OOTS #281 - The Discussion Thread

[CatPeeler]

#206

"Plus, there's a good chance that if she associates with me, she'll lose all her Paladin powers...and that would be just too funny not to try."

[Amalthea]

*tips hat to Phantom Fox* I didn't actually think someone would come up with an answer. Actually I didn't even know there was an answer, I was just being a cheeky smartass. Very nice!

Back to the comic, if I remember correctly a lead blocking sheet doesn't have to be very thick. Given that Belkar's sheet is probaby 2-3 feet tall, anyone happen to know how much it would weigh?

Lead has a density of 11.34 g/cm^3. Working with a sheet of lead that is 1 meter square and 1/2cm thick, you have 5,000 cm^3 of lead. That gives you 56,700 grams of lead. That's 56.7 kilograms or 124.74 pounds. I'm not certain that a 1/2 cm thick sheet of lead is thick enough to form an unflexible sheet, though. I would say it would need to be 1 cm thick, which would double the weight to 113.4 kilograms, or 249.48 pounds. Then again, it wouldn't need to be 1 meter square, it could be 1 meter by 1/2 meter, which would drop the weight back to 56.7 kilograms / 124.74 pounds.

Belkar has a size modifier to his carrying capacity of 3/4, so he would need a Strength of 14 to carry the lead sheet, period, and even then he'd be heavily burdened. With a Strength of 17, he'd only be carrying a medium burden.

Unless he somehow got it into his bag of holding, but given his comment, I doubt it.

[Edited for spelling]

[PhoeKun]

Lead has a density of 11.34 g/cm^3. Working with a sheet of lead that is 1 meter square and 1/2cm thick, you have 5,000 cm^3 of lead. That gives you 56,700 grams of lead. That's 56.7 kilograms or 124.74 pounds. I'm not certain that a 1/2 cm thick sheet of lead is thick enough to form an unflexible sheet, though. I would say it would need to be 1 cm thick, which would double the weight to 113.4 kilograms, or 249.48 pounds. Then again, it wouldn't need to be 1 meter square, it could be 1 meter by 1/2 meter, which would drop the weight back to 56.7 kilograms / 124.74 pounds.

Belkar has a size modifier to his carrying capacity of 3/4, so he would need a Strength of 14 to carry the lead sheet, period, and even then he'd be heavily burdened. With a Strength of 17, he'd only be carrying a medium burden.

Unless he somehow got it into his bag of holding, but given his comment, I doubt it.

[Edited for spelling]

This is why its cool to have scientisits on message boards. I had honestly never really thought about just how heavy a sheet of lead like that would be. And given that a Greatsword sized for a Huge creature weighs a whopping 32 pounds... that sheet would hurt.

I feel it is safe to say that Miko's hit point total has no bearing on whether or not that big honking sheet of death... er... lead would knock her out. As such, all bets are off... again. Yay for uncertainty!

[CatPeeler]

I'm not certain that a 1/2 cm thick sheet of lead is thick enough to form an unflexible sheet, though.

I've worked with lead sheet before. A sheet about a quarter-inch thick was slightly easier to bend than stiff leather.

[FreeloadingSausage]

Not that I want to get into the alignment discussion, but this bit had to be quoted. God of mittens. My player shall curse you for giving me ideas.

Oh, I'm sorry, has no one ever introduced you to Roc-thaur, god of mittens and kittens? It's quite an amusing story invented by my friends and I.

Roc-thaur was the god who showed up late to the pantheon meeting when they handed out the portfolios. He's essentially a Half-Orcian god who was very interested in such divine portfolios as Slaughter, Murder, Death, Destruction and Murder (again). However, the god of deceit (Vechna?) gave him the wrong directions to the meeting so he arrived when the only remaining deific openings were in mittens and kittens. Essentially, he resides in the plane of said mittens and kittens--a giant ball of yarn filled with cat hair and other less pleasant things. He sits on a giant throne of living kittens and grants domain powers to his one cleric, a mid-level gnome with chronic depression, 8 slots of summon divine kittens, and thirteen ranks in Craft: Mittens.

(Roc-thaur has to heavily import from the plane of kitty litter, obviously)

Further information to adding Roc-Thaur to YOUR campaign:

His divine symbol is that of a man being split in two by a Great Axe which is Roc-thaur's favored weapon. His domain spells are as follows:

Lvl. 1: Summon Divine Kitten lvl. 1
Lvl. 2: Summon Divine Kitten lvl. 2
Lvl. 3: Summon Divine Kitten lvl. 3
Lvl. 4: Summon Divine Kitten lvl. 4

And so on.

His followers include his single gnome cleric, who is most often found surrounded (Rat King style) by kittens, which is unfortuante, because he is allergic to cats.

Needless to say, Roc-thaur's name gets left out of a lot of invitation lists for the gods' dance parties, and Erythnul, Vechna, and the other "cool" gods won't let him join their poker group.

[iltharanos]

Oh, I'm sorry, has no one ever introduced you to Roc-thaur, god of mittens and kittens? It's quite an amusing story invented by my friends and I.

<snip>

LOL, that's hilarious.

Poor Roc-thaur. ;D

[Denaes]

Ex-Paladins
A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who grossly violates the code of conduct loses all paladin spells and abilities (including the service of the paladin’s mount, but not weapon, armor, and shield proficiencies). She may not progress any farther in levels as a paladin. She regains her abilities and advancement potential if she atones for her violations (see the atonement spell description), as appropriate.

Ahem.


For the last time. Violating the Code will cause a fal. However as I have underlined and italicized it must be a gross violation.

Ignoring one Cease and Desist order which hasn't even gone to trail is not, I repeat not, a gross violation.

Thank you, good night.

Well, I don't think it's so much the code itself as that breaking the code is itself a chaotic act and anything you're doing in breaking the code (lying, cheating, stealing, ignoring innocents you could help, etc) are all pretty chaotic actions.

So you could argue that when you hit the point where you hit "Gross Violation" of your Code of Conduct, you're not Lawful anymore as you're not sticking to your Code, you're dishonoring your vow to your diety (which is an issue I have with one single Code of Conduct covering so many dieties) and to perform Chaotic acts.

But a few minor transgressions spread out might be the start of a downhill slide, but wouldn't be enough to lose powers over.

[rebellioussong]

Belkars alignment evilish-chaotic but mostly just adhd-chaotic

[Amalthea]

I've worked with lead sheet before. A sheet about a quarter-inch thick was slightly easier to bend than stiff leather.

How stiff is stiff leather? Rawhide stiff? Leather armor stiff? Boot leather stiff?

I was basing my estimations of bendable thickness off of recollections of lead aprons used to protect the body from X-Rays and the 5cm thick lead bricks we have in the lab.

[Edit] And even if it is 1/2 cm thick and 1m x 1/2m in dimension, it's still 62.37 pounds of lead, which is nothing to sneeze at when it's hitting you in the head. (The lead bricks I was fussing with today are about 25 lbs. each, and 5cm x 10cm x 20cm.) Belkar would need a minimum Strength of 9 to carry the sheet, a Strength of 12 for it to be a medium load, and a Strength of 17 to carry it as a light load.

[Edit 2] My apologies for my inherent nerdiness. :o

[nagora]

Perhaps the sheet is lead over something else. Something that might go "wang" and weigh less than solid lead.

I think we can deduce from this strip (and others) that Belkar is currently CN. He isn't evil, he's just amoral. He'll be good (but not very) if it serves him, and he'll be evil (but not very) if that serves him.

Jack the Ripper, Hitler, Condoleeza Rice, Stalin, the Moors Murderers. THESE are evil people. Someone who doesn't slay a helpless foe and who rides a dachshund just isn't.

If he had been evil there is any number of times he could have literally cut and run, but I doubt that any of the OotS would expect him to desert them in difficult times.

Even good people can really dislike each other. Lawful and Chaotic can certainly hate each other without either being evil.

And: "I'm the 8th dwarf, Stabby" was a great line.

[iltharanos]

How stiff is stiff leather? Rawhide stiff? Leather armor stiff? Boot leather stiff?

I was basing my estimations of bendable thickness off of recollections of lead aprons used to protect the body from X-Rays and the 5cm thick lead bricks we have in the lab.

[Edit] And even if it is 1/2 cm thick and 1m x 1/2m in dimension, it's still 62.37 pounds of lead, which is nothing to sneeze at when it's hitting you in the head. (The lead bricks I was fussing with today are about 25 lbs. each, and 5cm x 10cm x 20cm.) Belkar would need a minimum Strength of 9 to carry the sheet, a Strength of 12 for it to be a medium load, and a Strength of 17 to carry it as a light load.

[Edit 2] My apologies for my inherent nerdiness. :o

Wooo, numbers pretty. ??? ;)

[Starbuck_II]

Nagora:
Since the last time Belkar fought Miko with a the party. Belkar was CE. THe Giant confirmed this.

Was not killing her a non-evil act: of course! but one non-evil or good act do not make an evil person good (it takes more and consistent acts).

[theKOT]

Nagora:
Since the last time Belkar fought Miko with a the party. Belkar was CE. THe Giant confirmed this.

Was not killing her a non-evil act: of course! but one non-evil or good act do not make an evil person good (it takes more and consistent acts).

Nope, sorry, WRONG. If Evil equaled "kill in a hearbeat", Bond-esque heroes wouldn't have made it to the end of the movie. Evil doesn't mean smart or efficient, it means evil. It doesn't mean that the villain (or evil protagonist) doesn't get a thrill from toying with their enemies. It doesn't mean that the evil person can't find value in keeping a friend of foe alive while they serve a purpose (entertainment value). It doesn't mean that an evil character can't take a fancy to someone and not want to kill them, cause then they'd be dead. no, wait, this line of thinking is how we got to the disturbing image that started this all, nevermind.

See? I thought so at first, but RawBear (who posted the above) makes a very convincing argument.

[nagora]

Nagora:
Since the last time Belkar fought Miko with a the party. Belkar was CE. THe Giant confirmed this.

Was not killing her a non-evil act: of course! but one non-evil or good act do not make an evil person good (it takes more and consistent acts).

"Sometimes the things you create can take on a life of their own" - V Frankenstein.

Belkar's not killing Miko was not a good act or an evil one, it was a classic neutral one; Belkar is having fun. The rest of the strip (ie, the 280 strips) make no good case for him being evil as opposed to just being a bit of a git at times. I certainly can't think of a time when he has killed an unarmed opponent without provocation and he has worked with the other PCs fairly consistantly.

He just enjoys annoying people. But does that make him (or Jim Carrey) evil?

edit: Bond villans are LE anyway.

[Sneak]

Well, he also enjoys killing people and stabbing people. Which, believe it or not, generally makes one evil.

[Finwe]

"Sometimes the things you create can take on a life of their own" - V Frankenstein.

Belkar's not killing Miko was not a good act or an evil one, it was a classic neutral one; Belkar is having fun. The rest of the strip (ie, the 280 strips) make no good case for him being evil as opposed to just being a bit of a git at times. I certainly can't think of a time when he has killed an unarmed opponent without provocation and he has worked with the other PCs fairly consistantly.

He just enjoys annoying people. But does that make him (or Jim Carrey) evil?

Evil doesn't mean chaotic stupid you know. There are much more Evil things you can do to a person than simply killing them. Belkar didn't spare Miko out of the goodness of his heart, or any kind of obscure code of honor. Belkar spared Miko because he wanted to continue to toy with her, torment her, and (possibly) make her fall.

You guys are arguing over nothing. When Belkar wanged her on the head, she fell down, right? Well, at that point the discussion about whether Miko is going to be a fallen paladin or not became moot.

You are awesome.

[WNxArrakis]

Lead has a density of 11.34 g/cm^3. Working with a sheet of lead that is 1 meter square and 1/2cm thick, you have 5,000 cm^3 of lead. That gives you 56,700 grams of lead. That's 56.7 kilograms or 124.74 pounds. I'm not certain that a 1/2 cm thick sheet of lead is thick enough to form an unflexible sheet, though. I would say it would need to be 1 cm thick, which would double the weight to 113.4 kilograms, or 249.48 pounds. Then again, it wouldn't need to be 1 meter square, it could be 1 meter by 1/2 meter, which would drop the weight back to 56.7 kilograms / 124.74 pounds.

Belkar has a size modifier to his carrying capacity of 3/4, so he would need a Strength of 14 to carry the lead sheet, period, and even then he'd be heavily burdened. With a Strength of 17, he'd only be carrying a medium burden.

Unless he somehow got it into his bag of holding, but given his comment, I doubt it.

[Edited for spelling]

True, but if he had a lesser bag of holding, it reduces it to 20% of the weight, which would cut it down to about 14.25 kilos - something manageble for him.

[nagora]

Belkar didn't spare Miko out of the goodness of his heart, or any kind of obscure code of honor. Belkar spared Miko because he wanted to continue to toy with her, torment her, and (possibly) make her fall.

I am NOT saying he's CG. Wanting revenge on someone who has been as much of a pain as Miko has is not evil, just selfish and a bit stupid.

I would rather have Belkar in my party than Miko, that's for sure. CN and CG are both far more trustworthy than L-anything; Lawfuls have a habit of suddenly finding some "higher purpose" which overrides their loyalty to their friends.

We Chaotics answer to no higher purpose than ourselves and (apart from CEs) we thus hold honour much more highly since our word is a very personal thing; in fact many of us feel that its all we have that is really ours, which is why we don't want to break it.

[nagora]

Well, he also enjoys killing people and stabbing people. Which, believe it or not, generally makes one evil.

He does not enjoy killing people; he enjoys defeating them and has no qualms about killing. So what? That covers three-quarters of the heroes in fantasy novels. Robin Hood was not noted for being miserable in a fight; nor Conan or Gimli (who actually made a game out of counting his dead opponents!). Were they evil characters?

If he simply enjoyed killing people he would not wait until they were armed and dangerous, or had given him grief previously. Has he ever killed anyone in cold-blood?

[humanpylon]

Has he ever killed anyone in cold-blood?

Yup, some surrendering goblins http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/Gian...tscript?SK=115

[Amalthea]

True, but if he had a lesser bag of holding, it reduces it to 20% of the weight, which would cut it down to about 14.25 kilos - something manageble for him.

Yeah, but I'm just wondering how he manages to get the sheet in and out of the bag of holding. I didn't think the mouth of the bag would be quite so... stretchy.

[Jefepato]

1. I would require a fortitude save for the victim of a successful called shot to the head, with DC's to beat against being stunned or knocked completely unconscious. Blows to the head do this sort of damage, it is not unreasonable.

There's no such thing as a called shot in D&D, under either 3.0 or 3.5 rules, so I'm not sure where you're going with this.

[Denaes]

Evil has nothing to do with killing anyone. You can be evil and never kill anyone. Evil is often the intent behind why you do things.

If you save a schoolgirl from from being hit by a bus, is that a good act? Possibly.

If you know she'll grow up and cause the deaths of millions and you save her because she's a human being and every life is sacred, would it be a good act? I'd think so, but it's getting kinda grey.

If you saved her for the sole purpose of ensuring that she kills millions, would that be a good act? Probobly not.

Now what if she kills millions to save billions? Is that a good act for her? kinda grey I'd say. I'd say if she was intending on saving the human race, it would be a good act.

If she killed millions because they were too old and causing a drain on society? Also grey area. Some societies do this as a matter of fact. For the best of the society.

If she killed millions because they questioned her judgement? Most people would agree thats pretty evil, but some may make an argument.

And when you bring two different cultures into the same descision things really get hairy.

D&D is a lot more B&W. They don't deal with Cultural Relativism. The dieties that created the world basically make it a very cut & dry process by boiling down what good/evil & lawful/chaotic is for everyone.

What you have is a character who is evil. The player (Giant) has said so. You may be able to attempt to explain away some of his actions as not evil, but the player flat out says that the character does things with evil intentions.

He doesn't kill kobolds to save the world, he does it to make squishy noises.

He is also Chaotic. That just means he doesn't follow any laws that he doesn't feel like.

Put the two together and you have a character who does whatever he likes with no regard for others. That's pretty much what Chaotic Evil is.

Yeah, evil is evil in D&D. No shades of gray. The old man in the gun shop who sells guns to people from a back alley to supply crooks is evil. So is the guy who hunts people down and wears their skin as clothing. So is the guy who directs underlings to murder people for him. All evil.

I'd say that CE is the closest you can come to being truely selfish/sociopathic in the D&D alignment scale. I mean truely selfish as in you don't care about others and will do whatever you want no matter what. Not selfish like you ate the bag of sweedish fish your brother was saving.

[WNxArrakis]

Evil has nothing to do with killing anyone. You can be evil and never kill anyone. Evil is often the intent behind why you do things.

If you save a schoolgirl from from being hit by a bus, is that a good act? Possibly.

If you know she'll grow up and cause the deaths of millions and you save her because she's a human being and every life is sacred, would it be a good act? I'd think so, but it's getting kinda grey.

If you saved her for the sole purpose of ensuring that she kills millions, would that be a good act? Probobly not.

Now what if she kills millions to save billions? Is that a good act for her? kinda grey I'd say. I'd say if she was intending on saving the human race, it would be a good act.

If she killed millions because they were too old and causing a drain on society? Also grey area. Some societies do this as a matter of fact. For the best of the society.

If she killed millions because they questioned her judgement? Most people would agree thats pretty evil, but some may make an argument.

And when you bring two different cultures into the same descision things really get hairy.

D&D is a lot more B&W. They don't deal with Cultural Relativism. The dieties that created the world basically make it a very cut & dry process by boiling down what good/evil & lawful/chaotic is for everyone.

What you have is a character who is evil. The player (Giant) has said so. You may be able to attempt to explain away some of his actions as not evil, but the player flat out says that the character does things with evil intentions.

He doesn't kill kobolds to save the world, he does it to make squishy noises.

He is also Chaotic. That just means he doesn't follow any laws that he doesn't feel like.

Put the two together and you have a character who does whatever he likes with no regard for others. That's pretty much what Chaotic Evil is.

Yeah, evil is evil in D&D. No shades of gray. The old man in the gun shop who sells guns to people from a back alley to supply crooks is evil. So is the guy who hunts people down and wears their skin as clothing. So is the guy who directs underlings to murder people for him. All evil.

I'd say that CE is the closest you can come to being truely selfish/sociopathic in the D&D alignment scale. I mean truely selfish as in you don't care about others and will do whatever you want no matter what. Not selfish like you ate the bag of sweedish fish your brother was saving.

D&D isnt black and white alignments... anyone who's read the intro to The Book of Vile Darkness can see that... to use an example from it, "If a paladin slips and causes a landslide on a mountain, and rocks crush villagers at the bottom, has she done an evil act? What If she knew of the risk of the landslide, but was chasing a mass murderer who would otherwise escape? What then?"

As for the kill-a-girl save-a-girl thing, thats only if you could look 30 years into the future spontaneously before the girl gets crushed and see her future and then decide. However, there is no D&D spell that can do that, so it makes that discussion error-filled.

Arrakis

[malagigi]

I would rather have Belkar in my party than Miko, that's for sure. CN and CG are both far more trustworthy than L-anything; Lawfuls have a habit of suddenly finding some "higher purpose" which overrides their loyalty to their friends.

We Chaotics answer to no higher purpose than ourselves and (apart from CEs) we thus hold honour much more highly since our word is a very personal thing; in fact many of us feel that its all we have that is really ours, which is why we don't want to break it.

Umm, it's always seemed to me that one could go through the core book and replace 'lawful' with 'consistent' and have it be just as accurate if not more so. I point this out to illustrate the fact that if you hold that your honor should not be broken and follow that dictate, then you are adhering to a 'law,' thereby making you 'lawful'.

[Sarathi]

this fight keeps going back and forth. Has anyone noticed that each fight scene ends with one person ahead? First it was the sake and fire(belkar), then being cut across the face and being pushed off the wall (miko) and now the whole being stunned by lead sheet (belkar).

I just kinda want this the fight to be over. Personally I think Belkar should die. Not because I dont like him or anything, he is very funny, its just that I feel he crossed a line. As a DM if one of my characters got captured and was put in the middle of a fortress of a LG society and he escaped and killed a guard and then used his blood to taunt his enemies, there would be no going back. He would probably die in battle or be recaptured and executed.

Also, on Miko breaking the Cease and Disist order, has no one brought up the fact that the order was drawn up in a foriegn state, and that they now are in a different soviergn country where it is obviously legal to us it(seriously its run by paladins)?

[theKOT]

Also, on Miko breaking the Cease and Disist order, has no one brought up the fact that the order was drawn up in a foriegn state, and that they now are in a different soviergn country where it is obviously legal to us it(seriously its run by paladins)?

Actually, it has been brought up, but it's been ignored. However, the rest of your post made some good points. Personally, to paraphrase Roy, I'm getting a bit sick of this plotline. The last two Mikar strips haven't really done anything for their plot, despite being quite hilarious and featuring good artwork, and the trial is going nowhere fast. I just want some conclusiveness! Still, the strips have been funny. I just feel that it is hard to balance the humor and plot sometimes... But I just thought of something! The Belko stips have been showing them changing scenery, there must be some reason why the Giant is going out of his way to do this. It is hard for me to take suspense when the pieces are so bite-sized.

[Denaes]

D&D isnt black and white alignments... anyone who's read the intro to The Book of Vile Darkness can see that... to use an example from it, "If a paladin slips and causes a landslide on a mountain, and rocks crush villagers at the bottom, has she done an evil act? What If she knew of the risk of the landslide, but was chasing a mass murderer who would otherwise escape? What then?"

Woah there partner! I never said actions were Black & White, I said alignments are B&W. World of difference. I'm the master of getting jerked over for doing something good in Ravenloft because the GM feels that it's inherently evil. I know all about shades of grey for actions.

As far as Alignments, you're either evil, good or neutral. There isn't a baby evil or a BAD evil and mass murderer evil. If you qualify for evil as your alignment, you're evil. This is why not all evil acts the same way.

As for the kill-a-girl save-a-girl thing, thats only if you could look 30 years into the future spontaneously before the girl gets crushed and see her future and then decide. However, there is no D&D spell that can do that, so it makes that discussion error-filled.

Arrakis

And D&D also has no stats for busses. I also didn't mention classes.

It was just an example of intention being the driving force behind determining if an action is good/evil. I just mentioned the only facts you need to know - which is in each case the inention. You need not know how the person knows this information and it could even well be flawed.

Saving a girl ONLY because she'll kill millions is an evil act and doesn't become good because you were wrong and she doesn't kill anyone. It was your intent to see to it that millions of people died.

You can use your Paladin (or whatever) example you mentioned as well, it's just differing semantics.

If the paladin causes a landslide by sheer ignorance, it's not an evil act.

If the paladin risks a landslide for a greater good would that be evil? If the risk is an evil action, it wouldn't become less evil if nobody died (ie, if you point a gun at someone with the intent to shoot them, it's not less evil because there were no bullets in the gun). If the risk isn't evil, it would remain not evil wether people died or not.

Tons of grey area there when you start gambling with peoples lives for the better good. Not what I'd consider lawful good. I'd think that would be more chaotic.

Now, if you intentionally start a landslide with the intent of burrying a village, thats evil...

but what if they're plague carriers? Is that then good? You want to stop a plague. What if they found the cure while you started your quest to burry the town (like in outbreak). You think you're doing something for the best, but you're really killing a bunch of innocents.

Lots of crazy gray areas that are mucho fun to roleplay around.

[Amalthea]

There's no such thing as a called shot in D&D, under either 3.0 or 3.5 rules, so I'm not sure where you're going with this.

:P If someone says they're taking the action of bonking someone on the head with a lead sheet, and made their attack role, I'd tell the victim to make a Fortitude save, because it's realistic that someone hit in the head with a lead sheet would be either stunned or knocked completely unconscious. I don't particularly care if the rules don't cover the situation.
My point is that regardless of one's current sum of hitpoints, it is realistic for someone hit in the head with ~65 pounds of lead to be knocked unconscious. ::)

[Denaes]

As a DM if one of my characters got captured and was put in the middle of a fortress of a LG society and he escaped and killed a guard and then used his blood to taunt his enemies, there would be no going back. He would probably die in battle or be recaptured and executed.

I agree that the situation looks grim for Belkar, but I wouldn't GM Vendetta him for playing in character.

When you allow a CE charcter into the game, you shouldn't punish them for playing in character.

Now of course there will be concequences. Allowing a CE character doesn't mean you put on the kid gloves when they do something just stupid. If he's captured, things would look VERY grim for his character.