17th October, 2013: No!

[mightclark]

I think this has relevance to reasoning before hand before as to how important that necklace was,
http://www.goblinscomic.org/02082013/
Panel 7-9

[AntMac]

I am crying in ( What is the opposite of retrospect?, is it? ) prospect. This is like deja-vu for the heart, I know I am going to feel bad like I did for the characters trying to escape Brassmoon.

[Quild]

I've been starting this webcomic this week-end and I don't know if you guys can imagine the feeling of reaching the end of what has been currently updated on this specific comic

There's just a thing I'd like to point out that I don't find mentionned here, maybe some of you may have forgotten this.
On a previous strip we've seen MM reaching Oblivious while he's obviously facing Complains.

Which means that:
- There won't be any fight using Oblivous againsts Kin's kins (But would he use his axe against anything else than humans?)
- MM will say green (may be relative to the teapot rather than Kin)


Doesn't help much but when I thought about it, I was remembering MM's glove being red, which would have had an entire different meaning

[Krulle]

We have not discussed this in this thread (on this comic) maybe, but in general it has been discussed many, many, many times, in many, many different threads.

Anyway, welcome, and feel free to share all ideas!

[Jochi]

I was talking about selfish people, and shouldn't have added the unwarranted crack nor the stupid generalisation at Libertarians. Not all of whom are selfish by any means. I offer an apology.

Happily accepted. And not really needed. I wasn't offended, I was trying to make the reasoning of people who think like I do clear, that freedom and civic or filial duty are not contradictory, freedom and external compulsion are. And I have no right to expect everyone to agree with me on that, however clear it seems to me.

As for the main discussion, I remain convinced that Ruby does not deserve to die, she deserves to see that what she did was both a betrayal and a deeper form of rape that what Goblinslayer did to her, molesting Kin₁₅₆'s person, her mind and soul, not just her body. And then be left to decide what to do about it.

THunt said he was considering "disappearing from the internet for a week" or so. Maybe that means the NEXT update, in about five days, he hopes will ease everyone's feelings and he'll 'come back' to apologies from us for all the horrible things said and threats made over the currently pending update. Five days isn't so bad. Look how long we've had to deal with what Lucas did in Episode III.

Me, I hope for a better explanation of whether losing the necklace and her memory of it means losing the feelings started by it, or just her confidence IN those feelings, and either way, why.

[willpell]

Happily accepted. And not really needed. I wasn't offended, I was trying to make the reasoning of people who think like I do clear, that freedom and civic or filial duty are not contradictory, freedom and external compulsion are.

Mind if I get in on this discussion? It sounds like an intereting contradiction to resolve, and bears on my pet D&D setting, which is based around a critical analysis of American-style ideals in a world of objective Good and Evil, so this seems very pertinent. Essentially, this issue hinges on one of the kinds of questions that my campaign struggles to answer: if you're not allowed to force someone to behave in a Good (or "socially responsible" or whatever) way, then what do you do if they simply choose not to? If you've denied yourself the right to force their compliance, then how do you deal with them exercising the freedom - that you yourself granted them - in order to defy you? It's a very interesting puzzle and I could always use more input on it.

[Sutremaine]

Tick tock, less than one hour left on the countdown... I think the next thread may be the fastest-appearing one ever.

[Jochi]

I know this moment has been cited as one Kin₁₅₆ is unlikely to forget and is not dependent on the necklace, but has anyone pointed out how deeply Minmax's words apply to the current situation?
http://www.goblinscomic.org/03062013/
This also means, she didn't just mind-rape KIn₁₅₆, but Minmax, and to a lesser extent Forgath.

[stevedj]

The next page might be worse...

Final separation of Kin and Minmax maybe?

1 day, 18 hours until the next Goblins update. I honestly have no idea how you'll react. I may disappear from the internet for a week after.

I think you're right, except I wonder if hope that plead it won't be final.
Forgath and Minmax use the Jade Teapot and leave, teleporting to GAP/Kore.
Kin joins the Kinship, and levels up in the MoM on repeated runs.
During this time, she figures out that she did love Minmax; or at least that she wants to see him again.
Level 4 adventurer Kin then uses the Jade Teapot to teleport to Minmax et. al. (almost no 'real world' time has passed).

Except ... Kin wants the Teapot, to keep. So, she will have to exit the maze as "a winner". No 'real world' time may have passed, but MM and Forgath are miles away meeting up with their goblin targets, while Kin is standing at the entrance to the MoM. Even if she decided to head straight to MM (still with teapot in hand, or whatever) it would take some time. Days? Weeks? Would she even know where to look? Most likely is she'd return the teapot to her clan, and only THEN use it to find MM.

[RedwoodElf]

Except ... Kin wants the Teapot, to keep. So, she will have to exit the maze as "a winner". No 'real world' time may have passed, but MM and Forgath are miles away meeting up with their goblin targets, while Kin is standing at the entrance to the MoM. Even if she decided to head straight to MM (still with teapot in hand, or whatever) it would take some time. Days? Weeks? Would she even know where to look? Most likely is she'd return the teapot to her clan, and only THEN use it to find MM.

She could still brew some teleport tea, hide the teapot carefully, and then drink/teleport to Minmax...thus minutes, not weeks or days.

[Krulle]

Tick tock, less than one hour left on the countdown... I think the next thread may be the fastest-appearing one ever.

Just finishing up text now. I need another 30-45 minutes.

BTW: There have been tremendously fast ones already. Less than three seconds.
But, with this many online, I expect a record amount of parallel update threads...
But now we don't have an update timer...

[Jochi]

Just finishing up text now. I need another 30-45 minutes.

?? Finishing up text ... It's going to be an Altsplanation! I am both amused and frustrated.
And probably wrong. I'm batting about .033 in successful predictions on THunt's actions.

[Krulle]

I read that as "the images are ready, now I need to put in the text. Please stand by, I am sooooo close."

[Master TMO]

Just finishing up text now. I need another 30-45 minutes.

?? Finishing up text ... It's going to be an Altsplanation! I am both amused and frustrated.
And probably wrong. I'm batting about .033 in successful predictions on THunt's actions.

Not necessarily. Most of the comics have text in them. But given the detail of his world, I'll be very interested in an Altsplanation too.

[Krulle]

I wouldn't mind an Altsplanation either, but THunt announced them the last times, so I don't think it'll be one this time.

By the way: we are now in the 30-45 minutes zone. The tweet was from 33 minutes ago.

[fecorax]

This is the first comic that got me to join the forums, and here shows how much of child he really is and how little he understands kin, he also shows how little he understands the pain she is in, and finally he shows just how selfishly human he is. I would also like to bring up the prophesy, "when the serpent becomes your prey, friends will become enemies and love will fuel hate." I believe the serpent has just become prey.

[Krulle]

Indeed. But I think your comment should go to the thread for the next update (22-10-2013)

[Jochi]

...if you're not allowed to force someone to behave in a {fill in the blank} way, then what do you do if they simply choose not to? If you've denied yourself the right to force their compliance, then how do you deal with them exercising the freedom - that you yourself granted them - in order to defy you? It's a very interesting puzzle and I could always use more input on it.

I'm not sure I see the dilemma. If you have chosen to not force compliance, you accept the consequences of your choice or you make a different choice.
If you want their behavior to change, but will not force them, you can advise, bribe (set incentives) or set an example you hope they will follow. And they accept the consequences of THEIR choice to comply or not comply.
It's a lot like parenting, or being a boss. "No, I won't FORCE you to work your position on the assembly line, but if you don't, I really have no reason to give you this paycheck, do I?"

[warrl]

Happily accepted. And not really needed. I wasn't offended, I was trying to make the reasoning of people who think like I do clear, that freedom and civic or filial duty are not contradictory, freedom and external compulsion are.

Mind if I get in on this discussion? It sounds like an intereting contradiction to resolve, and bears on my pet D&D setting, which is based around a critical analysis of American-style ideals in a world of objective Good and Evil, so this seems very pertinent. Essentially, this issue hinges on one of the kinds of questions that my campaign struggles to answer: if you're not allowed to force someone to behave in a Good (or "socially responsible" or whatever) way, then what do you do if they simply choose not to? If you've denied yourself the right to force their compliance, then how do you deal with them exercising the freedom - that you yourself granted them - in order to defy you? It's a very interesting puzzle and I could always use more input on it.

I believe you've misidentified the contradiction. The real contradiction lies in your thinking that it is desirable to coerce people into being Good, while simultaneously accepting that an attempt at such coercion is Evil.

In fact it is not even possible to coerce people into being Good, and the attempt tends to decrease the amount of Good in the world - if someone does a seemingly-Good act only because they are coerced, that is a Neutral act at best, and you have removed the possibility that someone might voluntarily do the same deed as a Good act - whereas if someone does a Good act that you *would otherwise* have coerced someone to do, their Goodness is masked by your pattern of coercion and does not serve as an example to others.

Now refraining from coercing people to be Good is not the same as allowing them to be actively Evil without restraint. You have the right of every organism to defend yourself against coercion and fraud. As a member of a somewhat-social species, that extends to defending other innocent organisms (but be sure you actually know what's going on first).