The Order of the Stick

For an internet version of strange aeons any way.

That's the motto of Wayback Machine, right?

Technically, necromancy isn't evil if it creates positive-energy undead.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

@Yinyang 107

Those are not house rules if they are just part of the general rule set. And we don't know the full details of the rule set for Rich's setting.

Anyway I am of the opinion that Hilgya is evil. (Rich even saying so.) Loki is evil too. But has a specific rule that makes it so that his clerics turn rather then rebuke undead.

If I can just get someone to actually use the rules thread for discussing rules, I think thats more like an epic resurrection.

edited 21st Mar '18 11:46:40 AM by DeMarquis

When you try to get people to use the rules thread it really comes across more as you trying to shut down conversations you're not interested in.

edited 21st Mar '18 11:56:31 AM by shigmiya64

Envyus: there is no official rule saying Loki's clerics turn undead instead of rebuking. Therefore, if Rich says there is such a rule, that would be a house rule.

If I were interested in a rules conversation, I would go to the rules thread... since thats what its for.

~Envyus

The general rule set is the revised rules system for 3rd edition D&D. Rules for Rich's specific setting are called "house rules" because it comes from the phrase "my house, my rules".

Since 90% of the rules are accessible by online SRD, we have a thread for discussing how Rich interprets those rules. We can say, definitively, that evil clerics of evil gods cannot turn undead without house rules.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

New comic: #1115: It's Never Failed Before

See, this is how you make a plausible redemption arc. And one loaded with dramatic irony, given Belkar's future or lack thereof. Most of the time this sort of thing just makes me yawn, but I actually care about it to a remarkable degree. Writers everywhere take note.

edited 27th Mar '18 2:14:25 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

"Baka Durkon, its not that I like you or anything like that!"

"You can reply to this Message!"

Wow, this whole ordeal has really messed Balker up.

Also, she's doing a much better cleric therapy than we've ever seen in this comic before.

Not surprising. Remember Belkar's initial reaction when Durkon essentially died for him. The fact that, at that point he really would have tried to save Durkon if he'd been able to.

Quite possibly the one time Belkar wanted to save someone else for reasons beyond pure selfishness, and he could only sit and watch.

I'm not surprised it's still weighing hard on him.

One Strip! One Strip!

Durkon's selfless sacrifice has clearly filled Belkar with anger.

edited 27th Mar '18 4:52:55 PM by shigmiya64

Where does this fit on V's chart of Belkar emotions?

This is breaking that chart. That's the whole point of character development

Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you

I was kind of thinking of the chart too, because Belkar's comments do mirror stereotypical tsundere comments, which are obviously typically in a romantic context.

However, I don't think that chart was ever accurate. It was pretty much just V's supposition, and partly seemed to be used for a (implicitly somewhat transphobic) joke about Belkar feeling gratitude toward V and therefore being attracted to hir.

edited 27th Mar '18 6:45:13 PM by Hodor2

More of a joke on Belkar's primitive mindset only being able to process two emotions: hate and lust, and getting confused over which applied to V. Heck, if there's anyone in the party who would feel threatened by the idea of being attracted to someone of the same sex, it's Belkar, not Vaarsuvius. (We can presume that Belkar sees V as male, regardless of the actual truth.)

I'm actually thinking back to Roy's interview with the deva after his death, where they chalk his association with Belkar up to "attempting to reform an evildoer". Little did Roy know, in his determinedly masochistic cynicism, that this would actually happen, or at least come close to happening.

I have a hypothesis about what's coming, and the biggest reason I have to doubt it is that Rich loves messing with foreshadowing cliches. Spoiler tagging so I don't piss in anyone's porridge: Belkar's having redemptive thoughts. These thoughts started when Durkon sacrificed his own life for Belkar's. We know Belkar's about to die, and his little flirtation with maybe-not-complete-evilness is not going to bear more than transient fruit. So what better resolution than for him to sacrifice himself in the upcoming battle in some way that directly or indirectly leads to Durkula's destruction and thus Durkon's return to the land of the living?

Narratively speaking, it would tie off this whole arc with a ribbon and a flourish.

edited 27th Mar '18 7:13:32 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

I get the impression that Rich doesn't think much of Redemption Equals Death as a trope (and even more so, that he doesn't think much of Death Equals Redemption). It didn't happen for Miko. It hasn't happened for V, and is unlikely to happen because it would come across as letting him/her off easy.

It's not likely to happen for Belkar, who isn't even close to the point of regretting a lifetime of murdering civilians for fun. Belkar's becoming slightly less evil, to the point of caring about 2 animals and one person, but he's still very Evil - and unlike V, he's shown no notable indication of regretting any of his previous Evil actions. If he dies, irrespective of how he dies, he will still be Evil. The interesting element of his storyline is that he's becoming a slightly better person not through a sincere effort to be one, but more or less against his own will.

I don't really expect us to get anything so straightforward as the traditional Heroic Sacrifice.

edited 27th Mar '18 7:37:38 PM by Galadriel

Nobody is suggesting (well, I'm not) that a single act of self-sacrifice by Belkar would redeem a lifetime of evil. Not even close. But throughout this entire prolonged arc where he's slowly becoming a slightly less evil person, everyone else has continually given him shit (and again, deservedly so). Roy in particular has completely ignored Belkar's Character Development and has shown every sign of being perfectly willing to deliver a Heel–Face Door-Slam should it come to that.

So, again, what better way for this to end than for Belkar to do something to unambiguously prove that he's willing to start trying to redeem himself, die in the process, and weigh Roy down with even more guilt?

I'm by no means certain of this, but when an evil character walks into a major confrontation with the niggling thought that maybe being a good person isn't so awful after all, the confrontation is with the character who inspired those thoughts, nobody else buys that they're not totally evil any more, and they have a death prophecy hanging over their heads, it doesn't take a genius to predict the outcome.

It's a bit more subtle than a drama where one guy is talking about how he's going to retire soon and proudly displays a photo of his wife and kids while lamenting that he's "getting too old for this", but it's still foreshadowing all the same.

edited 27th Mar '18 7:45:24 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

I don't think Belkar's going to die this book. I think Xykon is going to upgrade to a demilich and devour Belkar's soul.

edited 27th Mar '18 8:00:51 PM by shigmiya64

I think Belkar's end is likely to involve the Snarl, and will not happen in this book. But my OOTS predictions are almost invariably wrong.

What's up with demiliches? Why is a stronger version of the creature using a word that would mean "lesser lich"?

I have a message from another time...

My only objection to the sacrifice angle is that if Belkar dies doing something genuinely heroic, it becomes hard to argue that he should be left dead - especially with this critical end-of-the-world mission and all.

Like, if it seems like Belkar truly, genuinely has a shot at redeeming himself, that messes up the variables. Even if we make the argument that there's only enough diamond dust for one resurrection, then the choice comes down to either:

• Resurrect Belkar and take that chance while Durkon kicks it in the Lawful Good afterlife with his buddy Thor, having given his life valiantly trying to vanquish an evil vampire.
• Resurrect Durkon and let Belkar rot in the Chaotic Evil afterlife, because what Good person honestly cares about a chance for redemption? Man, f*ck that little prick. He deserves what he gets, sacrificing himself for Durkon and whatnot.

We know for a fact that Belkar never gets resurrected. I've been saying for a while now that he needs to die in a fashion that prohibits him from being revived, because it'd be a self-sabotaging move for the Order to knowingly and deliberately leave a high-level combatant dead during a Godzilla Threshold situation.

Having him die legitimately performing a heroic act in front of everyone only makes the decision to let him rot even harder to defend. It just doesn't seem like something that Good people would do.

I'm still in the "killed by Snarl" camp. It's the easiest way to explain why he never comes back, especially now that this Character Development thing is happening.

edited 27th Mar '18 8:47:00 PM by TobiasDrake

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

They're literally smaller / "partial" bodies, despite being substantially more powerful than an ordinary lich.