Familicide Mega-Thread

[Jabberwok]

Reposting this from the discussion thread:

In my country, we have a method tracing relatives and I thought I should share this. We measure the distance of relatives by traversing the family tree up and down.

Spoiled for image size: Family tree

Spoiler

Show

1. First relation is
Father(1up), Mother(1up), Son(1down), Daughter(1down)
2. Second relation is
siblings(1up1down),
Grand Parents(2up),
Grand Children(2down)
3. Third relation is
uncle,nephew,etc(2up1down,1up2down,3up,3down)

As I see it blood-relations are traced by the red line.(If you can be traced by going up-down). The greys are marrige-relations because they have to go down-up and wont be targeted by the first clause of familicide.
But they will be targeted by the second clause because each and every member targeted by the first clause will repeat this process over again.
(So Aunt will be targeted because in Cousin(4)'s tree she will be up1)

[factotum]

It's quite possible that nobody in Sandsedge was affected by the spell. It's quite distant from the Empire of Blood (and thus Windy Canyon), so the Draketooths may never have gone baby-hunting there. Also, bear in mind they were in Sandsedge only a day or two after Familicide--it's possible anybody who *had* mysteriously died there hadn't been discovered before the caravan left.

[zimmerwald1915]

I think it'd be more along the lines of:

"We're going to try and conquer another nation huh... We'll probably fail..."

"Look at me, brain the size of a planet and they send me off to die scaling the walls..."

[Elfey]

Something is bugging me a bit.

V was certain, and we saw the panels backing it up, that everyone who shared the blood of the Draketooths is dead, as is anyone related to them.

Now I'm assuming V's right, which makes the dragon ancestor a direct relative of the Dragon V fought.

The question is how many degrees does it go? The degrees of sanguinity go pretty far, but genetic drift seems to die off somewhere between 3rd and 4th cousins. Now, this is applying real world genetics to a fantasy world, whose rules don't have to obey em.

If the answer is no limit, then we'd get millions dead. After all, you have 2 parents, 4 grand parents, 8 great-grand parents and so on. So in theory, go back 10 generations and you'll have 1024 ancestors. In practice you'll have less due to some of those ancestors being the same people. But you get the idea, Your 10th cousins may number in the hundreds of thousands.

People's thoughts? We're seeing random deaths, enough to be noticeable, and quite a lot of innocents, but we're not seeing the damage of really distant cousins where entire cities could be empty.

[Despiser]

"And I have extinguished their own family lines as well! Countless parents, siblings, and children, dead - down to the last cousin."

Whoah. That's a pretty serious claim. Just how serious is this claim?

Let's do the math.

Assuming a standard 2 child family, how many human cousins does the typical 30-year old Draketooth have?

Well, I believe the universe of OOTS is around 1000 years old, give or take, which translates into 30 generations, generously assuming 33 years per generation.

Thus, each Draketooth has:

1st cousins: 2^1 (2; two on the non-dragon's side)
2nd cousins: 2^2 (4)
3rd cousins: 2^3 (8)
4th cousins: 2^4 (16)
5th cousins: 2^5 (32)
6th cousins: 2^6 (64)
7th cousins: 2^7 (128)
8th cousins: 2^8 (256)
9th cousins: 2^9 (512)
10th cousins: 2^10 (1024).
....
20th cousins: 2^20 (1,048,576).
....
30th cousins: 2^30 (1,073,741,824).

That's right. Assuming that that V is correct on how the spell works, and that even a single drop of related blood is enough, mathematically, assuming a two-child family, each dead Draketooth took with them up to a billion cousins. Given that there were at least around 25 living Draketooths, this means that upwards of 25 billion cousins could have been killed!

Now, obviously the world of OOTS doesn't have a population of nearly that size, plus the spell has to have some limit. But even if we just look at 10th cousins, V has a killcount of 25 x 1024 = ~25,000 kills!

5th cousins: 32 x 25 = 800 cousin kills.

As close as 3rd cousins: 8 x 25 = 200 cousin kills.

Know what's really scary? That's not accounting for any uncles or aunts...or any nephews/nieces, which would double or triple the kill count again.

What Varsuvius did wasn't throw a fireball in a crowded market. What she did was obliterate an entire city worth of people...and, depending on how far back the spell reaches, V has theoretically killed more people than every mass murderer and war criminal in real-life Earth's history, combined.

As Belkar had said, "Welcome to the deep end of the alignment pool, buddy..."

[Killer Angel]

Eat your heart out, Belkar!

[Murray]

Ah! I see, Belkar dies from shame.

[Tass]

It also bothers me somewhat. It is a plot hole that strains my suspension of disbelief.

It is not just blood relatives, it is also the relatives of those, and so on. How far it goes is unclear. Many people claim that it is only two steps, but this is disproven by the comic.

The dragon which started the Draketooth clan is according to Blackwing not the dragon, but just one of the dragons V killed. Which is consistent with the ABD saying she had only one child.

The Draketooths were not blood relatives of the ABD just possibly relatives of relatives. The fact that it killed Penelope too, who were not a Draketooth but only related through her child gives it a step more. Killing hers and Tarquins hypothetical child would be yet another.

V's line about the innocents peoples families also being dead down to the last cousin further corroborates this.

The thing is if it is not limited in the number of recursions, then almost all humans at all should be dead. It doesn't need to work back through many generations of long dead ancestors, it will jump through living grandparents to cousins, through children to spouses, etc. It will easily jump continents as well, had Tarquin and Penelope had a child then Tarquin, Elan, Nale and their mother would also be dead, similar things would surely happen to others. The only ones left alive would be people with very few living relatives who happen to not be related to anyone outside.

If the spell also goes back trough lines of dead people then there is no hope for anyone. The world is more than a thousand years old after all.

[Tass]

It's worse: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=235303

[Roland Itiative]

The way I see it now, we have two conflicting descriptions of what the spell does, but neither would cause the death of Tarquin.

Every living creature that directly shares your bloodline is dead. Every living creature that is directly related to any of those creatures is also dead. Anyone who could possibly make a claim to be part of your family is gone now.

Assuming "direct bloodline" means "-parents" and "-children", this would happen:

Spoiler

Show

The people in red (including all of the omitted Draketooth clan) were all killed, and caused the death of the people in pink (who are either members of branching family paths, or people who "married" into the main branch), and then it would stop. The families of Penelope and the other people tricked by the Draketooth would not be wiped "to the last cousin", only a direct line of ascendency/descendancy would be killed. That, of course, contradicts:

The Familicide spell I cast killed everyone of the black dragon's blood – and then killed everyone who shared blood with any of the dragon's blood.

[...]

I have scourged the Western Continent of humans whose only sin was falling in love with a mysterious scarlet-tressed stranger! And I have estinguished their own family lines as well! Countless parents, siblins, and children, dead – down to the last cousin.

This definition ignores the "direct" part, and says everyone "with the blood of the black dragon is killed". This means cousins and uncles/aunts of the ABD would be part of the first loop, and should be painted in red instead of pink. This would also mean most of the people in blue in the first chart are now in pink.

Spoiler

Show

However, this definition still wouldn't have killed Tarquin even if he had a child with Penelope. The second loop was targeted at Penelope, not the hypothetical child. Everyone who shared blood with her would be killed. And, as much as Tarquin would share blood with the kid, he'd still not share blood with her.

[Ron Miel]

It's quite possible that nobody in Sandsedge was affected by the spell.

Look again at the montage. The second image obviously is Sandsedge. The third image is certainly inside a tent, perhaps it's a Sandsedge one.

[Tass]

Uhm, there is no evidence that the ABD was the one starting the Draketooth clan, in fact there is evidence to the contrary.

Blackwing said it must have been one of the dragons killed.

ABD herself said she had only one child.

[Math_Mage]

While it's true that the extension of Familicide into human bloodlines hugely scales up the death count, keep in mind that a lot of the cousins you're counting there are redundant. A lot of people will be showing up more than once on the family tree--possibly several times.

[Porthos]

I'm starting to think that Familicide is being picked to death (no pun intended) way too much.

Mind, I'm not suggesting that people shouldn't analyze what was said about Familicide. Far from it. But, and I think this is my main point, treating what has been said about Familicide as Crunch rather than Fluff might be a bit of an error, and is, IMO, what is leading to most of these arguments.

Simply put, none of us have the Crunch (that is the Stat Block) for Familicide. It simply isn't there. Instead what we have been given is the Fluff (that is [part of] the spell description) and trying to tease out what mechanically the spell actually does from that description. At the absolute most, we only have Partial Crunch since we don't have definitions for things like "direct", "bloodline" and "shared" or what limiting factors apply to the spell (and limiting factors must apply since the entire world didn't go kerplooie).

And, I think, it really is nearly impossible to do so in such a way that would satisfy everyone, since we don't have agreed upon definitions for things like "direct", "bloodline" and "shared".

Instead all we can really do is look at what happened 'on-screen', compare it to what was said about the spell, and come to a conclusion that makes sense, even if it isn't quite as logically sound as our preferred defintions for "direct", "bloodline" and "shared" might be.

PS: If Rich should happen sometime in the future to mention that, yes, Familicide would have destroyed the whole planet/killed millions of people if it had been cast on a human/elf/dwarf/whathaveyou, and that OotSWorld is "lucky" that it was "just" on a dragon, then I of course will withdraw my statement above about there being limiting factors to the spell and that, yes, we pretty much had all the Crunch we needed.

And also, simultaneously, perhaps wonder just how bonkers Haerta had to be to come up with something like that in the first place.

[sohvan]

I have bolded your mistake. That sentence is wrong. Familicide is cast on two waves, the first one kills everyone related by blood to the original target. The second one kills everyone related by blood to anyone killed in the first wave.

You misunderstood something. I was responding to a claim that familicide works in infinite recursion. So it kills a first wave, second wave, third wave, and so on until it's killed everyone who has a direct link to anyone in any previous wave. I wasn't claiming that Familicide worked that way, I was pointing out why it couldn't work that way.

[Math_Mage]

Spoiler those images, please. My screen hurts.

Draketooth's grandfather was not one of ABD's descendants. Your graph needs to be revised.

[Chess Tyrant]

Well,

1) The world isn't much over a thousand years old. It's possible the gods created several tens of thousands of each race at the beginning of the world, and while V wiped out a few of them, even at the furthest definition of 'blood relative,' s/he only killed a few thousands of tens of thousands of people, scattered all across the world. Unfortunate, but by no means cataclysmic (except to the black dragons).

2) V mentions in the spell description that it only targets living relatives of the main target, and then only targets living relatives of those people. To an immortal race such as dragons, this could be apocalyptic; to short-lived races, humans in particular, it's not as much of a problem.

3) Combine this with the fact that it only affects two sets of targets - the primary target, and all the people killed when it was cast on the primary target - and we can see that it wouldn't annihilate anyone vaguely related to anyone vaguely related to anyone vaguely related to the ABD. For example, even if Penelope had borne Tarquin a son, Tarquin wouldn't have died, because the Familicide effect was only recast on Orrin and Penelope's daughter, and Tarquin doesn't share any blood with that child. Penelope/Tarquin's hypothetical child does, and would die, but Elan would be safe.

[Math_Mage]

After a few generations you start to get overlap as one person's third or fourth cousin is another person's first or second cousin.

However, it is the case that Familicide as described should have killed an extraordinary number of people--far more than what we've seen evidence for, at any rate. A family tree for every Draketooth escapade, with 'blood relative' ties stretching back over at least 50 generations? Without some kind of cutoff, at least on the second clause, most of the Western Continent should have evaporated.

[BaronOfHell]

The Draketooths were not blood relatives of the ABD just possibly relatives of relatives.

We don't really know that. I'd be rather surprised if the ABD and the draketooth's were not blood relatives.
What a blood relative actually is, doesn't seem completely unambigious when comparing each forum users perception of said concept.
When someone says blood relative, then I think it means that they share the same "blood". So as I see it, the draketooth's could easily be blood relatives.

The fact that it killed Penelope too, who were not a Draketooth but only related through her child gives it a step more. Killing hers and Tarquins hypothetical child would be yet another.

No, I disagree. Said child would be blood related with the draketooth offspring by sharing the same blood (through penelope). Please notice how V doesn't mention how Elan, or even Tarquin, would have been effected. Because they were not blood related to neither any ABD or to Penelope.

V's line about the innocents peoples families also being dead down to the last cousin further corroborates this.

I understand it as it means that every family member who shares the same blood as said child is brought down. I imagine a lot of spouses to be left alive.

had Tarquin and Penelope had a child then Tarquin, Elan, Nale and their mother would also be dead

Yet V didn't mention this at all.

[BaronOfHell]

The way I see it now, we have two conflicting descriptions of what the spell does, but neither would cause the death of Tarquin.

I don't get what's conflicting about those two descriptions. You're very welcome to explain. I personally find the newest comic only helps to describe our earlier definition much more detailed.

What V meant by everyone related, i.e. the second cause, was everyone blood related. This makes the spell a lot easier to work with and avoids it to stretch out and destroy every living being.

[Math_Mage]

Oh, right. Need to remember to interpret the spell correctly.

It is not just blood relatives, it is also the relatives of those, and so on. How far it goes is unclear. Many people claim that it is only two steps, but this is disproven by the comic.

Wrong.

The dragon which started the Draketooth clan is according to Blackwing not the dragon, but just one of the dragons V killed. Which is consistent with the ABD saying she had only one child.

Correct, Girard's grandfather was a blood relative of ABD.

The Draketooths were not blood relatives of the ABD just possibly relatives of relatives.

Wrong. Since Girard's grandfather was a blood relative of ABD, Girard is also a blood relative of ABD. If your brother is your blood relative, your brother's grandson is as well, as you share a bloodline. The same goes for the other Draketooths. Hence all Draketooths were killed as blood relatives of ABD.

The fact that it killed Penelope too, who were not a Draketooth but only related through her child gives it a step more. Killing hers and Tarquins hypothetical child would be yet another.

Wrong. Since Penelope's child was killed as a blood relative of ABD under Clause 1 of Familicide, Penelope was killed as a blood relative of an ABD relative under Clause 2 of Familicide. Penelope's family, those who share her blood (and her child's), would also fall under Clause 2--including a hypothetical child by Tarquin. Nowhere is a third iteration required, let alone a fourth.

V's line about the innocents peoples families also being dead down to the last cousin further corroborates this.

Wrong. Your cousin is your blood relative; hence the same step of Familicide that kills you kills your cousin; hence no additional step is required to kill your cousin, or any of your other blood relatives.

The thing is if it is not limited in the number of recursions, then almost all humans at all should be dead.

Good thing it's limited, then.

[Emperor Flumph]

I still don't get how people don't understand how this works. All that we've been shown are two steps: killing all of the ABD's, then killing all of their relatives.
The dragon in the family tree was related to the ABD, so all of its children, grandchildren etc. are as well. If one of your relatives has children, they are also your relatives. That's just how genetics works.
Penelope was not a relative of the ABD, but her child was, making her a relative of a relative. Since all her family are related to her child, they're relatives of relatives too.
And we've been given no indication it goes further than that. Two simple steps.

[Quild]

Uhm, there is no evidence that the ABD was the one starting the Draketooth clan, in fact there is evidence to the contrary.

Blackwing said it must have been one of the dragons killed.

ABD herself said she had only one child.

Considering that Girard's grandmother was totally human and the long lifespan of dragons, we could think that:

- Being young, ABD had a "long term" relation with an human woman, had 3 child with her (shapechange solves adoptions rights problems!).
- Then, the woman died, the children grew up, and ABD as well.
- ABD had a relation with a male dragon, she had a son, both her mate and son were killed.

Or maybe ABD had another son she didn't care to talk V about.

Fact is, Familicide killed more than sixty dragons. I don't think it can be done without considering that Familicide kills everyone related to someone killed by Familicide (or related to the direct target).

Also, the whole purpose of the spell is to avoid having someone to come to avenge one of those whom died. It doesn't kill friends and spouses without child, but what would be the point of leaving an husband (or wife) alive, with is wife (or husband) and child killed? More people to come for vengeance?

@Baronofhell : It's highly unlikely that Draketooth were killed by the first clause. So Penelope can't be killed by the second clause, but only by a... third!

[Roland Itiative]

Spoiler those images, please. My screen hurts.

Sorry. Spoiler-tagged they are.

Draketooth's grandfather was not one of ABD's descendants. Your graph needs to be revised.

Yeah, I've noticed that reading the recent posts. That means the first graph simply can't work at all (the Draketooth would all be pink, and thus would not have their sexual partners killed by the spell, which we know isn't the case), while the second one still works the same way, I just got the assumption of a second ABD child wrong (just like half of the family tree is made up without evidence, only to illustrate a point ).

I don't get what's conflicting about those two descriptions. You're very welcome to explain. I personally find the newest comic only helps to describe our earlier definition much more detailed.

What V meant by everyone related, i.e. the second cause, was everyone blood related. This makes the spell a lot easier to work with and avoids it to stretch out and destroy every living being.

The way I see it (which seems to not coincide with the way Rich sees it, considering the above), a "direct bloodline/relation" does not include cousins or uncles. It should be a single line, moving either up or down on the family tree, but never moving up and down on the same trip.

EDIT: And here is a (hopefully) final draft of the chart. I made the draconic progenitor of the Draketooth clan a niece of the ABD (pure conjecture, but it doesn't change the results), and also made the secondary targets of the spell clear with their own colour, instead of just using pink for them too. Also added a little explanation on the image itself, showing what's happening.

Spoiler

Show

Basically, the spell's algorithm is:

• The primary target is brown.
• If a creature shares blood with the creature in brown, the creature is red.
• If a creature shares blood with a creature in red, the creature is orange.
• If a creature shares blood with a creature in orange, the creature is pink.
• If a creature shares blood with a creature in pink, the creature is blue.
• In case two or more of the above are positive, the creature is the topmost case's colour.
• Red, orange, pink and supposedly brown all die.

[Firewind]

What you have to remember is that we are seeing what V claims that spell has done, not what it has actually done. It is possible that V is being overly dramatic and exaggerating like V usually does.

[pendell]

The really important question is: How much XP does V get for that?

Tongue-in-cheek,

Brian P.

[Jay R]

The only person we've seen with the ability to put that data together is Tarquin, who characteristically does not tell you what he knows. Maybe Malack is in a position to notice lots of deaths, but a cleric of a god of Death will be less horrified than others about it.

Beyond that we've seen the Order of the Stick, who arrived after it happened, gladiators locked away from the world, the Linear Guild who is focused on their own quest, an elven ambassador whose city was under attack, and bounty hunters who just got here. Who have we actually seen who could have noticed it?

[Tass]

I understand how genetics work, but the thing is V said: "any creature that directly shares your bloodline is dead". http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0640.html

I don't interpret that as including cousins, but okay then, I accept that it is the only way to make it work. Cousins do share genes (blood) after all even if they are not in the same line.

But it doesn't help much, because now there is no way to add a "trough living" clause. Cousins share blood even if their grandmother is dead. Given a thousand years of interbreeding, it has to have a cutoff where the amount of genes shared are to low, if not then it would still depopulate the species.

[hamishspence]

Penelope was not a relative of the ABD, but her child was, making her a relative of a relative. Since all her family are related to her child, they're relatives of relatives too.
And we've been given no indication it goes further than that. Two simple steps.

The problem is "all her family" because, from a genetic point of view, this can include the whole human species.

Meaning that "her family" needs a narrower definition.

[Morty]

It's not like Western Continent has Internet. People dropped dead all over the place, but news of any single incident didn't reach that far, most likely. In time, people might be able to piece it together, though.