How Belkar will die...

[Peelee]

Twice, actually. We saw Banjo smite Roy once. It was not especially impressive, but it happened.

I stand corrected. This also makes Banjo one of the more active gods in mortal affairs.

[Silverionmox]

Why? Roy has already expressed that he isn't going to raise Belkar, and that he thinks running out the clock on the prophecy is a good way to handle it. It only makes sense for the Order to leave him dead. He's a known killer and a dangerous psychopath. Even in the illusion they left him dead, meaning none of them think "We can make Belkar change" is a goal they would like to see.

The Order would need a very good reason for raising him and taking on the responsibility of keeping him in line for the rest of their lives. Right now, it looks like all signs point to "They won't actively kill him or let him die by inaction, but they aren't going to raise him if he does die."

If he dies here and now in some conflict with Darkon then the Order would be down *two* party members instead of one. They're not going to stop Xykon with that kind of HR management. So they'll reluctantly recover that resource, since Darkon will probably have run off in that case and the place is swarming with resurrection-capable priests, so it only costs money that they had put aside already, but no time.

But it's not going to come down to fighting, and certainly not killing. At most some skirmish like in the first time in Shojo's throne room.

Disintegrate doesn't actually prevent resurrection though. It makes it easier to dispose of the body in a way that it cant have spells cast on it, but by itself, and especially indoors, death by disintegrate isn't any harder to recover from than death by hole-in-body.

It makes it harder to recover the body though, and if the weather turns stormy, then it's a done deal. Ask Nale. But there are other options too, of course. Halflings have an unhealthy attraction to lava too.

[Rougn]

The thing is, Belkar is not an invited guest and therefore not bound by the rules of the moot. If he were to be executed, it would not be for offending the gods.

He was invited though; he is the honored guard of a high priest. Not to mention as they are walking there they are being informed about the rules (which is why there is only Belkar and Roy) which suggests they are bound by the rules of the godsmoot.

As for the gods not being proactive. If I remember my crayon drawings correctly: The gods agreed to let their clerics handle it directly for them with their guiding. In this neutral territory they are allowed to truly smite as part of the godsmoot agreement.

[Keltest]

He was invited though; he is the honored guard of a high priest. Not to mention as they are walking there they are being informed about the rules (which is why there is only Belkar and Roy) which suggests they are bound by the rules of the godsmoot.

As for the gods not being proactive. If I remember my crayon drawings correctly: The gods agreed to let their clerics handle it directly for them with their guiding. In this neutral territory they are allowed to truly smite as part of the godsmoot agreement.

As Wrecan pointed out, all that means is that they help the priest get to the moot. They are not obligated to allow them to observe or attend, and indeed Belkar is definitely outside of the permitted area of the temple at this point. As for the gods smiting, I see nothing that indicates that they are permitted to do so just because the clerics are meeting.

[Rougn]

As Wrecan pointed out, all that means is that they help the priest get to the moot. They are not obligated to allow them to observe or attend, and indeed Belkar is definitely outside of the permitted area of the temple at this point. As for the gods smiting, I see nothing that indicates that they are permitted to do so just because the clerics are meeting.

Panel 13 of 994 has him saying that they will dust him on the spot.

[Keltest]

Panel 13 of 994 has him saying that they will dust him on the spot.

Yeah, the clerics.

[Rougn]

Yeah, the clerics.

That is in place to protect their clerics. Why wouldnt the same rules apply to an assassin?

[Kish]

That is in place to protect their clerics. Why wouldnt the same rules apply to an assassin?

Let me rephrase what Keltest said to have more words.

The guard did not say the gods had put something "in place" to protect their clerics. The guards said that if the vampire tried anything that violated the terms of his presence there, he would be dusted on the spot because he would be on the wrong side of a one-against-many battle against most of the most powerful clerics in the world.

[Keltest]

Let me rephrase what Keltest said to have more words.

The guard did not say the gods had put something "in place" to protect their clerics. The guards said that if the vampire tried anything that violated the terms of his presence there, he would be dusted on the spot because he would be on the wrong side of a one-against-many battle against most of the most powerful clerics in the world.

Thank you. I should have been clearer, aye.

[Rougn]

Let me rephrase what Keltest said to have more words.

The guard did not say the gods had put something "in place" to protect their clerics. The guards said that if the vampire tried anything that violated the terms of his presence there, he would be dusted on the spot because he would be on the wrong side of a one-against-many battle against most of the most powerful clerics in the world.

He also said the other clerics would not attack the vampire. Why? What would stop them from wasting him without asking questions? Its clear that his goddess doesnt have powerful allies or other clerics (otherwise they would come rather then being thankful durkon was turned) so it couldnt be that the other clerics would come to his aid. There most be another reason why his safety is ensured.

[Kish]

It can't be that they obey the rules because they believe in the rules, it has to be that something magical, unheralded, imposed by some of the most childish characters in the setting because they believe in the rules, stops them?

Yeah, you have fun with that.

[Rougn]

It can't be that they obey the rules because they believe in the rules, it has to be that something magical, unheralded, imposed by some of the most childish characters in the setting because they believe in the rules, stops them?

Yeah, you have fun with that.

Yes because as we know chaotic evil clerics truly love following the rules.

[Keltest]

Yes because as we know chaotic evil clerics truly love following the rules.

They are perfectly capable of following them when its in their own interests.

[Rougn]

They are perfectly capable of following them when its in their own interests.

And what makes it their best interest? Protecting their butts or power.

[Keltest]

And what makes it their best interest? Protecting their butts or power.

So in what way is "not getting smacked by a dozen clerics as powerful or more powerful than I" not protecting their butts?

[Kish]

They love it as much as chaotic evil gods do. At least recognize that you're just kicking the "someone must choose to follow the rules" upstairs, not putting it on an impartial force of nature.

[Rougn]

So in what way is "not getting smacked by a dozen clerics as powerful or more powerful than I" not protecting their butts?

Simple: They have no promise that the other clerics are not planning on killing them nor is there anything stopping the evil clerics from teaming up and ambushing the good.

[Keltest]

Simple: They have no promise that the other clerics are not planning on killing them nor is there anything stopping the evil clerics from teaming up and ambushing the good.

Wow, its almost like there is a mutual assumption of trust in the whole meeting designed to get priests who would otherwise be enemies together. I can guarantee you that a church that continually violated the rules of the godmoots would stop being invited.

[Rougn]

Wow, its almost like there is a mutual assumption of trust in the whole meeting designed to get priests who would otherwise be enemies together. I can guarantee you that a church that continually violated the rules of the godmoots would stop being invited.

Correct they would be. They would not be invited to the next godmoots but if the evil clerics/gods are done with the godsmoot and make a play for the power so they are no longer equal but servant and master that wouldnt matter to them would it?

[Keltest]

Correct they would be. They would not be invited to the next godmoots but if the evil clerics/gods are done with the godsmoot and make a play for the power so they are no longer equal but servant and master that wouldnt matter to them would it?

Where are you even going with this? Of course the whole idea of the godsmoot relies on the idea of mutual nonviolence. What does that have to do with the idea that the gods are going to vaporize anyone who breaks the protocols?

[Rougn]

Where are you even going with this? Of course the whole idea of the godsmoot relies on the idea of mutual nonviolence. What does that have to do with the idea that the gods are going to vaporize anyone who breaks the protocols?

Because those gods are enemies and those clerics are enemies. Yes they do have allies but when enemies come together it is a very very delicate matter a verbal agreement wouldnt cut it. After all a rule is only as powerful as the backing of it. What is backing the rules? The other clerics? Why would the chaotic evil trust that? I am saying this is a neutral grounds that the gods have agreed on. The gods will watch and the gods will enforce.

[Keltest]

Because those gods are enemies and those clerics are enemies. Yes they do have allies but when enemies come together it is a very very delicate matter a verbal agreement wouldnt cut it. After all a rule is only as powerful as the backing of it. What is backing the rules? The other clerics? Why would the chaotic evil trust that? I am saying this is a neutral grounds that the gods have agreed on. The gods will watch and the gods will enforce.

Yes, the other clerics. The chaotic evil clerics would trust it because the alternative would mean that they don't get to participate at all.

And I fail to see how the gods being given permission to vaporize people at the moot is going to make the clerics less paranoid.

[Rougn]

Yes, the other clerics. The chaotic evil clerics would trust it because the alternative would mean that they don't get to participate at all.

And I fail to see how the gods being given permission to vaporize people at the moot is going to make the clerics less paranoid.

Yes they would follow the rules until the time came that are tired of not ruling the world. Nothing risked nothing gained.

As for the gods: Those clerics are their power in that world. Do you really think they would risk losing them when they could protect them?

[Keltest]

Yes they would follow the rules until the time came that are tired of not ruling the world. Nothing risked nothing gained.

As for the gods: Those clerics are their power in that world. Do you really think they would risk losing them when they could protect them?

Absolutely. The last time the gods fought with any severity, it created the snarl.

[NerdyKris]

I don't remember Nerghal stepping in to save his high priest. Or Thor stepping in to save a devoted follower.

[Psyren]

Absolutely. The last time the gods fought with any severity, it created the snarl.

I don't remember Nerghal stepping in to save his high priest. Or Thor stepping in to save a devoted follower.

These. Even without a magically enforced PvP ban, the clerics still have circumstances like this where being at each other's throats is undesirable, much like their deities do.

Also, the notion that Chaotic clerics won't follow the rules is pretty bunk. ALL clerics follow rules of some sort, or else they aren't clerics for very long.

[Kish]

The gods will watch and the gods will enforce.

You have no evidence of this at all, you know.

[Knewred]

Simple: They have no promise that the other clerics are not planning on killing them nor is there anything stopping the evil clerics from teaming up and ambushing the good.

To quote the fiends on the subject of being evil from comic 668 "And that makes us one big happy family? Screw that."

The evil clerics are hardly likely to team up against the good on the grounds that that isn't in their best interests either. An evil cleric would be just as likely to team up with a group of good clerics to kill other evil clerics that they don't like than they would be to team up with evil to eliminate good. Belkar is a good example of this- he's teamed up with good PCs to kill evil creatures not because they're evil, but just because they're not his allies. You need to remember that evil and good are not large teams trying to kill eachother, but simply represent the philosophies of the character. If every good thing in the world was eliminated, not every evil being would actually come out on top, so they'd still be fighting regardless.

I explained that really badly, so put it this way. There are three groups, A B and C. B and C are both evil, but A is good. However, B and C are enemies. They probably won't team up to kill A. In fact, B or C could even team up with A to eliminate the other evil group, as that puts them in a more advantageous position (since good generally won't backstab them).

[Firest Kathon]

Disintegrate doesn't actually prevent resurrection though. It makes it easier to dispose of the body in a way that it cant have spells cast on it, but by itself, and especially indoors, death by disintegrate isn't any harder to recover from than death by hole-in-body.

It does make it harder to resurrect the dead character (in D&D 3.5). Death by (small) hole-in-body requires a Raise Dead spell (level 5), while death by Disintegrate requires a Resurrection spell (level 7). If the remains are scattered and can no longer be retrieved, it even requires a True Resurrection spell (level 9).

[Quild]

Because those gods are enemies and those clerics are enemies.

Among other weird things, where do you get this idea?

Thor and Loki being didn't prevent some of their priest to be close. They're not High Priests, but still.

Rat is an evil god among the twelve gods. Maybe not the only one.

About High Priests protection, do you remember how Tiger prevented Thor to help to protect AC? 3 pages later, HPoTG dies without any help from his gods.


So I don't really see why you thinks gods and clerics are enemies.
Also regarding Hel's allies, do you think the Evil gods wouldn't mind if Hel was impaired by some Good gods just for being Evil? They would be next in line...