Comic for February 29th, 2012

The comic stuff here.

Moderator: Moderators

Message
Author
User avatar
Cody MacArthur Fett
Master
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:30 pm
Location: Northeast Continental United States

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#16 Post by Cody MacArthur Fett »

I really have to smirk at people believing that Eric would ever even conceive the idea of letting Evals free. He's a slaver, his entire world view revolves around power and control, and as such he is not going to willingly do anything that might result in him losing control. Make no mistake, slavery is a fundamentally evil institution, and I will be unconscionably satisfied to see its most prominent practitioner in this comic finally disposed of. Image

User avatar
Leafstripe
New Citizen
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:44 pm

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#17 Post by Leafstripe »

The pure terror I imagine going through Evals is truly haunting.
Someone said it a while back, to have tasted freedom and have it ripped away is far more torturous then to never have been free at all.
Poor Evals...
Image

Moviedude18.0
Templar GrandMaster
Posts: 673
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 6:16 am
Location: Noneyer. :P

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#18 Post by Moviedude18.0 »

avwolf wrote:Maybe it'll be dull and Evals will say "No," and then everybody's going to wonder how the fire started, and Flora will suggest consulting Keith to see if he heard anything and we'll finally see Keith in the chapter. But Evals saying "Yes" would be much more exciting. ;) (The entertainment value of Eric's self-assuredness being crushed notwithstanding.)

I don't know... It would be very, very, very satisfying to see his self-assuredness crushed right now...

I say if you want a twist, have Mike, the most cowardly character since Laura, upon witnessing the renslavement of his friend and faced with the same threat unexpectedly act against Eric. A punch to the face, wrestling on the decks, slapping each others' hands as they try not to look a each other; I don't think it would matter so long as Mike acted. I would be a great bit of character development for Mike.

Of course, it's probably not gonna happen. *shrugs*

Cody MacArthur Fett wrote:I really have to smirk at people believing that Eric would ever even conceive the idea of letting Evals free. He's a slaver, his entire world view revolves around power and control, and as such he is not going to willingly do anything that might result in him losing control. Make no mistake, slavery is a fundamentally evil institution, and I will be unconscionably satisfied to see its most prominent practitioner in this comic finally disposed of. Image
I think that depends on how much gold Trace has at his house. Eric was reluctant to sell them before, but do you really think Eric would turn down gold if the amount was significant enough?
Image Image

User avatar
RedDwarfIV
Templar Inner Circle
Posts: 2615
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:52 pm
Location: Out of the frying pan.
Contact:

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#19 Post by RedDwarfIV »

Cody MacArthur Fett wrote:I really have to smirk at people believing that Eric would ever even conceive the idea of letting Evals free. He's a slaver, his entire world view revolves around power and control, and as such he is not going to willingly do anything that might result in him losing control. Make no mistake, slavery is a fundamentally evil institution, and I will be unconscionably satisfied to see its most prominent practitioner in this comic finally disposed of. Image
Remember, he's not actually doing it to be evil, he's doing it for the money and, of course, the female slaves. When it comes to Trace getting the money he said he had, its entirely possible that he could buy their freedom from Eric. Probably for more than the average slave, but Trace is probably minted anyway.
If every cloud had a silver lining, there would be a lot more plane crashes.
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Leafstripe
New Citizen
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:44 pm

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#20 Post by Leafstripe »

As to the glazed eyes before the collar's removal, we can see that sometimes they do, while under the illusion, Mike had normal (blue) eyes, but Evals had his normal glazed eyes. But closer detail shows that they are detailed sometimes too.

So... Yes and no?
Image

epiclyrandom
Traveler
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 5:41 pm

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#21 Post by epiclyrandom »

Leafstripe wrote:As to the glazed eyes before the collar's removal, we can see that sometimes they do, while under the illusion, Mike had normal (blue) eyes, but Evals had his normal glazed eyes. But closer detail shows that they are detailed sometimes too.

So... Yes and no?
Interesting, altough it could also simply be art progression. Eyes like that are commonly used to portray things like boredom or neutrality. Tom might aswell have started focussing on the eyes to give more personallity to the characters?

Coincidence or intended, can't tell... But good you noticed.

User avatar
BadFoMo
Grand Templar
Posts: 2492
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 4:05 am

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#22 Post by BadFoMo »

Leafstripe wrote:As to the glazed eyes before the collar's removal, we can see that sometimes they do, while under the illusion, Mike had normal (blue) eyes, but Evals had his normal glazed eyes. But closer detail shows that they are detailed sometimes too.

So... Yes and no?
I was wondering about something like this myself. When he had the collar on, he seemed to have more free will then he does right now. Perhaps there are different levels of control spells.

For example:
A Keidran that has been born into slavery (like Mike) might just simply accept it and not need as powerful a restraint on his mind. For argument purposes, it’s called his a Level I Restraint.
Where is a Keidran that has been captured and knows what freedom tastes like (like Evals) would probably have enough willpower to be able to ignore and reject a Level I Restraint and instead need a Level IV or V Restraint which would lobotomize or kill a weaker minded Keidran (like Mike).

My guess is that the one on Evals right now is probably one level higher than he needs. If I’m right, I’m really hoping Eric at least turns it down when he’s done here.
Image
Why yes, in addition to the usual ships, I support Zen X Kathrin and Alaric X Laura.

TwoKinds Printable Game Toys!
Now crowd sourcing ideas!

User avatar
RedDwarfIV
Templar Inner Circle
Posts: 2615
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:52 pm
Location: Out of the frying pan.
Contact:

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#23 Post by RedDwarfIV »

BadFoMo wrote:
Leafstripe wrote:As to the glazed eyes before the collar's removal, we can see that sometimes they do, while under the illusion, Mike had normal (blue) eyes, but Evals had his normal glazed eyes. But closer detail shows that they are detailed sometimes too.

So... Yes and no?
I was wondering about something like this myself. When he had the collar on, he seemed to have more free will then he does right now. Perhaps there are different levels of control spells.

For example:
A Keidran that has been born into slavery (like Mike) might just simply accept it and not need as powerful a restraint on his mind. For argument purposes, it’s called his a Level I Restraint.
Where is a Keidran that has been captured and knows what freedom tastes like (like Evals) would probably have enough willpower to be able to ignore and reject a Level I Restraint and instead need a Level IV or V Restraint which would lobotomize or kill a weaker minded Keidran (like Mike).

My guess is that the one on Evals right now is probably one level higher than he needs. If I’m right, I’m really hoping Eric at least turns it down when he’s done here.
So a Level VI then?

Hell, he's in a bad position.
If every cloud had a silver lining, there would be a lot more plane crashes.
ImageImageImage

User avatar
bsteven93
Master
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:49 pm
Location: Under attack at the great giant!... help the... zo..om..bies...ar..e....com..om..ei...ei..eing!!!!!

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#24 Post by bsteven93 »

avwolf wrote:
Moviedude18.0 wrote:
avwolf wrote:Those...are very Keith looking eyes (as B_Dog noted). Makes one wonder... ;) No. No it doesn't.

I don't think this will be resolved so easily. Seito suggests that Evals will say "yes," and I agree, though I think the event Evals will be referring to is a different (and probably accidental) happenstance from much earlier, not the recent fire.
Wait, huh?

Pardon if I missed this theory before in the last topic, but could you please explain? I can't recall an instance where Evals might have set any kind of fire period.
Right. We don't know of it for extra shock value. It'd be some time long before Trace and Flora boarded the ship. I make the point because Eric doesn't provide the context for the question. He just says "Did you set fire to my ship?" He doesn't specify when that might have happened or ask whether or not it was intentional (yet). Any good RPG GM should be able to tell you that being asked a context-less question like that is just begging to be answered in a way that doesn't help the interrogator at all, or at least not as much as they think it will. The biggest shock for the readership and for the other members of the party is for Evals to answer "yes." It's the most dramatic answer he could give. As a result, there's good money on him saying it, but it's still pretty likely that he wasn't involved in the most recent fire, implying that he started some other fire on the ship at some period in the past.

Maybe it'll be dull and Evals will say "No," and then everybody's going to wonder how the fire started, and Flora will suggest consulting Keith to see if he heard anything and we'll finally see Keith in the chapter. But Evals saying "Yes" would be much more exciting. ;) (The entertainment value of Eric's self-assuredness being crushed notwithstanding.)
Well here is a piece of information that a lot of people over looked and was stated back in before they left harbor to the Basitin Islands if you recall when Eric's elder brother walked in on him at late in the night on duty he asked Kat to bring him a drink and he spilled it over the floor because it was to warm and told her, more like commanded her to clean it up. Of course Kat declined and this made Eric's elder brother figure out instantly that Kat didn't have a control spell placed on her. So what does this all mean well simply a obvious fact once placed under the spell the subject can't use the essence of "no" those no matter how you make the question the subject will always speck in a matter that isn't his/her own those Evals will most likely say yes since he has no will of his own or the power to use any meaning to the word "no"

EDIT: and the only way this could be different if Tom pulls a fast one on my theory and Evals breaks free from the spell...... or something else around those lines...
Are you looking for a story about seven lucky people who gain the powers of the gods to fight evil as pawns of greater game? then Read my story Crystalian 1st Tier: War Beckons here!

Moviedude18.0
Templar GrandMaster
Posts: 673
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 6:16 am
Location: Noneyer. :P

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#25 Post by Moviedude18.0 »

Umm, I don't think the spell prevents one from using the word "no" so much as it prevents being able to say "no" in response to an order. I think you're reading Roderick's words a bit too literally...
Image Image

templar99
Traveler
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 8:26 pm

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#26 Post by templar99 »

lol this weeks comic is dramatic!
i cant wait for evals to get what he deserves.

User avatar
Leafstripe
New Citizen
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:44 pm

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#27 Post by Leafstripe »

Perhaps... The glazed eyes are used for lack of expression?

Boredom or dullness, or otherwise flat expressions, can use the glazed eyes to show the thought process behind them. The recent pages have been filled with fervor and excitement, however, which could call for detailed eyes. Eyes are, as we know, the window to the soul.

Evals soul is captured once again and his expression turned back into a dull almost nothingness, and this is reflected in his eyes?

That's my best guess.
Image

Moviedude18.0
Templar GrandMaster
Posts: 673
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 6:16 am
Location: Noneyer. :P

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#28 Post by Moviedude18.0 »

templar99 wrote:lol this weeks comic is dramatic!
i cant wait for evals Eric to get what he deserves.

Fixed it for ya'. :P

Unless you actually meant Evals...in which case I ask why you say that.
Image Image

User avatar
bsteven93
Master
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:49 pm
Location: Under attack at the great giant!... help the... zo..om..bies...ar..e....com..om..ei...ei..eing!!!!!

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#29 Post by bsteven93 »

Moviedude18.0 wrote:Umm, I don't think the spell prevents one from using the word "no" so much as it prevents being able to say "no" in response to an order. I think you're reading Roderick's words a bit too literally...
http://twokinds.keenspot.com/archive.php?p=292

yea i think it does prevent them from using no and probably anything to the same context as no
Are you looking for a story about seven lucky people who gain the powers of the gods to fight evil as pawns of greater game? then Read my story Crystalian 1st Tier: War Beckons here!

User avatar
avwolf
Templar Inner Circle
Posts: 7006
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 5:33 pm
Location: Nebraska, USA
Contact:

Re: Comic for February 29th, 2012

#30 Post by avwolf »

bsteven93 wrote:
Moviedude18.0 wrote:Umm, I don't think the spell prevents one from using the word "no" so much as it prevents being able to say "no" in response to an order. I think you're reading Roderick's words a bit too literally...
http://twokinds.keenspot.com/archive.php?p=292

yea i think it does prevent them from using no and probably anything to the same context as no
I have to side with Moviedude. The context is refusing an order, not expressing herself in the negative. Obviously slaves should be able to say "no" when it would be appropriate: "Has my morning appointment gotten here yet," "Do we need more food for the feast," and "Was that enough gold to pay the shopkeeper" are all questions for which a slave answering "no" could be appropriate and would be important. Kat shouldn't be able to say "No, I don't want to do that." She should be able to answer, "No, I can't," if Eric asks her "Kat, can you speak Basitin?" Not permitting slaves to answer truthfully just because the answer in the negative is ridiculous. You're definitely taking Roderick too literally.
Image

Post Reply