|
terminal mehmet posted:No it's not. How could it be? She was on the ships in the original evac. Besides, undead are grey, not green.
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2007 14:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 11:18 |
|
|
terminal mehmet posted:No it's not. How could it be? She was on the ships in the original evac. I thought she and Belkar were left on the main land? Either way, the color thing appears to point elsewhere, unless Burlew colors differently depending on type of undead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2007 18:49
|
|
|
Dr. Ron Paul posted:I thought she and Belkar were left on the main land? Either way, the color thing appears to point elsewhere, unless Burlew colors differently depending on type of undead. No, Therkla was on the ship. Haley was back on the mainland with Belkar. Hence, they can't be the same person.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2007 18:59
|
|
|
 The new strip is up! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 14:01
|
|
|
Hahahaha, what. I am pretty sure I have already forgotten whatever "thinly-veiled deus ex machina" Vaarsuvius is referring to here. His/her escape seemed pretty logical to me, really. Also, I imagine in either the next strip or the one after that we might finally discover why Durkon has not raised Roy. It seems like it will clearly come up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 15:17
|
|
|
The skull from the zombie dragon crushed the death knight.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 15:20
|
|
|
Quarex posted:Hahahaha, what. Quarex posted:Also, I imagine in either the next strip or the one after that we might finally discover why Durkon has not raised Roy. It seems like it will clearly come up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 15:20
|
|
|
Quarex posted:
Or maybe it did in this one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 15:34
|
|
|
Sock posted:Or maybe it did in this one. Well, it was kind of obvious all along. You can't raise what's not there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 15:35
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Well, it was kind of obvious all along. You can't raise what's not there. Short of True Resurrection, but I think he's still a few levels shy of that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 17:39
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:No, Therkla was on the ship. Haley was back on the mainland with Belkar. Hence, they can't be the same person. Right, but could Xykon teleport her there, if he wanted? The physical location doesn't seem like a big deal. Of course, there's no reason to think it's Haley at all, I'm just making a stupid speculation. edit: what's Nale's current status? Jon fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Nov 9, 2007 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 17:43
|
|
|
Dr. Ron Paul posted:Right, but could Xykon teleport her there, if he wanted? The physical location doesn't seem like a big deal. Of course, there's no reason to think it's Haley at all, I'm just making a stupid speculation. Check it out: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0484.html Therkla's on the ship at the same time that Haley's still alive and in Azure City. It's definitely not the same person.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 18:01
|
|
|
You know, its been so long that I'd completely forgotten that V was best friends with Haley. Curse your interesting characters, Burlew!
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 19:18
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Check it out: Ah, gotcha. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 19:19
|
|
|
Mortanis posted:Short of True Resurrection, but I think he's still a few levels shy of that. You would think I am a big enough D&D nerd to think about this, but in my head you did not need anything to bring someone back with resurrection, it just had to be within [x] amount of time. I thought "raise dead" was the only spell that needed the body--but I think I am just confusing it with the fact that true resurrection does not need the body and has a ridiculously long time limit, whereas resurrection still needs the body and has a reasonably long time limit. It will be great when they are separated long enough that Roy is past the death due-date.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 23:12
|
|
|
Resurrection- You need the body, or at least what there is of it left.. True Resurrection- you only need the name. quote:The condition of the remains is not a factor. So long as some small portion of the creature’s body still exists, it can be resurrected, but the portion receiving the spell must have been part of the creature’s body at the time of death.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 23:51
|
|
|
It would be awesome to time travel by killing yourself and having a contingency true ressurection that takes place in 1000 years. Or turning yourself to stone or similar.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2007 23:57
|
|
|
greatn posted:It would be awesome to time travel by killing yourself and having a contingency true ressurection that takes place in 1000 years. Or turning yourself to stone or similar.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2007 00:11
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:Stone would suck. What if someone comes along in 100 years or so and decides that you'd make good building material for their house? Nobody makes cobblestones out of stone fingers, its just creepy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2007 00:29
|
|
|
Aw, poor V. I want to give uh... them a hug. Who cares if its a girl or a guy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2007 00:31
|
|
|
Gally posted:Aw, poor V. I want to give uh... them a hug. Who cares if its a girl or a guy. You know, I always think of V as a male. In the earlier comics I didn't understand the bit with V and Hayley in the inn and everyone making lesbian jokes. I think it's because V is drawn in the same way as the male characters - every other female in the strip is depicted slightly differently.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2007 07:48
|
|
|
Haley refers to V as 'he', so yea. I don't really think about it too much anymore.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2007 08:38
|
|
|
New comic is up! Also hosting!  I really want to see what Haley is actually up to, and when Durkon is going to be convinced to go back and rescue Roy. I'm really worried about those guys 
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2007 00:59
|
|
|
Taear posted:You know, I always think of V as a male. In the earlier comics I didn't understand the bit with V and Hayley in the inn and everyone making lesbian jokes. I think it's because V is drawn in the same way as the male characters - every other female in the strip is depicted slightly differently. The difference is the position of the eyes (it was brought up by Burlow when Roy turned into a woman, and everyone noticed a bald woman looked weird)- but it actually happens that V's eyes are half-way between a man and a woman's. Still, most signs point to him being a man, his eyes are probably a bit lower because he has a fringe (hair is the reason girls got lower eyes). Also Roy calling him "V-man" in a very-early strip seemed to have been a way of saying "He's a guy", before Burlow realised he could carry the whole gender-debate on. Despite that, I still think of V as a girl. I dunno why, when my logic tells me he's probably a guy (and I refer to him as a he in these threads), he just has a girl vibe to me. Also, a new strip is up. We seem to be getting updates pretty regularly just recently, hurrah! And I like the plot a lot more now that they're out of Azure city too (it was getting a bit old!)
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2007 01:00
|
|
|
Noonsaliwah posted:Also Roy calling him "V-man" in a very-early strip seemed to have been a way of saying "He's a guy", before Burlow realised he could carry the whole gender-debate on. I think Burlew has always maintained that while others may refer to V as a woman or a man, that doesn't mean they are right, it's just what they think V is. Of course, since Haley always sleeps with V, she's probably in the best position to know. But then again, V's an elf, and elves don't sleep (as covered in the last strip), so maybe V has never changed "his" clothes, and thus shown off "his" body. They may sleep in the same room, but I don't think they bathe at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2007 01:58
|
|
|
foobardog posted:I think Burlew has always maintained that while others may refer to V as a woman or a man, that doesn't mean they are right, it's just what they think V is. I think he just says that to cover up how he did not make a mystery out of V's gender until people were confused by it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2007 21:48
|
|
|
The new strip is up  The Sexy Kind of Resistance. gothfae fucked around with this message at 16:38 on Nov 14, 2007 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2007 16:30
|
|
|
Good ol' Elan. He sees the Ninjas, but doesn't recognize what they are.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2007 17:04
|
|
|
While I laughed at that comic and enjoyed it (particularly the opening "Billy Goat Gruff" reference; that may be the first "Billy Goat Gruff" reference in popular culture), I was a little disappointed that Elan still has not learned, despite encountering them as early as like strip #3, that anyone dressed like that is a ninja, and is likely evil and going to kill you. Yes, I realize that is the point of Elan, but still. Maybe he is thrown off by the fact that she is green!
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2007 17:56
|
|
|
I'm going to miss that goblin ninja when she is inevitably killed horribly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2007 18:41
|
|
|
"we're flanking together" may just be the funniest thing I read today.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2007 18:43
|
|
|
Haley is not going to like Therkla. I hope they get to meet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 02:27
|
|
|
Soylentbits posted:I'm going to miss that goblin ninja when she is inevitably killed horribly. I don't think she's a goblin, actually.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 02:43
|
|
|
XkyRauh posted:Haley is not going to like Therkla. I hope they get to meet. [Therkla surprises Haley] T: "Sudden Strike! Hah!" [Normal initiative begins] H: "Sneak Attack! Sneak Attack! Sneak Attack!" T: "Oh yeah, rogues can do that while ninjas can't. I'd forgot." *dies* E: "Good work, Haley! I wonder who that was." ~ alternately ~ H: "Elan, flank this ninja for me!" T: "No, my love! Help me flank this hussy!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 05:16
|
|
|
MelvinTheJerk posted:I don't think she's a goblin, actually. Stickin' with my half-orc answer. Possibly related to Thog.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 13:08
|
|
|
IMJack posted:[Therkla surprises Haley] third choice: interracial(inter-species?) 3 way
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 20:26
|
|
|
Johnny Aztec posted:third choice: interracial(inter-species?) 3 way That would be some sexy flanking, if you know what I mean.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 20:46
|
|
|
IMJack posted:[Therkla surprises Haley] On a D&D nerd topic, can't you only do one Sneak Attack per round? I thought that was how Rogues were kept from being ridiculously deathworthy at high levels.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 22:27
|
|
|
Kahrytes posted:On a D&D nerd topic, can't you only do one Sneak Attack per round? I'm looking at it right now and it doesn't say anything about only being able to use Sneak Attack only once per round. As long as the person is flat footed (or denied their DEX) and they aren't consealed in anyway or immune to Sneak Attack, you can do it to your heart's content. Eckertmania fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Nov 15, 2007 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 22:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 11:18 |
|
|
Eckertmania posted:I'm looking at it right now and it doesn't say anything about only being able to use Sneak Attack only once per round. As long as the person is flat footed (or denied their DEX) and they aren't consealed in anyway or immune to Sneak Attack, you can do it to your heart's content. Edit: I'm an idiot. Apparently I can't tell the edit and quote buttons apart. Eckertmania fucked around with this message at 22:34 on Nov 15, 2007 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 22:31
|
|