OOTS #1182 - The Discussion Thread

[redzimmer]

Can we itemize every evil act Belkar has done since he triggered the Mark?

[bunsen_h]

Once we see the X’s in Belkar’s eyes, most of the forum will be amazed by the unforeseen twist that lead to his death and how they would never had guessed his character development would lead to [insert ending here] but about 40% will insist the order is totes gonna raise him you guys.
Then Roy and Durkon will discuss how they won’t raise him and how they feel about that.

Out of curiosity, if a character was reduced to a thin smear, well-mixed with a combination of smeared goblinoids, pulverized lich skeleton, and allosaur mush, could the first of them be raised?

[Aeson]

Out of curiosity, if a character was reduced to a thin smear, well-mixed with a combination of smeared goblinoids, pulverized lich skeleton, and allosaur mush, could the first of them be raised?

Sure. Resurrection doesn't care about the condition of the remains as long as you have a bit that was part of the body at the time of death so I don't see any explicit reason why it couldn't bring back the first despite their remains being inseparable from the others listed, and True Resurrection doesn't need any part of the remains whatsoever.

[GrayGriffin]

Belkar's "build", such as it is, would do basically no damage worth noting to anything. Daggers aren't useful weapons to anyone except rogues. Of course, Belkar does deal considerable damage to many enemies, which one would think be a clear this comic doesn't obey 3E's non-functional rules and non-existent balance. And yet here we are, in year 2019 and 1182nd strip. I guess people will keep saying this until the very end.

I'm also not sure why a character abandoning their major motivation to optimize according to rules the comic adheres to loosely at the best of times is treated as a good or desirable thing. The same goes for using a rulebook maybe 1/4 of the comic's readership has heard about, much less used.

I was just pointing out it'd be hypocritical for Belkar to complain about Roy's build. I agree with you, you know. Heck, Roy's devotion to using just his sword is why it ended up becoming a Weapon of Legacy in the first place!

[Necris Omega]

Well he's not really doing it that much, he's just not seeking out more items.

I mean he took the Belt of Ogre Strength and the Bag of Tricks, and the other miscellaneous stuff he's run across, but he just never went looking for new stuff outside of loot.

I'm guessing his share is also the one that gets the most cut into for things like "resurrection fund" and "travel expenses" on account of how he is the leader and all.

I think it's at least partially a matter of Giant trying to tiptoe around the trap that is having too much stuff become the focus.

Yeah, an adventuring party of this level is probably going to come armed with such a plethora of weaponized stuff Giant could probably squeeze a few dozen comics out of it. It's usually a pretty cool moment to see a main character get an upgrade or neat gadget. At least, in how he's handled it, which has been pretty good for the most part.

But... detailing every Belt of Agility or Scabbard of Blessing could quickly get tiresome for a lot of people. Me? I'd love to see him sit down and flesh all that out, and I doubt I'm alone. But I realize that a whole heck of a lot of people would probably get real sick and tired of that really quick. The D&D mechanics/themes have always been used, but only insofar as they improve the comic, rather than shackle or hinder it, and going that indepth into the player's various armaments could easily do that.

Also, it's rare people enjoy a hero who "stuffs" his foes to death. Bat Shark Replant and all that. From a narrative standpoint, it can be tedious, gimmicky, and tension ruining. It's an absolute joy to watch Haley punk her golemized rival with flight, but it's ("it" being the idea of well-equipped characters in general, not just the amazing flying rogue) the kind of thing I think could lead to more narrative problems than leverage points in the long term, so I can see why Rich would hold back on it.

Roy's over reliance on his sword might not make any strategic sense, but it fits the story, and that's the more important part.



But... again, I for one don't mind seeing characters whip out nifty magical artifacts, or exposit about them for panels on end, so if this results in Roy doing a 180º and kitting himself out, you'll hear no complaints from me.

Yay materialism, I suppose.

[NNescio]

I...never actually realized that Roy was skipping out on his magic items to prove something with his family sword.

Belkar is more attentive than I am, at least.

(...)

EDIT:

Well he's not really doing it that much, he's just not seeking out more items.

I mean he took the Belt of Ogre Strength and the Bag of Tricks, and the other miscellaneous stuff he's run across, but he just never went looking for new stuff outside of loot.

I'm guessing his share is also the one that gets the most cut into for things like "resurrection fund" and "travel expenses" on account of how he is the leader and all.

Obviously he dumped most of his WBL into his Weapon of Legacy.

[Ruck]

I have 100 imaginary gold pieces on Belkar doing a heroic (and soul-ending) sacrifice a la Kraagor of the Order of the Scribble, to Save the World *and* avoid a nasty afterlife.

That's probably my betting favorite right now, too. Not confident enough in it to be odds-on, but I think I like the parallel to Kraagor, and the step of self-sacrifice as redemption, to think it's the most likely of the outcomes I've considered. (Except I think I'm betting on his soul not being erased. My thinking there is more "finds himself in Chaotic Neutral afterlife after his act of self-sacrifice.")

[Forikroder]

Well to fit the Belkar metaphor; if you got an army and conquered the British Empire, you could pretty much declare yourself the Queen of England and only the other Superpowers could disagree with you. But the Empire and the Commonwealth certainly only contributes to your rise at that point.

Likewise if Belkar gets enough Soul power to make himself a God, then there may be a window for Thor to murder him on ascension before Belkar gets more Soul power to give him full Godly powers; but there's nothing the mortals can do about it except pray he doesn't smite them. Which as Hel shows was a pretty good deal. Also if he's famous ENOUGH for all his super-murdering, the other warriors may pray to him for his blessing in their own super-murdering.

EDIT:



Well he's not really doing it that much, he's just not seeking out more items.

I mean he took the Belt of Ogre Strength and the Bag of Tricks, and the other miscellaneous stuff he's run across, but he just never went looking for new stuff outside of loot.

I'm guessing his share is also the one that gets the most cut into for things like "resurrection fund" and "travel expenses" on account of how he is the leader and all.

not like the OoTS is really getting much loot in the first place either, if it wasnt for haley theyd be long broke and even then i think there last big score was grubwiggers place

Haley already pointed out they didnt have much funds left, if it wasnt for Hilgya they might not have been able to rez Durkon, and im guessing all those wands Haley got wasnt just from her personal share so i think its muchj more likely that Roy simply cant afford much magic items rather then is choosing not to out of some wierd sense of pride, plus his sword is extra effective against undead even before the legacy bonuses so it would be pretty hard for him to get a better weapon anyway

[Dr.Zero]

Even if a case of Redemption equals life would be cool, I think it's obvious that we will see a case of Redemption equals death.
I don't remember if I was the first one or simply in the first wave to propose his last line being like: "Why this thing... doesn't hurt me... anymore? X_X" but narratively it was obvious for me that the main purpose of introducing the clasp was exactly to prepare the field for that line.
So, even if I love Belkar, I've accepted that he will die definitely. Resurrection would be cool, but aside from being a bit like cheating (oh, we have an oracle... but, surprise!, it gives false prophecies!) it would detract from the absolute tearjerkerism power of that line. And Belkar must die as he lived: as a concentrated of awesomeness!

[LuisDantas]

It was nice to see Belkar at long last grow a bit of character. He needed it badly.

[KorvinStarmast]

I...never actually realized that Roy was skipping out on his magic items to prove something with his family sword.

Belkar is more attentive than I am, at least.

there is that belt of giant strength, and it helped him beat that tough frost giant lady.

[GloatingSwine]

, plus his sword is extra effective against undead even before the legacy bonuses so it would be pretty hard for him to get a better weapon anyway

This is kind of the thinking that Roy has displayed and Belkar hasn't.

Roy's permanent magical items are about making him better at things he's already good at.

When Belkar went shopping he went and bought items to correct the things he was bad at.

Belkar might not be right about the why, but he's got the what. Roy needs to be covering his weaknesses better, not thinking about what makes his strengths stronger.

[The MunchKING]

not like the OoTS is really getting much loot in the first place either, if it wasnt for haley theyd be long broke and even then i think there last big score was grubwiggers place

I dunno, Hailey was the one that was taking 95% before they even got to dividing it up, and then conning them out of an extra double-share of the loot of the stuff she couldn't hide.

Though I guess that really did help the Resistance when she decided to open up her purse strings for them.

[Nomen]

Perhaps not as a good god. But the way Thor described it doesn't exactly imply worship has to be positive. (Helya alone is proof of that.) What matters is that they're being thought of at all, both in life and death. Belkar's managed to get so many people pissed at him the Oracle got together just enough Kobolds together to legally constitute a town. If they were told why they were living there, that's a thing. There's no way Belkar's corpse-screaming moment at Azure City didn't get more than a few heads turning. Even in the City of Blood he easily managed to get everyone in the arena immediately recognizing him as the 'villain' of the bunch.

My point (in this discussion I'm only moderately believing feasible, but find fun) is that godhood is not predicated on people being on their knees, praying to you a whole lot. Having an army screaming for your blood in furious anger or citizens trembling every night praying you don't find them is 'prayer' just the same, so it seems to me anyway. If everywhere you go you make people mad at you, they KNOW you. Everyone Belkar kills is probably going to remember him pretty damn strongly in the afterlife... And he's pretty hard to ignore when he does kill them, making their dedication strong.

Tbc I don't know if this theory is really, actually plausible or not, but I mean... Evil gods have to get their start in a Pantheon SOMEHOW, right? And it's sure as heck is not going to be by making the people like you a whole bunch.

Here's my best guess.
Worship: requires mentally talking to a person.
Belief: requires having an idea what a person is like and possibly actually thinking they are real.
Dedication: I'm sort of spitballing here but there are two main methods I can thing of. 1. Legalese either the person is assigned to you (must already be in the club for this) or the person sold their soul to you. 2. Self directed dying after devoting their life to you, dying for you, dying while thinking about you, dying while believing they are going to you. I'm also not sure where to put this but what other people believe will happen to your soul might have some effect.
Souls: see dedication but slower.

Notes on worship: Hell is sort of starving despite lots of dwarves really not wanting to go to her, so my guess is please don't let her get me does not count as worship, but you can hate people and still worship them demonstrated by people praying to her not to hurt them, so I'm guessing please don't get me would count. Thing is nobody is asking her for help or mercy they are either trying to win by themselves or asking another god for help.
No notes on belief it seems of straight forward.
Dedication/Souls notes: TDO got souls and dedication so I'm guessing legalese is not the only thing that matters. I know dying with the intent to go to someone who you devoted your life to and believing you will actually get there counts so long as no one else has claim on your soul, and your allignment matches, and others think you are going to them. Beyond that most of it is spitballing and you can devote your life to harming someone or die trying to hurt someone and I don't know if that would count. I'm pretty sure a combination of the things I listed are taken into account by default but I don't know how much or to what extent.

[Furious J]

It was nice to see Belkar at long last grow a bit of character. He needed it badly.

I'd say that he has been growing his bit of character for a while. He's already showed a bit of growth, or self-reflection - just a bit - to Durkon, in Halfling Baby Steps Are Very Small, and to Minrah, in It's Never Failed Before. These days, any time Belkar gets a line that gives some hint of his inner thoughts, I can't help but go back and look for the other comics where he's done it before, to try to form a more complete picture of what's going on in his head.

My current take: Belkar is afraid of rejection. He can't (or doesn't want to have to) deal with the extreme bad-feels that would come if he tried to actually make a real emotional bond with anybody and got rejected. By being hostile, rude, and hurtful first, he removes the uncertainty and gains some measure of control, because he is guaranteeing the rejection, instead of leaving an open possibility that he might be blindsided by it.

I think that all the time spent with the OotS is starting to get him to lower his defenses, because in spite of his caustic personality, he's finding that he is not getting pushed away - not consistently. He says that the Order only keeps him around because "hurting people is the only thing I'm good at", downplays Durkon's sacrifice by saying "it's not like he gives a damn about me, specifically", and in this comic, again restates that everyone would be happier if they could find a "raw muscle equivalent" to replace him. The fact that they continue to travel with him, though, and that he does get hints of acceptance - in spite of all the terrible things he has done - is leading to these moments of vulnerability that Belkar seems to be having.

I'll grant to you that he's been drinking, and that's probably a factor in why he's saying this stuff to Roy, but I think he's starting to feel like he belongs, and I am very curious to see how things play out between him and the rest of the OotS in the last book.

[Caynist]

Roy needs to be covering his weaknesses better, not thinking about what makes his strengths stronger.

It's really funny how Roy realised his crippling weakness is losing his sword all the time ages ago, and he doesn't do anything about it til the plot's like 'here, that particular recurring subplot's gone forever now'.

Really though, Roy hasn't had too many other plot-related weaknesses. By my count, all that's left is fire damage, Hold Monster, and gravity.

Although now that I mention it, some Protection Against Fire could be useful against Xykon's favourite Meteor Swarm.

[Dellis]

A long, long time ago, when everybody was piling on Belkar, cheering when they learnt he was going to die, I said something.

"Mark my words. When Belkar dies, we'll all shed tears."

This is just the first signal I was right.

I know there are lots and lots of people who do not like Belkar as a character. I know.

I can only conclude these self-righteous people never have made a mistake who hurt someone.

Worst mistakes are the ones in which you think you're right, or simply think it doesn't matter if you are. You keep doing them a long, long time, until they're everything you ever was.

I'll say it again.

Mark my words. When Belkar dies, we'll all shed tears.

"Belkar is a horrible, loathsome, supremely selfish creature who behaves contemptibly, laughs at the pains of others, has no manners whatsoever and whose mental acuity would be compared unfavourably to that of a table.

And yet, I find I still prefer him to you."

[Peelee]

A long, long time ago, when everybody was piling on Belkar, cheering when they learnt he was going to die, I said something.

"Mark my words. When Belkar dies, we'll all shed tears."

This is just the first signal I was right.

I know there are lots and lots of people who do not like Belkar as a character. I know.

I can only conclude these self-righteous people never have made a mistake who hurt someone.

Someone has to be perfect in order to dislike a psychopathic slaving murderer?

Regardless, I can't deny Belkar is improving. I may well be sad when he dies. I'll put five bucks on no tears being shed, though.

[Dellis]

Someone has to be perfect in order to dislike a psychopathic slaving murderer?

Regardless, I can't deny Belkar is improving. I may well be sad when he dies. I'll put five bucks on no tears being shed, though.

No, just to be happy about his death. (And that's even if he never did any improvement.)

Might have been clearer about that, though. Granted. If you will, read that line as " I know there are people around who do not like Belkar's character so much they'd be happy to see him killed off", but it sounds less catchy.

Although in the first lines of the post is quite clear what I'm taking issue with.

[Doug Lampert]

No, just to be happy about his death. (And that's even if he never did any improvement.)

Might have been clearer about that, though. Granted. If you will, read that line as " I know there are people around who do not like Belkar's character so much they'd be happy to see him killed off", but it sounds less catchy.

Although in the first lines of the post is quite clear what I'm taking issue with.

I don't expect to be particularly happy about his death, but I don't expect to shed any tears.

See my post about Crystal's death, and replace her name with his and make appropriate pronoun and circumstance changes (like changing who kills him) and I expect it to be completely suitable for Belkar's death too.

[Sir_Norbert]

It's a work of fiction. The feeling of relief and catharsis when a bad guy dies or otherwise meets their comeuppance has been a key part of fiction as long as fiction has been around, from Penelope's suitors to Saruman and Umbridge.

We are allowed to have these feelings and it doesn't make us "self-righteous", nor does it mean we would have the same feelings about a bad person dying in real life.

[super dark33]

When he dies, his development will reach a point where we will weep.

When the prophecy was first made, no one would :P

[The Pilgrim]

Someone has to be perfect in order to dislike a psychopathic slaving murderer?

Regardless, I can't deny Belkar is improving. I may well be sad when he dies. I'll put five bucks on no tears being shed, though.

If you don't cry when Belkar dies, that would mean The Giant will not have done his job.

By time Belkar dies, the OOTS webcomic will be 20 years old, at least. Plenty of time for him to find the way to make all us weep.

Giant, I'm counting on you.

[MossyMeow]

I don’t know if I’ll cry when Belkar dies, but I do know one thing: he’ll go out with a bang. All hail the sexy shoeless god of war!

[Dellis]

It's a work of fiction. The feeling of relief and catharsis when a bad guy dies or otherwise meets their comeuppance has been a key part of fiction as long as fiction has been around, from Penelope's suitors to Saruman and Umbridge.

We are allowed to have these feelings and it doesn't make us "self-righteous", nor does it mean we would have the same feelings about a bad person dying in real life.

To be sure.

I am speaking about those who have that feeling while suspending their disbelief about it being fiction and not true story, which you must do to immerse yourself in it, and to a degree, to comment on the moral behaviour of characters.

Without this temporary suspension of disbelief, "Belkar" is just a drawing on paper. Can't claim people ought to be sad about his death.

I can, though, to people who comment on his behaviour and morals and "fate he deserves" like he was alive. They're suspending their disbelief, I'm too. Fair game.

I don’t know if I’ll cry when Belkar dies, but I do know one thing: he’ll go out with a bang. All hail the sexy shoeless god of war!

That's something we can agree on :)

[hroþila]

How about we let different people react to the story differently.

[Dellis]

How about we let different people react to the story differently.

Am I allowed that? Because last time I tried to say that I do not read Belkar as a psychopath little murderer without redemption or soul and feel empathy for him, I seem to recall people bashing me for four days straight (mind you, me, not my ideas, but I suppose that's par for the course).

Apart from this little sarcasm not directed at you but people who burned me on this, I'm all for letting people choose their side in this, but I'm not going to keep silent on how I view Belkar and his actions, and that includes stating what is my reaction to the story and express why other reactions seem to me incoherent with the source material, in an in-universe perspective, or a bit devoid of empathy. (edited for clarification).

In fact, I've received answers that engage in my same action.

I'm sorry if you read me as trying to get others not to express their ideas. Feel free. I'm just going to express why I think they're wrong. That's the core of discussion. Of course, meaningful discussion is always antagonistic in nature (in the sense of requiring a clash of views), but that's part of the game. I want to state very clearly, if any doubts were there, that I do not think any less of any people who view it differently from me. I'll just discuss their ideas, and mine.

This is a discussion forum, isn't it?

[Verappo]

generally speaking, one of this comic's most recurring themes is redemption and whether it is even possible, so I think we are very much meant to engage with that theme as a question, rather than something the comic will provide a clear answer to.

This is the subtext I read behind Roy's assessment of V's familicide actions at the end of the last book, as well as Soon's discussion with Miko. The comic's approach to redemption so far seems to be more "eh, who knows if you achieved it, but trying to do better does mean something" rather than a definite yes or no. I'd say asking the question may very much be the point, so I wouldn't fault anyone who finds empathy for Belkar or other evil characters, when that just shows how successful the comic is at eliciting those feelings.

[KorvinStarmast]

The fact that they continue to travel with him, though, and that he does get hints of acceptance - in spite of all the terrible things he has done - is leading to these moments of vulnerability that Belkar seems to be having.

He's said tough things to Roy before, to include in Strip 881.

The Order keeps him around because of Roy's decision that he shared with the Deva: if he can keep Belkar's murderous impulses pointed at the bad guys who are either threatening the world (Xykon and allies), threatening a city(War and XP), or just plain threatening (Frost Giants, Tarquin's minions and vampires) then other people are not in danger of his casual habit of murder.

With Haley's experiences in trying to handle Belkar resulting in unfavorable outcomes, it is apparent that Belkar needs someone who can kick his butt to keep him aimed in the right direction. That someone is Roy. Belkar seems to need an alpha male, and he knows who the alpha male is in this pack: a man named Greenhilt.

Evolution isn't rapid change. Belkar's char dev since the evolve or die password has taken another 550 strips (off and on) so far.

"Belkar is a horrible, loathsome, supremely selfish creature who behaves contemptibly, laughs at the pains of others, has no manners whatsoever and whose mental acuity would be compared unfavourably to that of a table.

And yet, I find I still prefer him to you."

Was that Haley talking to Celia, or was that V going on a rant versus Elan? Or was that V talking to Miko? It sounds so familiar.

By time Belkar dies, the OOTS webcomic will be 20 years old, at least. Plenty of time for him to find the way to make all us weep.

The odds are in his favor.

Am I allowed that? Because last time I tried to say that I do not read Belkar as a psychopath little murderer without redemption or soul and feel empathy for him, I seem to recall people bashing me for four days straight (mind you, me, not my ideas, but I suppose that's par for the course). This is a discussion forum, isn't it?

It is supposed to be. But some days it feels like it's something else.

[Sindeloke]

Even without the size penalty a dagger is a 1d4 damage weapon. With it, it's 1d3. Rogues get Sneak Attack to counteract the pitiful damage of their weaponry, Rangers don't.

Y'all have been playing 5e too long. A ranger with well-chosen favored enemies can deal a very reasonable amount of damage dual-weilding. Can't complete with a rogue, of course, but depending on DM it can be much easier to get the bonus consistently. Certainly he's liable to get it at least as much as an archer like Hayley.

The whole Stickverse is extremely low-op, though, in every conceivable way, so neither Roy nor Belkar are, practically speaking, particularly behind the curve of their own local setting. Which is for the best now that they're at high levels - rocket tag would make for a pretty boring comic.

Put my quatloos on "redemptive self-sacrifice death," by the way. I won't cry but I'll probably feel a similar positive catharsis to the sort that Elan's happy ending will provoke.