2014/07/14 - Whale Of (A) Time

[Miles the Wolf]

I wouldn't go nearly so far as saying Joel is "evil incarnate." We do know Joel has a criminal history, since he says he can't go back to prison. Prison is usually the preserve of the career criminal or one with a sentence in excess of one year, with lesser or first offenses typically resulting in a fine or incarceration in a jail.

I think about 60% of everyone who reads this comic had pretty much forgotten about Joel's criminal past until now.

[Obbl]

It's why we like to remind you of it. Shattering your visions of fancy with cold, harsh reality

[ConvoyWolf]

Considering theres people here with may more intellegence on the subject, balanced views, and common sense than myself i think ill try to sit this one out. My emotions are getting the better of me as they do and i dont wish to make it worse by speaking without having the facts straight....nothing against anyone here just myself.

[valerio]

Whether or not Joel is terrible, horrible, no good, or just very bad, it doesn't make what the Cosmic Jerks do any less bad, especially since there's never been a single hint that it was done to help make King a better person. Bahamut even started to ask Pete if his actions were for the betterment of a mortal and Pete interrupted him to say it was only for his own benefit. If King has grown as a person it's in spite of the abuse he's taken.

Couldn't have put it better, kind Sir!

[Obbl]

Whether or not Joel is terrible, horrible, no good, or just very bad, it doesn't make what the Cosmic Jerks do any less bad

"Bad" in the relative mortal frame of reference, but yes, Joel's badness does not make them any more good. Simply that Joel's goodness would not make them any more bad. Just that some people have been framing the situation so it appears that way

Bahamut even started to ask Pete if his actions were for the betterment of a mortal and Pete interrupted him to say it was only for his own benefit. If King has grown as a person it's in spite of the abuse he's taken.

That's not exactly what either of them were saying. Bahamut was saying that if he were to override the Book of Fate for the mortal's own good that would be fine. But Pete's interruption was very bluntly honest that he only meant to neutralize the book's effect on himself. However, Bahamut then says that as long as mortal souls continue to pass into eternity unmolested, their actions are fine. Pete's next comment about doing King a favor by turning him into a dog is then actually about the fact that dog heaven is more lenient, and therefore King will have an easier time making it there than he would if he remained human.
So King's growth as a mortal is in his rising to the challenge of his circumstances. But as far as his eternal soul, he has in fact been done a favor

[Miles the Wolf]

It's why we like to remind you of it. Shattering your visions of fancy with cold, harsh reality

Reality...... Y U SO COLD?!?!

[aerion111]

I vaguely remember hearing once that jail/prison have different meanings but I've only seen the terms used interchangeably. I'm fairly sure that close to 100% of the non-criminal population not working in law or justice or grammarization have no clue that there is one, I'd completely forgotten it and I'm curious as to whether Rick intended for it to mean that he'd been to a state prison or not.

While in Norway we've only got the one word for it, from what I've gathered, Jail is a 'lesser' prison.
You go to jail if you're drunk, or stole a couple of CDs.
You go to prison if you're a danger to others (or if you're guilty of pirating)

Essentially, jails are lower security, lower on the punishment (I've never heard of a jail-guard beating the people locked up there), and may or may not still be part of the police building (older movies show them as being as such, I don't know what's common nowadays)
I think you also cannot be put in prison without a trial, so you're kept in jail when you're interrogated and/or awaiting trial.

[SettaFlamowitz]

I was really sort of hoping that King would say 'yes' to the question 'do you want to be punished' - or, alternatively, "What do you think THIS is?" while grabbing at his own fur. Having everything from his old life taken from him, having even in Heaven had to show himself that way to his own parents, and everything else Petey's done to him? He's accepted that. What got him to fight? When Bailey, an innocent, was called on to suffer on his behalf.

And really, it's understandable that he wants to at least know that Bailey is okay. A King of course wants to check his mate, even if she's had a knighthood pawned off on her in passing by some divine cRook. Hopefully the cast'll get their bits-up and help get King his Queen back.

[WhoElseButQuagmire]

I didn't realize King had a last name as King. That's... kind of amazing.

That threw me for a few minutes too, but technically he is a pet of the Milton's so it makes sense. It seems ironic though that Bahamut would call him that instead of Joel Robinson as it was as JR that he committed most, if not all of his sins.

I was really sort of hoping that King would say 'yes' to the question 'do you want to be punished' - or, alternatively, "What do you think THIS is?" while grabbing at his own fur. Having everything from his old life taken from him, having even in Heaven had to show himself that way to his own parents, and everything else Petey's done to him? He's accepted that. What got him to fight? When Bailey, an innocent, was called on to suffer on his behalf.

And really, it's understandable that he wants to at least know that Bailey is okay. A King of course wants to check his mate, even if she's had a knighthood pawned off on her in passing by some divine cRook. Hopefully the cast'll get their bits-up and help get King his Queen back.

I see what you did there! And welcome to the group

[gamepopper]

There is a good point, about not everyone being guilt free, but my issue with Bahamut's argument is that I honestly don't know everything bad King has done to justify it.

Sure, we know the reason why Joel had a hatred of animals, and it's "implied" that he's spent his life blaming things and hurting animals, but aside from being responsible for Fox's kidnapping and attempted murder, most of the bad stuff we seen him do have been indirect or helping someone else, and even then you could say King WAS PUNISHED by being friends with Fox for years, only for Fox to find the truth and beat him up over it, and yet Fox seems to forgive him.

Pete on the other hand has pretty much damaged someone's life, and when that life started to get better only to damage it again, and all for a board game that in heaven isn't seen as a big deal. He shows little remorse because the avatars and earth beings are "low-order" and gets off very lightly whenever heaven feels like he's actually done something wrong.

However, I guess it isn't an easy thing to compare guilt trips when both sides have completely different point of views.

[Hedronal]

So, if they (Dragon, Pete, etc) are not the bad guys, who are ? ... Maybe there are no "bad" guys

Good and evil are mere constructs. Nobody considers themself to be the villain, until the point of some atonement realization. It is also described in:

Morality can be such a drag sometimes. I can't even be a bad guy in video games because I don't want to hurt the npc's feelings.

Even if you're a good guy, you're still hurting someones feelings. The enemies just have a differing opinion on whats right, therefore they defend it because they don't understand why you don't agree with them. You are the bad guys to them and they are the bad guys to you. Everything is just an opinion set by an influential person who convinced people to live a certain way based on what they thought should happen. It's all just in the eye of the beholder.

A lot of it is this but another part of it, and my biggest hang up on it, is what their doing is really selfish and they way they are doing it is pointless and rather counterintuitive.

That describes some facet of essentially everything that has ever been done.

Charges for Pete:
2. Breaking and entering
3. Tampering with the fate of a mortal.

Both of which he was already punished for

Not that his punishment has been seen to change his attitude about manipulating people for his own gain. Since then we just haven't seen him do anything heaven court sees as punishable.

This morality crap

King has quite the potty-mouth

Least it aint that other word for excrement. Heh

I was rather surprised to see an actual swear word in HousePets, instead of something subbed in, or a punctuation filter. On the excrement part, he could have used any number of other words for it. The more people are supposed to not talk about something, the more words they tend to have for it.

Why not just pick a blank universe a beat the crud out of each other there? It amounts to exactly the same thing anyway.

I assume for the same reasons you wouldn't normally challege someone to a fistfight when you could challenge them to a game you are familiar with.

The issue I have with that is, the game and beating each other up are the same thing. Except in the interim you screw with mortals for absolutely no reason whatsoever.

This way, they can focus on the strategy requirements of the game instead of having to get their metaphorical hands dirty. They also (in theory) do not get directly hurt.

I think he cares but understands better than anyone that there has to be a balance.

Put it another way, without evil there could be no good.

The "balance" speech never made an iota of sense, truth be told.
A good balance would be to give each their due punishment, not letting everyone go because everyone is flawed.

Good and evil are defined as opposites. Without something to compare a thing to, the thing loses all meaning, or never gains it. For instance, if someone has only had what is generally considered spicy food for all of their life, they won't consider it spicy because they have no frame of reference to compare it to.

I notice some of you people say that while King has done wrong things in his past, they don't came anywhere near to what Pete has done. You don't seem to grasp the fact that one sin is all that matters. It doesn't matter how big or how many, one sin is the qualifier.

Qualifier for what, exactly? Guilt? Punishment? Culpability? If one sin equals another, then is it not the case that everyone that has ever stolen a pen is guilty of someone else's genocide.

I was really sort of hoping that King would say 'yes' to the question 'do you want to be punished' - or, alternatively, "What do you think THIS is?" while grabbing at his own fur. Having everything from his old life taken from him, having even in Heaven had to show himself that way to his own parents, and everything else Petey's done to him? He's accepted that. What got him to fight? When Bailey, an innocent, was called on to suffer on his behalf.

Such great matters across time have been altered forever by the simplest 'Yes' or 'No'.

[Gamewolf67]

[ Whale Of (A) Time ]

Title Text: you'd think space-whales wouldn't have to worry about morality but they do so more than most

It would appear King just cannot escape Joel's criminal (or just plain bad) history.

Nah. If Fox is worried about that, Space-Whale is too.

Why not just pick a blank universe a beat the crud out of each other there? It amounts to exactly the same thing anyway.

I assume for the same reasons you wouldn't normally challege someone to a fistfight when you could challenge them to a game you are familiar with.

The issue I have with that is, the game and beating each other up are the same thing. Except in the interim you screw with mortals for absolutely no reason whatsoever.

This way, they can focus on the strategy requirements of the game instead of having to get their metaphorical hands dirty. They also (in theory) do not get directly hurt.

I think he cares but understands better than anyone that there has to be a balance.

Put it another way, without evil there could be no good.

The "balance" speech never made an iota of sense, truth be told.
A good balance would be to give each their due punishment, not letting everyone go because everyone is flawed.

Good and evil are defined as opposites. Without something to compare a thing to, the thing loses all meaning, or never gains it. For instance, if someone has only had what is generally considered spicy food for all of their life, they won't consider it spicy because they have no frame of reference to compare it to.

I notice some of you people say that while King has done wrong things in his past, they don't came anywhere near to what Pete has done. You don't seem to grasp the fact that one sin is all that matters. It doesn't matter how big or how many, one sin is the qualifier.

Qualifier for what, exactly? Guilt? Punishment? Culpability? If one sin equals another, then is it not the case that everyone that has ever stolen a pen is guilty of someone else's genocide.

I was really sort of hoping that King would say 'yes' to the question 'do you want to be punished' - or, alternatively, "What do you think THIS is?" while grabbing at his own fur. Having everything from his old life taken from him, having even in Heaven had to show himself that way to his own parents, and everything else Petey's done to him? He's accepted that. What got him to fight? When Bailey, an innocent, was called on to suffer on his behalf.

Such great matters across time have been altered forever by the simplest 'Yes' or 'No'.[/quote]

I was too!

[WhoElseButQuagmire]

I vaguely remember hearing once that jail/prison have different meanings but I've only seen the terms used interchangeably. I'm fairly sure that close to 100% of the non-criminal population not working in law or justice or grammarization have no clue that there is one, I'd completely forgotten it and I'm curious as to whether Rick intended for it to mean that he'd been to a state prison or not.

Jail = "The Andy Griffith Show"
Prison = "Oz"

[Argent]

[ Whale Of (A) Time ]

Title Text: you'd think space-whales wouldn't have to worry about morality but they do so more than most

It would appear King just cannot escape Joel's criminal (or just plain bad) history.

Not fair. He's already been punished for it. He even let Fox beat him up, AFTER he served his time for kidnapping him.

[Darquirrin]

I think the Space Whale's point is that as Joel he did bad things but as King he learned to change, so don't dish out judgement if you're not able to take the same burden on yourself. Metaphorically speaking, these 'divine beings' ARE teenagers in their relative spheres. So while what they have done (which he is not discounting) is bad, they could change for the better (though even I have my doubts on Pete).

If one of us (or even Joel) had been given the same power as say Pete or Kitsune or Dragon, would we be any more reasonable in our usage of it? Probably not. It takes time (perhaps eons of it) to learn to use that power responsibility. It doesn't mean what the Nerds are doing is malicious. We know Pete and Dragon have ulterior motives. We know they control of their gaming group. (Which, let's face it, if I could run a universe a la Dwarf Fortress style like that...muffins and cookies that's one **** of a game... Anyway, never said I was better Pete)

Let's also look at it from this perspective, SW may also be trying to get King to look at it from a larger perspective because if he does, he can start to see the rules they use... and perhaps even use them for his own benefit, etc. Lots of ways that could go.

I think there is a lot more to the SW than some diatribe on good versus evil, Both of which are nothing but constructs of social mind to justify selfish actions or reward ourselves with pride and well being for doing something we conceive as good.


Besides. What got that outburst from SW in the first place? King claiming his rights superseded that of others... Which is kinda the same thing the others were being called out on... Just saying.


Mod Edit: That word is not to be used as a swear

[Argent]

Charges for Pete:
2. Breaking and entering
3. Tampering with the fate of a mortal.

Both of which he was already punished for

The problem is... all the other skeevy stuff Pete and Dragon have done over the last 5000 years, that's OK because it's part of the game. They're only getting away with that stuff because they're demigods:

Breaking Joel out of jail? That would be a crime if a mortal had done it.
Kidnapping Joel/King? That would be a crime if a mortal had done it.
Turning Joel into King? He only got punished for that as far as it violates the game rules, and the rest of the stuff he did to King was OK.

And the punishment for breaking into Heaven was a slap on the wrist that he shrugged off. He was more upset about being kept out of the game for a few years than being locked up for a thousand centuries.

Basically, Joel/King's crimes... so far as we know them... were committed out of a misguided will to help, or out of desperation. He's not a bully like Pete or a romantic comedy style stalker like Dragon. And, as I already noted, he's _already_ been punished for them.

If one of us (or even Joel) had been given the same power as say Pete or Kitsune or Dragon, would we be any more reasonable in our usage of it?

I think Joel would. He's short-tempered and not really a _nice_ person, but as far as we've seen he's basically a _good_ person.

This morality crap

King has quite the potty-mouth

Good point, that shoulda been "carp".

I wouldn't go nearly so far as saying Joel is "evil incarnate." We do know Joel has a criminal history, since he says he can't go back to prison. Prison is usually the preserve of the career criminal or one with a sentence in excess of one year, with lesser or first offenses typically resulting in a fine or incarceration in a jail.

That's the theory, but the prison-industrial complex is stuffed with people who are guilty of nothing more than petty larceny or even victimless crimes. You absolutely can get a significant custodial sentence for minor offenses, and for all we know it was juvenile detention for whatever he got up to while he was on the streets with his former pets... in fact that's likely, if he was only getting "time served" for theft and resisting arrest. Repeat offenders don't get off that easily.

[SuperStar]

I notice some of you people say that while King has done wrong things in his past, they don't came anywhere near to what Pete has done. You don't seem to grasp the fact that one sin is all that matters. It doesn't matter how big or how many, one sin is the qualifier.

Qualifier for what, exactly? Guilt? Punishment? Culpability? If one sin equals another, then is it not the case that everyone that has ever stolen a pen is guilty of someone else's genocide.

No, they are not guilty of someone else's sin, only their own. But, if someone stole a pen, then it's the same as someone who committed genocide on a sentient race.

[Argent]

No, they are not guilty of someone else's sin, only their own. But, if someone stole a pen, then it's the same as someone who committed genocide on a sentient race.

I don't buy that. At all.

[GameCobra]

Heh. King Milton. I just think it's funny hearing the name. Bino be jealous.

It's nice to see Bahamut give King a reality check for once. He maybe doing what he thinks is right, but he certainly isn't the type to remember that he gets his own just rewards just lke everyone else in life.

Which brings me to the only thing that has me wondering at this point: What kind of fate is on Bailey's shoulders now if this is exactly Bahamut's stance on this situation?

[villa]

No, they are not guilty of someone else's sin, only their own. But, if someone stole a pen, then it's the same as someone who committed genocide on a sentient race.

by that logic i can get a slap on the wrist for killing millions of people or put to death for stealing a pen
all crimes need punishments and results subjective to their severity

[gamepopper]

No, they are not guilty of someone else's sin, only their own. But, if someone stole a pen, then it's the same as someone who committed genocide on a sentient race.

by that logic i can get a slap on the wrist for killing millions of people or put to death for stealing a pen
all crimes need punishments and results subjective to their severity

This is why we have courts, trials and judges. All sins are bad but they need to be looked at on a case by case so there is fair just.

[Welsh Halfwit]

I believe Star is referring to the belief that the sin is not just the act but the choice to commit the act. To paraphrase a fictional Devil I half remember - "I'm all about the choices. The tempting and the cajoling towards my path. Once they make the choice I lose interest. I have lesser demons for that sort of thing."

EDIT - I remember now. It was quoted by a being claiming to be 'Satan' in a Judge Anderson story of the same name. Here's how he looked there

[Argent]

So if you didn't make a choice but just found yourself accidentally kidnapping a dog because your monologuing gravitationally-challenged partner fast-talked you into it, is that a sin? What if your intentions were good?

[Perfesser_Bear]

Poor Joel / King. He came to air his grievances, and wound up getting called on the carpet.

Even if it is a very nice purple carpet.

[valerio]

I'm pretty sure Fox will intervene in this audience. Hoping without violence to King this time

[Saturn381]

So, if they (Dragon, Pete, etc) are not the bad guys, who are ? ... Maybe there are no "bad" guys

I think that's what Rick wanted to show. That the game isn't all black and white as one might think when they first read Housepets.

[TheOne]

I vaguely remember hearing once that jail/prison have different meanings but I've only seen the terms used interchangeably. I'm fairly sure that close to 100% of the non-criminal population not working in law or justice or grammarization have no clue that there is one, I'd completely forgotten it and I'm curious as to whether Rick intended for it to mean that he'd been to a state prison or not.

While in Norway we've only got the one word for it, from what I've gathered, Jail is a 'lesser' prison.
You go to jail if you're drunk, or stole a couple of CDs.
You go to prison if you're a danger to others (or if you're guilty of pirating)

Essentially, jails are lower security, lower on the punishment (I've never heard of a jail-guard beating the people locked up there), and may or may not still be part of the police building (older movies show them as being as such, I don't know what's common nowadays)
I think you also cannot be put in prison without a trial, so you're kept in jail when you're interrogated and/or awaiting trial.

Here in America the difference between jail and prison is the level of government that runs it. Starting at the bottom there is the town/township/city jail. Many localities have them. Where I'm from its very rural though, so most jails are at the next level up. The next level is the county jail. Depending on how old the jail is and how much money the county has, the jail can be extremely low security or moderately escape-resistant. Many towns don't have jails so the county is responsible for them. The next level up is the state level, as far as I know, and it's at this level that they're referred to as prisons. They're almost always more secure than jails because of the larger amounts of funding the states have compared to the counties. The last level up is the federal/national prison. Generally more secure, but again, depending on the age of the prison, that can be debated for weeks.
I'm not sure how the exchange system works, but I know that the jurisdiction the prisoner goes to depends on the crime committed. For example someone who breaks a county ordinance generally won't be held in the town jail, and that someone is very unlikely to be processed into a federal prison. Similarly they wouldn't place high profile (think Al Capone or Bin Ladin) villains in the county jail when they're being accused of big federal crimes.
Sometimes a county will catch/apprehend a federal criminal, in which case the criminal will be held at the most secure facility they have before federal agents come for the transfer to the federal prison.
There are also "grand juries" who decide if someone should be held in custody until the main trial. While the grand jury is being arranged the accused may or may not be held in custody, depending on the severity of the crime. Someone accused of murder is likely to be held, while someone accused of accidental vehicular manslaughter may just be told "don't leave town." (depending on other things, too...criminal history, is it hit & run or did he/she call 911 and wait for paramedics, etc.)

Moving along...

I notice some of you people say that while King has done wrong things in his past, they don't came anywhere near to what Pete has done. You don't seem to grasp the fact that one sin is all that matters. It doesn't matter how big or how many, one sin is the qualifier.

Qualifier for what, exactly? Guilt? Punishment? Culpability? If one sin equals another, then is it not the case that everyone that has ever stolen a pen is guilty of someone else's genocide.

No, they are not guilty of someone else's sin, only their own. But, if someone stole a pen, then it's the same as someone who committed genocide on a sentient race.

I don't buy that. At all. ... So if you didn't make a choice but just found yourself accidentally kidnapping a dog because your monologuing gravitationally-challenged partner fast-talked you into it, is that a sin? What if your intentions were good?

by that logic i can get a slap on the wrist for killing millions of people or put to death for stealing a pen
all crimes need punishments and results subjective to their severity

This is why we have courts, trials and judges. All sins are bad but they need to be looked at on a case by case so there is fair just.

Heavy subject here...I'll try to tread lightly...One type of sin is equal to another type of sin. For example, murder and theft are on the same level. Killing your neighbor is on the same level as stealing a pen. However, the number of sins committed makes a difference. One murder may be as sinful as stealing one pen, but 10,000 murders are not the same as stealing one pen.
Please don't think me heartless for comparing human life to an object of little worth. I don't mean to do that. But sin is sin. Stealing a pen is the same as stealing a Lamborghini. Both objects were taken without the owner's permission, so the action is the same. The only difference is in the perceived value of the object. Human life is more valuable to us humans than any object should be, but sin is sin. It's just as sinful to steal a pen as it is to murder.
Not that I want to break the rules, but I believe SuperStar is referring to the Biblical "qualifier" for damnation. One sin is enough to 'qualify' you for hell. (I'll try to stay within rules by not quoting verses, but SuperStar is right in that regard. One sin is enough.)

Argent, in Joel's case, he would be guilty of theft. They were caught in the van, but don't forget that this was after they had already kidnapped Fox and driven some distance away. Admittedly, Joel was questioning whether he had done the wrong thing, but Fox was already kidnapped at that point. Here we have an example of someone's conscience being "seared." Joel had convinced himself that what he was doing was justified, though it was, in fact, sinful.

...Wow, that was a lot of writing. If I can mention something different, I wonder if King wants the cosmic nerds to be punished as much as he wants his problems to go away. I'm of the opinion that if Bahamut stopped the game or told Pete to leave Bailey alone, King would be (mostly) satisfied. He said the reason he couldn't relax was because Bailey's in trouble. If she was taken out of trouble King could unwind a little.

[Obbl]

OK, guys, we're going to leave a certain philosophical/theological discussion at this: King has not been punished for his wrong-doings by the law of the celestial court.

[ConvoyWolf]

OK, guys, we're going to leave a certain philosophical/theological discussion at this: King has not been punished for his wrong-doings by the law of the celestial court.

Bahamut DID say King wasnt in trouble.

[Obbl]

OK, guys, we're going to leave a certain philosophical/theological discussion at this: King has not been punished for his wrong-doings by the law of the celestial court.

Bahamut DID say King wasnt in trouble.

Would you like to be punished for all the evil you yourself have done, the people you have hurt, the irreversible damage you have caused?

^That

[ConvoyWolf]

OK, guys, we're going to leave a certain philosophical/theological discussion at this: King has not been punished for his wrong-doings by the law of the celestial court.

Bahamut DID say King wasnt in trouble.

Would you like to be punished for all the evil you yourself have done, the people you have hurt, the irreversible damage you have caused?

^That

Ok so he FIRST said he wasnt in trouble but THAN asked if he wished.

[Macsen]

Well, Bahamut did call him King, so that's a positive.

[Leomon2004]

I don't think there's a good or a bad.

To quote Voldemort from Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone "There is no good or evil. There is only power."

[Welsh Halfwit]

I don't think there's a good or a bad.

To quote Voldemort from Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone "There is no good or evil. There is only power."

To quote the Punisher (blowing lumps out of the Devil's son as he talks) "There is NO grey area! There is only right, wrong and punishment!"

[Cesco]

You would like that, heh King? He's so tired of all this story... Many things must be permissible, Bahamut? Ok, but it's easy say so when this depends by the own points of view. You're looking perverse... BTW, Bahamut has at least a point: King in past, as Joel, did crimes punished by laws finishing in prison. Looks like he's referring to them, despite he called him "King Milton". Can King really accuse and defense himself claiming the right to order punishments? Somehow yes, because the crimes done by the demigods can't be compared to those made by him... Such crimes that only an immortal demigod can do are much more worse than the little ones that the mortal Joel did. Bahamut is the supreme judge, however, will see his decision.
But, King it's not caring of what's behind, concerning his wife. Remember that she entered in your new life all due to Pete, your fate changer both in good and bad ways.

[matthew Wolf]

I think the difference from from jail and prison is the level of security and how long your going to be there and woah I was surprised to hear that word its not necessarily a swear but its sort of close

[IceKitsune]

The issue I have with that is, the game and beating each other up are the same thing. Except in the interim you screw with mortals for absolutely no reason whatsoever.

This way, they can focus on the strategy requirements of the game instead of having to get their metaphorical hands dirty. They also (in theory) do not get directly hurt.

At least the other way it wouldn't involve needlessly messing with mortals. Heck it would have given Pete a more likely chance to win because, if we are going to talk strategy then as I said before Pete lost that part of the game to the point were I don't know why anyone would want him to be a leader of anything. This fight would be pointless if anyone cared about strategy in this plot line, and the arc would have ended years ago. Plus the other game is about fighting demons or something, how would any practice here fighting and manipulating mortals even remotely help with that? Any human (or anything else for that matter) would want to help fighting against demons, and if they needed manipulating into it, they aren't going to be much help in the long run anyway. Its not like they are practicing their individual goals that they want to see which is better or more attainable or something like that; heck we don't even know what they are.

Really since this is about leadership of the group then were are the other two players? Shouldn't they have some say in this? Why would they want to follow Pete after this anyway, all but maybe one plan (if he even got rid of Baileys family in the first place) worked. He then promptly screwed that up by letting his one likely backup that could help him (King) go away; or he just never bothered to bring one at all. Even if he wins the fight it will be though luck (a.k.a plot convenience) as he has shown himself to be really incompetent next to Dragon. All evidence points to this being all about the two of them duking it out the whole time nothing more. Also if you recall Dragons original plan was to just keep Pete locked into his temple until he gave up, that is not really a good way to go about focusing on strategy when your other game is likely fighting demons and what not.

[Argent]

Really since this is about leadership of the group then were are the other two players?

Other two players? Do you mean Kitsune and Dragon? I didn't get the impression that there were only the three players in the group.

[IceKitsune]

Really since this is about leadership of the group then were are the other two players?

Other two players? Do you mean Kitsune and Dragon? I didn't get the impression that there were only the three players in the group.

In the other game that started the duel in the first place. In trial in Heaven Pete said that there should be four more people on the stand if the game was illegal. He was referring to Kitsune, Dragon, and the two other players from the game in the other Universe. Those other two players were who I was referring to, if he is going to lead them then wouldn't they have some say on if they want to even let him do it or not, based on his pretty terrible performance here.

[Argent]

Ah, good eye.