I mean, not entirely. Her innocence is well and truly shattered, and she arguably has PTSD and uses Goblin Slayer as a crutch to work around it. Not as badly as Sword Maiden does, but Priestess uses him as a crutch all the same. But pure-hearted...? That, at the very least, she remains I would say.
During a session of in-universe D&D, Priestess died to bs so many times that she snapped and went full GS, steamrolling the game with strategies that would make any DM cries. In fact, she impressed GG (the DM) so much that she forgot to explain she needed some keys to open the final chest and win the game. '"Just play again!" She said, Priestess burned the chest.'
If she's helping GS regains his humanity, GS is essentially making Priestess lose hers.
I would argue that dealing with enough of a DM's bullshit could (and does) make anyone snap. Sounds like she got pissed enough to hit a full Henderson on the Henderson Scale of Plot Derailment on the campaign.
Personally, I'm more interested in whether or not she will reclass from Cleric. She won't have a choice in the matter if she uses Purify Liquid on a goblin's blood again....
I would argue that dealing with enough of a DM's bullshit could (and does) make anyone snap. Sounds like she got pissed enough to hit a full Henderson on the Henderson Scale of Plot Derailment on the campaign.
Personally, I'm more interested in whether or not she will reclass from Cleric. She won't have a choice in the matter if she uses Purify Liquid on a goblin's blood again....
Not everyone snaps in the same way, though. Other people without the spark of rage ready to be kindled within them would simply choose to quit and play a different game.
In the anime, a particularly good moment of symbolism is when, after Goblin Slayer kills the baby goblins in the first episode, the blood from his club drips onto her staff, physically demarcating her loss of purity. When she accepts his explanation that even the babies need to die because there is no real hope for a goblin to be good, she's not so "pure" anymore. If she was pure, she wouldn't decide to join up with GS to help his genocidal crusade after watching him murder infants in cold blood, she'd try to find some more peaceful way to help people, like being a local healer and tender of the sick.
Remember: There's a difference between a good person, and an innocent person. Those baby goblins were innocent, but innocent can also mean that they're an asshole that hasn't had the opportunity to sin yet. A good person is someone who has learned the error of their sins, and become a better person for it.
Not everyone snaps in the same way, though. Other people without the spark of rage ready to be kindled within them would simply choose to quit and play a different game.
In the anime, a particularly good moment of symbolism is when, after Goblin Slayer kills the baby goblins in the first episode, the blood from his club drips onto her staff, physically demarcating her loss of purity. When she accepts his explanation that even the babies need to die because there is no real hope for a goblin to be good, she's not so "pure" anymore. If she was pure, she wouldn't decide to join up with GS to help his genocidal crusade after watching him murder infants in cold blood, she'd try to find some more peaceful way to help people, like being a local healer and tender of the sick.
Remember: There's a difference between a good person, and an innocent person. Those baby goblins were innocent, but innocent can also mean that they're an asshole that hasn't had the opportunity to sin yet. A good person is someone who has learned the error of their sins, and become a better person for it.
It's Paarthrunax all over again. "Which is better, to born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?" You can argue the goblin babies are innocent by this point, but as long as they are brought up in the goblin community, there's no way they can learn that raping people are bad. Only if they are separated from the goblin community they can be taught (if possible) otherwise, and there's still chance for their evil nature to resurface because at the very first place, they are monsters, not demi-humans.
It's Paarthrunax all over again. "Which is better, to born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?" You can argue the goblin babies are innocent by this point, but as long as they are brought up in the goblin community, there's no way they can learn that raping people are bad. Only if they are separated from the goblin community they can be taught (if possible) otherwise, and there's still chance for their evil nature to resurface because at the very first place, they are monsters, not demi-humans.
Why would you give a chance to any potential high-level, high-intelligence goblin from being born? Risking another Goblin Lord, who brained an adventurer that spared him as a child, just so the so called noble humans can wank their 'superior' morals is just not worth it when hundred of girls are raped just so any of these monster can be conceived in the first place.
In the anime, a particularly good moment of symbolism is when, after Goblin Slayer kills the baby goblins in the first episode, the blood from his club drips onto her staff, physically demarcating her loss of purity. When she accepts his explanation that even the babies need to die because there is no real hope for a goblin to be good, she's not so "pure" anymore.
I actually interpreted the moment a bit differently- I thought it demarcated the moment she lost not her purity, but her innocence, learning just how brutal and unforgiving the world she lived in truly was on both sides. Didn't occur to me it could also/instead represent a loss of pure-heartedness, because she just remains so unfailingly nice to everyone and everything that is not a goblin.
Rathurue said:
It's Paarthrunax all over again. "Which is better, to born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?" You can argue the goblin babies are innocent by this point, but as long as they are brought up in the goblin community, there's no way they can learn that raping people are bad. Only if they are separated from the goblin community they can be taught (if possible) otherwise, and there's still chance for their evil nature to resurface because at the very first place, they are monsters, not demi-humans.
Minor spoilers for the first few volumes, MAJOR spoilers for later
I would argue they truly are a case of Always Chaotic Evil , since even the children will brutally kill humans if their backs are turned. In fact, that is exactly how the Goblin Lord that attacked Cow girl's farm arose in the first place. An adventurer spared him as a near-infant, he brained her as soon as her back was turned, and it all went downhill from there. The only chance we've seen of a goblin rising above that is the Paladin, and he was explicitly a paladin of a god who is more Chaotic Neutral than anything else ( as opposed to the Evil god(s) his followers worshiped). Even then, the main difference is that he lost all the cowardice typical of the goblin race and wanted his race to learn blacksmithing. Which would have been a Very Bad Thing for obvious reasons. While he would probably have been able to unite goblins into a civilization, all indications are it would not have calmed their threat, but massively increased its potency instead.
It's Paarthrunax all over again. "Which is better, to born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?" You can argue the goblin babies are innocent by this point, but as long as they are brought up in the goblin community, there's no way they can learn that raping people are bad. Only if they are separated from the goblin community they can be taught (if possible) otherwise, and there's still chance for their evil nature to resurface because at the very first place, they are monsters, not demi-humans.
I mean it more in the sense of a creature that is "neutral" (like a human like Priestess) rather than inherently good or evil. Innocence or purity tends to be overrated, being little more than naivete, while only choices made with knowledge of the consequences can actually have their morality judged. A hungry beast attacking because it wants to eat may seem hostile, or a zombie attacking because its limited programming may be declared "evil", but it's really only following the only programming it has rather than making a sentient choice whose morality can be judged. Likewise, is something inherently programmed to be fluffy and give everyone free hugs doing so really that "good" from a moral decision-making standpoint? It's only after they have knowledge of their world, and the capacity to do otherwise that an "inherently good" creature can actually choose to be good. (See also: The entire premise of Gabriel Dropout. Gabriel Tenma is a perfect goody-two-shoes until the instant she gets suckered into MMOs with pay-to-win mechanics, whereas the "demons" are all villains with an F in evil.)
Garrus said:
I actually interpreted the moment a bit differently- I thought it demarcated the moment she lost not her purity, but her innocence, learning just how brutal and unforgiving the world she lived in truly was on both sides. Didn't occur to me it could also/instead represent a loss of pure-heartedness, because she just remains so unfailingly nice to everyone and everything that is not a goblin.
I read "innocence" and "purity" as basically synonymous, so I lump that together, but beyond that, it's what I said above: Her actions show that she may lose her innocence or purity, but that doesn't mean she loses her inherent desire to do good. She recognizes the world isn't sunshine and rainbows and things aren't going to be solved just throwing down heals and never needing to hurt others, so she takes the path she thinks will help the most people (read: friendly humanoids that are definitely NOT goblins), even if it means marching over a million dead goblins.
