OOTS #1301 - The Discussion Thread

[Metastachydium]

I vaguely remember something about clerics as well as paladins being members of the Guard, so presumably members of other classes can join and take a level of one of those upon being initiated.

That is correct.

Rooting around him then?

Dctrue is a fellow PLANTY?

[Vikenlugaid]

Indeed. They were willing to take a risk on putting the afterlife on permanent hold, which at least in my book is a good case for martyrdom. Given enough time, they might've faded away in the same way that afterlife souls do as they reach enlightenment / are consumed by the gods.

As I said, I don't think it worked like that. I think they enjoyed the afterlife as normal and were summoned at the time of need. The alternative seems evil to me, even if they chose that willingly.

[Ruck]

Do we know how many of the ghost-martyrs, aside from Soon, had died previous to the battle with Xykon in the throne room?

[brian 333]

As I said, I don't think it worked like that. I think they enjoyed the afterlife as normal and were summoned at the time of need. The alternative seems evil to me, even if they chose that willingly.

If they were enjoying their afterlives they would have been growing away from their mortal experience. When the day came, would spirits evolved into a Devas even remember oaths made by their former mortal selves?

The whole point of martyrdom is self-sacrifice for a greater cause.

[Provengreil]

Do we know how many of the ghost-martyrs, aside from Soon, had died previous to the battle with Xykon in the throne room?

That's actually a really good question, and I'm betting the answer is zero, though it's impossible to say for sure. First, I note that during their rising, Soon is the only spirit shown descending. That doesn't necessarily mean anything as the army behind him is much larger than those shown actively rising but it's the best hint I can see. The only other hint comes from playing match-the-paladin to to their original splash, but between the art style's limitations* and the fact that the panels aren't one-to-one mirrors, and a few can be spotted that are maybe, maybe not in the background of the first one or blocked from view by Soon in the second. Since we don't know how many Xykon took out before we get another look, the best we can say for sure is "most of them".

The only hard conclusion I'd feel safe drawing is that the Paladins probably have to die inside the throne room to join the defense. Otherwise there'd be a lot more in there, those who fell while in full favor of the 12 but off in some other place.

*If we didn't know they were elsewhere, you'd swear you could spot Miko, Thahn, and Lien.

[Ruck]

That's actually a really good question, and I'm betting the answer is zero, though it's impossible to say for sure.

Yeah, I didn't revisit the strips before asking, but the rest of what you wrote kind of gets to how I remember it. I don't think the Sapphire Guard, Soon aside, necessarily sign their entire afterlives over to defend the Gate, which seemed to be the question at hand. It just seems like the ones who die in the throne room rise again to fight as spirits. Which would mean there isn't any scenario where the Guard is signing over their entire afterlives in defense of the gate. (I have to suspect there would be far, far more of them if that were the case, considering how long the Guard has existed and surely that many more of them have lived and died than the ones we see fighting in the throne room.)

[arimareiji]

As it turned out, they put them on hold: "Our oaths to defend the Gate was all that bound our souls to this world.... Even now, we are fading to the Celestial Realm."
https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0464.html

Indeed. They were willing to take a risk on putting the afterlife on permanent hold, which at least in my book is a good case for martyrdom. Given enough time, they might've faded away in the same way that afterlife souls do as they reach enlightenment / are consumed by the gods.

As I said, I don't think it worked like that. I think they enjoyed the afterlife as normal and were summoned at the time of need. The alternative seems evil to me, even if they chose that willingly.

My original full post addressed this. Whether we personally like the notion or not, the text of the comic strongly implies it.

[KorvinStarmast]

The whole point of martyrdom is self-sacrifice for a greater cause.

Indeed, and certainly not evil. It is selfless, not selfish.

[Rrmcklin]

As I said, I don't think it worked like that. I think they enjoyed the afterlife as normal and were summoned at the time of need. The alternative seems evil to me, even if they chose that willingly.

In what way is it evil? It's unfortunate and sad, but those aren't synonymous with evil. Martyrdom, by its very nature, requires unfortunate but willing sacrifice.

[Precure]

As per Hinjo's words, paladins at the throne room are reinforcements, not the whole force. There is also characters who weren't in the throne room before: the guy with viking helmet, the girl with bare midriff and long hair, the girl with blue stripe, the guy with dark visor, the guy with white visor, the girl with bare midriff and medium hair, the girl with bare midriff and short hair, the old woman with bun, the old guy with blue helmet, the old guy with black helmet, the old guy without helmet but with white beard, the old guy without helmet but with grey beard, the guy with messy blue hair.

[KorvinStarmast]

As per Hinjo's words, paladins at the throne room are reinforcements, not the whole force. There is also characters who weren't in the throne room before:

There are also characters who weren't in the throne room before ... sorry, the blue pencil habit becomes a life long one.

[Ruck]

As per Hinjo's words, paladins at the throne room are reinforcements, not the whole force.

He says "They are not there to guard the gate alone. They are there as reinforcements."

I always interpreted that as "They are not there solely to guard the gate, but as reinforcements (when they die)." Perhaps as reinforcements for Soon, he meant. But I didn't think he meant that there were many other spirits also there.

There is also characters who weren't in the throne room before: the guy with viking helmet, the girl with bare midriff and long hair, the girl with blue stripe, the guy with dark visor, the guy with white visor, the girl with bare midriff and medium hair, the girl with bare midriff and short hair, the old woman with bun, the old guy with blue helmet, the old guy with black helmet, the old guy without helmet but with white beard, the old guy without helmet but with grey beard, the guy with messy blue hair.

I didn't look through all of the strips, but maybe then there were more who came back. Looking at the ends of 448 and 449, I largely see the same people.

(And even if there are some we didn't see, I dunno if that means past members of the Guard also came back, or Rich just got bored of drawing the same characters over and over. There might not be a way to get a real answer to this except from him.)

[hroþila]

There are also characters who weren't in the throne room before ... sorry, the blue pencil habit becomes a life long one.

There's with a plural referent is perfectly fine and quite ubiquitous in informal speech/texts. There is looks a bit weird to me personally but people do write that too. It's ok

[Peelee]

There are also characters who weren't in the throne room before ... sorry, the blue pencil habit becomes a life long one.

In that case, you should not have used ellipses and "lifelong" is one word.

Prescriptivists, i tells ya....

[Lord Torath]

Prescriptivists, i tells ya....

See, now you should have capitalized the 'i' there.

... I'll show myself out.

[Peelee]

See, now you should have capitalized the 'i' there.

... I'll show myself out.

Nah. Prescriptivists should. Me? It's perfectly correct as-is.

[arimareiji]

Nah. Prescriptivists should. Me? It's perfectly correct as-is.

Somehow it doesn't seem right on a couple of levels for dragons to have small i's... are you sure that wasn't just bait for a joke? (^_~)b

[KorvinStarmast]

Somehow it doesn't seem right on a couple of levels for dragons to have small i's... are you sure that wasn't just bait for a joke? (^_~)b

A beady eyed dragon would work with the Penguin in Wallace and Grommet's "The Wrong Trousers" movie.

For Peelee: there ya go.
There are also characters who weren't in the throne room before.
Sorry, the blue pencil habit becomes a lifelong one.

[arimareiji]

A beady eyed dragon would work with the Penguin in Wallace and Grommet's "The Wrong Trousers" movie.

For Peelee: there ya go.
There are also characters who weren't in the throne room before.
Sorry, the blue pencil habit becomes a lifelong one.

Surprised you didn't go for the possible bait of "an ellipsis".

_{(For the record, if it is joke bait I approve.)}

[Precure]

He says "They are not there to guard the gate alone. They are there as reinforcements."

I always interpreted that as "They are not there solely to guard the gate, but as reinforcements (when they die)." Perhaps as reinforcements for Soon, he meant. But I didn't think he meant that there were many other spirits also there.

I interpret it as a reinforcements to the other ghost martyrs. Soon also said that it was their oaths to defend the gate that bound their ("us") souls to this world.

I didn't look through all of the strips, but maybe then there were more who came back. Looking at the ends of 448 and 449, I largely see the same people.

(And even if there are some we didn't see, I dunno if that means past members of the Guard also came back, or Rich just got bored of drawing the same characters over and over. There might not be a way to get a real answer to this except from him.)

447 and 448 are all the same people, also the dead bodies on 449. Other characters only appear as ghost martyrs in 449 and consequent strips.

[Vikenlugaid]

If they were enjoying their afterlives they would have been growing away from their mortal experience. When the day came, would spirits evolved into a Devas even remember oaths made by their former mortal selves?

The whole point of martyrdom is self-sacrifice for a greater cause.

That's why I suppose they need to not die of old or so. A martyr is someone who sacrifice his life, not his afterlife.

Yeah, I didn't revisit the strips before asking, but the rest of what you wrote kind of gets to how I remember it. I don't think the Sapphire Guard, Soon aside, necessarily sign their entire afterlives over to defend the Gate, which seemed to be the question at hand. It just seems like the ones who die in the throne room rise again to fight as spirits. Which would mean there isn't any scenario where the Guard is signing over their entire afterlives in defense of the gate. (I have to suspect there would be far, far more of them if that were the case, considering how long the Guard has existed and surely that many more of them have lived and died than the ones we see fighting in the throne room.)

Yeah, this too.

I mean, the situation of Soon binding the soul of a paladin to wait eternally instead of enjoy the afterlife is absurd to me, Soon is lawful good and that action seems neutral at the very best.

[gbaji]

That's why I suppose they need to not die of old or so. A martyr is someone who sacrifice his life, not his afterlife.

It's entirely possible that it only includes paladins who actually died in the process of defending the gate itself.. Which would explain why it appears to mostly be the folks who all died to Xykon's attack, but there appear to be some number of others as well. It's a good bet that while many paladins have died of varius things over the last 50 decades or so, only a small number have died in some kind of direct defense of the gate (well, and then a big number right then and there).

I mean, the situation of Soon binding the soul of a paladin to wait eternally instead of enjoy the afterlife is absurd to me, Soon is lawful good and that action seems neutral at the very best.

If it was imposed on them, it would be evil. But if they volunteered for this service after death it is neither evil nor good. It's someone making their own choice.

The paladins presuambly willingly bound their own souls to service. Soon did not force or trick them. That's self sacrifice. Nothing there that would violate a lawful good alignment at all.

[brian 333]

That's why I suppose they need to not die of old or so. A martyr is someone who sacrifice his life, not his afterlife.

Ghost Martyr

A martyr dies for his faith. That's just a regular martyr. There is no reason to add Ghost because we already know that martyrs are dead.

Ghost Martyrs don't sacrifice their lives, they sacrifice their afterlives, which makes them different from regular martyrs. That's why they need a special name.

Feel free to disagree. I have nothing to prove my head canon is better than yours.

[Precure]

It's important enough to highlight that there is many noticeably older characters amongst the newcomers on 449, especially compared to the ones Xykon killed.

[Vikenlugaid]

If it was imposed on them, it would be evil. But if they volunteered for this service after death it is neither evil nor good. It's someone making their own choice.

The paladins presuambly willingly bound their own souls to service. Soon did not force or trick them. That's self sacrifice. Nothing there that would violate a lawful good alignment at all.

Well, I think that is strongly not good. There are laws against abusive contracts. And people who sing a contract with the devil is also making their own choice.

Ghost Martyr

A martyr dies for his faith. That's just a regular martyr. There is no reason to add Ghost because we already know that martyrs are dead.

Ghost Martyrs don't sacrifice their lives, they sacrifice their afterlives, which makes them different from regular martyrs. That's why they need a special name.

Feel free to disagree. I have nothing to prove my head canon is better than yours.

Well, I think a ghost martyr is just the ghost of a martyr. All martyrs are dead, but not all dead people are ghosts.

[bunsen_h]

If it was imposed on them, it would be evil. But if they volunteered for this service after death it is neither evil nor good. It's someone making their own choice.

The paladins presuambly willingly bound their own souls to service. Soon did not force or trick them. That's self sacrifice. Nothing there that would violate a lawful good alignment at all.

We don't know the terms of their binding oaths. Assume, for the sake of argument, that they're bound "as long as the gate needs to be protected". If they're bound to the immediate location of the throne room, fully conscious, with no time slippage and no sleep... that would be pretty unpleasant. All they'd be able to do is to watch what happens in court, and discuss it amongst themselves. Fairly dull stuff. Anyone bring a go board with them?

But they might be able to suspend time, skipping ahead to when interesting things were happening. They might be able to wander around the city, keeping track of events, society, and their own descendants, but drawn back when need arose. They might be able to hob-nob with other incorporeal beings... for broad values of hob-nobbing. It would lack many virtues of being alive, but it wouldn't be all that dire.

[Peelee]

Ghost Martyr

A martyr dies for his faith. That's just a regular martyr. There is no reason to add Ghost because we already know that martyrs are dead.

Ghost Martyrs don't sacrifice their lives, they sacrifice their afterlives, which makes them different from regular martyrs. That's why they need a special name.

Feel free to disagree. I have nothing to prove my head canon is better than yours.

I never thought about any of this all before this discussion came up, but if I had, the above is exactly how i would have envisioned it. Perfect explanation IMO.

[Ruck]

Well, I think that is strongly not good. There are laws against abusive contracts. And people who sing a contract with the devil is also making their own choice.

And your post here has a number of assumptions other people don't agree with. Like that this is an abusive contract, or that Soon is the devil (??).

[Rrmcklin]

And your post here has a number of assumptions other people don't agree with. Like that this is an abusive contract, or that Soon is the devil (??).

To be fair, assuming the worst of Soon seems pretty commonplace here from what I've observed.

[arimareiji]

And your post here has a number of assumptions other people don't agree with. Like that this is an abusive contract, or that Soon is the devil (??).

One of the more interesting notions I've heard recently is that games are much more than just entertainment. They're practice to help kids develop a framework of understanding how to live as part of a society.

What is "success"? It's running around all four sides of a square, without being touched by a ball that the other team is holding while you're between the corners of the square. How do you accomplish that? Someone on the other team throws the ball in front of you. You get to try to hit it with a stick so that they can't catch it in the air, or touch you with the ball before you get to the first corner, or throw it to someone who's touching the first corner. (Etc.)

But what if I want to play a game that involves throwing darts instead? You can go do that, but we're playing this game. Well, okay - I'll play this game, but I'll catch the ball and throw it instead of hitting it. That's breaking the rules, so you're penalized. I don't like the rules! We should change them! If you can convince everyone then we can play using that rule. (Etc.)

Your mileage may vary, but I think a similar framework has developed around what we call civil discourse and the shared understandings that are necessary to support it.