OOTS #629 is up

[Henrix]

Rich again shows an amazing ability to cover a very wide range of emotions in his comic!

Fantastic!

As for my initial reaction to the strip in question: By the Abyss!

 

[Donovan Morningfire]

If I were V's player, I'd be awfully tempted to dump my drink on the DM's notes and leave the game, as this reeks of just being one gigantic screw-job simply to feed the DM's ego.

"Oh look, here's this super-powerful dragon that's going to massacre everyone near and dear to you. And you can't do jack-all about it! Am I not clever?" *roll eyes*

I think it would have been more tortorous and cruel to have the dragon say that not today, maybe not tomorrow, but one day it'll show up and slaughter V's family. Heightens the tension that was built with the lsat strip, but also gives the PC a chance to get ready for a proper rematch against said beastie.

 

[Nymrohd]

What I like is the comment from the previous comic about V's aim being affected by lack of rest that the dragon again repeats. I wonder if this will register in V's unusually-thick-for-an-elf skull.

 

[robertliguori]

What I like is the comment from the previous comic about V's aim being affected by lack of rest that the dragon again repeats. I wonder if this will register in V's unusually-thick-for-an-elf skull.

Anyone can roll a 1 at any time, after all, and that's pretty much exactly what's required for an elf with a BAB of 6 or more to miss a Huge creature with a touch attack.

That being said, V has spent an arbitrary amount of time trying to find a way to magically locate and contact people. If he happens to have V's Greater Sending in the list of spells he's researched, his family may have a chance to run.

Or adventuring might run in families, and V's mate might hand out scrolls of Shivering Touch and everyone might ready an action.

 

[Draksila]

If I were V's player, I'd be awfully tempted to dump my drink on the DM's notes and leave the game, as this reeks of just being one gigantic screw-job simply to feed the DM's ego.

"Oh look, here's this super-powerful dragon that's going to massacre everyone near and dear to you. And you can't do jack-all about it! Am I not clever?" *roll eyes*

*headdesk headdesk headdesk*

... okay, that feels better now.

While I would agree that such a turn of events might be disastrous for a player in a tabletop campaign and their trust of their DM, these are fictional characters who just happen to live by D&D rules. There are no players, there is no DM, and this has been repeated ad nauseum both here and on the OotS forums (I tried to find the relevant discussion on the GitP boards so I could link it, but I'm tired and my forum-fu is weak).

Also, I've been in campaigns where turns of events like this happened and were okay with the group. The key here is, was it dramatically appropriate and did the character bring it on themselves? I say yes to both in V's case; V has repeatedly ignored moral and story dilemnas by simply not bothering to be concerned about them. (S)he is completely emotionally detached; as a DM, I'd be kind of sick of it by now and would find what does emotionally rope in the character so that he doesn't feel quite so much like a cookie-cutter power-hungry mage. In addition, V may have been able to put up a fight with the dragon or at least stop her progress... but (s)he's been abusing the rest and recovery rules in order to munchkin his/her magic. As such, his/her inability to keep the dragon from leaving to attack those (s)he cares for? His/her own fault entirely.

And, yes, I realize that through this rant I prove myself biased against mercenary characters. Other people may like their PCs/fantasy protagonists to be detached and unshakeable, and that's fine in their games, books, or cinema. Personally, I like my PCs and fictional heroes to be driven by something a bit more personal. Even the neutral ones.

As always, your casting range may vary.

 

[LostSoul]

"Oh look, here's this super-powerful dragon that's going to massacre everyone near and dear to you. And you can't do jack-all about it! Am I not clever?" *roll eyes*

This is clearly the consequence of V's choices.

1. Instead of dealing with his emotional issues, he decided to obsess about arcane research.
2. He separated himself from his friends.
3. He wasted all his good spells fighting an imp who was, at best, a nuisance.

The important one is that he decided to obsess about arcane research instead of dealing with his guilt.

 

[wedgeski]

The dragon's repeated observations on V's affected sense of aim seems to suggest that it will succeed in its threat, and that V will then suffer enormous guilt at ablating his own abilities to the point that his children were killed because of it (I'm tired of gender-neutering V and will henceforth use the male pronoun!).

On the other hand, having V make a pact with the imp, and STILL fail to save his kids... that would be a double-whammy worthy of a Greek tragedy! Either way, I don't hold out much hope for the little tykes.

Either way either way, a lot is about to be revealed about his background, I think.

 

[I'm A Banana]

V had a chance to stop it. That DimAnchor could've hit, for instance.

Character development is a b-witch, son.

It's not like it wasn't properly motivated, or well set-up, or well-reasoned. This isn't just a "hose the PC" moment. This is a legitimate tactic from an evil creature who has been planning this with a colossal intellect for a good long while. If your family is somehow safe, but the families of everyone in Azure City somehow aren't, it's like the world is giving you special treatment. Yes, Vaarsuvius, there is a Dragon Clause, and it has just given you a crowning moment of awesome.

It's situations like this where I like staring at the player, asking them:

"What do you do?"

It can easily get over-used, but about once a campaign is OK.

 

[Michael Morris]

If I were V's player, I'd be awfully tempted to dump my drink on the DM's notes and leave the game, as this reeks of just being one gigantic screw-job simply to feed the DM's ego.

I'll infer from this that your campaigns are boring as Hell. Good guys always win.

There are few things more satisfying than successfully defeating an utterly vile and despicable villain. I've had players jumping out of their seats over the defeat of a simple goblin (granted, said goblin kidnapped one of the player character's younger siblings and did terrible things). Getting an emotional investment out of players requires that villains occasionally hit well below the belt.

However, with the attitude you've announced you've made it clear your players will never get to know the pleasure of defeating a villain they truly want to defeat. Again boring....

 

[LostSoul]

It's situations like this where I like staring at the player, asking them:

"What do you do?"

It can easily get over-used, but about once a campaign is OK.

Unless you're specifically playing to bring about these sorts of choices. In that case, you want them to occur all the time!