August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Discuss the comic here!
ChuckNorris
Whispers Softly
Posts: 57

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by ChuckNorris » Fri Aug 30, 2013 3:16 pm

Sigh... Well, I was hoping this wouldn't happen (Though I think I knew it would). I guess all I've gotta hope for now is that Psimax doesn't come back for a cheap death

biggmac
Remains Silent
Posts: 8

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by biggmac » Fri Aug 30, 2013 3:39 pm

Ahhh. Re-tail therapy. Always makes me feel better.

User avatar
Wolfie
She Who Admins
She Who Admins
Posts: 3472
UStream Username: Wolfie213
Location: In a handbasket on a bus... and it's hot

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by Wolfie » Fri Aug 30, 2013 3:54 pm

biggmac wrote:Ahhh. Re-tail therapy. Always makes me feel better.
I'm glad someone else had the same pun run through their head.

And *shakes fist at Ruby* your timing is too good
"This is my therapy dragon, she's for my panic attacks. I attack, everyone panics." (Quote found on http://outofcontextdnd.tumblr.com/)

"If I have a +2 strength sword and I stab you, you won't get a +2 strength, you get wounds" ~Sir Butcher

"How few there are who have courage enough to own their faults, or resolution enough to mend them." ~Benjamin Franklin

User avatar
boneguard
Of Few Words
Posts: 75
Location: Gatineau (Qu├®bec) Canada

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by boneguard » Fri Aug 30, 2013 3:55 pm

So much speciism. When will we earn to Love and let love.
You can keep your precious reality, I got a kingdom to save from a horde of savage orcs and then go and do this wetjob for Mr. Johnson.

User avatar
AntMac
Likes to Contribute
Posts: 207

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by AntMac » Fri Aug 30, 2013 4:05 pm

biggmac wrote:Ahhh. Re-tail therapy. Always makes me feel better.
I laughed out loud. :lol:

Ah, poor Minmax, people don't approve of his hearts choice, that is going to be difficult for him.

What I want to know is, what logical reason is motivating Ruby?. Intelligence is the core of the Kins actions always. What does she know about this sort of love affair, that makes her act like what seems like a bigot or prude?. I will be all disappointment if she is just being un-intelligent in this one aspect of her life, a mere contemptible bigot, it seems so un-Kinlike.

Sometimes cultural taboos are for a good reason, we ought to consider. ( I am not being funny when I add this next bit. I could have chosen someone else's taboos, but that might be insensitive, right? ) My people were once cannibals, and we had an iron-clad cultural taboo against eating anything above the neck, in fact it went so far as to be taboo to so much as touch the head at a meal. Turns out there may have been a sound reason for this being so, what with kuru, which was in populations in our line of descent, etc.

User avatar
Tofu
Is Heard Often
Posts: 321
UStream Username: Tofu

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by Tofu » Fri Aug 30, 2013 4:53 pm

I wish Morikane (?) were here to shade/colour Kin's new tail. I'm going to be confused at all the colour mark changes with our beloved characters. Transparent, remade from IME psionic magiks, just normal ime effects and baseline standard world stuff are all likely to confuse. Ah well ... just saying he brought something good to the webcomic.

On another note, Ruby has issues with people, she might recall what's been suppressed through her tattoo, which would be good character development, cos she thinks she has never failed to achieve her goals - arrogance could be her downfall.

DrinksTooMuchCoffee
Indulges in Conversation
Posts: 809

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by DrinksTooMuchCoffee » Fri Aug 30, 2013 4:56 pm

Look, you can be nice to the stupid monkeys, but don't wrestle with them naked. :P ;)

Sockmonkey
Whispers Softly
Posts: 63

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by Sockmonkey » Fri Aug 30, 2013 5:37 pm

Weren't the MMs from Ruby's reality and those of the other Kins total jerkwads?

Ciaran
Remains Silent
Posts: 5
UStream Username: Ciaran Barnes

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by Ciaran » Fri Aug 30, 2013 5:56 pm

Some of the expression are weird, but I beleive Tarol has talked about not liking to draw side views of faces, so thats not my nit-pik. Some of my favorite moments in the comic are the looks that characters exchange. Tarol obviously puts a lot of work into them, and it tells me a lot about the characters' relationships. In panel 3, Kin's eyes are not prtraying the same emotion. Hold a finger over Kin's left eye (on the right side of the page) so as to block it from view. She looks sorrowful, or like she's empathizing with another's sorow. Now cover her right eye and she looks very perturbed about Ruby's comment, which is how I would fel about it.

I don't want to complain Tarol, your character's expression are my favorite part of the comic!

User avatar
AntMac
Likes to Contribute
Posts: 207

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by AntMac » Fri Aug 30, 2013 7:12 pm

Ciaran wrote: Some of my favorite moments in the comic are the looks that characters exchange. Tarol obviously puts a lot of work into them, and it tells me a lot about the characters' relationships.
I don't want to complain Tarol, your character's expression are my favorite part of the comic!
I couldn't agree more. Some of the looks Kin and Forgarth exchange over Minmax are as good as a paragraph of description, and they are worth looking at again and again.

Very humane and endearing Kin looks sometimes. When she dealt with scorpion Kin, it was as good as a epic to read into her facial expressions, I think.

User avatar
Liesmith
Indulges in Conversation
Posts: 752
UStream Username: Liesmith

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by Liesmith » Fri Aug 30, 2013 7:16 pm

I dunno, Ciaran, it looks fine to me. It looks like she's giving a sighing "are you kidding me with this BS?" look to Ruby. If you cover each eye, they *do* look like they're giving different emotions...but I checked a few other panels and saw the same thing; I think it's just a quirk of a 2D face.

Personally, I'm very happy that we finally got to see Kin's GFY face in panel four.
"All it takes is one bad day to reduce the sanest man alive to lunacy. That's how far the world is from where I am. Just one bad day. You had a bad day once. Am I right? I know I am. I can tell. You had a bad day and everything changed."
► Show Spoiler

DrinksTooMuchCoffee
Indulges in Conversation
Posts: 809

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by DrinksTooMuchCoffee » Fri Aug 30, 2013 7:44 pm

I think I recall some documentary thingy saying that real human faces do display different emotions on each side of the face and the left side is the more genuine side. Also that's the side dogs have evolved to look at on humans. :)

EatsAbug
Whispers Softly
Posts: 40

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by EatsAbug » Fri Aug 30, 2013 7:50 pm

The near-invulnerability aspect has to come into play soon - when PsiMax is restored and teleports back while Ruby and Kin are out of the room arguing.
PsiMax's eyes and head will be near-invulnerable - MinMax is going to need another way of killing PsiMax this time.

MinMax says something is green. PsiMax comes back - "Remember me?" Sword is drawn.
PsiMax pins everyone and probably kills Sapphire and Onyx to keep them from messing with his machine again. Assumes our Kin is dead.
Begins preparations to destroy the Maze.

Ruby distracts him - and dies. Kin grabs him again. PsiMax fails his Splishk attempt, and goes unconscious. MinMax finishes him somehow.

Kin uses he machine to change PsiMax's vulnerability to 'everything'. The party gets the teapot and leaves.
Maze resets. PsiMax tries to kill his party and fails to even affect them - and they remember every time he killed them. Oops!

User avatar
jakesdad
Mutters to Themself
Posts: 39
UStream Username: jakesdad
Location: Near a brewery
Contact:

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by jakesdad » Fri Aug 30, 2013 8:10 pm

One error on the part of Reality 80 Kin--Ruby in the last panel.

"Can I speak privately with you?" means "do I have the physical capability to speak with you privately?" Can I do it?

"May I speak privately with you?" means "do I have permission to speak with you privately?" May I do so?

Because all of these Kins are highly intelligent, I don't think this one would make a basic grammatical mistake. I know you could argue this is slang/common usage, but Kins don't slang. They are always extremely precise with their choice of wording.

P.S. Thanks to Mrs. Meeks, my high school English teacher for responding with "I don't know, can you?" every time I made this mistake.

P.P.S. Why do I hear violins playing when I read the last few panels, only to stop like a record slowing down in the final panel? :lol:
Last edited by jakesdad on Fri Aug 30, 2013 8:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
RocketScientist
Global Moderator
Posts: 5886
Location: Massachusetts

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by RocketScientist » Fri Aug 30, 2013 8:13 pm

Ruby is horrible.

And no, we are NOT amused!
► Show Spoiler
edit:
EatsAbug wrote:The near-invulnerability aspect has to come into play soon - when PsiMax is restored and teleports back while Ruby and Kin are out of the room arguing.
PsiMax's eyes and head will be near-invulnerable - MinMax is going to need another way of killing PsiMax this time.

MinMax says something is green. PsiMax comes back - "Remember me?" Sword is drawn.
And then the "sky" in the maze turns yellow like the sky where the GAP is? There's a yellow glow and what looks suspiciously like daylight coming through the "remember me?" hole.

Psychorat911
Remains Silent
Posts: 1

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by Psychorat911 » Fri Aug 30, 2013 8:31 pm

GuessesWildly wrote:"When the serpent becomes your prey, friends will become enemies and love will fuel hate."



The love between Minmax and Kin is fueling hate in Ruby. They are friends now but Ruby's xenofobia will turn them to enemies. Ruby is the serpent.

This can only mean that Forgath's death is nearing. They are about to exit the maze and fight Kore.
At least we now know from who the green " hey names, remember me" comes from.

So my guess is since kin is the prey of minmax affection, when they comes face to face with the goblins,
the friends of kin(goblins) who are the enemies of minmax will make the profecy comes true .
... and the other profecy with the dwarf very soon after ;P

vonpenguin
Whispers Softly
Posts: 58

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by vonpenguin » Fri Aug 30, 2013 11:47 pm

Sockmonkey wrote:Weren't the MMs from Ruby's reality and those of the other Kins total jerkwads?
Ruby's Minmax and Forgath didn't care about her situation and joined GoblinSlayer anyway. Sapphire's tried to help her deal with the trauma but because they later died she doesn't know they existed, Onyx's I can't recall but the fact she kept Forgath's pet means she likely liked him at least.

Which means that Ruby hating Minmax may be influenced by her existing bigotry but to a much larger extent is probably because she was wronged by someone with the exact same face.

User avatar
Simon
Speaks Quietly
Posts: 130

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by Simon » Sat Aug 31, 2013 2:07 am

Aww man, what is she up to? I hope she has a good reason for stopping them! (hopefully it's not about the kiss, but about the tail growing back or something).

User avatar
Cero
Remains Silent
Posts: 1

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by Cero » Sat Aug 31, 2013 3:22 am

Finally registered, in order to say...

I love how Minmax is all 'Dammit, so close.' in the last panel.

User avatar
Starfire
Whispers Softly
Posts: 50
UStream Username: Starfire

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by Starfire » Sat Aug 31, 2013 4:58 am

Does anyone else wonder when Kin will secure her leash again? It's kinda just hanging out there for anyone to grab; that doesn't bode well...

My theory on Ruby is that she's about to show Kin the machine again and how it's not behaving like a good psi-gear-thingy. I don't think it has to do with the almost kiss; that was just coincidence.

User avatar
Moroser
Of Few Words
Posts: 72

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by Moroser » Sat Aug 31, 2013 6:32 am

Starfire wrote:Does anyone else wonder when Kin will secure her leash again? It's kinda just hanging out there for anyone to grab; that doesn't bode well...
lol, I just entered the forum to wright about the leash. You shouldn't worry that much though. Minmax and Forgath already earned Kin's trust, and the other Kins are very unlikely to use the power of the collar against each other. Our Kin has more important things to worry about atm.

Depai
Remains Silent
Posts: 2

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by Depai » Sat Aug 31, 2013 7:58 am

With regards to the expression Kin is pulling in panel 3, THunt tweeted that it was heavily influenced by Ellen Page's "Bitch please" expression. So I'm guessing Kin is merely thinking "Bitch please, I want my tail"
"This 'bitch please' expression is heavily inspired by fellow Canadian, @EllenPage http://t.co/ELIzFHpWV9"

User avatar
Changes_everything
Pipes Up Sometimes
Posts: 182

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by Changes_everything » Sat Aug 31, 2013 12:29 pm

Moroser wrote:
Starfire wrote:Does anyone else wonder when Kin will secure her leash again? It's kinda just hanging out there for anyone to grab; that doesn't bode well...
lol, I just entered the forum to wright about the leash. You shouldn't worry that much though. Minmax and Forgath already earned Kin's trust, and the other Kins are very unlikely to use the power of the collar against each other. Our Kin has more important things to worry about atm.
If Thunt, like he did, clearly draws something like the leash being loose, he has a reason for it.
Thunt does not do anything without a plan.


Admittedly that plan sometimes just amounts to stirring speculation, but still.

We should be worried.

User avatar
Thunt
Draws Goblins
Posts: 90

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by Thunt » Sat Aug 31, 2013 12:58 pm

jakesdad wrote:One error on the part of Reality 80 Kin--Ruby in the last panel.

"Can I speak privately with you?" means "do I have the physical capability to speak with you privately?" Can I do it?

"May I speak privately with you?" means "do I have permission to speak with you privately?" May I do so?

Because all of these Kins are highly intelligent, I don't think this one would make a basic grammatical mistake. I know you could argue this is slang/common usage, but Kins don't slang. They are always extremely precise with their choice of wording.

P.S. Thanks to Mrs. Meeks, my high school English teacher for responding with "I don't know, can you?" every time I made this mistake.

P.P.S. Why do I hear violins playing when I read the last few panels, only to stop like a record slowing down in the final panel? :lol:
Oh good point! I always forget that can/may rule, dammit! :wall:

Thanks!

User avatar
BuildsLegos
Indulges in Conversation
Posts: 906
UStream Username: BuildsLegos
Location: So rorery in OKC

Re: August 30, 2013: We are not amused.

Post by BuildsLegos » Sat Aug 31, 2013 1:48 pm

Don't worry, we know you flubbed grammar and mis-colored Minmax's fingers for a reason.
The only one to pay attention to what happens in Goblins.

Post Reply