|
The guy with the see-through blade is using a one-handed sword and also doesn't appear to be wearing any armor, so my theory is going to be either: 1.) Rogue with a couple levels of Wizard or Sorcerer (less than the dude in yellow, who appears to be more Wizard/Rogue than Rogue/Wizard), used primarily for casting low level combat enhancing utility spells-- in this instance, Wraithstrike. 2.) Invisibility on the sword trick, though Permanent Invisibility seems a bit pricy for some mook, and it should affect the hilt of the sword if this is the case. Maybe Blurstrike weapon, from Races of the Wild.
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 07:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 14:37 |
|
|
Nine kills in as many seconds with bonus points for style. Belkar is officially the most badass character in the comic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 07:13
|
|
|
I think I caught a rather clever joke in the fourth panel. You'll notice that you can see the words on the wall in the background. Of the words, the following are the most visible: Alive, in danger (Greysky?) (with?) Belkar Rogue's alive, in danger Mist is akin to a greysky and Belkar is currently descending on him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 07:21
|
|
|
Cabbit posted:The guy with the see-through blade is using a one-handed sword and also doesn't appear to be wearing any armor, so my theory is going to be either: I stand by invisibility as you can easily wrap the hilt of the sword in something so that it's easy to draw and find. And It's not really that pricy, especially if he stole it from someone or a wizard owed him a favor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 08:18
|
|
|
seaborgium posted:I stand by invisibility as you can easily wrap the hilt of the sword in something so that it's easy to draw and find. And It's not really that pricy, especially if he stole it from someone or a wizard owed him a favor. Or if they're in a decently successful Thieves Guild, especially if it happens to have casters in it as well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 10:53
|
|
|
Can Roy pick it up if it is a ghost-touch weapon?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 11:52
|
|
|
Vanadium posted:Can Roy pick it up if it is a ghost-touch weapon? Ghosts can pick up and use ghost touch weapons, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 12:13
|
|
|
Vanadium posted:Can Roy pick it up if it is a ghost-touch weapon? Actually... I think so. Unless I'm thinking of another quality that allows incorporeal creatures to carry an object. I know there's a ghostly prestige class (Libris Mortis) that gets the ability. EDIT: Beat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 12:14
|
|
|
I could almost hear the Popeye them. EDIT: I don't see this "invisible sword". Er... no pun intended.
3 Action Economist fucked around with this message at 15:03 on Nov 25, 2008 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 15:00
|
|
|
Second page, second panel, guy in the blue shirt yelling "sneak attack" has a sword that's transparent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 15:23
|
|
|
Is Roy actually a ghost? I thought ghosts were dead spirits still bound to the Material plane, where Roy is not and just sort of visiting on and off. I don't know what he would fall into, but I'm not sure that he's a ghost - case in point, you can see and hear ghosts, and they can attack you. He can't do any of those.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 15:30
|
|
|
Jeez dudes, Belkar finally goes off on a rampage and all you can talk about is a random transparent sword? EDIT : And he already fixed it on the site even! Shavnir fucked around with this message at 15:38 on Nov 25, 2008 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 15:35
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:Is Roy actually a ghost? I thought ghosts were dead spirits still bound to the Material plane, where Roy is not and just sort of visiting on and off. I don't know what he would fall into, but I'm not sure that he's a ghost - case in point, you can see and hear ghosts, and they can attack you. He can't do any of those. That is why I asked  Actual ghosts get to do all kinds of neat stuff like manifest themselves that Roy is obviously having trouble with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 15:36
|
|
|
Shavnir posted:Jeez dudes, Belkar finally goes off on a rampage and all you can talk about is a random transparent sword? Awww, and I was having fun with all the speculation. Dang.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 18:21
|
|
|
Fuckin' rangers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 19:07
|
|
|
Shavnir posted:Jeez dudes, Belkar finally goes off on a rampage and all you can talk about is a random transparent sword? Ah! See, I read it on the website. No wonder I didn't see it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 19:40
|
|
|
Aww. And Wraithstrike is such a fun spell, too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2008 21:04
|
|
|
Although it's a funny comment on how bloated D&D has become, that it's plausible for this to have been an actual intentional decision instead of just a coloring error!
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2008 04:00
|
|
|
It's possible that this 'invisible blade' just a coincidence. The sword might be a +2 or +3 weapon, and valued more for that than any special properties. These guys are probably mid-level rogues, so any + to hit would be appreciated against a higher level opponent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2008 04:41
|
|
|
Scopedog posted:Although it's a funny comment on how bloated D&D has become, that it's plausible for this to have been an actual intentional decision instead of just a coloring error! Considering Invisibility is one of the most core of the core spells in the game, is it really? People have been using and abusing that spell since day one, and I'm sure it wasn't long after that day a rogue put 2 and 2 together.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2008 08:24
|
|
|
Cabbit posted:Considering Invisibility is one of the most core of the core spells in the game, is it really? People have been using and abusing that spell since day one, and I'm sure it wasn't long after that day a rogue put 2 and 2 together. I had a Thri-kreen Rogue who had a ring of invisibility and Multiattack. Yeah, I even pissed myself off with that one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2008 19:21
|
|
|
Well, it must have been a coloring error - the sword is now colored in.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2008 17:15
|
|
|
That's a shame, were invisibility available, an invisible sword (in the hands of an experienced fighter) would make reasonable sense. If you can't see the blade, you have to judge its position by the angle of their hand, so you'll end up focusing on that over anything else. If you don't know what type of blade your opponent's sword is, you have to assume it's long and give them a lot of room when they swing. An invisible blade on an "incorrectly sized" hilt could provide significant benefits in combat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2008 04:07
|
|
|
Protip: If you want the compilation books but don't want to spend full price, keep checking the APE Games Product List now and again for their "Scratch and Dent" sales. They shave a good amount off the price of that batch, and chances are likely you won't even notice anything wrong. Mine looked perfect. Last month I got the prequels that way, and right now they're selling the first two compilations $6-$10 off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2008 11:23
|
|
|
goatface posted:That's a shame, were invisibility available, an invisible sword (in the hands of an experienced fighter) would make reasonable sense. If you can't see the blade, you have to judge its position by the angle of their hand, so you'll end up focusing on that over anything else. I see you havn't read enough fantasy to realize that real swordsmasters look people in the eyes when they fight! Hah!
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2008 18:12
|
|
|
Affi posted:I see you havn't read enough fantasy to realize that real swordsmasters look people in the eyes when they fight! Hah! Only the sucky sword masters can even see. Blindness makes the best fighters, and deafness probably would make you an epic level bard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2008 23:14
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Only the sucky sword masters can even see. Blindness makes the best fighters, and deafness probably would make you an epic level bard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2008 23:27
|
|
|
 New Strip!  A valuable lesson for us all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2008 13:13
|
|
|
Belkar coming back is the best thing this comic has done in months.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2008 14:46
|
|
|
drat, I guess this means that Priest of Loki's not joining up with the gang.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2008 15:17
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:drat, I guess this means that Priest of Loki's not joining up with the gang. He probably wouldn't have gotten along that well with a priest of Thor. And this was a pretty good comic, hopefully things will keep moving along.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2008 17:15
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:drat, I guess this means that Priest of Loki's not joining up with the gang. Given we now have two priests of Loki hanging about (this guy and Hilgya), I think we'll be seeing him again after this chapter is over. That is, if he doesn't end up dead before we're through (which isn't unlikely, depending on how things progress)
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2008 17:28
|
|
|
Rehost in case the site goes down: Click here for the full 724x933 image. Heh heh. "Brany Pete." 
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2008 07:31
|
|
|
I do love the idea of Belkar as an evangelist of violence.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2008 08:01
|
|
|
 Anybody else want a sandwich now? Also: "Whuh??"
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2008 09:07
|
|
|
You know, there were definitely times that I found Belkar to be kind of dull and irritating... but this is just great. Keep on killing, you furious, lethal little man.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2008 15:49
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:You know, there were definitely times that I found Belkar to be kind of dull and irritating... but this is just great. Keep on killing, you furious, lethal little man. I have to agree ... Belkar was my least favorite member of the Order ... now he's making me laugh so hard I wanna see more of the little bastard! I'm glad those who were naysaying the setup to this are eating their words 
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2008 16:37
|
|
|
That was some grade A banter there. "Wow, it's almost like I'm a seasoned warrior and you two are glorified pickpockets."
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2008 16:56
|
|
|
How did those two not get attacks of opportunity on her while she flew in? They said she couldn't do it for that very reason a few strips ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2008 19:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 14:37 |
|
|
Already focused on Belkar and Hayley. Or something.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2008 19:41
|
|