The Order of the Stick

Belkar is still acting like a good person. There's been nothing that Mr Burlow would use to indicate a dramatic alignment shift since Dorukon's Dungeon. He's evil to the core, but that doesn't mean he can't be helpful.

I just thought of something. For all the villains that had loved ones, no matter how much they said that they cared for them in the moment, if they stood between them and their goals, the villains were perfectly willing to cut them down or at least really hurt them and those they loved. I was going to say Belkar and Mr. Scruffy were the exception, but it's a bit hard for a cat to do that. If Hilgya is really Evil and she and Kudzu really disagree when he grows up...

I think Durkon's sacrifice affected Belkar at a deeper level than mere pragmatism, though it isnt clear exactly in what way. Now that Durkon's back, I bet we find out.

Incoming third Resurrection.

"Belkar is still acting like a good person. There's been nothing that Mr Burlow would use to indicate a dramatic alignment shift since Dorukon's Dungeon. He's evil to the core, but that doesn't mean he can't be helpful."

I think that Belkar's Chaotic Neutral now, if not Chaotic Good. Alignment's a tricky thing at the best of times, but I would very surprised if Belkar were to kill a random gnome for a cart, or stab an oracle after hearing a prophecy he didn't like. At the very least, he's not going to make things more difficult for the party, and random acts of violence always screw things up.

Belkar can literally not be anything other than Evil as long as his Protection from Evil charm thing hurts him as well, as we've seen that still happening.

Maybe Belkar will narrowly cross the line into Chaotic Neutral before he dies (not really sure how I'd feel about that), but there's just no argument that he's already done so.

That being said, just dismissing the actual changes that Belkar is undergoing as "pretending to act nice" stopped being true awhile ago.

...he could be turning Neutral Evil. As in, pretending to obey the rules to go along with everyone else eventually leads him into actually following the rules to get along with everyone else, which is the kind of pragmatic middle point that being the Neutral on the Lawful/Chaotic axis generally represents.

But what if the charm really was defective all along ??

Okay but yeah seriously I think if he were to live long enough he could hit Chaotic Neutral, but I don't think he's hit it yet and I suspect he won't get there before dying.

This debate is part of the reason why I suspect Belkar's going to be killed by the Snarl. The morality surrounding his character got really complicated in a way that makes his upcoming death suddenly feel unfair. Who knows who he might become if he had more time? But he doesn't, and never will. And, like, judging him now without ever finding out just doesn't feel right.

Sending him to an Evil afterlife feels like a Heel–Face Door-Slam and not sending him to an Evil afterlife feels like Karma Houdini. There's really no final destination Belkar can land in that doesn't feel unsatisfying in some way.

Cessation of Existence seems like a compromise, wherein he is not wholly absolved yet doesn't have to suffer.

We don't really have any solid details on how alignment works at this point. We know V "trended towards Evil" during their Soul Splice—but how long does it take for the label to become definitive? How many unambigiously evil actions do you have to make before the powers-that-be decide you're capital-E Evil? Conversely—how long does Belkar have to play nice before he can slide into Neutral?

Is it even something decided by on high? Roy's case worker seems to suggest that he got sent to the Lawful Good afterlife because he himself identified as Lawful Good and tried to uphold that way of life. Roy didn't become Chaotic or Neutral during his time on Earth no matter how often his actions swung that way, and only risked being sattled with those identifiers after death.

I guess if we're arguing what afterlife Belkar goes to, it's still devine judgement that matters? What alignment is Belkar at the moment he croaks, according to his case worker? Belkar himself seems to believe he's still Chaotic Evil, or at least is fighting such a change. Damn near every action taken (save childhood antics) is taken into account, though—even if Belkar does have a change of heart, he's gonna have a real hard time arguing that all the people he's slaughtered doesn't matter in the face of that change.

Edited by Wackd on Dec 25th 2018 at 3:03:52 PM

Still think it would be funny if Belkar got the atonement that Miko couldn't. Especially if she found out about it somehow.

As I recall there was an early joke that Belkar was simply too dumb not to be evil, and when given a magical boost to his wisdom he suddenly developed empathy. We know for a fact that wisdom itself does not make someone good, ie: evil clerics, so it does seem like Belkar has always been characterized as one epiphany away from being non-Evil.

Edited by Clarste on Dec 25th 2018 at 12:10:09 PM

Belkar took a WIS point last level, making him shift his alignment. Or maybe he did that when he started to act nice in the first place.

If nothing else, it is a bit interesting that Belkar seems the most pissed off at Hilgya killing Durkon again.

Meanwhile, V just seems a bit puzzled by the entire situation.

Belkar has become less Evil than he was (I think Rich mentioned it in a book commentary, saying that feeling empathy towards someone is not a completely alien concept to him anymore). Problem is, feeling empathy towards an extremely small subset of people and completely disregarding the lives of everybody else is where most redemption stories begin.

EDIT: Actually, now that I think about it, witnessing Durkon's death triggered step 2 for Belkar: realizing he deserved to live less than Durkon did (It's another thing Rich mentions in Book 5 commentaries). This shows in Gnometown, when Belkar refuses the sort-of-date with the girl from the item shop.

Point is, the tragic irony of the situation is that we're being shown the first steps of what could be a long and hard road to redemption, while knowing it will definitely be cut short somehow.

Edited by Cozzer on Dec 25th 2018 at 9:38:44 PM

I am now imagining a spin-off webcomic featuring post-mortem Belkar struggling against the injustices of the alignment system, called The Lawful Good Place.

Edited by Noaqiyeum on Dec 25th 2018 at 10:32:27 AM

Belkar’s still Evil. He’s shown no regret for any of his previous Evil actions (like randomly murdering civilians or selling people into slavery) much less any desire to atone for them. “Hasn’t murdered anyone in the last week or so” is not remotely sufficient to constitute an alignment shift. And I wouldn’t find it at all unjust for him to end up in a Evil afterlife.

At the same time, Durkon’s sacrifice did genuinely change Belkar’s perspective. He now feels guilt when he does bad things (like ripping off a gnome merchant); and he regards himself as undeserving of Durkon’s sacrifice, which is what fueled his hatred of the vampire.

Edited by Galadriel on Dec 25th 2018 at 9:30:44 AM

Belkar's still Evil. He's just become a bit more self-aware and empathetic, enough to realize that somewhere along the way he's changed. He's may not regret randomly stabbing and killing innocent people in the past, but he's no longer the kind of person who would do so (if only because he realizes it'd be stupid and self-destructive).

It's important to keep in mind that there's a third alignment outside of Good and Evil. And also that the qualifications for Miko becoming a Paladin again are more strict than the qualifications for merely being Good.

Belkar would need to actively repent and atone for all of his sins if he wanted to be a Paladin.

Belkar would need to become a person who actively helps others for selfless reasons to become Good, but may not necessarily need to address and atone for his past crimes.

Belkar would need to stop maliciously harming other people for selfish reasons and actually try to help the people directly in his life to become Neutral, but would be under no obligation to be completely selfless or atone for his past sins.

This is, in my opinion, the fundamental problem with "redemption" as a plot device. It acts as though everyone must be either Hitler or Gandhi, and unless you're willing to go whole hog into Gandhi, you're still Hitler. But there's a ton of room in that spectrum between the two extremes. Most people live meaningful lives without ever murdering millions of people or dedicating their entire mortal existence to charity.

Indeed, the function of rehabilitative systems is to take bad people and make them okay people. Being good has never really been a priority for rehabilitation. When we try to rehabilitate a person, we aren't trying to give them medical doctorates and make them EMTs. We aren't enlisting them for a special peacekeeping service.

We really just want them not to stab people anymore. After that, their life is theirs to do with as they wish. There is nothing wrong with being Neutral.

But "redemption" as a plot device acts as though once you've been Evil, the only acceptable course is to become the most singularly virtuous, noble hero that Good has ever known. And that's just silly. There is a world of difference between not Evil and Spider-Man.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Dec 26th 2018 at 8:22:39 AM

There is the fact that the protection from evil spell does still hurt him. He's still Evil, just not as evil as he was in the past. Or at least he has better impulse control.

Edited by M84 on Dec 26th 2018 at 11:24:21 PM

Yes, he is presently still Evil. I'm just saying, shifting to Neutral doesn't have the same redemptive requirements that, say, Miko becoming a Paladin again in her final moments might have.

Belkar's never going to be redeemed in the sense that people typically mean. Even if he had the time for it, it's extremely unlikely that Belkar would ever become a stalwart champion of justice and spend the rest of his days atoning for his sins and fighting evil to protect the innocent. He'll never be Good and no one has ever argued that he would ever be Good.

I really feel like a lot of the "He's Evil and he'll die an Evil bastard because XYZ reasons" arguments are predicated on the fact that if he can't become Good, then he must by definition remain Evil. Things like Belkar trying to make amends for his terrible crimes are really only necessary if he's shooting for Good.

But Neutral definitely feels like it's within reach or, at least, like it could be if only he had more time. Redemption is not on the table. However, but for the unfairness of time, rehabilitation could be.

I think sometimes people look at the alignment chart and see it as "Not Good", "Good", and "SUPER Good".

Edited by TobiasDrake on Dec 26th 2018 at 10:20:06 AM

I still hold that if Belkar's alignment ever changes, it'll be in the Lawful/Chaotic axis, not the Good/Evil one. I can absolutely see him becoming Neutral Evil as a result of what's been going on with his characterization over the last few years.

^^ Didn't someone say like one page back that Belkar was already Chaotic Neutral and was going to end up Chaotic Good?

My take on the issue is that OOTS is in a weird halfway space between how D&D works and how real life issues of sociopathy shake out.

Actual D&D gameplay is divided into game sessions, and while the setup for an alignment change can take some time, it's usually handled pretty quickly - over the course of a few sessions. And while it hasn't been that long since Durkon's death and vampirization in-universe, there's still at least four sessions (if not more) between then and where we are now. I think I can say with fair confidence that if OOTS was an actual D&D game, Belkar's player probably would have penciled in "Chaotic Neutral" at the top of his character sheet by now.

Real world sociopathic disorder is the opposite. It requires months (if not years) of careful therapy, potentially aided by medication to handle side issues, to get a sociopath to show the progress Belkar has shown in a few weeks with no real help. If anything, it wouldn't surprise me if the attitudes of Roy & co. would probably be seen as detrimental to Belkar's progress by an actual therapist.

Thus we have this debate, because the handling of Belkar doesn't feel "right" either from a realistic perspective or from a pure D&D perspective. And there are reasonable arguments to be made for both Belkar remaining Chaotic Evil and him having moved away from that, depending on which approach to the matter you prefer.

Edited by TotemicHero on Dec 26th 2018 at 1:15:34 PM

I think I agree with Tobias' statements, people always talk about Belkar repenting for past actions, but the way D&D morality works, that only ever made sense to me if the point were for him to actually be good instead of just "not evil".

@The Lovecrafitian, that's kind of ignoring the actual changes he's been going through haven't been about Law and Chaos though. Belkar growing a (tiny) conscious, and this weird (to him) guilt over Durkon's death isn't because he's becoming less Chaotic.

Edited by LSBK on Dec 26th 2018 at 12:58:26 PM