|
I like the webcomic where the stick figures do funny things and quip in amusing ways. Who's with me? 
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 17:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:38 |
|
|
rantmo posted:I like the webcomic where the stick figures do funny things and quip in amusing ways. Who's with me? stop having your discussion RIGHT NOW  EDIT Oh, in case anyone is interested: Rich Burlew wrote a little on his personal opinions of the Paladin class in "No Cure for the Paladin Blues." Basically, he said that while he thinks the shining white knight is a great trope that always has a place in fantasy, the Paladin class as-written is kind of prone to causing dysfunction between players because it seems to give one player the imperative to try and police all the others. Ferrinus fucked around with this message at 18:30 on May 7, 2007 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 17:45
|
|
|
Efreet saiid posted:Anyway I think i've said my peace, if you want to take this further, maybe we could move this discussion to TG? Hahahahha, just kidding. About the TG bit, I mean. You're not talking about D&D, you're talking about the Order of the Stick. Stop complaining about this thread being more discussion-y than TG when this is a discussion that would in fact be pretty out of place in TG!
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 18:49
|
|
|
Its kind of like a breath of fresh air when legitimate discussion pops up in a webcomic thread. Its all "Wait, huh?" It shows that the comic's good enough to hold people's attention even when something happens that they disagree with, and it spurns pretty interesting two-page discussions 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 18:55
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:You- Rather, I concede, because even though I think this is going fine, I don't want to keep going in case I somehow ruin the thread or something. Also there should be a new strip soon. But to me, this stuff is stale. Falls from grace are predictable when they're like this. It's always the straight and narrow person, the establishment figure, who falls from grace. It's dull. This guy, for all his trappings of tropes, tends to do a lot better. And while you may think i'm overly damaged about this cliche and you're probably right, I think you'd be more aware of it and it's inherent flaws, if the situation were one you were more familiar with. As an example . . . are you familiar with the Clan Malkavian? Ferrinus posted:Oh, in case anyone is interested: Rich Burlew wrote a little on his personal opinions of the Paladin class in "No Cure for the Paladin Blues." Basically, he said that while he thinks the shining white knight is a great trope that always has a place in fantasy, the Paladin class as-written is kind of prone to causing dysfunction between players because it seems to give one player the imperative to try and police all the others. Efreet saiid fucked around with this message at 19:18 on May 7, 2007 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 19:00
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:Its kind of like a breath of fresh air when legitimate discussion pops up in a webcomic thread. Its all "Wait, huh?" Discussion OoTS Style: Who can post the longest essay on why they're right, Happy Elf or Ferrinus??! 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 19:09
|
|
|
Efreet saiid posted:hahaha, nobody ever reads the last post, I win! Oh, gently caress those guys, I'm going to keep talking about this purely out of spite. "How dare people have a discussion in the discussion thread that goes on for more than three posts?! I want to go back to waiting in silence for the next comic and possibly posting and  !"quote:But to me, this stuff is stale. Falls from grace are predictable when they're like this. It's always the straight and narrow person, the establishment figure, who falls from grace. It's dull. This guy, for all his trappings of tropes, tends to do a lot better. That's sort of because the Straight And Narrow person has grace, isn't it? Like, a neutral or chaotic good character is probably not liable to sweep away everything they once stood for in a gigantic stroke of murder purely because they never particularly stood for any grand supposedly-unassailable principles or codes of conduct. If someone like Haley "fell" it'd be more like quietly sabotaging the other PCs for a gigantic payoff, not committing one crime and suffering divine retribution - because only paladins are dramatically weakened if they violate their own code a single time in the first place. quote:As an example . . . are you familiar with the Clan Malkavian? Look, we can go back and forth on whether an overly-righteous paladin committing murder and falling is cliched or tediously predictable, but it's not actually gratingly annoying - unlike vampires with teddy bears who play "pranks" on people. quote:A lot of people have that attitude about Paladins, that the premise leads to inter-party conflict, but i'm a bit dubious. It strikes me a bit like the alignment system, a lot of people talk about it being broken, but it's not the rules that are the problem, it's the assumptions people attach to them. Well, the Paladin is the only one that actually has to police the actions of everybody else in order to keep their class features. Roy's a pretty good Lawful Good fighter, but he couldn't cut it as a paladin in his exact situation simply because associating with Belkar would probably strip him of his powers - even though, under his guidance, Belkar's endless psychopathic rage is generally channelled towards things that deserve it. I guess a cleric is the second most problematic class after paladin because a cleric who fails to cleave to his code will lose his powers too ("George, unless your evil cleric sacrifices one of the PCs on a desecrated altar within one week, you will lose your ability to cast spells") but it's not spelled out so explicitly and it's easier to tailor a cleric's divine mandates to fit any adventuring party.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 19:21
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:Oh, gently caress those guys, I'm going to keep talking about this purely out of spite. "How dare people have a discussion in the discussion thread that goes on for more than three posts?! I want to go back to waiting in silence for the next comic and possibly posting quote:That's sort of because the Straight And Narrow person has grace, isn't it? Like, a neutral or chaotic good character is probably not liable to sweep away everything they once stood for in a gigantic stroke of murder purely because they never particularly stood for any grand supposedly-unassailable principles or codes of conduct. And yet we rarely see such a character fall from grace in these kinds of stories, even though in many ways they'd be more likely- they don't even have a code of ethics or honor to fall back on. I'd much rather see say, a CG barbarian who beserks at the wrong people and then refuses to make amends, or a NG ranger who develops an obsessive vendetta. But it's always the paladin, and it's not just because of fall from grace + pyrotechnics, it's because, among other things, inherent in that premise is a rejection or undermining of certain assumptions about authority wich are laughably outdated anyway. There are other factors also, but they follow a similar path- for instance some people think it's awfully clever and fresh to show that an order of knights or a righteous church has a seamy underbelly or is outright corrupt, but that is the cliche now, and has been for a long time. quote:If someone like Haley "fell" it'd be more like quietly sabotaging the other PCs for a gigantic payoff, not committing one crime and suffering divine retribution - because only paladins are dramatically weakened if they violate their own code a single time in the first place. quote:Look, we can go back and forth on whether an overly-righteous paladin committing murder and falling is cliched or tediously predictable, but it's not actually gratingly annoying - unlike vampires with teddy bears who play "pranks" on people. Ok it's a lot worse, but my point is the same. In theory it might be feasable (and they did kinda fix them for NWOD, the malk primogen in V:TM:Bloodlines is basically a new-school Malkovian), but in pratice you know where it's coming from and it's not coming from anywhere good. the motives are bad, the approach is bad, it's grating but it's grating because that's what they're after. quote:Well, the Paladin is the only one that actually has to police the actions of everybody else in order to keep their class features. Roy's a pretty good Lawful Good fighter, but he couldn't cut it as a paladin in his exact situation simply because associating with Belkar would probably strip him of his powers - even though, under his guidance, Belkar's endless psychopathic rage is generally channelled towards things that deserve it. I guess a cleric is the second most problematic class after paladin because a cleric who fails to cleave to his code will lose his powers too ("George, unless your evil cleric sacrifices one of the PCs on a desecrated altar within one week, you will lose your ability to cast spells") but it's not spelled out so explicitly and it's easier to tailor a cleric's divine mandates to fit any adventuring party.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 19:44
|
|
|
sakesniper posted:Discussion OoTS Style: Who can post the longest essay on why they're right, Happy Elf or Ferrinus??! hey, I had visual aids...
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 21:30
|
|
|
Efreet saiid posted:As I said, I don't juge the strip by this, just this subplot. And again, seriously, i'm pretty sure part of why people inexplicably bitch about Roy and call him a jerk so much is because he's LG. One idea you never seem to entertain here is that perhaps being Lawful Good does tend to make you a jerk? Of all the people I know that I would describe as LG, most are jerks and all but a very few are extremely annoying. Also, it is supposed to be hard to be a Paladin. The reasons you see Paladins falling so often is because it is very easy for a Paladin to fall. They have to follow ridiculous codes of honor. That is part of what they are. They are the only class that has to do that, and it is that way for a reason. Of all the people I have known who play Paladins, a grand total of one of them didn't play a jackass. I know it's bad, and that well done Paladins make good characters, but the fact of the matter is most of these people are jackasses. Ferrinus posted:Oh, in case anyone is interested: Rich Burlew wrote a little on his personal opinions of the Paladin class in "No Cure for the Paladin Blues." Basically, he said that while he thinks the shining white knight is a great trope that always has a place in fantasy, the Paladin class as-written is kind of prone to causing dysfunction between players because it seems to give one player the imperative to try and police all the others. Yeah, basically this. Even people who normally play fun characters will turn into jackasses when they play paladins. It's part of the job. Efreet saiid posted:A lot of people have that attitude about Paladins, that the premise leads to inter-party conflict, but i'm a bit dubious. It strikes me a bit like the alignment system, a lot of people talk about it being broken, but it's not the rules that are the problem, it's the assumptions people attach to them, and the excuses people use for being jerks. Exactly. Being a Paladin does not turn someone into a jerk, but it does give them one hell of a good excuse. It's just like being a cop. There are good cops, there are bad cops, but whether you're good or bad, by virtue of being a cop you are required to be a jackass. Efreet saiid posted:I do think it's wierd, but are evil PC's really that common? Genuinly evil ones? And if there is a genuinly evil PC in the game, surely they'd be a tad more disruptive than a Paladin who responds to them? I guess something like a sniveling cowardly CE character is possible, i'm not saying everyone evil is a lunatic, but at some point it's clear to me that the player of the paladin is getting the blame for a situation of wich they're only one part. I've played multi-year campaigns where we never discovered that a third of the party was NE.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 21:42
|
|
|
Backdoor Blanche posted:One idea you never seem to entertain here is that perhaps being Lawful Good does tend to make you a jerk? quote:Also, it is supposed to be hard to be a Paladin. The reasons you see Paladins falling so often is because it is very easy for a Paladin to fall. They have to follow ridiculous codes of honor. That is part of what they are. They are the only class that has to do that, and it is that way for a reason. quote:I've played multi-year campaigns where we never discovered that a third of the party was NE.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 22:05
|
|
|
This is why I prefer to play Neutral characters, because I find the whole idea of "Oh this guy is evil, I can't associate with him", or "oh this guy is good, gently caress that" retarded.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 22:11
|
|
|
So you would have no problem asociating with somebody who was immoral and sadistic?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 22:16
|
|
|
Efreet saiid posted:You can say that about any alignment. GC? Fickle and recalcitrant. NG? Vague and fearful of commitment. Yes, and if there are classes out there that force you to be CG and then emphasize all the bad parts of that, giving you "detect law" at will, and gave them a code of honor that basically boils down to "be a jackass to everyone with a different alignment" then I would agree. LG does not necessarily mean jackass, but Paladin pretty much does. quote:Actually clerics do it too, they just inexplicably don't get any flack for it, even though their ethods are often far more retarded. I think that really depends on the player. I've seen clerics who are retards and ones that are great at getting everyone in the party to agree and work together despite radical alignment differences, but this is something that Paladins, by definition, cannot do. A very forgiving NG cleric can get the NE rogue and LG fighter to work together if he's smart enough, but a Paladin cannot. quote:And it's not easy for Paladins to fall, it's just easy for people to fall into the trap of thinking it's easy for them to fall. Again, I think this depends on the DM. I've seen DMs who won't remove Paladinhood for blatant murder, and I've seen DMs who will revoke Paladinhood for failing to remember to use your Detect Evil power on a new party member (who ended up being True Neutral). quote:You just proved my point. A paladin cannot knowingly asociate with evil characters. And if mr secret NE really was NE and eventually did something to reveal that he's NE, he should be kicked out anyway, unless everyone sides with him. All that leaves is detect evil and there are variants aplenty to replace that. I said "a third of the party." There were five of them. There was one paladin, played by one of the NE character's players after his NE character got killed, but he got killed rather quickly because the player was an idiot. The player then made another NE character. Efreet saiid posted:So you would have no problem asociating with somebody who was immoral and sadistic? he =/= his character. I'll put up with a lot of poo poo in DnD that I won't in real life, or vice versa, depending on who I'm playing.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 22:25
|
|
|
Efreet saiid posted:So you would have no problem asociating with somebody who was immoral and sadistic? So many creatures are automatically labelled evil. Goblins, for instance. They are evil... why? It seems like they have society. They kill humans, but it seems that's mainly becaus humans are always killing them, too. Then you have guys like Bob. Bob's a beet farmer. He's evil, but all he does is farm beets, because he's not particularly inclined to do much with that evil. Maybe he cheats on his taxes and sells beet wine to underage girls. Ok, so he's kind of evil, still what warrants judgement. Should I just kill the dude cause he's evil? And if a guy is immoral, in whose eyes? If we were playing D&D in the 1950's suburban god-fearing America, would gay people have the CE alginment?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 22:25
|
|
|
hey happyelf can you be a buddy and give me a summary of what happened in the dragonlance series after dragons of summer flame? I read the first book of the nex tDragons of whatever with the Mina chick but no more.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 22:32
|
|
|
Evil is not necessarily immoral and sadistic, it can be amoral and selfish.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 22:43
|
|
|
I just played a Ptolus campaign as a paladin where I made it a point not to be 'that guy'. In fact, I argued for the looting of a house and not returning the treasure to its proper owners because the need for us to fund our crusade was greater than their need for the treasure. (Night of dissolution adventure). I didn't kick anyone out and I only got into a few other arguments with the other PCs. One time, our druid wanted to take the magic staff of a CE guy who had helped us. I stopped him, because the staff was Mr. CE's lawful property. I knew Mr. CE was evil but he had done nothing wrong so I let him go. The second time, our CN bard executed a helpless prisoner (a chaos cult fighter) we had captured. I tried to stop him but he did when I wasn't around. This was the session where we saved the world and was the last one for the adventure so I didn't try to get him punished although I should have. I do think the paladin needs a new writeup. The paladin code of conduct is too simple and vague. Furthermore, other classes need a code of conduct.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 23:01
|
|
|
greatn posted:And if a guy is immoral, in whose eyes? In D&D, 'good' and 'evil' (and 'law' and 'chaos') are supposed to be objectively defined cosmic forces, not subjective frames of morality. Someone raised in a "lawful evil" society is still "lawful evil", regardless of the fact that the culture and norms are totally different than in the neighboring "chaotic good" society. Someone who cheats on their taxes and sells alcohol to minors would be, at the very worst, 'chaotic neutral' under the D&D system. If he were basically a decent guy otherwise, he'd be 'chaotic good'.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 23:03
|
|
|
Regarding the point raised by Happyelf about Paladins dying all the time, I think that makes perfect sence for them to do so. A Paladin after all is the epitome of good and being good means being altruistic towards others. I can't think of a better way to demonstrate altruism than to sacrifice oneself in order to save others, and thus I think that doing so should come naturally to that class.clockworkjoe posted:I do think the paladin needs a new writeup. The paladin code of conduct is too simple and vague. Furthermore, other classes need a code of conduct. Paladins have codes of conduct because they derive their powers from another entity that supports them in exchange for them behaving in a certain manner. Why would other character classes, other than perhaps clerics and druids, need codes of conduct as well?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2007 23:42
|
|
|
clockworkjoe posted:I just played a Ptolus campaign as a paladin where I made it a point not to be 'that guy'. In fact, I argued for the looting of a house and not returning the treasure to its proper owners because the need for us to fund our crusade was greater than their need for the treasure. greatn posted:So many creatures are automatically labelled evil. Goblins, for instance. They are evil... why? It seems like they have society. They kill humans, but it seems that's mainly becaus humans are always killing them, too. quote:Then you have guys like Bob. Bob's a beet farmer. He's evil, but all he does is farm beets, because he's not particularly inclined to do much with that evil. Maybe he cheats on his taxes and sells beet wine to underage girls. Ok, so he's kind of evil, still what warrants judgement. Should I just kill the dude cause he's evil? quote:And if a guy is immoral, in whose eyes? If we were playing D&D in the 1950's suburban god-fearing America, would gay people have the CE alginment? If somebody is a real nasty ashsole, they're probably evil. If somebody generally, genuinly means well and tries to do good, they're good. Everyone else is neutral. A guy in the 1950's who went around sadistically bashing gays with his buddies might be CE, while a gay person would not be evil unless they were also incidentally evil for other reasons. Meanwhile a psychiatrist who kept trying to 'cure' gays via lobotomies or ECT might still be neutral depending on how he treats his patients. It's really just a set of guidelines, it's not as "objective" as people claim. anyway I find many of the criticisms of D&D morality to themself be ignorant of real-world morality, for, while moral absolutism is a pretty laughable concept, absolute moral relativism is likewise quite absurd. It's not really that far-fetched that, in a setting where people routinly fly and come back from the dead, they'd also have a slightly better grasp on some kind of universal princible of benevolent coexistance. And anybody who doesn't? Neutral. Backdoor Blanche posted:he =/= his character. I'll put up with a lot of poo poo in DnD that I won't in real life, or vice versa, depending on who I'm playing. Johnny Aztec posted:hey happyelf can you be a buddy and give me a summary of what happened in the dragonlance series after dragons of summer flame? I read the first book of the nex tDragons of whatever with the Mina chick but no more. Efreet saiid fucked around with this message at 00:53 on May 8, 2007 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 00:33
|
|
|
Hey guys. The new comic is out. http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0449.html I say this in the kindest way possible. If you doubted Rich, it's time to eat your hat. Zooloo fucked around with this message at 00:38 on May 8, 2007 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 00:35
|
|
|
Zoolooman posted:Hey guys. Oh. My. God.  The look on Xykon's face is just...yeah.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 00:42
|
|
|
Zoolooman posted:Hey guys.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 00:42
|
|
|
Ohhh shiiit look how stupid I am! I don't even care if he beats them anyway, that'll do nicely.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 00:49
|
|
|
Zoolooman posted:Hey guys. holy poo poo
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 00:54
|
|
|
Efreet saiid posted:Ok see this? This is what results in people falling from grace. One day it's spite in BSS, the next you're hate-trolling self-styles "Theists" and "Deists", and before you know it we've got Evil Ferrinus zooming around with a giganting goatee glued to his hull, doing Mspaint threads in GBS about stupid retail customers, and running a Card Capturer Sakura PBP thread in TG. Only the law of the mods matters now! *decapitates ur avatar* quote:There are other factors also, but they follow a similar path- for instance some people think it's awfully clever and fresh to show that an order of knights or a righteous church has a seamy underbelly or is outright corrupt, but that is the cliche now, and has been for a long time. The basic problem here is that you're damning a story development for the author-motive you perceive motivated the story development. It may be that the Sapphire Guard got their asses handed to them because Rich just haaaates Paladins and wants to show them up at every opportunity, but A) that's unlikely given his treatment of every paladin but Miko and B) who cares? quote:Oh some on, i'm sure somebody could do it right! The menacing evil crazy uh.. . desperate for attention. . . loves disrupting the game... This example just isn't applicable because you're talking about the behavior of a player at a game table, but the conversation as a whole is abuot the behavior of a character in a story being told by one guy. Also, my problem with Malkavians is that they specifically encourage the sort of behavior you're referring to here (just like a Paladin sort of encourages policing the other players), and because they are ultimately pointless as a clan. You don't have to be a Malkavian to be an insane vampire, and therefore anyone who does play a vampire thinks they have to be defined wholly by the fact that they're insane. (And they have terrible pop-culture conceptions of "insane"). quote:I do think it's wierd, but are evil PC's really that common? Genuinly evil ones? And if there is a genuinly evil PC in the game, surely they'd be a tad more disruptive than a Paladin who responds to them? Well, Belkar is a pretty good example of how it could work out. You don't actually have to be out to conquer the world with an army of demons to be considered evil, you just have to have absolutely no qualms with killing and stealing from strangers. And sure, technically any Good PCs have an incentive not to associate with evil PCs or vice versa (same with lawful and chaotic, really.) But...well, Monk, for example, doesn't take away your Flurry of Blows if you hang out with a chaotic guy. I think Paladin is a good class, but I definitely buy the argument that it's more likely to disrupt party cohesiveness than the others. RE: NEW COMIC: ohhhhhh poo poo
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 01:00
|
|
|
Maldraedior posted:I guess why I like this strip is because Xykon epitomizes why I'm so terrible as casters. The approriate way is to hang back, let the meatshields take thier hits and blast the crap out everyone. But eventually I just go gently caress THIS poo poo I'm a high level caster what the hell are a bunch of lower level semis going to do to me? Which leads to this happening: By the way, this post is from way back on the last page but I just want to quote it because I think it's a brilliant summation of Xykon's problems. Xykon is like an impatient player going through a video game with an extremely high level caster. He's like, "Heh, I can do this, whatev- OW OW OW! Damnit! gently caress!" But he can't reload  EDIT: Also, Xykon's expression in the last panel there is so perfect. It's like he's really really hoping to suddenly burst out laughing because what he's seeing is a giant practical joke. Ferrinus fucked around with this message at 01:18 on May 8, 2007 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 01:07
|
|
|
Well! I know some folks here are happy to see Xykon challenged and I'll agree I'm dying to see the doubtlessly badass conclusion to this, but I hope the badguys still win. Maybe Xykon gets sent back to phylactery and the hobgoblins overrun the city anyhow. I'm still of the opinion that it serves the grand story arc well for the heroes to suffer a major setback here. Plus if Xykon's sent to respawn and the hobgoblin army is stuck trying to figure out how to get through hundreds of ghost paladins to reach the gem that means the badguys can have their worrying victory without necessarily accomplishing anything for a good long time.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 01:11
|
|
|
A perfectly executed twist in these past two comics. Xykon seemed to be just an arrogant and possibly incompetent walking joke machine fueled by sheer overpoweredness. Then Burlew showed he was quite competent when he wanted to be with the crazy-ball He's now showing that he isn't quite invincible (and therefore not a boring villain) with his response to the ghost army. But he's still managing to be badass the entire time. VVVVI don't know D&D, but they probably knew they were going to die defending the saphire when they agreed to stand there, so their method of death non-swithstanding, it's dying for their cause. Big Mad Drongo fucked around with this message at 01:22 on May 8, 2007 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 01:19
|
|
|
SuperKlaus posted:I'm still of the opinion that it serves the grand story arc well for the heroes to suffer a major setback here. Roy dying isn't a big enough setback for you? That was an awesome new strip; but there's one thing I'm confused about. Now, forgive me because I know bugger all about D&D outside of C64 games, but those paladins all killed each other in a fit of insanity; how can they be martyrs? They didn't martyr themselves, they slaughtered each other!
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 01:20
|
|
|
Efreet saiid posted:Ohhh shiiit look how stupid I am! I don't even care if he beats them anyway, that'll do nicely. What if he defeats all of them with a single, questionably legal use of Ray of Frost?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 01:20
|
|
|
Semiru posted:Roy dying isn't a big enough setback for you? Nah, they were martyred. They died doing their duty.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 01:23
|
|
|
Yeah, the site's been smashed again with the new comic going up. Anyone have a mirror?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 01:38
|
|
|
Oh god the site went down someone please post the strip in waffleimage please please please.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 01:39
|
|
|
Cowcaster posted:Yeah, the site's been smashed again with the new comic going up. Anyone have a mirror? 
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 01:47
|
|
|
Like how mondays crash the site. Lets me know Im not alone in my obsessive love of this comic. Now, regarding the Palidins still being martyrs: they killed eachother while under the control of a spell. In the DnD world that is literally the equivalent of the old "stop hitting yourself" bully technique. Their actions were not their own, and so they were still performing their duty to the best of their ability. There ability just happened to consist of "roll 1D6, if 1-3 attack random adjacent person, if 4 wander randomly, if 5, drool..."
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 02:09
|
|
|
Presumably most of the paladins had a lifetime of duty before this point to fall back on, and even if they were induced to kill each other, they still fell in the defense of the throne. I like how despite the fact that Xykon's head is just a grinning skull, that is still a perfectly recognizable "ohhhhhhh poo poo" facial expression.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 02:15
|
|
|
Hedgehog King posted:Like how mondays crash the site. Lets me know Im not alone in my obsessive love of this comic. Well, except for the last Paladin, who offed herself. Query... What can Ghosts do against a Lich? I seem to recall their primary attack being an age 10-40 years thing.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 02:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:38 |
|
|
Is that Shojo, or the founder of Azure City calling forth his army?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2007 02:37
|
|
