Haley and Solt Lurkyurg

[Lacuna Caster]

Psychopaths are a small minority of the general population, and don't even make up the bulk of violent criminals (though they are disproportionately common in that group.) But given that Nale and Belkar both clearly fit the profile and are the strip's most glaring recurrent examples of our heroes 'sparing the rod', they make a pretty terrible argument for rehab vs. deterrence. (The MitD works, kinda, but he's sort of low-hanging fruit.)

On the subject of reformed criminals- another misattribution I could probably touch on is that Ian Starshine would probably have almost nothing to do with Haley's mental problems. Parents in general have very little influence over personality once you control for genetic factors, although the Thieves' Guild, Crystal, and Greysky City in general would certainly impact her development. (It's such a common scapegoat, even among experts, that I don't want to hold it against the author too much, but... at the same time, it's such a recurring theme in the story that I think it's a non-trivial technical objection.)

Would Miko's case be severe enough? I actually think there are some interesting parallels between her and Haley, but this depends entirely on whether she got Blind Master Po or less worthy candidates.

EDIT: I should caution I'm not a mental health professional- this is all just based on secondary reading of mine. So, take it with a pinch of salt.

[SilverCacaobean]

I'm not sure I would call borderline childhood trauma a part of her personality.

Ok, it's not really trauma but she was taught to feel guilty for trusting people, opening up and telling the truth. That's not part of her personality.

There's an analogy I kind of want to make about certain religions that can do the same, only with sexuality instead of secrets but forum rules. I'm sure everyone can understand what my point is.

So we know for a fact that similar things can happen in the real world and bad parenting can influence a child a lot. And if I understood Ian Starshine correctly, he didn't allow anyone else to have an influence on Haley.

[Lacuna Caster]

Religious influence is typically peer-and-culture-based, rather than exclusive to the family or individual, and you'd really have to keep a kid chained in the basement to cut off external influence entirely. I can certainly think of other plausible reasons for Haley being messed in the head, but the same subtext pops up elsewhere in the strip, and is explicitly considered a big deal by the writer- Roy getting his snark from Eugene, Durkon learning passiveness, Nale and Elan having identical genes, et cetera. I can think of alternative influences in all these cases, but screen time is screen time.

Treasure Type O remarks aside, I don't think one particularly needs to bring up hypothetical sexual hangups (which we actually know very little about, and the inquiry raises it's own questions.) I just wanted to note that both Haley and Miko have absent parents, plus paranoid, manipulative CG father-figures embedded in hierarchical societies that share information on a 'need to know' basis*.

I can't guarantee that my subjective head-canon version of Miko matches the author's (whatever that was), and many of Haley's traits appear to be tell-don't-show, but if you squint right and accept the strip's basic logic, one could argue both have a shell of exaggerated conformity to peer/parent values surrounding an inner core of self-doubt, separation anxiety and repressed need. Their stress mechanisms are inverted- Haley shrinks, crumbles and lies to others, while Miko expands, explodes and fools herself. But given the symmetry, it's a pity the two never get a chance to talk about it.

Word of God has her as an originally angry, unstable individual who picked up her positive traits by association, but I would say the capacity to learn implies some other internal motive- the drive to excel, the fear of sanction, or the urge to please. The really bad kids don't learn a thing.


* The Gates, the Guard, and many of their missions are highly classified, though Miko makes no effort to conceal them during her early appearances, so this is probably a retcon. It does suggest, however, that the Guard's mission-statement is in some ways in tension with the spirit of their own code.

[Lacuna Caster]

(I just edited for brevity, assuming nobody minds- if I go much further then Moviebob will wind up shouting at me.)

Anyway- I guess this all comes back to Mr. Lurkyurg in a roundabout way, in that defending Belkar would predictably yield that exact result. And that Haley shows no particular sign of actual self-reliance by excusing his behaviour for the sake of 'I need all the help I can get'.

[woweedd]

Religious influence is typically peer-and-culture-based, rather than exclusive to the family or individual, and you'd really have to keep a kid chained in the basement to cut off external influence entirely. I can certainly think of other plausible reasons for Haley being messed in the head, but the same subtext pops up elsewhere in the strip, and is explicitly considered a big deal by the writer- Roy getting his snark from Eugene, Durkon learning passiveness, Nale and Elan having identical genes, et cetera. I can think of alternative influences in all these cases, but screen time is screen time.

Treasure Type O remarks aside, I don't think one particularly needs to bring up hypothetical sexual hangups (which we actually know very little about, and the inquiry raises it's own questions.) I just wanted to note that both Haley and Miko have absent parents, plus paranoid, manipulative CG father-figures embedded in hierarchical societies that share information on a 'need to know' basis*.

I can't guarantee that my subjective head-canon version of Miko matches the author's (whatever that was), and many of Haley's traits appear to be tell-don't-show, but if you squint right and accept the strip's basic logic, one could argue both have a shell of exaggerated conformity to peer/parent values surrounding an inner core of self-doubt, separation anxiety and repressed need. Their stress mechanisms are inverted- Haley shrinks, crumbles and lies to others, while Miko expands, explodes and fools herself. But given the symmetry, it's a pity the two never get a chance to talk about it.

Word of God has her as an originally angry, unstable individual who picked up her positive traits by association, but I would say the capacity to learn implies some other internal motive- the drive to excel, the fear of sanction, or the urge to please. The really bad kids don't learn a thing.


* The Gates, the Guard, and many of their missions are highly classified, though Miko makes no effort to conceal them during her early appearances, so this is probably a retcon. It does suggest, however, that the Guard's mission-statement is in some ways in tension with the spirit of their own code.

(Emphasis mine.)
It should be noted that Julia inherited similar sarcastic tendencies. Also, these two strips seem to indicate that the Greenhilt family has gotten trapped in a vicious cycle IE Eugene rebelled against his father by becoming a Wizard, then Roy rebelled against Eugene by becoming a Fighter

[Dr.Zero]

(Emphasis mine.)
It should be noted that Julia inherited similar sarcastic tendencies. Also, these two strips seem to indicate that the Greenhilt family has gotten trapped in a vicious cycle IE Eugene rebelled against his father by becoming a Wizard, then Roy rebelled against Eugene by becoming a Fighter

I think it was pointed out by someone that difficult relations between father and offsprings[*] and "rebelling against your father" is a recurring pattern in OOTS.

Eugene does that to Horace.
Roy to Eugene.
Elan and Nale to Tarquin.
Haley (on some extent, regarding the trust issues) to Ian.
Miko to Shojo (who was her father figure).
Even the bandit-sorceress-whose-name-I-can't-remember-but-that-Belkar-called-hot-chick had daddy issues.
Xykon... ok, Xykon doesn't count.
[*] Edit: Meh, I was sure "prole" was in an english dictionary as well. Oh, whatever.

[Lacuna Caster]

Parental frictions are definitely a recurring theme in OOTS, but in at least one respect, Roy still became his father. (I'll confess the whole afterlife subplot actually strikes me as oddly redundant, because Roy's family relations are of debatable relevance to his core motives, and touching on the subject only raises more questions.)

The primary agonists of the first several hundred strips are, in essence, Xykon, Redcloak, Eugene, Miko, Belkar and Shojo (everyone else, including Roy, is effectively either shanghai'd or a hanger-on) and I'm not sure they always get screen-time proportionate to their influence.

(As an aside, it's emminently possible that Miko has sexual hangups that derive from her background and contribute to her, ah, frustrations in non-trivial ways. I just think homing in on that explanation by default tends to trivialise her character.)

[SilverCacaobean]

Apparently all those dad issues everyone has, is an unintended theme. I mean, in that they are dad issues. They were mostly meant to be parental issues and sources of conflict.

Parental frictions are definitely a recurring theme in OOTS, but in at least one respect, Roy still became his father. (I'll confess the whole afterlife subplot actually strikes me as oddly redundant, because Roy's family relations are of debatable relevance to his core motives, and touching on the subject only raises more questions.)

I don't really agree that it's redundant. We've explored each and every character (now Durkon) and it was Roy's turn. The Giant actually discusses this in the book commentary. Apparently he (strongly) considered not showing Roy until he's resurrected, to show how important death is. But he already missed Roy's voice by the end of the Azure city battle. He says (almost verbatim) that Eugene interests him as a character because the story isn't about him, yet every decision he made is reflected in it because of how it impacted Roy. He thinks that if Roy had been born to a different father, he'd be a completely different person. To show this, he explores the other influences Roy had, growing up.

Um, it'd be better if I didn't copy paste the whole book commentary here . Suffice it to say that Rich believes parents have a huge impact on their kids and Eugene had a huge impact on Roy.

I also have my reservations about what you've said in part because of the word "personality". Psychologists and psychiatrists have a more strict definition of the word than a layman and while parents may not be able to influence it much, there are other parts of a kid they can influence. I agree that one is never a blank slate but that only means they have a different starting point, not much else.

As for the religion thing, yes, what you said is how it usually works, however it's entirely possible to not be peer-and-culture based at all, instead being only part of a household. It's just more efficient if it's peer-and-culture based. I'm sure you've seen something like that, so I won't bother with anecdotal evidence.
(Sorry for answering this late to something you said back then but I've been busy.)

The primary agonists of the first several hundred strips are, in essence, Xykon, Redcloak, Eugene, Miko, Belkar and Shojo (everyone else, including Roy, is effectively either shanghai'd or a hanger-on) and I'm not sure they always get screen-time proportionate to their influence.

Well done on saying "agonist" instead of "tagonist"!
I have no idea what shanghai'd is, though...
Screen time doesn't have to be proportionate to influence. See what rich said about Eugene above (I've bolded the part I think is relevant to this).

(As an aside, it's emminently possible that Miko has sexual hangups that derive from her background and contribute to her, ah, frustrations in non-trivial ways. I just think homing in on that explanation by default tends to trivialise her character.)

I'm glad Rich didn't go for the "hysteric woman" archetype, even though Roy does say that treasure type O comment. At times, I kind of thought he did go for the archetype but if you look at the greater picture he didn't really.

Anyway, yes sexual frustrations sort of explains her behaviour and I agree that homing in on that explanation by default tends to trivialise her character but I still think there's more to it.
For example there is a bonus strip where she tries to invite two of her colleagues for dinner(or lunch) but goes about it the wrong way. They almost go, despite the reservations they have at the beginning but then she drives them away and they find an excuse to leave. In the final panel we get shown she had already prepared food for them, which she gave to her horse.
So in short her problem could be sexual frustration but I think it's more like general social rejection. She had terrible social skills.

There's also a very important part of her character that I think isn't evident in the strip.
That she was chosen by the gods isn't some craziness of hers, she had been explicitly told that she was the chosen one. That influences how one sees her actions greatly. (You know keep waiting for her destiny, seeing signs everywhere and such). IMO, it would be better if this was shown in the strip.
...Well, I'm sure I read the above somewhere but I can't find it... So, it could be false...

[Lacuna Caster]

Yeah, Durkon's vampirism is another example of me not-quite-seeing-the-development, since it's mostly about external parties fighting over Durkon's corpse. (I think Durkon mostly worked fine as-is, since he's among the more defined and less objectionable of the Order- his onion only has one layer, but it's faithful beyond recognition.)

I'm afraid that for nearly every measurable aspect of personality, heredity-controlled studies keep showing about a 0-10% influence from home environment, so... I don't really have much to add to that. (The Nurture Assumption noted a few exceptions- cases of severe abuse were not specifically studied in humans, kids raised in hermetic isolation are often damaged, and religious affiliation can be passed down to the extent that it doesn't affect non-family interactions. I can think of one person that might apply to.)

My take is that, assuming reality-based rules, Eugene probably had almost no influence over Roy compared to the jerks who hazed him in fighter college, and it wouldn't matter greatly, because Blood Oaths don't care- it's like the latter was born with a Mark of Justice stamped on his forehead. To me, the interesting questions are why Eugene ignored his own Oath for so long, how he was so close to Fryon and Sara despite being a jerk, and other factors which get pretty offhand treatment.

Shojo would have had a good deal of indirect influence over Miko, precisely because he removed her from one environmental context and put her in contact with different peers, but by himself wouldn't ordinarily be the crux of her development (i.e, the 'tape holding her together'.) Much of Shojo's concrete behaviour is baffling in retrospect, but it's possible that promoting someone with zero social skills to second-in-command while minimising her actual contact with underlings also had adverse side-effects. I think the bonus strip you mention makes it clear that Miko was partly the architect of her own problems, but I think she had a genuine desire to change, and couldn't see a way to do it without losing face. (It also highlights the screentime allocation problem, because it's (A) so very revealing, and (B) only one strip.)

[woweedd]

Yeah, Durkon's vampirism is another example of me not-quite-seeing-the-development, since it's mostly about external parties fighting over Durkon's corpse. (I think Durkon mostly worked fine as-is, since he's among the more defined and less objectionable of the Order- his onion only has one layer, but it's faithful beyond recognition.)

I'm afraid that for nearly every measurable aspect of personality, heredity-controlled studies keep showing about a 0-10% influence from home environment, so... I don't really have much to add to that. (The Nurture Assumption noted a few exceptions- cases of severe abuse were not specifically studied in humans, kids raised in hermetic isolation are often damaged, and religious affiliation can be passed down to the extent that it doesn't affect non-family interactions. I can think of one person that might apply to.)

My take is that, assuming reality-based rules, Eugene probably had almost no influence over Roy compared to the jerks who hazed him in fighter college, and it wouldn't matter greatly, because Blood Oaths don't care- it's like the latter was born with a Mark of Justice stamped on his forehead. To me, the interesting questions are why Eugene ignored his own Oath for so long, how he was so close to Fryon and Sara despite being a jerk, and other factors which get pretty offhand treatment.

Shojo would have had a good deal of indirect influence over Miko, precisely because he removed her from one environmental context and put her in contact with different peers, but by himself wouldn't ordinarily be the crux of her development (i.e, the 'tape holding her together'.) Much of Shojo's concrete behaviour is baffling in retrospect, but it's possible that promoting someone with zero social skills to second-in-command while minimising her actual contact with underlings also had adverse side-effects. I think the bonus strip you mention makes it clear that Miko was partly the architect of her own problems, but I think she had a genuine desire to change, and couldn't see a way to do it without losing face. (It also highlights the screentime allocation problem, because it's (A) so very revealing, and (B) only one strip.)

(Emphasis mine.)
Ah, there's your problem.

[Jasdoif]

To me, the interesting questions are why Eugene ignored his own Oath for so long, how he was so close to Fryon and Sara despite being a jerk, and other factors which get pretty offhand treatment.

Spoiler: Start of Darkness

Show

Eugene told Roy that Eugene's adventuring group never got close to finding Xykon (it took Eugene a trip to the Oracle simply to get the name "Xykon"), and that Eugene had never left to search for Xykon in the twenty-plus years since he met Sara...but only because he never had any decent information.

Of course, that's directly contradicted by a flashback in the same book; Redcloak's brother gave Eugene the location of Xykon's lair and offered him "his last three utility bills and a copy of his credit report", and the chronology (Eugene missed Roy's soccer game because of the meeting) establishes it occurred after he met Sara.


So the question is, indeed, interesting.

[Lacuna Caster]

(Emphasis mine.)
Ah, there's your problem.

I know, I know. It's a stick-figure comedy webcomic. Why take it seriously, right?

"Don't neglect or abuse your offspring" is such an innocuous moral that I always feel awkward bringing it up, but inaccurate perceptions do entail a cost, so I feel obliged to point out that moving kids to a different school/neighbourhood can actually be more effective.

I do think it's interesting to imagine how a TN or otherwise differently-disposed character might have reacted in Roy's shoes. I mean, certainly there's an evil version who'd drive disposable minions before him with the lash sooner than repeatedly confront Xykon in single combat, but a grimly-efficient long-term strategist with confidence in their tools and slight tweaks in reasoning would probably arrive at some similar decisions, and maybe a few better ones.

Well done on saying "agonist" instead of "tagonist"!
I have no idea what shanghai'd is, though...

Oh, here.

I'm afraid I do have to say that I consider screentime-proportionate-to-influence to be a virtue in storytelling, almost by tautology- the people the story is about should be... the people the story is about.

[BroomGuys]

I know, I know. It's a stick-figure comedy webcomic. Why take it seriously, right?

I don't think that was the point at all. It's more a criticism of your analysis, saying it's grounded on the faulty assumption that psychology in the story works the same way as it does in the real world. It's not that this isn't a good thing to point out:

"Don't neglect or abuse your offspring" is such an innocuous moral that I always feel awkward bringing it up, but inaccurate perceptions do entail a cost, so I feel obliged to point out that moving kids to a different school/neighbourhood can actually be more effective.

It is; I would only point out that it reflects the story better to analyze the characters' psychology based on the way psychology is implied to work in the story. To impose real-world knowledge that contradicts that is certainly an interesting hypothetical exercise, though (imagine The Dark Knight Rises where the twist ending is that no, you certainly cannot make a nuclear bomb out of a nuclear reactor like that, so the military just ignores Bane's threat and comes in to retake the city).

[Lacuna Caster]

Mmm. I was bothered more by Bruce's affected concern over weaponisation when fusion bombs were already developed over 50 years ago, but then I'm one of those irritating people.

In technical terms, even the most meticulously constructed fiction can only ever amount to a kind of synthetic anecdote, so it's clear that to the extent stories yield some cognitive benefit, it can't be derived from strictly empirical criteria. In that sense, it's only charitable to assume that narrative logic can, to varying degrees, bend, replace or abolish some of the normal rules of nature. However, to put it delicately, I don't think people read OOTS for a physics lesson.

I would not say that everything OOTS has to say is untrue. Ruthless butchers can be personally charming, warm to their loved ones, driven by a worthy cause, or haunted by pain- and one can infer possessing such traits doesn't make a person infallible. Steady persistence and reciprocal loyalty can often make up for middling ability and uneven circumstances. And words themselves can have a terrible power.

Sometimes, however, I get the impression that the author is straining so hard to make a particular point that the very effort becomes awkward. (Does Elan need the help so badly that two major NPCs must have the sole and naked function of making him look good? Is expecting signs from God so abnormal in a universe where faith-healing is super-effective and all species the result of intelligent design? Given Orcs have an intrinsic -4 Int/Cha penalty, which real ethnicity are we meant to correlate them with? And are we seriously expected to extend the hand of friendship to serial killers?)

[SilverCacaobean]

I'm afraid that for nearly every measurable aspect of personality, heredity-controlled studies keep showing about a 0-10% influence from home environment, so... I don't really have much to add to that.

I'd be interested to know where you got those numbers. And what are the measurable aspects of personality. A quick google search didn't yield results for the former and gave me something about the five big personality traits for the latter. Is this what you mean? If you have time, of course. I understand that it's pointless to waste time for this on the ninth-to-tenth page of a thread about Solt Lurkyurg...


Speaking of whom... I've been slowly reading through Don't Split the Party for quite some time now, so I got to strip 622. This is actually why I posted, today. I mean, that strip shows both that Haley did have enough money to raise one person (ok she robbed Grubwiggler) and also has this gem:
Celia: "I had every right to try to reverse deaths that I accidentally helped cause, through any means at my disposal!"
...Damn it, Celia.
So, Celia goes out of her way to preserve the lives of Toby, the dog-fight arranger, George the wife beater and all the other people, every single one of whom is an ******* (normally I don't trust Haley's moral judgement but judging by Toby and George she is understating). She does so by perpetuating the bad situation in and the thieves guild grip on Greysky City by giving back to the thieves guild all the manpower they lost, actually giving them money (by the way, I would, in fact, support Haley losing some of that hoard of hers. For a Good cause, that is. Like, say... wait, wait not yet) and helping them craft a story that will improve their rep and intimidates freelancers(who could be people not wanting to give Bozzok anything and I wouldn't blame them) while simultaneously evaporating the hopes people might have had of escaping, after hearing about Haley escaping the guild's "justice". So, what she does, does have victims, whether she likes it or not. That's an interesting brand of pacifism. "I will absolutely never harm anyone at all directly and personally but will do more than I have to, to save people that will go on to hurt others." (Note that she escaped Yor's grip, so she could have ran away again)
She fails to do anything resembling this, in a much less morally ambiguous situation...

Pacifism doesn't have to be Good, it seems.
That, and... WHAT ABOUT SOLT LURKYURG?

Spoiler: BATMAN

Show

Since batman was brought up, it is of note that what Celia did, isn't what batman does. He actually gives the criminals to the society, which decides to not inflict the death penalty upon them. It's not the same thing. That's not to say that the moral code of superheroes hasn't been the result of a combination of them needing recurring villains, thus needing a reason to spare them and the Comics Code Authority back then.

However it is what movie batman did, in that she followed the word of a self inflicted rule (never harm anyone) but not the spirit (all of the rant above).
End of 1st Batman movie, anyone?
The dialogue might as well have been:

Batman: "Well, TECHNICALLY I'm not going to be killing you myself. Haha %#&$ you. I'm Batman."
Presumably ra's al ghul after batman jumps off:"I HATE 'well, technically' people... mumble grumble" *BOOM*

I mean what's the point of having a moral code of your choice, if you abuse loopholes. No one is forcing you to have it in the first place, right? I mean he could have said "I'm always doing my best to not kill anyone at all but sometimes risking my life to save a mass-murderer is not justified." but decided to be a smart-ass instead.

[Kish]

I thought one of Haley's companions stealing from her was hilarious. Wasn't really able to analyze it beyond that because whenever I tried my brain went, "One of Haley's companions stole from her, ha ha!" I would, however, suggest that if Celia could have dragooned Haley into signing a contract that she'd pay to resurrect Solt Lorkyurg, she would have done so, but I don't know how she could have. (She would not have realized that Haley wouldn't bother to obey such a contract, as she didn't realize that neither Haley nor Bozzok would honor the contract she negotiated at Greysky City.)

(Also, the first Batman movie had Adam West, though I may have made a similar comment, using the phrase "moral cowardice," about Batman Begins when it came out. )

[Jasdoif]

I would, however, suggest that if Celia could have dragooned Haley into signing a contract that she'd pay to resurrect Solt Lorkyurg, she would have done so, but I don't know how she could have.

Suddenly I have this mental image of Celia with a microscope adding "and Solt Lorkyurg, gnome merchant" to the part where she stipulated every Guild thief would be raised from the dead in incredibly fine print.

[BroomGuys]

Mmm. I was bothered more by Bruce's affected concern over weaponisation when fusion bombs were already developed over 50 years ago, but then I'm one of those irritating people.

Yeah, tell you the truth, I thought that was a pretty weak bit of writing.

In technical terms, even the most meticulously constructed fiction can only ever amount to a kind of synthetic anecdote, so it's clear that to the extent stories yield some cognitive benefit, it can't be derived from strictly empirical criteria. In that sense, it's only charitable to assume that narrative logic can, to varying degrees, bend, replace or abolish some of the normal rules of nature. However, to put it delicately, I don't think people read OOTS for a physics lesson.

I'm afraid your euphemism obscures your point here. I think you're arguing that the breaks from reality are an impediment to the story's effectiveness in communicating its messages and themes, so to say that OOTS is in fact very dissimilar from the real world still doesn't quite get at that main point.

I would not say that everything OOTS has to say is untrue. Ruthless butchers can be personally charming, warm to their loved ones, driven by a worthy cause, or haunted by pain- and one can infer possessing such traits doesn't make a person infallible. Steady persistence and reciprocal loyalty can often make up for middling ability and uneven circumstances. And words themselves can have a terrible power.

Sometimes, however, I get the impression that the author is straining so hard to make a particular point that the very effort becomes awkward. (Does Elan need the help so badly that two major NPCs must have the sole and naked function of making him look good? Is expecting signs from God so abnormal in a universe where faith-healing is super-effective and all species the result of intelligent design? Given Orcs have an intrinsic -4 Int/Cha penalty, which real ethnicity are we meant to correlate them with? And are we seriously expected to extend the hand of friendship to serial killers?)

I don't read the Therkla arc at all as serving to make Elan look good. He looks quite bad at being a hero, as he himself points out. I'm not sure what you mean about orcs' ethnicity, but I don't think we're supposed to associate them with any real ethnicity--are you saying that you think reading real-world ethnicities into orcs as characters is inevitably going to happen? If so, I disagree but would be interested to hear you flesh that point out. And which character are you referring to about serial killers?

[Lacuna Caster]

I'd be interested to know where you got those numbers. And what are the measurable aspects of personality.

Spoiler

Show

Mr. Pinker mentions the standard measurements in the video I linked before- typically it's personality questionnaires based on the Big 5 traits or similar measures, sometimes with interviews, but also including stats on the incidence of schizophrenia, IQ, and various personality disorders (BPD, hystrionic, narcissism, etc), along with likelihood of smoking, divorce, alcoholism, lifespan and various other 'hard' stats. The references from the book are here, which are too long to go through exhaustively, so I'll just give a few random samples.

Twin study from the University of Minnesota, based on the the Big 5:
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/264/5166/1700

An adolescent twin study on self-esteem from Japan (behind a paywall, sadly, but you can read the abstract):
https://keio.pure.elsevier.com/en/pu...change-in-self

A twin study on personality disorders (antisocial, histrionic, borderline and narcissist) from Norway:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3606922/

General recap and overview:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3147062/

Speaking of whom... I've been slowly reading through Don't Split the Party for quite some time now, so I got to strip 622. This is actually why I posted, today. I mean, that strip shows both that Haley did have enough money to raise one person (ok she robbed Grubwiggler) and also has this gem...

This is reminding me of the older Miko debates: people will castigate a character for getting an A-- and nod with approval at a C-average. I guess it is mildly inconsistent that Mr. Lurkyurg is never tossed in the cart, but again, I suspect that Haley and Belkar would've vetoed the idea. What bothers me here is that Haley's ostensible justification for hoarding was being able to ransom her father, which she never actually does (and would have immediately stolen back if she had. Where's the love?)

(Batman was on the train to prevent it slamming into Wayne Tower, not specifically to rescue Ra'as, so I can gloss over that. It was years later that I read a forum post on how blowing up the whole monastery to avoid executing a prisoner was far more problematic.)

I'm afraid your euphemism obscures your point here. I think you're arguing that the breaks from reality are an impediment to the story's effectiveness in communicating its messages and themes, so to say that OOTS is in fact very dissimilar from the real world still doesn't quite get at that main point.

If your underlying message is directly concerned with psychology, and your psychology is wrong, then I would suggest this undermines the utility of the message. I suppose if you consider the value of art independent of it's truth, then that wouldn't be a problem, but many artists don't.

My broad point on race/religion is that they don't mean the same things in D&D/OOTS as they do in reality. For example, the idea that Miko might be an allegory for religious fundamentalism honestly never occurred to me until quite recently, because the clerics and faithful of D&D have direct and abundant empirical evidence for the intercession of their deities in mortal affairs (if only by delegation.) I don't know if people will reliably equate Orcs with any particular human ethnicity, but demihuman species in D&D have inherent biological differences in mental and physical aptitudes that make equality in outcomes impossible even under ideal starting conditions. If you go about saying that about jews and latinos, people will call you names.

Your mileage may vary on Therkla, but I would have thought V and Belkar were pretty clear examples of mass-murderers?

[Lacuna Caster]

Pacifism doesn't have to be Good, it seems.

...people will castigate a character for getting an A-- and nod with approval at a C-average.

This may have come off a little harsh, so I'll mention I actually agree with the broad point that pacifism has it's downsides. However, that kind of commitment to the principle is so rare, especially in this comic, that I'm willing to cut Celia some slack.


My point on race doesn't necessarily mean that the ordained order of things in D&D is justified and normative, by the way- given that Goblins have perfectly normal Int scores and a Cha penalty/size-modifier doesn't stop Dwarves/Halflings from being civilised, there's no obvious reason why the former couldn't have a functioning government and normal tech progression. Redcloak's crusade is not inherently quixotic in that regard, even if he long ago crossed the threshold of becoming what he hates.

But... if you were to take every species from D&D and tossed them together into a single big social melting pot where all promotions and training were based strictly on merit, one would still expect Ogre Wizards to be something of a rarity.

[Keltest]

Suddenly I have this mental image of Celia with a microscope adding "and Solt Lorkyurg, gnome merchant" to the part where she stipulated every Guild thief would be raised from the dead in incredibly fine print.

It would certainly be in line with her hypocritical enforcement of her own morals and codes on others, which she herself ignores when convenient.

Sorry, I don't like Celia. I think she is much better off acting as Roy's girlfriend from Canada.

[Lacuna Caster]

Which moral codes does she enforce on others while ignoring herself?

[Keltest]

Which moral codes does she enforce on others while ignoring herself?

Well, she's a pacifist but has no problem with electrocuting people who annoy her, and she's a lawyer (in training) who admonishes Hayley for stealing, but is perfectly willing to steal from Haley (in a "legal" position, no less).

[hroþila]

Well, she's a pacifist but has no problem with electrocuting people who annoy her

This is very unfair. It wasn't people who "annoyed" her, it was Nale being a huge jerk in the most hurtful way possible. And it's not that she didn't have a problem with electrocuting it, she simply snapped. She's a pacifist, not an automaton. The Giant addressed this quite explicitly in his commentary.

[Lacuna Caster]

Which book did this comment come from?

I'd kind of assumed that, like most of the strip's early characters, Celia was inserted more-or-less at whim and got repurposed later. I'm not sure how she could realistically defend the Air Sigil without resorting to force, but yeah, it's not like Nale was dead.

[Hamste]

This is very unfair. It wasn't people who "annoyed" her, it was Nale being a huge jerk in the most hurtful way possible. And it's not that she didn't have a problem with electrocuting it, she simply snapped. She's a pacifist, not an automaton. The Giant addressed this quite explicitly in his commentary.

Sure it was hurtful but she still attacked two unarmed tied up prisoners one of which was not doing anything at the time and she had never seen or heard Thog
do anything wrong (Thog might not have taken enough damage to get any marks but he did scream how it hurt and she had no idea he was tanky enough to survive the electricity).

[SilverCacaobean]

Here I thought we'd let this thread die but there's going to be another round...

Spoiler

Show

Mr. Pinker mentions the standard measurements in the video I linked before- typically it's personality questionnaires based on the Big 5 traits or similar measures, sometimes with interviews, but also including stats on the incidence of schizophrenia, IQ, and various personality disorders (BPD, hystrionic, narcissism, etc), along with likelihood of smoking, divorce, alcoholism, lifespan and various other 'hard' stats. The references from the book are here, which are too long to go through exhaustively, so I'll just give a few random samples.

Twin study from the University of Minnesota, based on the the Big 5:
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/264/5166/1700

An adolescent twin study on self-esteem from Japan (behind a paywall, sadly, but you can read the abstract):
https://keio.pure.elsevier.com/en/pu...change-in-self

A twin study on personality disorders (antisocial, histrionic, borderline and narcissist) from Norway:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3606922/

General recap and overview:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3147062/

Thanks for the links but holy... They're very long, so I hadn't had time to read them yet. Sorry I can't really watch videos so I didn't know about that. To be honest, I didn't know there was a time they blamed some of these things to parenting (thought I'll admit the divorce I didn't expect).

I don't really see the OotS guilty of giving false information about any of these though...

people will castigate a character for getting an A-- and nod with approval at a C-average.

I think it's very inappropriate to put this quote under a quote by me. When did I nod with approval at a C-average? You could only argue I did half of this but I don't consider Celia an A--.

Though this has nothing to do with her blasting Nale. I can't in good conscience chastise anyone who tries to murder Nale . Or with her stealing from Haley. Why would I get madder at someone who steals from Haley than I get at Haley when she steals from others?


That said, I don't really dislike any character as a character. Well, I do find Belkar a bit boring 'cause his jokes are a bit hit-or-miss and I don't like the "token violent psychopath". But what the hell, it was all worth it for this.

[Lacuna Caster]

I think it's very inappropriate to put this quote under a quote by me. When did I nod with approval at a C-average? You could only argue I did half of this but I don't consider Celia an A--.

Yeah, it's not really you I'm venting at- I'm just reminded of some of the content of older threads. How come you can't watch videos?

I'm basically content with the interpretation that the Celia prior to and after the trial scene are essentially different characters tied together by the same cosmetics and a slender pretext for involvement. It's the latter version I like, anyway.

[SilverCacaobean]

Yeah, it's not really you I'm venting at- I'm just reminded of some of the content of older threads. How come you can't watch videos?

I'm basically content with the interpretation that the Celia prior to and after the trial scene are essentially different characters tied together by the same cosmetics and a slender pretext for involvement. It's the latter version I like, anyway.

Well, I don't disagree that people do that. It's just that I consciously try not to.

There are a number of reasons I can't, though "can't" maybe too strong a phrase. I almost always have music on and generally have many-many tabs open along with an auto tab-unloader. So while I can keep an article open and read it slowly, videos reload each time I open them making my pc slow to a crawl(youtube is bad for bad connections). I also assumed it didn't have extra info, just proof of what you were saying.

Celia, well, she had that thing with her boyfriend and I know real-life people who take that very hard, so she may have taken pacifism more seriously after that shock... People react weirdly to that kind of stuff you know. They give themselves a makeover inside and out :P. Don't forget that non-main characters can change a bit off-panel. Just trying to explain Early Installment Weirdness :P

[Jasdoif]

...and she's a lawyer (in training) who admonishes Hayley for stealing, but is perfectly willing to steal from Haley (in a "legal" position, no less).

Indeed....Celia doesn't approve of Haley stealing money, but is perfectly fine with giving said stolen money to other thieves because....well, I presume because the thieves' guild was able to further Celia's goals, in a way that Haley and the legitimate owners of the money could not.