OotS 996
Yes and no. I hesitate, because the whole point of this arc is that resurrection spells in this setting are not exactly a dime a dozen. At the present, the party has no compelling reason to resurrect Belkar, and death for him would therefore be pretty final. I don't see him being allowed out of Pandemonium, the Abyss, or other such places to wander as a ghost (though, hmm, yes, ghosts can walk the world for purposes of revenge, which sorta suits him).
But a dead party member haunting the living has been done already (Roy, for about a hundred strips or so), so I don't see Rich returning to that well.
What I'd like to see, though it might not shake out this way, is Belkar surviving this, and doing something that clearly sacrifices his life for the benefit of others, and that shakes up Durkula enough that DurkonInside can take over again.
Basically, I'd like his death to mean something, rather than to be the result of a crappy skill check.
But that's me.
Edit: Stupid italics.
Scott DeWar
Prof. Emeritus-Supernatural Events/Countermeasure
its not the fall that kills you - its that sudden stop!!
Scorpio616
First Post
Right, Belkar is going away for good. Splat and that's that! We might get a scene where he's waiting in Cedrik's inbox, but that's about it.
Are we reading the same comic? It seemed clear that sort of thing doesn't happen. Beardy is just a passenger with no influence over his old husk.
Apparently we're not, because all the extended scenes about Durkon's childhood, all the time we're spending inside his head (which has never been done in the comic until this point), all the character development that's being done, would be entirely pointless if Durkon can't be in some way responsible for his own fate.
Rich rarely breaks out the deus ex machina. I trust him to give Durkon a way out that is both within the rules, and satisfying in terms of a narrative that both rewards characters for playing the game and developing as people. *shrug*
Scorpio616
First Post
Why do you think that? IMHO we are being shown Durkon's backstory this way because it adds to the tragedy of his fate. Also this is the only way we can can learn it before Beardy is removed from play permanently so the backstory gives the audience a last chance to get a few answers.
After all, even if the clerics dust Durkon, the high priest of Thor will forbid Durkon from being Resurrected due to the Prophesy that got Durkon kicked out in the first place.
Last edited:
Yep, we're largely working on different readings here. In your reading, Belkar dies, Durkon dies, and the Order goes forward with Haley, Roy, and Elan the Intermittently Competent to face the lich and his increasingly powerful and ruthless goblin priest sidekick. No characters have been lined up in the narrative to replace them. Bandana is a rogue type, yep, but isn't a ranger. The ranger with the tiger is a testimonial to a fan who passed away, and whose wife asked for his character to appear in the strip. The not-so-bright priest who's with the ranger is a fan who paid through Kickstarter for an appearance.
So, in the absence of characters being lined up to replace them, and the fact that going into a big confrontation one person down is dramatic, but two people down is stretching credulity, I'm going to put my chips on "Rich goes with the party he's been writing about since page one, and Belkar redeems himself partially by enabling Durkon, in some manner, to save himself."
Of course, when the narrative moves on, I may very well have to move my chips with it. *shrug*
Scorpio616
First Post
Durkon is already dead, he will be going home posthumously and destined to destroy his homeland should he return to it, Belkar is slated to leave the world never to return. These are things the narrative has already promised.
I'm also doubting things look that great for Roy's future since he is carrying a sword that emits a deadly glow that he was warned to counteract, but chose NOT to.
Hey, new comic up. Dun dun DUN. . . .
Posthumously could mean in evil undead, redeemed undead, in a very small vial of dust, or in resurrected state, yep. All four possibilities remain in play at this time, though his agency in the destruction would be pretty iffy in the vial of dust state.
Destruction is also an iffy word when it comes to prophecy, and prophecy tends to be slippery at best. Does destruction actually mean "leaves the dwarven homelands in a smoking crater" or does it mean "brings down the dominant social structure, paving the way for a new government?" Both things could be described as destruction of the dwarven homelands, but one's quite evidently not as bad as the other.
I don't doubt that Belkar's slated to leave the world. I reiterate, again, that I would prefer his death to be one with meaning, rather than an "oops, bad roll." Rich wouldn't have put so much time into developing Belkar to make his death so utterly meaningless.
But hey, as I said above, new strip up. And seriously, dun dun DUN. . . .
