THE OotS Thread, Part IV.

[Irbis]

I think I might know what he's planning, but it'll be a trick to pull off.

My bet: Bore the Vampirkon to death?

[Ralin]

If that's his plan, though, he's got a problem, because the Order already knows that vampire!Durkon is more ruthless and cruel than old!Durkon.

Yeah, which is why Durkon has to do it just right and make the gaffe show lack of understanding, not just a change in perspective. "Belkar not comprehending morality" level lack of understanding.

[Rogue 9]

Also, this particular memory sequence shows Durkon learning and overcoming this trait, in which case Durkula will know not to display that trait.

But the vampire spirit explicitly did not get that. It didn't even understand how the two incidents in his memory were related. That kind of thing is a flaw, a hole in its judgment that can be worked with.

[Simon_Jester]

That's a good point, although arguably it's a hole Durkon couldn't have relied upon in advance.

Hm. Perhaps these vampire spirits have a sort of supernatural deficiency, in that they are incapable of change or personal growth. Undeath has locked them into the psychological state they were in when they were living beings, and while they can respond to new stimuli and assimilate new memories, they can't really learn and grow as a person...?

[Ralin]

Various iterations of D&D have played with that idea. But the settings that did usually included things like not being able to gain levels or create new magic. The last vampire we saw clearly did develop new magic and was able to grow enough as an individual to form a strong and by all appearances sincere friendship with Tarquin. He also said that his priorities had changed from wanting children to wanting a peer relationship, so again that's personal growth.

[Simon_Jester]

I'm thinking more about fundamental changes in character. I don't see any contradiction between "incapable of personality growth due to having a 'locked-in' personality of malignant hungry darkness" and "capable of being innovative and resourceful and devising new magic." Some very creative people in real life have been very bad at actually learning lessons from their own past. Some people have acquired very high degrees of skill while still retaining the same character defects they had as children.

Now, your point that Malack's personality HAS evolved over time is considerably stronger. It may well be that this is not an issue for any vampire, that they're just as 'human' as we are in terms of their capacity for personal growth and learning from their experiences.

Or it might be that inability to see the other person's point of view, or to adapt and learn from (other people's) life lessons, is not a vampire flaw... but is a character flaw for Durkula. The evil spirit that is Malack might well be able to change over time due to something about his outlook, while the evil spirit that is Durkula might not, and it might have nothing to do with the nature of vampirism.

Or it might have to do with their gods- with Nergal being a god of destruction and Hel being a goddess of death, which sound similar but may be conceptually different in terms of their basic attitudes toward change and evolution. Attitudes which would be projected onto their servants... so as a cleric of Nergal, Malack might well be prepared to change himself over time and 'destroy' old ideas, while Durkula might embrace them because of his veneration of the condition of 'deadness.'

[Ralin]

I don't see any contradiction between "incapable of personality growth due to having a 'locked-in' personality of malignant hungry darkness" and "capable of being innovative and resourceful and devising new magic." Some very creative people in real life have been very bad at actually learning lessons from their own past. Some people have acquired very high degrees of skill while still retaining the same character defects they had as children.

True, but like I said that's how D&D has generally approached this idea in the past. Whether Burlew knows this, cares about this, intends to draw on it or intends to draw on it with his own twist I have no clue, but it's worth mentioning for possible context.

EDIT:

Should probably specify that I'm pretty sure it's been portrayed as "Undead spellcasters such as liches can't develop mentally in such a way as to create new magic and perform new magical research" and "Undead spellcasters such as liches are cursed to be incapable of doing so."

[Irbis]

Should probably specify that I'm pretty sure it's been portrayed as "Undead spellcasters such as liches can't develop mentally in such a way as to create new magic and perform new magical research" and "Undead spellcasters such as liches are cursed to be incapable of doing so."

"Xykon's Moderately Escapable Forcecage"?

[Ralin]

Should probably specify that I'm pretty sure it's been portrayed as "Undead spellcasters such as liches can't develop mentally in such a way as to create new magic and perform new magical research" and "Undead spellcasters such as liches are cursed to be incapable of doing so."

"Xykon's Moderately Escapable Forcecage"?

Forgot about that. Though Xykon lived a long life as a high level sorcerer before becoming a lich.

Anyway, I already said that there's no telling how much if at all Burlew cares about this. Just summarizing some of the ways D&D canon has handled it in the past. For all I know he's never even read those source books.

[Imperial Overlord]

True, but like I said that's how D&D has generally approached this idea in the past. Whether Burlew knows this, cares about this, intends to draw on it or intends to draw on it with his own twist I have no clue, but it's worth mentioning for possible context.

EDIT:

Should probably specify that I'm pretty sure it's been portrayed as "Undead spellcasters such as liches can't develop mentally in such a way as to create new magic and perform new magical research" and "Undead spellcasters such as liches are cursed to be incapable of doing so."

That's a 2nd edition thing, not 3.0/3.5 thing.

[Ralin]

That's a 2nd edition thing, not 3.0/3.5 thing.

Yeah, I know.

Like I said, just tossing it out as background. Not making an argument. Obviously the real answer is "Whatever the hell Burlew thinks makes for a good story." Especially since I'm pretty sure there wasn't any iteration of D&D with Buffyverse rules for vampire souls.

[PainRack]

What do you mean? The rest of the order doesn't see the memories. Just the Durkons do.

Something along the lines of "Say, do you remember when party member was controlled by an evil entity? " and then linking that to Durkon being controlled by evil entity

[Gaidin]

That's a good point, although arguably it's a hole Durkon couldn't have relied upon in advance.

So? You don't plan a situation like this in advance, mostly because someone like Durkon didn't plan on being turned into a Vampire. Especially because Durkon didn't plan on being turned into a vampire. You work with what you've got. Durkon has the personality of Durkula making demands. And he manipulates Durkula with specific memories of his own.

[Ralin]

It's not like Durkon has anything else to do with his time.

[Simon_Jester]

That's a good point, although arguably it's a hole Durkon couldn't have relied upon in advance.

So? You don't plan a situation like this in advance, mostly because someone like Durkon didn't plan on being turned into a Vampire. Especially because Durkon didn't plan on being turned into a vampire. You work with what you've got. Durkon has the personality of Durkula making demands. And he manipulates Durkula with specific memories of his own.

Yes, thank you for the patient explanation.

What I meant was that Durkon could not have foreseen that Durkula would fail to 'get' the connection between those two memories. It was, granted, worth a shot.

[Ralin]

What I meant was that Durkon could not have foreseen that Durkula would fail to 'get' the connection between those two memories. It was, granted, worth a shot.

Uh yeah, duh. Durkon clearly didn't know or suspect any such thing. The whole point of the strip is that this is when he gets the idea.

[Spekio]

964 UP

[Crazedwraith]

No OotS. You shouldn't do that. Not with your update rate.

And is steampunk even that trendy anymore? I mean has this strip been in development so long its come and gone out of fashion? I would not be surprised.

[LadyTevar]

Oh no, Steampunk is very much BIG. Like Goth and Punk, those who started it are now looking around and thinking "I was SteamPunk before it was Cool!"

[Simon_Jester]

Honestly, it does kind of come across as Burlew thumbing his nose at an audience frustrated with the low output level.

Lovely scenery, but given that we're seeing about one strip every 10-14 days, it basically means that we go for a MONTH with no plot advancement.

[Rogue 9]

Don't dare say that on his forum, though; they'll ban your ass.

[Irbis]

And is steampunk even that trendy anymore? I mean has this strip been in development so long its come and gone out of fashion? I would not be surprised.

Yeah, I am not into subcultures, but I feel it was mostly relevant decade ago. I wouldn't be surprised either.

Honestly, it does kind of come across as Burlew thumbing his nose at an audience frustrated with the low output level.

Lovely scenery, but given that we're seeing about one strip every 10-14 days, it basically means that we go for a MONTH with no plot advancement.

Yeah. That's 4th or 5th strip in recent times I feel can be summed as "up your" to everyone who dares to disagree. I remember he used to defend decisions in rational way, now it's just bans and "houserule, lalalala, can't hear you" even when it's blatant mistake...

Also, month? I feel like last plot advancement was Julio's help...

[Simon_Jester]

Let us rather say, no semblance of plot advancement- nothing that sheds new light on what's going on, or on the character of any individual.

With the last strip, at least we learned that Durkon used to have this weird hangup about helping people without their permission, and that he's trying to play mind games with Durkula which are somehow related to this.

[Irbis]

Let us rather say, no semblance of plot advancement- nothing that sheds new light on what's going on, or on the character of any individual.

With the last strip, at least we learned that Durkon used to have this weird hangup about helping people without their permission, and that he's trying to play mind games with Durkula which are somehow related to this.

Isn't it a bit like watching A New Hope and learn Chewbacca is rumoured to tear droids apart when losing the holochess game? That was cute scene, but pretty insignificant in the overall picture. Ditto for learning Durkon had handicapped mom, it's cute, but has little to do with overall plot.

Even the somewhat more important Northern Gods conflict subplot is interesting but has nothing to do with either Gates or Xykon. I have a feeling you could cut both to 1/10 of their planned size and lose little.

[Gaidin]

To wit, these are probably scenes between Durkon and Durkula that might have been better spent being dropped in between action as the plot moves forward as opposed to what...what would we call this? There's been so relatively little information on Durkon over the comics compared to the others that this is an infodump before the story starts. And the info on the others, we got as the plot moved forward at least mostly.