OOTS #1301 - The Discussion Thread

[bunsen_h]

I don't think there's any evidence that the ghost-martyrs were anything but fully-informed and fully-consenting; that there was any undue pressure or trickery. This wasn't a "deal with the devil" process, no unfairness to it.

Now if you want an unfair scenario, imagine if instead of Falling, Miko had died and become a ghost-martyr. And Xykon and Redcloak were defeated. Instead of spending some indefinite period in ghost form with like-minded comrades-in-arms, performing a sacred duty, all of the other ghost-martyrs would have been stuck in close proximity to her.

[hroþila]

I don't think there's any evidence that the ghost-martyrs were anything but fully-informed and fully-consenting; that there was any undue pressure or trickery. This wasn't a "deal with the devil" process, no unfairness to it.

I think the fact that O-Chul and that other paladin decided to shatter the gate rather than leave it to Soon is evidence that they weren't fully informed. It is not conclusive evidence (maybe they calculated that Soon and the ghost martyrs might not win, and that it was too risky because the ghosts wouldn't be able to destroy the gate at a later point if necessary), but it is evidence nonetheless.

Which doesn't mean it was abusive or Evil. The paladins may not have known the exact form of their posthumous service to the Sapphire Guard, but at any rate they probably knew enough to make an informed decision when swearing their oath.

[danielxcutter]

It's not unreasonable to expect that it only revived strictly willing paladins who died there. Except y'know, paladins, and paladins who literally got killed while (trying to) defend the Gate less than ten rounds ago at that. Why wouldn't they be willing?

[arimareiji]

I think the fact that O-Chul and that other paladin decided to shatter the gate rather than leave it to Soon is evidence that they weren't fully informed. It is not conclusive evidence (maybe they calculated that Soon and the ghost martyrs might not win, and that it was too risky because the ghosts wouldn't be able to destroy the gate at a later point if necessary), but it is evidence nonetheless.

Which doesn't mean it was abusive or Evil. The paladins may not have known the exact form of their posthumous service to the Sapphire Guard, but at any rate they probably knew enough to make an informed decision when swearing their oath.

But do we know that O-Chul had joined the group that was making themselves ghost martyrs? That group could've been a subset of the Sapphire Guard, not the whole Guard.

Alternately... we may be debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, when the Giant only gave careful thought to the plot requiring the elements of angels and a pin. The brain power of one author, no matter how clever, is unlikely to be able to plan out every possible angle dozens of obsessive readers can imagine. (^_~)

[No good @ names]

Are you for real? Do you seriously not get the score here? Look at what you’re saying! That a bunch of paladins wouldn’t try to out-paladin everyone else by sacrificing their afterlife to protect Soon’s Gate? That’s the most believable thing I’ve ever heard!

[arimareiji]

Are you for real? Do you seriously not get the score here? Look at what you’re saying! That a bunch of paladins wouldn’t try to out-paladin everyone else by sacrificing their afterlife to protect Soon’s Gate? That’s the most believable thing I’ve ever heard!

*microphone drop*

[brian 333]

And now we have the most paladiny of all the paladins (intentionally?) excluded from a life or death struggle against a foe who is the virtual opposite of a paladin, and his only means of getting into the fight is an unconscious monster.

My question is, will Lay On Hands work on non-humanoids?

[Tzardok]

My question is, will Lay On Hands work on non-humanoids?

Why wouldn't it?

[brian 333]

Why wouldn't it?

In 1st ed. Cure Wounds spells and similar abilities only functioned on humans, humanoids, and demi-humans. You could not heal your horse, for example. In 3.5 the word used is 'creature' so I presume any living creature could be healed. In the moment, I was thinking about the wrong edition.

[bunsen_h]

Are you for real? Do you seriously not get the score here? Look at what you’re saying! That a bunch of paladins wouldn’t try to out-paladin everyone else by sacrificing their afterlife to protect Soon’s Gate? That’s the most believable thing I’ve ever heard!

"If this gate, and the four others like it, are destroyed, that will unleash a monstrous being that will literally consume the world, all living beings, and their very souls, and endanger the gods themselves. Are you willing to put your ascent to the afterlife on hold indefinitely, to help protect this gate alongside your comrades in arms?"

EDITED to add:

In 1st ed. Cure Wounds spells and similar abilities only functioned on humans, humanoids, and demi-humans. You could not heal your horse, for example. In 3.5 the word used is 'creature' so I presume any living creature could be healed. In the moment, I was thinking about the wrong edition.

My unnumbered-edition Players Handbook uses the word "creature" in all of the Cure Wounds spells. "This healing will not affect creatures without corporeal bodies, nor will it cure wounds of creatures not living or those which can be harmed only by iron, silver, and/or magical weapons."

[KorvinStarmast]

Ghost Martyr

A martyr dies for his faith. That's just a regular martyr. There is no reason to add Ghost because we already know that martyrs are dead.

Ghost Martyrs don't sacrifice their lives, they sacrifice their afterlives, which makes them different from regular martyrs. That's why they need a special name.

It is an adjective indicating kind, like ghost pepper.

Well, I think that is strongly not good. There are laws against abusive contracts. And people who sing a contract with the devil is also making their own choice.

That has nothing to do with Soon

Well, I think a ghost martyr is just the ghost of a martyr. All martyrs are dead, but not all dead people are ghosts.

Ghost martyr ~ adjective modifying a noun
Ghost of a martyr ~ prepositional phrase.
Do you understand the difference?

To be fair, assuming the worst of Soon seems pretty commonplace here from what I've observed.

It is one of the more common mistakes made on these forums, and by Girard and Serini both.

Are you for real? Do you seriously not get the score here? Look at what you’re saying!
That a bunch of paladins wouldn’t try to out-paladin everyone else by sacrificing their afterlife to protect Soon’s Gate? That’s the most believable thing I’ve ever heard!

*golf clap*

[brian 333]

It is an adjective indicating kind, like ghost pepper.

I shall now undertake an experiment to discover what happens when one sprinkles holy water on a ghost pepper.

If I can find a cleric endowed with the ability, I shall also find out what happens when one Turns a ghost pepper.

I always assumed the term referred to their ability to haunt you all night. (Or perhaps the next morning, but I think those are zombie peppers...)

[bunsen_h]

I shall now undertake an experiment to discover what happens when one sprinkles holy water on a ghost pepper.

If I can find a cleric endowed with the ability, I shall also find out what happens when one Turns a ghost pepper.

I always assumed the term referred to their ability to haunt you all night. (Or perhaps the next morning, but I think those are zombie peppers...)

According to the always-reliable W'pedia, "The name bhüt jolokia (ভুট জলকীয়া) means 'Bhutanese pepper' in Assamese; the first element bhüt, meaning 'Bhutan', was mistakenly confused for a near-homonym bhut (ভুত) meaning 'ghost'."

[brian 333]

According to the always-reliable W'pedia, "The name bhüt jolokia (ভুট জলকীয়া) means 'Bhutanese pepper' in Assamese; the first element bhüt, meaning 'Bhutan', was mistakenly confused for a near-homonym bhut (ভুত) meaning 'ghost'."

You do realize the puns that are jumping out of that post, right?

I shall take the high road here and not list them.

[Peelee]

I shall take the high road here

So long as you live somewhere that's legalized it!

[danielxcutter]

Well that’s probably safer than smoking ghost peppers.

[bunsen_h]

You do realize the puns that are jumping out of that post, right?

I shall take the high road here and not list them.

I notice that "(ভুত)" reminds me a lot of Belkar.

[arimareiji]

I always assumed the term referred to their ability to haunt you all night.

My neighbor probably isn't thankful for the involuntary bark of laughter you just gave me, but I am. (^_^)b

[Gnoman]

Well that’s probably safer than smoking ghost peppers.

That's perfectly safe, as long as you do it outside and not in the kitchen where the fumes can build up.

[WanderingMist]

Ghost martyr ~ adjective modifying a noun
Ghost of a martyr ~ prepositional phrase.
Do you understand the difference?

It seems you don't understand there isn't one. A ghost martyr is a martyr who happens to be a ghost. The ghost of a martyr is the ghost of someone who happens to be a martyr.

[bunsen_h]

It seems you don't understand there isn't one. A ghost martyr is a martyr who happens to be a ghost. The ghost of a martyr is the ghost of someone who happens to be a martyr.

A ghost martyr appears to be someone who becomes a ghost for the purpose of continuing to be a martyr, an intentional act to continue to serve a cause even after death. The ghost of a martyr doesn't necessarily come into being for that kind of purpose.

[Vikenlugaid]

And your post here has a number of assumptions other people don't agree with. Like that this is an abusive contract, or that Soon is the devil (??).

Soon is not the devil, cause Soon didn't offer that "contract" cause my point ss that contract doesn't exist, and the ghost martyrs are just paladins who died for the cause, then enjoyed their deserved nice afterlife, and then were sumoned to defend the gate.

The alternative, to offer a "contract" that means to bind their soul to a gem denying their afterlife, seems strongly not good at all.

To be fair, assuming the worst of Soon seems pretty commonplace here from what I've observed.

I am not assuming the worst of Soon, that's why I don't buy the "bind souls to a prison-gem" thing
I think Soon was probably kind of a jerk, but still lawful good.



And NO, paladins were not informed of that. Hinjo explicitly said that only the ruling family knows.

[arimareiji]

That's perfectly safe, as long as you do it outside and not in the kitchen where the fumes can build up.

True for all sorts of hot gases expelled from the body. The more you keep producing them out of sheer persistence, the more likely it is that you'll have everyone else in the room's eyes watering too. (^_^)º

[Peelee]

True for all sorts of hot gases expelled from the body. The more you keep producing them out of sheer persistence, the more likely it is that you'll have everyone else in the room's eyes watering too. (^_^)º

I don't want to know why people hate when you exhale.

[arimareiji]

I don't want to know why people hate when you exhale.

I was thinking more of humans' nether exhalations... (_).(_)=3

[KorvinStarmast]

It seems you don't understand there isn't one. A ghost martyr is a martyr who happens to be a ghost. The ghost of a martyr is the ghost of someone who happens to be a martyr.

Nope. We now have two people who do not understand the distinction. Thank you, bunsen_h.

[brian 333]

Informed consent is a Chaotic principle.

Objection: It is Good!
Refutation: Does the toddler know not to play with magical experiments? Obviously, they must be prevented from doing so for their own good without informing them why or gaining their consent.

Objection: That's stupid, an adult can comprehend while a toddler cannot!
Refutation: An adult can comprehend, but can an adult be trusted? What about Miko? Or whatshisname from Redcloak's backstory?

Objection: But it's not right to force a character to give up his soul without consent! Even devils have contracts you have to sign!
Refutation: We know nothing of the process by which a character becomes a Ghost Martyr so whatever we imagine of the process is probably incorrect. As The Giant has said*, instead of assuming something does not fit the facts, why not assume something that does?

An assumption that fits the facts:
At each step of the way in training, a paladin of the Sapphire Guard takes a series of vows that lead to unlocking the potential to become a Ghost Martyr. Not every paladin has what it takes to achieve this goal. Upon death, the prospective Ghost Martyr meets Soon within the gem. The paladin is told everything, and is asked to take a final oath, or to choose to go on to the afterlife. If the paladin takes the final vow the paladin becomes a Ghost Martyr, and waits in the gem until Soon calls upon the Ghost Martyrs to defend the gate. Only Soon is awake and aware while the Ghost Martyrs sleep until called.

* Summon Banana for the exact quote.

Edit:

So long as you live somewhere that's legalized it!

Smoking peppers has been legal in Louisiana since there have been peppers in Louisiana. Try to take away our peppers and there will be war!

Try them diced into whole kernal corn with sauteed diced onion, and stir on a hot cast iron skillet until the corn starts to slightly brown. Stirring in a tiny bit of diced tomato at the end does not hurt, but not too much.

Try them diced into grits, with or without cheese. Don't use instant grits, dried smoked peppers have the same cook time as regular grits.

Try them stuffed with dirty rice. They need to soak in hot water, use the water to make your rice.

Dr. Jeanfreau sez you gotta smoke ya peppas b'fo ya dry 'em fa da winta, er dey gonna get moldy b'fo da Spring peppas come in. Boudreaux always lissen ta ol' Doc Jeanfreau 'cause is Daddy done dat an 'e lived ta da ripe ol' age a fawty-seven. Da alligata dat ate ol' Pop Boudreaux spit 'im out 'n' sed, "Dom, dat Cajun food is some hot, I tol' ya."

[Vikenlugaid]

Informed consent is a Chaotic principle.

Objection: It is Good!
Refutation: Does the toddler know not to play with magical experiments? Obviously, they must be prevented from doing so for their own good without informing them why or gaining their consent.

Objection: That's stupid, an adult can comprehend while a toddler cannot!
Refutation: An adult can comprehend, but can an adult be trusted? What about Miko? Or whatshisname from Redcloak's backstory?

Objection: But it's not right to force a character to give up his soul without consent! Even devils have contracts you have to sign!
Refutation: We know nothing of the process by which a character becomes a Ghost Martyr so whatever we imagine of the process is probably incorrect. As The Giant has said*, instead of assuming something does not fit the facts, why not assume something that does?

An assumption that fits the facts:
At each step of the way in training, a paladin of the Sapphire Guard takes a series of vows that lead to unlocking the potential to become a Ghost Martyr. Not every paladin has what it takes to achieve this goal. Upon death, the prospective Ghost Martyr meets Soon within the gem. The paladin is told everything, and is asked to take a final oath, or to choose to go on to the afterlife. If the paladin takes the final vow the paladin becomes a Ghost Martyr, and waits in the gem until Soon calls upon the Ghost Martyrs to defend the gate. Only Soon is awake and aware while the Ghost Martyrs sleep until called.

* Summon Banana for the exact quote.

That doesn't fit the facts for the recently murdered paladins in that throne room.

[brian 333]

That doesn't fit the facts for the recently murdered paladins in that throne room.

Sure, it does. Soon called them, they came. There was no time for the formalities, and there were none who appeared unwilling to finish the fight.

But even if you reject the premise I set forth, the assumption that the Ghost Martyrs are tricked into or forced into serving has to be wrong because that would be Chaotic, Evil, or both.

The assumption should be that the process, whatever it is, does not violate the code of the paladins.

[gbaji]

Well, I think that is strongly not good. There are laws against abusive contracts. And people who sing a contract with the devil is also making their own choice.

There are laws in modern day against all sorts of things that exist in the Stickverse. I'm relatively certain that the mark of justice falls well within the definition of "cruel and unusual punishment", for example.

On could also argue that there are (numerous) elements of the standard paladin oaths that would not stand under modern legal rulings either, so I'm just not sure how relevant this is.

Sure, it does. Soon called them, they came. There was no time for the formalities, and there were none who appeared unwilling to finish the fight.

But even if you reject the premise I set forth, the assumption that the Ghost Martyrs are tricked into or forced into serving has to be wrong because that would be Chaotic, Evil, or both.

The assumption should be that the process, whatever it is, does not violate the code of the paladins.

That would be a reasonable assumption. Why assume an explanation that requires this to be "evil" and thus a violation of their lawful good alignment, instead of assuming one which does fit under said alignment?

It is well within the concept of a lawful good order of paladins to include oaths binding them to a duty, even after death. If the thing they are doing is just that important, and "good" (and the oath itself is "lawful"), I see no issue with it at all.

I'll also point out that we don't know exactly how the ghost martyr thing works, nor what those spirits are doing while waiting to defend the gem. We've speculated various ways this might work, but none of us can definitively say for sure.