3267 Turg Misleads
on October 9, 2019
Chapter: Finding Alaria
Characters: Awl the Sphynxetaur, Low the Sphynxetaur, Narla the Sphynxetaur, Sir Aeden, Sir Idries of Falconheim, Turg
Location: Castle Elegrost
Pick up your copies of YAFGC Volumes 1 - 5 at our online store. Multi-book bundles and sketch editions available.
He’s not completely wrong.
It is technically true.
Ooof. No Avenue of escape now. Though I don’t think Turg is thinking long-term here. Say Runt IS turned? If they make use of him, he may try to bring an army against Turg’s wife in vengeance. This could potentially be very bad for our Minotaur’s family.
Am I the only one in thinking Turg is being a little selfish here?
Yes, I know Runt running off with Awl got them into a lot of danger and was incredibly stupid. But Turg not telling them "He’s in the dungeon, get him yourself." is risking alienating many allies in the fight against Ranna, as well as risking future repercussions to him and his family when everything settles and the people of Elegrost find out, no, Turg lied. You could’ve saved your King.
Honestly, I think Turg is letting his anger cloud his judgement and it could come back to bite him and his family hard later.
But you could easily (ridiculously easily, actually) argue that leaving Runt to his fate is addition by subtraction.
If Turg were going to tell them "He’s in the dungeon, get him yourself", why would he have gone in in the first place? He easily could have said that without ever setting foot inside.
Technically he didn’t lie. What he told is 100% true. Only he kept certain details for himself.
Equivocation IS a lie.
Particularly when there is a very clear inference you want your dupes to draw.
And even more so in this case, where the intended result of that inference is likewise blatant.
t!
I tend to differentiate between decieving or misleading and lieing. Equivocation I would categorise into the first terms, provided everything said is true. It is not better than lieing though, actually can be even worse. If someone ever checks upon your words, could easily figure out they were true, and would eventually be more inclined to follow the direction you want them to. Also for practised decievers it is not difficult to "explain" why they didn’t mention certain things, or how did the other "misinterpreted" what they said. Playing their cards right, they can convince others to believe them again without any problem. With lies that is not the case. It might be just my personal view on the subject, but I generally find decievers who never or seldom lie way more dangerous.
It is a common truism that the best lie is 99% truth.
(so is mental illness, come to that)
I broke ties with a ‘friend’ without explaining why, because I knew that any explanation would have been twisted to suit an explanation that made him look injured and me look like a monster.
I consider Turg’s actions to be the knowing discouragement of a rescue attempt, and thus the equivalent of attempted murder. (That it’s by proxy is splitting hairs, the equivalent of pushing someone overboard in the Amazon and blaming his death *only* on the piranha.) Would you agree with that evaluation?
t!
No, your example would be more accurate if you saw someone stumble against the railing, you do nothing to help them, and then say the piranha got them
Turg had no hand in Runt being captured by the Rannite’s, that was _entirely_ on Runt’s actions, any attempted rescue, with just a handful of people (Aeden & Idris, with maybe or maybe not Turg and his two children), would be putting their lives at risk
Do you feel that is acceptable?
Oops! Forgot Low was there a well 🙁
> your example would be more accurate if you saw
> someone stumble against the railing, do nothing
> to help them, and then say the piranha got them
If you do all that when you could easily have helped them, and follow up by misleading other potential rescuers to think they’re already dead…that’s again attempted murder.
(And by any definition but a lawyer’s and any context but a strictly mathematical one, it’s a baldfaced lie as well.)
Was just pointing out, that your example doesn’t line up with what Turg did (or didn’t do)
Turg didn’t tell Runt to take his son and fly to Castle Elegrost, nor did he help the Rannite’s in capturing Runt
Didn’t say that what Turg did wasn’t wrong, was just correcting your analogy to match the facts
Okay, I would like to point out a few things then. First of all, the Rannites had already plenty of time to kill Runt, but they didn’t. That means his life is not in immediate danger. It doesn’t mean they don’t intend to do it later, only they have other plans with him first. Second, the torturing chambers are likely not at the top of the tower. Turg had to make his way down, then up again. That takes time. Even if he made his way easily and quickly there and back before, it is not certain that it is still possible, even with others at his side. Third, as others wrote before, what he said could be interpreted as "Runt is dead", or as "Runt is captured" (this was my first interpretation, and it took me some time to realise it could have meant the other thing too).
To take your analog t!, I would rather say "someone stumbled overboard and was taken by the water towards a waterfall. An other person saw it, could have helped, but because of a personal grudge, didn’t. To the newly arrived people he told what happened, leaving out the part he could have helped. An immediate rescue atempt might risks the life of the rescuers, and likely won’t succed before the victim reaches the waterfall- what he might survive, might not. Best course of action is leave the area and then look at the lower parts of the water later, but as soon as possible, with the hope he is still alive." Of course, in this scenario the victim knows what the other person did, or rather didn’t, and could charge him with attempted murder. But in our setting, that is likely little or no concern for Turg, he is not living in Elegrost, Runt can’t retaliate his actions that easily- if he does stay alive in the first place.
My point is, Turg definately doesn’t care much about whether Runt lives or dies, all he wants that he suffers "a bit". Taking him along now would avoid it, leaving him behind ensures he does. I would first say that he wants him dead only, if he is hindering any later attempt of rescue as well.
I might would even risk, that he had second thoughts about it as well, and perhaps thinking it really through the first time after hearing Runts last plea before leaving him. I still would interpret his last words in a way, that he even sees a strategical benefit in it (though I think it can be interpreted in other ways too).
I’m not saying I agree with his actions, but I do have the viewpoint of a Europian human, wheras Turg is a minotaur in the yafgc world, his entire mentality is likely quite different from ours. Also, as I mentioned somewhere before, he (almost) always seemed to be a nice person considering he is supposedly evil, so it is easy to forgot where he comes from. But if he wouldn’t have a darker side he wouldn’t have lived in the Black Mountain so long, simply because he just couldn’t fit in there. It is indeed the first time we are seeing him doing something really evil, I think thats why it has such an effect on the audience. The seriousness of this story-arch likely plays a role in it too.
In my eyes he is not acting out of his character. We just see a side of him, we didn’t know before, but likely was there all along. From an objective perspective his actions make sense, regardless whether we agree with them or not.
They didn't kill Runt because they wanted to torture him first. By torturing Alaria in front of him. Now that she's gone, why on earth would anyone think that he's safe just because they didn't kill him already? It seems obvious to me that they are either going to start torturing him in a more direct way, or they will cut their losses and kill him. And any talk about how dangerous or not it might be to go down there *again* is completely irrelevant, since Turg could easily have freed him while he was down there the first time. Leaving him to his fate doesn't become any more OK just because it's too late by the time he tells the others about it.
Also Turg did what he’s mad at Runt for doing. He came to save someone important to him just like Runt. Turg’s kid wasn’t forced to go, he went willingly. I’m not really getting why Turg left Runt behind.
I guess he’s just bull-headed
Did you just…
Runt isn’t Turg’s king, if anyone is, it would be Glon
I don’t think Kogan meant that Runt is Turg’s king. He’s saying that the citizens of Elegrost (especially those who were present here) will realize "You could have saved your king if Turg hadn’t lied to you."
Indeed, I meant that the citizens of Elegrost would realize that they could’ve saved Runt were it not for Turg. Apologies for the confusion.
Turg didn’t lie to them, the Rannite’s _do_ have him
Turg intentionally phrased his answer to lead the others to the conclusion that Runt is dead. That’s lying.
No, that is your interpretation, we don’t know what they think of that answer yet, the next page could be "Can we get him back?"
Because, to me, ‘They got him’ just as easily sounds like ‘They caught him’ rather than ‘They killed him’
While I don’t agree with Turg, as a character, it works. Emotions and mistakes are part of being… Umm human, for lack of a better word
Part of being mammalian, anyway. In our existence, humans can communicate more complicated ideas than most other mammals (except maybe for some whales and dolphins).
"Who are you calling mammali…ooh, pions!"
– Captain Fang
"Part of being a person" works well.
yes. that’s the word i was looking for! not being sarcastic, or species-centric. i often refer seriously, literally to pets as people, but not human, because they aren’t human, and so have their own values, etc.
Ah, so that’s what he went in for despite having no intention of rescuing Runt. To make it _look_ like he went looking for the king boy.
Evil is as evil does, apparently.
Runt acted recklessly asking Awl to transport him so he could rescue Alaria alone, and yes he endangered Turg’s son Awl by doing so, which understandably makes Turg furious. The question is though, with this harm done, why does everyone present, especially Awl, look sad with Turg’s answer? Is it because they value life and liberty over vengeance? Runt may be incompetant, but he’s still a good person.
Turg isn’t just being selfish, he’s responding to the potential danger to his son with a certain death sentence for Runt, or, worse, him being turned to serve the Rannites against everyone, including Turg, which may seem amusing at first, but there’s no guarantee that he would harm their plans, so why take the risk? So who’s the fool here? The fool, or the fool who scorches the earth behind him in retribution?
I like Turg, but this will take a long time to forgive.
First of all, Turg is supposedly an evil creature, even if he is mostly not acting as one. Second, as I wrote before Runtherd is important for Elegrost, but ultimatlely is not needed to defeat the Rannites. Turg and his family has nothing to do with Elegrost as such, why should he care whether they lose their king. You can always elect a new one…
As for consequences, they can go in many directions: if the people loyal to Runtherd hear that he is captured, they might feel more urged and motivated to attack the castle and fight better. Thus increasing their chances for victory- hence what Turg said in the previous strip last panel. At least, that would be my interpretation.
All what he risks is a personal grudge from Runtherd’s side. Which could have bad consequences on him, if he tries to take revenge on him, but the king would have to send quite a force of soldiers into an other country for that – I am pretty sure neither Turg nor the Sphynx should be taken lightly as opponents. Also, Turg and his family could just simply fly away from the battle, if needed.
Ultimately, the potential gain from leaving Runtherd behind is way more than it would be by rescuing him directly, and with relatively little to risk on Turg’s side. With a bit of luck, he might even learns his (rather harsh) lesson.
Now, whether Turg did think it through like this, or he is really acting on anger, or both, is a completly other question…
You wrote this before and I disagree that Ranna has no interest in Turg’s family. She is simply as yet unaware of them.
It’s much like how Holvo hid Silverydale. Would Ranna overlook some halfling village? Probably. She might send a minion or two if she could spare them, but otherwise, halflings are inconsequential to her.
Staying low might work in the short run, but Ranna wants to take over everything and we already know she’s way more powerful than all other gods combined, has countless minions at her disposal, including Jone.
While we know she has weaknesses and will eventually be defeated through them, she can still inflict a lot of destruction and turn nearly everyone hopeless.
You might got a point there. Might, I say, as it depends on Ranna’s intentions. I can’t remember it being said somewhere, so if it was, I would be happy about a link directing there.
So, in case Ranna wants to convert everyone, she will be interested in Turg’s family as well (also, if she finds a treasure there, that she could use). But if she just wants to have the leading positions around the world and is fine with her minions killing, terrorising and torturing the rest, she might won’t care.
But even then, strategically it can be benefical to leave Runt behind, even if it is morally highly disagreable. But we still talk about an evil creature here, and we all know that unfortunately morals tend to became more flexible during war times…
I understand Turg’s anger, and up through #3266 I was in his camp, but at this point I fear he’s gone way too far.
What will Turg’s kids think when they realize what he did…and worse yet, that he did it in their name? If I were to learn that a family member had once pulled a move like this to "protect" me or my siblings, or even that my spouse had done this to protect our kids…well, if it were years later and they were truly repentant, I would probably forgive them.
I would also act to ensure that they paid the full price for what they had done, because forgiveness is not the same thing as absence of consequences.
Oh wow, stubborn as a bull.
I mean, there are two ways this can play out now. One, Runt understands his foolish mistake, resists the Rannites and dies a martyr. However, Turg is exposed himself, so he has become a target for Rannites now.
Two, Runt holds a grudge against Turg, joins, or pretends to join, the Rannites to mount an attack against Turg specifically.
There are other ways this can play out, Idries and Aeden may still try to recover the body or storm the castle, but I just don’t see how this could work out well for Turg.
What an idiot.
Well, that was rude.
Oh Dang!
Welp, my opinion of Turg just plummeted. It’s one thing to be mad at Runt for being reckless and talking on of Turg’s kids into helping out, but it’s something completely different to just abandon Runt like that. If he’d broken Runt’s manacles and left him to his own devices, at least Runt would stand some sort of chance, but this is pretty much inexcusable.
I’m wondering if this might have played out differently if runt had shown any concern for awl or acknowledgement that his actions were wrong instead of just going on about alaria and himself.
Once they’ve arrived at the castle he seems to forget awl even exists and certainly never spares him a second thought. It never occurs to him that if this was a trap and he, an supposedly experienced adult, has been captured that an inexperienced kid like awl could also have been captured or worse.
Even when the kids father appears in front of him he doesn’t ask after awl or even spare a second thought for the kid just starts going about Alaria again. Even when turg makes it very clear why he is there runt never attempts to apologise or even mentions the kid just goes on about himself.
I doubt anything could have made turg rescue runt from the dungeon but maybe if he had expressed any concern for awl or even acknowledged the kid existed turg might have had a different response When asked what happened to runt.
Hey, good point!
Seconded!
t!
That is a good point. Runt really treated Awl more like a steed then like an intelligent teen who was someone’s kid, despite having to convince him to fly him there. Runt is at least somewhat responsible for his own predicament. But I still think Turg misleading the only potential rescuers around to discourage them from going down and finding Runt is going a bit far. In some ways, that is worse then just killing Runt outright, and blaming it on the Rannites.
Yes. SUCH a good call that we never saw Runt convince Awl to take him to the castle – we have no better idea than Turg does what actually went down.
t!
I honestly think Turg is completly and utterly in the wrong here.
His anger at Runt for endangering his son is kinda understandable, the rest isn’t.
Runt has not forced Awl to do anything. He asked him the boy to join him on a dangerous mission and there is no indication that he lied to him.
If Turg wants to play overprotective dad, fine, give Runt a thrashing, but NOTHING the king did deserves death.
Did Turg even consider that Runt has placed HIMSELF more in danger than Awl?
Awl, why can fly, was supposed to wait on a tower he could pretty quickly flee from.
Bottom line, Awl went with Runt willingly and was told to stay out of the majority of the actual danger.
As a reaction to that, Turg wants the king dead and the faces in the panel shows that the only person happy about that is Turg himself.asshole who was
I’m not defending Turg, but I have to correct you: Awl said "You made this sound a lot more fun than it looks now" and "You didn’t tell me it was so evil-looking". I’d say these look like pretty clear indications of Runt having deceived Awl and Awl having not actually consented to a dangerous mission.
Rich, I gotta ask… you’ve mentioned you become more eager to work on the next storyline than finish the one you’re on. Do the comments ever regenerate interest in the current chapter? Do they ever influence which section you do next?
Personally, I’m enjoying the character discussions- so many points and views I hadn’t considered. So happy the people here can discuss topics instead of flame-warring 🙂
So many of our old friends are acquiring scars to the conscience. Whether or not they believe themselves justified in the end, those scars have weight. I mourn for them.
Yeah. This one hurt.
t!
People were way less upset with Turg back when he literally ate Jamal, Marcus, Naakim and Sven.
(as one of the people who ditched GoT back after the end of Season 5, I have a possibly disproportionate attachment to minor characters)
That would be a lot for even Turg to eat. More likely he chewed them up and spit them out discreetly when no one was looking.
But in all seriousness…that scene was NOT in all seriousness. The strip does fluctuate between low-consequence, slapstick scenes that are not really meant to be taken seriously, and character-defining high-consequence moments. I think Rich does a good job of implying which events lie in which category, without having to actually make anything non-canon.
The adventurers in Temshutep’s tomb were way on the low-consequence, slapstick end of this spectrum, and in fact seem to be an in-joke between Rich and his gaming buddies from an old campaign. What’s happening here is high-consequence and deadly serious, with the potential to forever change the way these characters relate to each other, to the world, and to the audience.
@Mucat the idea that some characters being killed in scenes not to be taken seriously… that’s the same mentality that got Runt into his current predicament. He thought of Awl as a "minor character," and didn’t stop to consider that someone else might think of a "minor character" as "someone worth protecting," or even "someone worth killing over."
Hell, it reminds me of the very first Final Fantasy game. The very first quest is to rescue a kidnapped princess from a two-bit villain named Garland, a minor boss fight of no real consequence… easy even at low levels. Then you go on to fight the Four Fiends, save the elves, help the dwarves, restore the ancient airship, discover other forms of lost technology, then finally go back in time and confront… Garland, the same "minor character" defeated in the very first quest. Who was now stuck in a time loop due to his own rage and hate, determined to get revenge against four arrogant heroes who had completely forgotten about him and thought of him as just another random encounter. After which the final victory is the Light Warriors… fixing what they had actually caused, because the Four Fiends wouldn’t have existed if not for Garland being stuck in that time loop…
Heh, I also get the impression, that people forgot that Turg is a minotaur, therofere "evil". Given his personality I would say "neutral" at most, but even then with evil tendencies. I don’t know what alignement the Sphynx would have, if she has got any, and so the same goes for their kids.
I do really think, that the only questionable thing about Turg’s action now, whether he thought through the possible long-term consequences or just acting upon anger alone, but for that see my comment above.
If Turg really thinks that Runt deserves to die for convincing Awl to fly him there, I could understand his killing Runt outright, and then blaming it on the Rannites. I mean, I wouldn’t agree with the action, but it would fit with bull-headed Minotaur rage and his supposed racial alignment. It is the cold fate-worse-then death part of leaving him there like that, and discouraging the others from looking for him, implying he is already dead that I find to be somewhat worse then I would expect from Turg, even accepting who and what he is. I am not complaining, mind you, this is how story telling works. You find out things you didn’t know about previously familiar characters, and sometimes what you find out is considerably darker then what you expected.
The thing is, as annoying as Runt can be, didn’t he know about the mage’s plan to distract Ranna while they try to wake her sister? Just that would be reason enough to not want him in the hands of the Rannites, whatever your opinion of him is. If you really really hate him that much, kill him, and make sure you take the body (or at least the head) with you or destroy it so that the Rannites can’t get information out of him. Turg does not seem to be thinking this through.
Whoops, I was not remembering correctly, I went back and checked. The plan Runt was aware of was the impending attack on Ruun to distract Ranna, and then hopefully trap her. The same problem applies though, with that knowledge (no matter how distracted Runt was by the thought of rescuing his princess) having him in the hands of the enemy could be a big problem, if it occurred to them to ask the right/wrong questions.
This strip shows that what I (and no doubt I wasn’t alone) thought was just a parting shot at Runt in the previous strip is, in fact, Turg’s firm ideological & strategic position.
t!
I do get silly though. When Meegs bought it I was like, ‘Yeah, that one’s for Definitely-Not-Mickey, you f*cker’
Also on a more serious note, I think again and again Rich’s shown he’s very much wedded to the whole ‘not-better-or-worse-just-different’ thing when it comes to the moral culture of intelligent non-human characters. As such, I feel like Turg’s actions are sort of meant to be somewhat incomprehensible or remote or unrelateable to us, as humans. On account of how he’s all kinda like not and all.
Although having said that I also know peope who are parents who I think would very probably find them eminently relatable…
Another thing that’s happening is that I’m now in considerable danger of re-reading this entire strip from back in 2007.
Oh well…
Bummer.
Race you.
t!
Let us take a moment to (for the nth time) once again reflect on Rich’s (instinctive?) mastery (sorry, Rich – that’s what it is) of this comic medium.
Imagine how much less powerful this moment would be if it consisted of more than one panel.
t!
Yeah, to me one of the hardest parts of the art of storytelling is recognizing when the story would be stronger WITHOUT some scene or element I want to include. I remember someone commenting on this when Urzal came home to Charla’s house, ready for a hard conversation to explain why she was leaving…and Rich simply skipped to after their confrontation. Which was the perfect thing to do there; knowing how the conversation ended is actually everything we need to vividly imagine how it played out. Same applies to Naomi’s showdown with her wife. There we just saw the beginning of their conversation…but we know how it must have ended, and I still feel like Alys had her say and left her mark on the story, staking out her character space for future appearances.
And again here with Turg’s decision. If I were telling the story, I probably would have included some indication of when Aeden and Idries arrived and what they know, including Awl’s conversations with the various new arrivals. I would have showed Runt’s final desperate bargaining with Turg, probably an ominous cruel smile from Vivay as she regained her wits from that collision with the wall.
It would probably have taken me a half dozen strips (or an equivalent blob of prose)…and it would have been a weaker story than Rich’s, because everything ESSENTIAL is right here in this panel.
Turg IS evil after all!
Could come back round to bite him in the ass if Runt somehow survives.
I started a couple weeks ago. I’m up to date now. Crap.
Welcome to realtime 😛
turg gets revenge for possible danger to his son.
runt gets revenge for possible danger to self, possibly.
would runt be any more right than turg? and would anybody want runt to try in the 1st place? just curious, not trying to stir the pot! 🙂
and out of curiosity, is there any evidence of how good or bad a king runt actually is?
Well, up until the whole Rannite mess, he seemed to be doing a fairly decent job. Getting poisoned by Vivay into not finding a Queen for himself wasn’t his fault. Certainly better then the Bugbear king, or king Fang would have been. No one really wants to go through the whole electing a king business again after that, so most of the (surviving) people would no doubt prefer that he survive. His nephew is an unknown factor, and knowing who the poor kid’s mother was… Yeah.
Yes, he _had_ shown signs of being a good ruler… sometimes, but then again, Eddy directed altered his brain so we don’t know how much of that was truly Runt or how much of it was Eddy’s mind-whammy
This could have been a case of Eddy’s spell wearing off and Runt returning to his natural ways
Wait, I thought the only thing Eddy mind whammied was that Runt was the one that pulled the Ax. The rest was Runt wasn’t it?
That was my interpretation as well.
Yeah, you are correct, that is a possibility. Perhaps the ‘whammy’ has to be re-cast every so often, and with everything else going on, Eddy forgot? *shrugs* He still seems to have the ability to convince people to do things, as with Awl, but there is somewhat less of the greater good involved. No idea what the kid would have turned out to be like without Eddy messing with his head.
Not ‘King’ for a start
No, but he might have made a fairly decent knight, like his brother, eventually. No telling what Eddy’s mind control, and then it possibly wearing off, has done to him though. Sad, really, an experienced princess, trained to rule, like Alaria, would have probably really helped to stabilize him and keep him on the right track, even without Eddy.
He did get along well with Hogga the Hobgoblin back when he was just getting started, and she isn’t that much older then him, and she does have some idea about how to rule, and be a war leader. And she is the daughter of the previous claimant to the throne. I think she might make a good match for him, once he got over her race… if she is interested, which is the big question, and if he survives this.
Okay, going back to some earlier pages has me, frankly, angry with the comments over the past couple days
Bob eats a harpy after finding out her family won’t even notice she is missing, commentators basically laugh and say that’s fine, he’s evil afterall
Turg leaves Runt to his fate after his little ‘speech’, commentators say basically the same thing: he’s evil
Meegs gets turned into a Gorgon, helps capture Gren and forces Bob to betray the Bloodhand Gang, commentators are calling for her (very painful and gruesome) death, no redemption, she deserves and must pay for what she has done, completely ignoring all the help she has giving in the past
So, why is it okay for Bob and Turg to do what comes naturally to them, but it’s not okay for Meegs to do something that goes against her nature (she is self-centered, not evil) with no hope of redemption?
I think I have an answer for you. 🙂
1) I think mucat is right: Rich does have (at least) two different type of storyarchs, one which makes you laugh with every step it makes, and one which is more serious. They both have jokes, "bad things", and decisive moments in them. What changes their amount and their "weight". The funny archs have more jokes, and the "bad things" seem to have less weight, they eventually could be categorised as dark (?) humor. In the more serious archs the same "bad things" have more weight. The part I disagree with mucat is the first ones having low-consequence, and that character-defining moments are only in the second one. As an example, the Mountain Quest arch I found rather funny and yet, look what it made with Celena. Or we could take any of Adina’s adventures. They are always funny, but still define her character all right.
With your examples here, what Bob made was meant as a joke, what Turg did wasn’t, and people reacted accordingly.
2) The thing with Meegs. You just gave an answer for your own question. Many are okay with what Bob and Turg did, because they acted upon their supposed nature. Many were not okay with what Meegs did, because that was not what was expected from her.
However, if we want to be really correct here, it is a bit more complicated, the 3 examples you brought up are 3 different settings. With Bob’s everyone could agree it was made for a laugh, so its fine for all. Turg’s case divides the opinions as I see, some calling him out, some saying he is evil, its all right for him to do evil. Meegs’ case divided the opinions even more if I recall correctly: some wanted her the gruesome fate that Rannites "should deserve", some complete redemption, seeing her actions as a result of the gorgonising and wanting the "old Meegs" back. Some seemed to be inbetween, saying they wouldn’t mind if she survived, but wouldn’t miss her either.
t! is right, Rich does an excellent job with his storytelling, and not only in the points he mentioned before. It is always clear fairly quickly in which direction an arch going to go, funny or serious. People simply are reacting them differently in the comment sections: the best jokes spawn a lot of joking comments, the serious archs generate lengthy discussions about the events and the characters, their natures and decisions. I also got the feeling, the heavier is the impact of a strip or arch, the lengthier the conversations are. What I really appreciate in the community here, that despite having differing opinions, the discussions are always in a civilised manner. 🙂
That bit with Bob eating the Harpy _after_ he found out she wouldn’t be missed, was just one example, another was when he ‘betrayed’ Niko for a few pieces of silver (yes, I do understand the symbolism) and handed her over to the humans
Don’t really recall many wanting to see Meegs redeemed, in fact, there was at least one call back to when Eddy gave her the keys to the keep, saying that her training was over and Lucas reacting to a sudden chill
Again, Meegs has never, for me, shown signs of being evil, self-centered (like nearly every other character, remember Glon helping Cadugan and Runt free the elves from the drow simply because it would be fun?) certainly, but not ‘evil’, and certainly not irredeemably evil
Oh, and this was aimed at the readers, not Rich (and having jokey fun archs and more serious archs shouldn’t make a difference if the characters are still acting and reacting according to their character)
Okay, I didn’t read the older strips for a while now, so I checked out your examples. Or rather say, the comments below. I get your point. I wrote upon my general experience from the years I have followed the comic. Indeed, it looks like the comments changed a bit in the last archs regarding evil. I still think thoguh, that is a kind of reaction to the general mood and the weight of the Ranna-story – those comments are mostly from a few years back, from around the time the Ranna-saga started.
There were comments expressing hope, that Meegs will be kept alive and around as a testsubject for the degorgonising. Ultimately with the hope she will be back to normal, and that her contribution will serve as a redemption.
I know you aimed it at the readers, not at Rich. I’m not sure what made you think otherwise, I certainly didn’t intented to twist it to that direction.
Because Rich is the author and the one who ultimately decides the fate of his characters and their stories
Controversy AHOY! I hope Runt makes it out okay!