further than a reasonable interpretation of it, would take it.

Since when does the story (or The Giant) particularly care about what is likely?

I agree that Kish's statement was ridiculous, but I do think that approach is not a great way to do things.