If it worked as you say then paladins would be the most out-of-work adventuring class in goblins because monsters are no longer default evil alignment. However, remember that big ears tried to describe what good or evil is and how it works for Paladins. He believes that good and evil are both based on someone's personal code of honor (http://www.goblinscomic.org/06242016-2/). He could be absolutely wrong, but there it is.BiggestBlackest wrote:This is a very silly discussion, but ok: so, a character who believed that raping slaves was an honorable act could do it and still be a paladin, and we the readers would think they were good because they had an idiosyncratic moral system?Liquidmark wrote:
Maybe the good/evil call works on the basis of what the individual paladin or the paladin's god considers good or evil?
...
To Minmax, killing the goblins at the warcamp wasn't evil. From his perspective *they* were evil and trying to conquer the world.
As I stated before, Minmax has a pretty clear code of honor. Killing in battle against an opponent that can fight back is honorable. Raping a monster that is essentially a slave and can't resist is dishonorable.
I don't know what's up with Kore but I assume Mr. Hunt has a card he has yet to reveal. He is NOT "Good" and the mechanism by which he retains his paladin status will be revealed at some point.
I am confident that, were Minmax a paladin, he would have lost the favor of his deity (paladins can only be Good) after butchering a goblin village full of innocents who never intended harm to anyone. The only reason D&D paladins can get away with killing a bunch of goblins without checking on their moral status is that all the monsters they encounter are, in fact, Evil, which was clearly not the case here. Were someone to cast Detect Evil on our buddies the goblins they would not be evil. Obviously Ears is not, he's a fucking paladin.
The reality is that we don't really see any other paladins in the story to have anything to go off of. Kore is certainly an exception but it would be nice to see other paladins.
Ok, I'll try to respond to this as concisely as possible. I'm typing on my tablet so it gets a bit dicey with long responses.Morgaln wrote:
I definitely disagree on that part. He doesn't let go; letting go would mean dropping the leash immediately. Instead he deliberately sets her free, by handing her the leash. That even requires him to give her another order, or she couldn't take it out of his hand. That is a powerful gesture, but it is the gesture of a master to their servant, not of an equal to another. "I am letting you go," as opposed to "I have no power over you."
I do agree that he was in an extreme emotional situation and wasn't thinking rationally, but I also believe that he knew full well what the leash does and that he did try to force Kin to listen. We also know from several other situations in the Maze of Many that he can think very quickly and come up with clever solutions to problems if necessary, so saying he's too dumb to realize what he was doing doesn't hold with me.
I understand how you see it that way, I'm not sure you understand my point. I think it sends a very different message (I almost used the word signamancy here, damn you Erfworld) if he hands her the leash instead of dropping it.
There is only one person who has the right to control Kin. That person is Kin. When MinMax grabs the leash, he takes that control away from her. Whether he did it deliberately or not is something we disagree on, since it might be either way. Either way, he had no right to do that, I think everyone agrees on these points.
However, when he realises what he did, he keeps hold of the leash. That means he unnecessarily prolongs the time she is under his control. Remember that during this time, she is still forced to obey the order he gave her earlier. She has to stay under his control until he allows her to take the leash. And he literally has to give her permission to take it. That permission takes the form of another order he is giving her. Which means he turns her having control over herself into his choice. He decides how, when and where she will be able to gain control again, and he lets her have it by his grace.
I am certainly not saying he does all of that intentionally. I doubt he thought of all of this. But it is the message the scene sends to me (again, subjective impression, I'm not trying to turn anyone to my view here).
I haven't seen anyone claim that MinMax is evil. Did I miss a post somewhere?
Also, I don't think Complains is attacking him unfairly at all. He's pointing out a very real hypocrisy in MinMax' behavior here. It's been maybe two weeks since Minmax attacked the goblin camp and killed almost everyone Complain's ever knew. Not only did he do that, he did so gleefully and unprovoked, for his own gain. Less than a day ago, Minmax appeared at Complain's location for the express purpose of killing Complains and taking revenge for the wound he took in their last fight. Revenge for Complains daring to defend his home against an unprovoked attack. The only reason MinMax didn't kill any of the goblins then is that Kore showed up and forced them to work together for their survival. This has been after he fell in love with Kin and lost her. So he might see Kin as a person and not a monster, but clearly it hasn't made him re-assess his opinion of the goblins.
I haven't seen MinMax ever acknowledge what he did. He hasn't apologized or tried to close the rift between him and the goblins. He's doing nothing to atone for his deeds. Instead he's accusing Complains of not caring about a goblin that MinMax tried to kill two weeks ago. Complains himself said it, MinMax has no business at all to take the moral high ground here. It's about time he got called on it, even if this is a bad moment.
Before anyone repeats Thaco's line about how war is always tragic and unfair: this is not a war. MinMax is not a soldier in an army. He's a free person who attacked others unprovoked. He himself said he did it because they were monsters (meaning, because of their race), and because they had something he wanted (loot). That's about as immoral as it gets for motivation.
Until and unless MinMax acknowledges this hypocrisy and starts to actively atone, Complains is fully justified in telling him to keep out of goblin business.
You know, I think it's funny that you call him Names, like MinMax does, and I call him Complains, like the other goblins do. I'm not sure if you do it deliberately or not, I just noticed.
I agree that Complains has no idea about the relation between MinMax and Forgath or Kin. It was a stab designed to get a rise out of him, nothing more and nothing less; a pretty effective one, even. But the hypocrisy is still very real when you consider that MinMax claims he's the only one who cares whether Fumbles lives or dies; two weeks ago, he tried to kill Fumbles; heck, a day ago, he told Fumbles he's "dead meat". And suddenly, Fumbles is his best buddy? I wouldn't believe it either, if I was Complains.
Just pointing out that Kin is a reptile that hatched from an egg...
1) I use whatever's convenient when it comes to Complains of Names. Names works better for me because it is shorter than the word Complains.
2) my main issue with what Names said is that it steps into territory that he knows nothing about. If he wants to hate Minmax forever because he killed goblins, that's certainly his right. He could have simply said "look, shut up, stupid human, you were trying to kill all of us literally a couple days ago. You don't even know Fumbles/Maxo like that and basically treat him like pet because you have some personal need for companionship that I don't care to explore further. Take a cup of stfu and go over there while we do our goblin thing" at least it would be accurate to what he can actually see. Saying that he just uses Kin and Forgath kinda comes way out of left field. He doesn't know anything about them or their relationships. At this point, MM knows Kin way better than any of the goblins there. Yeah, he might be trying to get a rise but woah nelly is that "slit throat" neighborhood. He decided to moonwalk through a minefield there.
3) if there is a hypocracy in MM saying he's the only one that cares if Fumbles lives or dies then flatly point out his hypocracy to him. I'm sure that he'll recognize it and try to make amends. I keep going back to it but he was ready to kill Kin and he went and fell in love with her. If the context of the scenario were different, he probably would have went through with killing her. In the battle at the war camp, he did try to kill fumbles and the others, but fumbles (and the others) was/were just a faceless mob(s) to kill for XP at the time to him. I think MM's belief that he cares more about fumbles than anyone else is misguided because they obviously know him better/longer than MM ever did and Fumbles has sort of become his surrogate for Forgath. I agree that MM should stay out of goblins business. I just think Names should stay out of lost love interest and lost best friend business.
4) I believe that people can change. As it stands now, it isn't helpful to anyone to push buttons either way. Forgath would have really been helpful here because he's a good mediator and was the first one to extend the olive branch at the war camp. He's already tried to make amends for what happened.
5) in this page (http://www.goblinscomic.org/10272013/), MM opens his hand and tries to hand it back to her. I guess he could have just dropped it but I think this works better as a "here, you have the power"
6) yes Kin has reptile traits and came from an egg but she doesn't count because she's adorable. So there.
