Belkar's Final Destination

[MountainTiger]

Am I correct that Belkar being permanently dead in standard 3.5e cosmology requires one of these things to happen?

• Nobody tries to raise him
• He dies in a way that prevents being raised (annihilated by the Snarl is the obvious option)
• He refuses to be raised
• He continues to exist outside the normal afterlife (we have seen party members as undead and constructs, mortals can ascend to godhood, probably other options)

Of these, "Annihilated by the Snarl" seems like the easiest narrative option, since it lets him have a heroic sacrifice without requiring a canonical answer to where his alignment ends up for eternal destination purposes.

[martianmister]

There is no one interested in raising him.

[Squire Doodad]

There is no one interested in raising him.

Like, there may be people sad about his death, but none who feel he should be back on his feet and continuing the stabbity lifestyle.

[RatElemental]

• Nobody tries to raise him
• He dies in a way that prevents being raised (annihilated by the Snarl is the obvious option)
• He refuses to be raised
• He continues to exist outside the normal afterlife (we have seen party members as undead and constructs, mortals can ascend to godhood, probably other options)

Option 5 is: He dies in a way that doesn't leave a corpse or his corpse isn't found and no one can cast True Resurrection.

Option 6 is: He dies and no one knows about it.

[Kish]

Option 5 is: He dies in a way that doesn't leave a corpse or his corpse isn't found and no one can cast True Resurrection.

Does a slightly more specific case of Option 2 really deserve being split out like that?

Option 6 is: He dies and no one knows about it.

Does a slightly more specific case of Option 1 really deserve being split out like that?

[Edreyn]

Option 7: He won't die at all, everything what Oracle said was anything, but prediction of death.

[Rrmcklin]

Option 7: He won't die at all, everything what Oracle said was anything, but prediction of death.

Except taking together, literally the only thing he could be referring to is Belkar dying.

[MountainTiger]

Option 7: He won't die at all, everything what Oracle said was anything, but prediction of death.

This is a possible way of resolving the prophecy, but the result is not that he's "permanently dead," which was my question.

[Peelee]

Am I correct that Belkar being permanently dead in standard 3.5e cosmology requires one of these things to happen?

I just noticed nobody answered the question. Yes, you are correct!

[Edreyn]

I don't know about 3.5, but in that game, Pathfinder Kingmaker, there were creatures that upon killing someone, also consumed his soul. And this companion couldn't be resurrected. Is there something similar in 3.5?

But in any case, I still believe that prophecies don't mean death, and will be explained in some hilarious way.

[Peelee]

I don't know about 3.5, but in that game, Pathfinder Kingmaker, there were creatures that upon killing someone, also consumed his soul. And this companion couldn't be resurrected. Is there something similar in 3.5?

That'd fall under 4, exists outside of the normal afterlife. For in-comic example, see the Ancient Black Dragon that was planning to Soul Bind V's children.

Spoiler: Start of Darkness

Show

Or Lirian or Dorukon.

[Bamsenn]

That'd fall under 4, exists outside of the normal afterlife. For in-comic example, see the Ancient Black Dragon that was planning to Soul Bind V's children.

Spoiler: Start of Darkness

Show

Or Lirian or Durkon.

Spoiler: Start of Darkness

Show

Dorukan. I have trouble switching back and forth as well, no worries :)

[Peelee]

Spoiler: Start of Darkness

Show

Dorukan. I have trouble switching back and forth as well, no worries :)

My phone finally accepts Durkon as a word to not autocorrect. Now to get it to stop autocorrecting Dorukon to Durkon...

[Kish]

My phone finally accepts Durkon as a word to not autocorrect. Now to get it to stop autocorrecting Dorukon to Durkon...

The phone is correct. Dorukon may not be a typo for Durkon, but neither it is the name of a character in this comic.

You might want to convince the phone to instead correct Dorukon to Dorukan, though.

[Peelee]

The phone is correct. Dorukon may not be a typo for Durkon, but neither it is the name of a character in this comic.

You might want to convince the phone to instead correct Dorukon to Dorukan, though.

You've saved me from a whole new headache for when I eventually realized that. Mucho appreciado!

[Ruck]

Well, we know Stickworld is judged on summation of lives, not personality, given Belkar's projection. So instead of Vader on a beach, Robot Nixon back in the head museum.

On the other hand, when Rich has spoken on characters alignments, he's usually talking from a prescriptive standpoint-- how he writes the character. So relevant to the conversation about Vaarsuvius, I think if V were judged right now they definitely could end up in the Evil category (because, you know, genocide), but V's general outlook is still True Neutral, hence the reaction of horror at learning the extent of the genocide, and not, say, shrugging it off as "Sometimes you have to ruthlessly crush 1/4 of a sapient species' eggs to make an omelet."

(I know I'm late to the party, but I just got caught up.)

[Peelee]

On the other hand, when Rich has spoken on characters alignments, he's usually talking from a prescriptive standpoint-- how he writes the character. So relevant to the conversation about Vaarsuvius, I think if V were judged right now they definitely could end up in the Evil category (because, you know, genocide), but V's general outlook is still True Neutral, hence the reaction of horror at learning the extent of the genocide, and not, say, shrugging it off as "Sometimes you have to ruthlessly crush 1/4 of a sapient species' eggs to make an omelet."

(I know I'm late to the party, but I just got caught up.)

Late to the party? The house has been clean for weeks! We even got Nixon's Head to finally sleep it off!

Anyway, V is at the very least remorseful. I have yet to see any indication that Belkar will ever regret any of his shenanigans.

[Ruck]

Late to the party? The house has been clean for weeks! We even got Nixon's Head to finally sleep it off!

Anyway, V is at the very least remorseful. I have yet to see any indication that Belkar will ever regret any of his shenanigans.

"Sorry I hit you in the face with a palm tree that one time."

[Peelee]

"Sorry I hit you in the face with a palm tree that one time."

Point taken. New theorem: I have yet to see any indication that Belkar will ever regret any of his shenanigans, except when the victim saved his life.

[ijuinkun]

Belkar may be starting to show a degree of caring for his friends, but he definitely has not changed in his outlook towards strangers and minor NPCs.

[AstralFire]

I think Belkar is showing the necessary growth to become non-evil, but has not actually taken the actions necessary to do so.

FWIW my money's on Vaarsuvius dying to the Snarl and Belkar going to an evil afterlife but deciding to make the most of it and slowly growing there. I think those ends avoid letting anyone 'off the hook' without giving endings that completely negate the progress they have made.

[locksmith of lo]

"Sorry I hit you in the face with a palm tree that one time."

as i re-read this, i noted that durkon did not simply acknowlege the apology, he said "ultimate extreme apology accept'd." while durkon may have been sarcastic, i wondered if apologizing to cleric and being forgiven carries some extra weight? kind of like a confession to a priest for absolving sins of the past? so not only does belkar admit and apologize but it is heard and forgiven by a lawful good cleric of a specific religion. it seems to me that apology has greater gravity than simply apologizing to haley, for example.

or am i reading to far into this?

[Peelee]

as i re-read this, i noted that durkon did not simply acknowlege the apology, he said "ultimate extreme apology accept'd." while durkon may have been sarcastic, i wondered if apologizing to cleric and being forgiven carries some extra weight? kind of like a confession to a priest for absolving sins of the past? so not only does belkar admit and apologize but it is heard and forgiven by a lawful good cleric of a specific religion. it seems to me that apology has greater gravity than simply apologizing to haley, for example.

or am i reading to far into this?

He'd be absolved of the one thing he confessed, then. I don't think the tree thing was the act that pushed Belkar over the edge into true Evilness.

[Kish]

as i re-read this, i noted that durkon did not simply acknowlege the apology, he said "ultimate extreme apology accept'd." while durkon may have been sarcastic, i wondered if apologizing to cleric and being forgiven carries some extra weight? kind of like a confession to a priest for absolving sins of the past? so not only does belkar admit and apologize but it is heard and forgiven by a lawful good cleric of a specific religion. it seems to me that apology has greater gravity than simply apologizing to haley, for example.

or am i reading to far into this?

I think you're reading in the wrong direction into this--as in, you're not paying attention to the conversation in the rest of the strip. Belkar has just concluded, from what Durkon was saying, that remaining evil is an indication of cowardice while reforming would show courage; Durkon is trying to encourage that line of thought for obvious reasons. There doesn't need to be some magical cleric thing that amounts to Durkon mystically mattering more than Haley.

[Sir_Norbert]

It's "ultimate extreme" because it involved a tree, simple as that.

[Squire Doodad]

I think you're reading in the wrong direction into this--as in, you're not paying attention to the conversation in the rest of the strip. Belkar has just concluded, from what Durkon was saying, that remaining evil is an indication of cowardice while reforming would show courage; Durkon is trying to encourage that line of thought for obvious reasons. There doesn't need to be some magical cleric thing that amounts to Durkon mystically mattering more than Haley.

Yeah, the power that asking a cleric for apologies would have (assuming it wasn't the cleric who you wronged) strictly comes from the power you give them as an authority figure. If you feel clerics are just mages who lie about where their power is coming from and thus have no real authority in comparison to any other mage, then this would not be the case. It's not their piety that matters, its their role in the OotSverse society.

[CriticalFailure]

It’s because Belkar chose to frame introspection and improvement in the idea that it makes him tough. So Durkon responded in the same vein.

[ijuinkun]

He'd be absolved of the one thing he confessed, then. I don't think the tree thing was the act that pushed Belkar over the edge into true Evilness.

No, but Belkar was specifically apologizing to Durkon for something that he had done to Durkon himself. Rather than being an apology for a general evil action, he was apologizing for something personal. It's significant because it shows Belkar as interested in a friendlier relationship with Durkon (who, after all, had been killed and vampire'd because he was attempting to save Belkar from Malack). In his own way, Belkar is acknowledging that maybe, just maybe, Durkon doesn't deserve Belkar being a jerkass towards him.

[RatElemental]

There actually is a mystical way confessing to a cleric can matter more than confessing to a random non-cleric when it comes to alignment. It's called the atonement spell, and no matter how much I wish it wasn't able to do this (because it gives the impression you need it to do this), it can be used by a cleric to give a willing creature a chance to switch alignments to that of the caster.

[Peelee]

No, but Belkar was specifically apologizing to Durkon for something that he had done to Durkon himself. Rather than being an apology for a general evil action, he was apologizing for something personal. It's significant because it shows Belkar as interested in a friendlier relationship with Durkon (who, after all, had been killed and vampire'd because he was attempting to save Belkar from Malack). In his own way, Belkar is acknowledging that maybe, just maybe, Durkon doesn't deserve Belkar being a jerkass towards him.

Yes? I've never argued that Belkar isn't growing, only that he's not making the shift away from Evil.