17 June 2016: Good and Evil

[Guus]

It might very well, but that doesn't take away that the axe is not just a magic item, it's an artifact. An artifact isn't destroyed by a magic dispel. It's possible that the staff destroyed the axe (if BE turns out to be wrong), but that means that the staff has to be very powerful in itself. Which is possible, but kind of a cop-out.

[Sessine]

I'm not sure the axe was ever quite as indestructible as people want to believe it was. The possibility of at least damaging the axe was foreshadowed back when they were crossing the river. http://www.goblinscomic.org/10122010-3/ has Ears dismissing the idea of damaging the axe, not because it's unbreakable as long as it's used right, but because it's a magic item and therefore can only be damaged by magic.

So I think this "prison" is less a case of "as long as you keep feeding it good deeds, it'll be unbreakable", I think it's always been "if you feed it good deeds, it'll be too strong to break out of" with a mostly unstated caveat of "but if you bulldoze the walls from outside, that's your own problem, so try not to break it."

Hahahaha! I'd forgotten that page. Aside from the very good point you make, this also proves that Ears is NOT exactly the smartest of goblins!

Edit: Also, it's worth noting that the Axe was able to cut through the ropes once, but when Fumbles was caught again, it didn't work. The staff did. That's a clue, for sure, though I don't know what it means yet. Maybe the Axe's magic was partially drained, temporarily or permanently, by being used against the ropes. Maybe it's an indication that this staff is an artifact too, as powerful or even more powerful than the axe. Maybe the staff has variable properties like that shield and when it's used there's a roll on a table of results.

All we know for sure is that Thunt really, really likes to use unique magic items with interesting properties. Many of the magic items we've seen would count as artifacts in someone else's game.

And sometimes... characters are going to find this out the hard way.

[Krulle]

Heh, the staff is leeching the magical properties of the Axe. And will soon have the demon imprisoned in the staff?

[miados]

Heh, the staff is leeching the magical properties of the Axe. And will soon have the demon imprisoned in the staff?

what if its power is something akin to stealing magic from your friends magical items to destroy magical items? i dunno im being dumb ill shut up now

[Guus]

That's not dumb, it'd be a homebrew item, and it'd be a very dangerous item that you would not want to use in most cases, but it's possible. I would never as a DM give my party an item like that though.

[miados]

That's not dumb, it'd be a homebrew item, and it'd be a very dangerous item that you would not want to use in most cases, but it's possible. I would never as a DM give my party an item like that though.

neither would I but in a comic it might be more viable.

[Owlbear]

Well, hello !

I've been silently reading the comic for years .. and I am a huge fan (keep up the good work \o/)
I registered because I though that maybe the axe broke because ..

► Show Spoiler

.. a demon used it to attack a paladin .. http://www.goblinscomic.org/08112015/ ... the axe seemed to loose cutting power right after

Well, just a theory.. have a nice day, all

Edit: now that I think about it ..

► Show Spoiler

Big ears detected their future selves as SO EVIL because he saw the future version of the axe broken, exuding evil ... but the axe would'nt have shattered had he not attacked .. but then again, he would not have detected evil if .... yay ! time paradox !

Underrated post, IMO

[Krulle]

Yeah, I miss "+1" or similar in our forum posts too...

In an older version phpBB had a "Karma" mod, but since customisation has took hold everywhere, this mod became unused, as every skin needed to modify that too.

There are plenty discussion posts with very good theories that just get drowned by the current discussion.

[Krulle]

The shaded page is up.
The frame cracking goes much faster than I would've guessed.

OP updated with new permalink.

[Talos]

Thunt's reasoning is, frankly, nonsense. The only reason I can see for the axe coming close to breaking is NOT because of attacking from behind or some other arbitrary crap. No. It would have to do with Ears himself setting the terms based on an overly strict idea of what good and evil is, then breaking his own overly restrictive code. Attacking from behind in self-defense is not evil. At all. Period. Even less so when it involves the defense of others as well. That's called clever fighting. It's not like he sneaked up on a sleeping Kore and attempted to hack him to death.

Also, the whole "good gives without questioning" isn't good at all. It's hopeless naivety. One might end up giving to people who aren't really beggars at all, for one thing. Or hustlers. Or people who are begging for money but will use it to buy drugs or alcohol. Giving freely to others doesn't mean giving into panhandling or listening to every single sob story, but giving to people in a way which helps them.

[Guus]

THunt himself said that wat BE defined as good is not actually completely correct. So if it's BE being confused instead of actual truth, it might very well be that the actual laws for good and evil in the THuntverse make more sense. Let's wait it out.

[Krulle]

Anyone else noticed the glowing mushrooms in panel 2 after shading?

Unshaded, they were not even present....

[Talos]

THunt himself said that wat BE defined as good is not actually completely correct. So if it's BE being confused instead of actual truth, it might very well be that the actual laws for good and evil in the THuntverse make more sense. Let's wait it out.

If I had to guess, Thunt just said that to cover himself when we called him out on his BES. His Big Ears Speech. That preachy wall of text really had the overtones of an author tract, using Big Ears as his mouthpiece. If he said that before people began calling him out on it, then I might be wrong. I know he says that he has this all plotted out from a long, long time ago, but there's no way he isn't tweaking things here and there. It's been over a decade since this began.

[Krulle]

Details like this ae mostly not fleshed out and weitten on the fly.
The "book" is as far as for some scenes details, otherwise what needs to be shown/said.
Often he needs more pages than he originally estimated...

[YardMeat]

THunt himself said that wat BE defined as good is not actually completely correct. So if it's BE being confused instead of actual truth, it might very well be that the actual laws for good and evil in the THuntverse make more sense. Let's wait it out.

If I had to guess, Thunt just said that to cover himself when we called him out on his BES. His Big Ears Speech. That preachy wall of text really had the overtones of an author tract, using Big Ears as his mouthpiece. If he said that before people began calling him out on it, then I might be wrong. I know he says that he has this all plotted out from a long, long time ago, but there's no way he isn't tweaking things here and there. It's been over a decade since this began.

As Thunt has pointed out, BE blatantly contradicts himself in the latest comic. We'll just have to see. He can't be right about everything.

[Talos]

We can wait and see, but as I said, the whole scene had the overtones of being true in-story. Like it is what we are "supposed" to think, an author tract. It was even accompanied by a black and white flashback, as if a character had remembered something, connected the dots, and finally realized the truth after the fact.

[Morgaln]

I think it's safe to say that Hunt agrees with what Big Ears says in the last panel. After all, Hunt used that panel to express his sympathy over the tragedy in Orlando. I don't think he'd do that if he didn't think what Big Ears said is true.

[Talos]

I think it's safe to say that Hunt agrees with what Big Ears says in the last panel. After all, Hunt used that panel to express his sympathy over the tragedy in Orlando. I don't think he'd do that if he didn't think what Big Ears said is true.

It's just not a very bright little tract. And a very extreme view to take. Very naive. I think Thunt knows this on a level, but he wishes it were otherwise.

[YardMeat]

I think it's safe to say that Hunt agrees with what Big Ears says in the last panel. After all, Hunt used that panel to express his sympathy over the tragedy in Orlando. I don't think he'd do that if he didn't think what Big Ears said is true.

It's just not a very bright little tract. And a very extreme view to take. Very naive. I think Thunt knows this on a level, but he wishes it were otherwise.

Again, Thunt has already pointed out that BE presents contradictory views in the the latest comic, which is obviously true.

[Talos]

Yeah, he does. Doesn't mean that such views aren't reflected in real people's views. As if everyone had consistent views. But at least he admits that they aren't consistent. Not much more anyone here can say about it.

[Shardstorm]

Thunt's reasoning is, frankly, nonsense. The only reason I can see for the axe coming close to breaking is NOT because of attacking from behind or some other arbitrary crap. No. It would have to do with Ears himself setting the terms based on an overly strict idea of what good and evil is, then breaking his own overly restrictive code. Attacking from behind in self-defense is not evil. At all. Period. Even less so when it involves the defense of others as well. That's called clever fighting. It's not like he sneaked up on a sleeping Kore and attempted to hack him to death.

Emphasis added. I know Paladin in 3-3.5 is a very straight up God's favour you, don't lose their favour sort of thing. But I think part of the reason must be that BE stopped himself from doing it because he perceived it as evil, and his instinct was to not do it. (See comic: http://www.goblinscomic.org/01072011-3/ and called back to in this comic) He does it because he feels he must, or to save his friends, or whatever decides it for him. But at the core of it, he felt this was not a paladin like act. He broke his own moral code, did something he believes is evil, and rather than the Axe being based on a deity's view of evil (why would it be, many Paladin's and Clerics of presumably different denominations fought to contain the demon inside it) it's based on the wielders view of good and evil.

[Morgaln]

Thunt's reasoning is, frankly, nonsense. The only reason I can see for the axe coming close to breaking is NOT because of attacking from behind or some other arbitrary crap. No. It would have to do with Ears himself setting the terms based on an overly strict idea of what good and evil is, then breaking his own overly restrictive code. Attacking from behind in self-defense is not evil. At all. Period. Even less so when it involves the defense of others as well. That's called clever fighting. It's not like he sneaked up on a sleeping Kore and attempted to hack him to death.

Emphasis added. I know Paladin in 3-3.5 is a very straight up God's favour you, don't lose their favour sort of thing. But I think part of the reason must be that BE stopped himself from doing it because he perceived it as evil, and his instinct was to not do it. (See comic: http://www.goblinscomic.org/01072011-3/ and called back to in this comic) He does it because he feels he must, or to save his friends, or whatever decides it for him. But at the core of it, he felt this was not a paladin like act. He broke his own moral code, did something he believes is evil, and rather than the Axe being based on a deity's view of evil (why would it be, many Paladin's and Clerics of presumably different denominations fought to contain the demon inside it) it's based on the wielders view of good and evil.

If that is true, the best thing they could have done is give the axe to Kore. That guy is clearly not capable of thinking anything he does is not good, so the axe would never break in his hands.

[YardMeat]

Thunt's reasoning is, frankly, nonsense. The only reason I can see for the axe coming close to breaking is NOT because of attacking from behind or some other arbitrary crap. No. It would have to do with Ears himself setting the terms based on an overly strict idea of what good and evil is, then breaking his own overly restrictive code. Attacking from behind in self-defense is not evil. At all. Period. Even less so when it involves the defense of others as well. That's called clever fighting. It's not like he sneaked up on a sleeping Kore and attempted to hack him to death.

Emphasis added. I know Paladin in 3-3.5 is a very straight up God's favour you, don't lose their favour sort of thing. But I think part of the reason must be that BE stopped himself from doing it because he perceived it as evil, and his instinct was to not do it. (See comic: http://www.goblinscomic.org/01072011-3/ and called back to in this comic) He does it because he feels he must, or to save his friends, or whatever decides it for him. But at the core of it, he felt this was not a paladin like act. He broke his own moral code, did something he believes is evil, and rather than the Axe being based on a deity's view of evil (why would it be, many Paladin's and Clerics of presumably different denominations fought to contain the demon inside it) it's based on the wielders view of good and evil.

Nope. Paladins do not in any way require any god's favor in 3.x. Case in point: we haven't seen Big Ears appeal to any deity at any point during this story. Paladins get their powers from the divine forces of good and law, not deities, just as druids get their abilities from the divine force of nature. In 3.x good and evil are not personal philosophies/viewpoints. They are objective, divine forces that shape the cosmos. (See sig). The core rules provide (albeit brief) definitions of good and evil. The views of individual characters don't matter; not even the opinions of deities matter.

Also, per the PhB: "Paladins need not devote themselves to a single deityÔÇödevotion to righteousness is enough."

Thunt can, of course, houserule any of that he wants, but those are the core rules.

[Guus]

I think we should repeat that a couple more times Yard, at some point the argument will arrive at the desired destination

[RocketScientist]

Case in point: we haven't seen Big Ears appeal to any deity at any point during this story.

I think this is key. If house rules were in play, and Ears was relying on a god, I feel like he probably would have mentioned it at some point. Which leads me to believe that we're going by rules as written on that point.