OOTS #1153 - The Discussion Thread

[zimmerwald1915]

(why on earth would he use Hilgya's saves instead of his own?).

He would if he was considered an object. As opposed to a 1-HD classless Humanoid.

[The_Weirdo]

Yeah this strip was kickass with everything that happened. With Hilgya being as high a level as she is, she realizes that Sidgi, whatever her level is, will destroy Hilgya and is not afraid to say it.

Also, Kudzu is super adorable. The Giant certainly shows how good of a storyteller he is. Can we do a GoFundMe page in favor of Rich DMing a game for us in person?

I'll play a Paladin.

[zimmerwald1915]

Also, Kudzu is super adorable. The Giant certainly shows how good of a storyteller he is. Can we do a GoFundMe page in favor of Rich DMing a game for us in person?

What, for all couple thousand of us?

[The_Weirdo]

What, for all couple thousand of us?

*Starts a GoFundMe to clone Rich a few hundred or thousand times*

[Peelee]

What meme?

Wha?

Except for AoE, as has been noted...

Right, because anything that would cause noticeable damage to Hilgya wouldn't kill Kudzu outright.

Again: He wound up being used as a shield by the head vampire. You seem to be actively ignoring all the story's actual indications of what a good idea this was (to whit: he was used as a shield by the head vampire) for assumptions from some version of D&D I'm not familiar with (why on earth would he use Hilgya's saves instead of his own?).

He would if he was considered an object. As opposed to a 1-HD classless Humanoid.

Now now, we should give the benefit of the doubt. Fortunately, the author has kindly statted babies for us, so we have a direct reference!

Movement: Gets away if you let it.
Saving Throws: Miraculously survives all accidents.
Armor Class You hit.
Hit Points: Congratulations, Baby-Killer.
Special Qualities: I hope you can live with yourself.

Why, it seems as though the author would not depict "hey let's go into battle with a baby strapped to myself" as a good idea. How shocking.

[Jay R]

Years ago, Rich did a strip about how Lawful Good doesn't mean Lawful Stupid. Sigdi now reminds us that Lawful Good doesn't mean Lawful Soft either.

[mucat]

What meme?

The one Nightcanon mentioned -- the idea that one should Never Split the Party, because (among other reasons) you'll need clerics on hand to keep you alive when everything goes to hell.

[TheNecrocomicon]

Years ago, Rich did a strip about how Lawful Good doesn't mean Lawful Stupid.

I'm pretty sure they were called No Cure for the Paladin Blues and War and XPs. With a side order of How the Paladin Got His Scar.

And still some people didn't get it, if the amount of internet warfare over Miko is any indication.

[Syncrogti]

I'll play a Paladin.

What, for all couple thousand of us?

*Starts a GoFundMe to clone Rich a few hundred or thousand times*

Sounds awesome, let's do it. And I don't care how many of us are in the game, as long as I'm in it.

Rich, what say ye?

[Kish]

The one Nightcanon mentioned -- the idea that one should Never Split the Party, because (among other reasons) you'll need clerics on hand to keep you alive when everything goes to hell.

Aside from the fact that that's not even what Nightcanon said, apparently the claim here is that being carried by a high-level cleric makes you invincible because...there is a meme that (something indeterminate but related to clerics keeping people alive).

Mistletoe, in other words, represents mistletoe.

[Aquillion]

Is there some reason to believe that she doesnt think Hilgya greatly overreacted? The evidence strongly suggests that she does not appreciate hearing about how Hilgya literally killed Durkon.

It's not impossible for her to hold two views at once - "hitting him in that situation was wrong but understandable", and also, "but he's my Durkon, so I'm still going to end if you do it again, understandable or not." Her reaction in the last part is clearly a personal one, not an abstract moral position.

nb. this is just one possible reading of what she's saying; I'm not necessarily agreeing with her. And whether you interpret it that way depends on whether you think the first part of her comments here were her genuine feeling or just her being polite to the mother of her granddaughter and / or getting Hilgya's guard down to give the threat more impact.

But by a quick reading, she's basically saying "yes, in an abstract sense, I can empathize with your situation a bit. Also if you hurt Durkon again for any reason I will kill you." These things don't contradict each other.

[Rrmcklin]

Clearly, in real life there is no way that it is reasonable to take a child into battle on a chest sling. But in D&D? Isn't this just an extension of the Don't Split The Party meme that there's no point hanging out with a high-level cleric if they aren't able to heal you within 6 seconds? With Hilgya, Kuzdu presumably shares the saves of a high-level cleric, hitting him is a called shot, and he has cures on tap.
This is still a humorous comic, and while taking your baby into battle is an indication of recklessness in keeping with the Temple of Loki's babysitting service, I think it signifies Hilgya's lack of trust in other alternatives and maternal devotion to Kudzu, rather than being a flag that she's Evil.

Going "this is still a humorous comic" doesn't change the fact that the situation clearly wasn't supposed to be humorous. Just like "this is still a humorous comic" doesn't mean you aren't actually supposed to think Xykon and Tarquin aren't monsters with all the over the top evil sh*t they do.

I really don't understand this consistent need by some people to defend this action on Hilgya's part.

[Spanish_Paladin]

Going "this is still a humorous comic" doesn't change the fact that the situation clearly wasn't supposed to be humorous. Just like "this is still a humorous comic" doesn't mean you aren't actually supposed to think Xykon or Tarquin aren't actually monsters with all the over the top evil sh*t they do.

I really don't understand this consistent need by some people to defend this action on Hilgya's part.

Neither do I. Apparently if you like a character you must defend or justify all his/her actions even the inmoral, stupid or evil ones.

I love Roy, but when he thought of leaving Elan in the bandit camp... That, that was an evil action even if later was in part redeemed when he came back.

[Peelee]

This is still a humorous comic.

[hroþila]

Neither do I. Apparently if you like a character you must defend or justify all his/her actions even the inmoral, stupid or evil ones.

I love Roy, but when he thought of leaving Elan in the bandit camp... That, that was an evil action even if later was in part redeemed when he came back.

Would other people with actual D&D experience normally consider abandoning Elan (i.e. refusing to risk his own life to save someone else) an Evil act? I'd peg it as strongly Neutral on both axes, which is why the Deva reckoned it would be enough to put Roy in the TN bin, but again, I have very little D&D experience.

[Fyraltari]

Would other people with actual D&D experience normally consider abandoning Elan (i.e. refusing to risk his own life to save someone else) an Evil act? I'd peg it as strongly Neutral on both axes, which is why the Deva reckoned it would be enough to put Roy in the TN bin, but again, I have very little D&D experience.

I feel like Elan being only in this situation because of his loyalty to Roy makes it worse than if he was a stranger.

[Kish]

I feel like Elan was only in this situation because of his loyalty to Roy makes it worse than if he was a stranger.

Yeah, my answer is that I choke on that i.e.. Roy was doing something he knew perfectly well was substantially more dangerous than joining the rest of the party to rescue Elan, in pressing on through the Wooden Forest alone. His "Walking into a camp of armed bandits is suicide" line was Grade-A fertilizer, badly attempting to cover the reality of "I don't want Elan back, more than I care whether he dies!"

An act which pushes an otherwise Lawful Good character to True Neutral is by definition a Chaotic Evil act. No deva is going to say, "You spend way more time in the bathroom than you spent rescuing the helpless, so on balance you're True Neutral." There's no such thing as a strongly neutral act--it's like saying "a zero of a high absolute value." If you're at 500, the number which gets you to 0 is -500, not "0, but a lot of it."

[Cat In Shadow]

Ha-ha, this strip conversation is great :)
And imho Kudzu is not bad name at all.

[The_Weirdo]

Yeah, my answer is that I choke on that i.e.. Roy was doing something he knew perfectly well was substantially more dangerous than joining the rest of the party to rescue Elan, in pressing on through the Wooden Forest alone. His "Walking into a camp of armed bandits is suicide" line was Grade-A fertilizer, badly attempting to cover the reality of "I don't want Elan back, more than I care whether he dies!"

An act which pushes an otherwise Lawful Good character to True Neutral is by definition a Chaotic Evil act. No deva is going to say, "You spend way more time in the bathroom than you spent rescuing the helpless, so on balance you're True Neutral." There's no such thing as a strongly neutral act--it's like saying "a zero of a high absolute value." If you're at 500, the number which gets you to 0 is -500, not "0, but a lot of it."

What about 500 -1s?

[Nightcanon]

Aside from the fact that that's not even what Nightcanon said, apparently the claim here is that being carried by a high-level cleric makes you invincible because...there is a meme that (something indeterminate but related to clerics keeping people alive).

Mistletoe, in other words, represents mistletoe.

The meme (as in 'persistent idea that is preserved in a culture in a manner analogous to the way genes are preserved by evolution') that you don't split the party because you never want to be out of arms reach of your cleric and your arcane caster.
Re the saving throw thing, sure, I'd rule that if Hilgya saves against something, Kuzdu is protected by that, just as the contents of a backpack are.
I'm not trying to argue that Hilgya isn't evil. I'm not trying to argue that carrying a baby into battle is a good idea. It's clearly a reckless thing to do. I see it as an indicator that Hilgya is reckless, i.e. Chaotic, and that her world view is that her baby stays with her because that is the best place for him, no matter what. 'In game', she might have some justification for that view, regardless of how it turned out. Nothing about the way she is characterised suggests that she wears Kuzdu in front of her breastplate because she doesn't care if he gets hit or not. She thinks he's better off with her.

[Ruck]

Just noticed-- i On the Origin of PCs it's spelled "Firuk Blackore," but here Sigdi calls him "Fyruk."

[TheNecrocomicon]

What about 500 -1s?

So to extend that math, you're saying one arguably CN act -- say, bankrupting a somewhat corrupt and definitely over-controlling family -- might not outweigh a lifetime otherwise full of CE in determining where someone's alignment stands overall?

[The_Weirdo]

So to extend that math, you're saying one arguably CN act -- say, bankrupting a somewhat corrupt and definitely over-controlling family -- might not outweigh a lifetime otherwise full of CE in determining where someone's alignment stands overall?

Nope. It was a genuine question, not a rhetorical one. To wit: a guy saves a life, but then he spends the remainder of his days being a bit of a jerk to everyone he meets and making the lives of those around him juuuust a bit more miserable. Is he Good? Neutral? Evil?

[woweedd]

The meme (as in 'persistent idea that is preserved in a culture in a manner analogous to the way genes are preserved by evolution') that you don't split the party because you never want to be out of arms reach of your cleric and your arcane caster.
Re the saving throw thing, sure, I'd rule that if Hilgya saves against something, Kuzdu is protected by that, just as the contents of a backpack are.
I'm not trying to argue that Hilgya isn't evil. I'm not trying to argue that carrying a baby into battle is a good idea. It's clearly a reckless thing to do. I see it as an indicator that Hilgya is reckless, i.e. Chaotic, and that her world view is that her baby stays with her because that is the best place for him, no matter what. 'In game', she might have some justification for that view, regardless of how it turned out. Nothing about the way she is characterised suggests that she wears Kudzu in front of her breastplate because she doesn't care if he gets hit or not. She thinks he's better off with her.

Again, the author has provided stats for children, and, the short version is: They have, like, one hit point, period. Also, yehs she thtink's that. because she's insanely reckless, and, similar to yourself, seems to consider Kudzu more as an burdensome object then as a person. Hilgyia's main character trait, whatever you consider her Alignment, is a hatred of having her freedom restricted in any way. The problem is, babies, as any parent will tell you, restrict your freedom quite a bit. She seems to have elected to ignore that, which is why she carried a baby into battle. Not going into battle because of him would mean she doesn't get to do what she wants to do, and she can't cotton that. Also, just because she's Chaotic doesn't mean she was to be a reckless idiot. Keep up.

Nope. It was a genuine question, not a rhetorical one. To wit: a guy saves a life, but then he spends the remainder of his days being a bit of a jerk to everyone he meets and making the lives of those around him juuuust a bit more miserable. Is he Good? Neutral? Evil?

Depends on who you ask, but, on balance? Probably Neutral, leaning towards Evil.

[Anitar]

Again, the author has provided stats for children, and, the short version is: They have, like, one hit point, period.

I thought the short version of what Rich said there was "Involving babies in combat (or any other situation where their defensive stats matter) is stone cold evil."

[Rrmcklin]

I thought the short version of what Rich said there was "Involving babies in combat (or any other situation where their defensive stats matter) is stone cold evil."

Makes sense - that Hilgya can rationalize her terrible decisions doesn't mean we're supposed to do so or that it somehow mitigates moral culpability.

[TheNecrocomicon]

Nope. It was a genuine question, not a rhetorical one. To wit: a guy saves a life, but then he spends the remainder of his days being a bit of a jerk to everyone he meets and making the lives of those around him juuuust a bit more miserable. Is he Good? Neutral? Evil?

The information is incomplete. The person who he saved -- where did they fall on the scale from genuine Good to abject Evil? And did the person being judged know what kind of person they were saving?

Also, the preponderance of what falls under Good or Evil plays a role, it's not a straight line from one to the other. If someone does Evil things (even minor ones) all the time except for one spontaneous act of Good, how can they make a claim to be Good or even Neutral overall?

[Kish]

Nope. It was a genuine question, not a rhetorical one. To wit: a guy saves a life, but then he spends the remainder of his days being a bit of a jerk to everyone he meets and making the lives of those around him juuuust a bit more miserable. Is he Good? Neutral? Evil?

I saw a movie about that one time.

("Almost an Angel," specifically.)

[woweedd]

The information is incomplete. The person who he saved -- where did they fall on the scale from genuine Good to abject Evil? And did the person being judged know what kind of person they were saving?

Also, the preponderance of what falls under Good or Evil plays a role, it's not a straight line from one to the other. If someone does Evil things (even minor ones) all the time except for one spontaneous act of Good, how can they make a claim to be Good or even Neutral overall?

Yeah, Werido, this isn't The Good Place. There's not a point system. The Celestials have to eyeball it to some extent.

[The_Weirdo]

Just to make it clear, this time, I wasn't arguing one way or the other. I myself don't know exactly how to measure this scenario either. But I do know it can be inverted: a guy that kills someone and is unfailingly nice and polite thereafter, brightening just a bit the day of everyone he meets...