Page 1174 - Left In the Cold

26th Jan 2019, 6:00 AM
<<First Latest>>
Left In the Cold
Average Rating: 0 (0 votes)
<<First Latest>>

Author Notes:

Newbiespud 26th Jan 2019, 6:00 AM edit delete
Newbiespud
And that's the last we saw of Discord himself for a while.

Which is probably for the best, just for the health of the comic and community. I mean, even the show likely wouldn't survive unscathed through an entire year of nonstop Discord episodes. That's why they cart him out only a few times a season. That and I imagine Mr. de Lancie is a rightfully expensive hire.

49 Comments:

Hankroyd 26th Jan 2019, 6:06 AM edit delete reply
OK, not sure what is going on anymore ... and note sure I want to know.
Between what everyone read, what the author intended, what some people really understood ... At least the comments was lively and passionnate.

But as Newbiespud said, DiscorDM leaving for a while is probably for the best.
DeS_Tructive 26th Jan 2019, 6:24 AM edit delete reply
DeS_Tructive
I've been avoiding the comments for quite a while, now. It was just too exhausting seeing the same people post the same stuff each and every update.

This story arc brought out some of the best and the worst geek/nerd behaviour I've seen in the last year or so.
Bojangles 26th Jan 2019, 7:36 AM edit delete reply
I suppose that means that DiscorDM did his work on a meta level as well.
Enigmatic Jack 26th Jan 2019, 8:53 AM edit delete reply
I agree, it definitely brought out the best and the worst in people. It really changed my perception of at least part of the community surrounding this comic, and not necessarily for the better. While I realize it was only a very small and very vocal minority of readers, I find myself just kind of scanning the comments most of the time these days and sometimes just skipping them altogether.
Digo Dragon 26th Jan 2019, 7:44 AM edit delete reply
Digo Dragon
I think Discord is the core definition of "That One Player". The one that causes debating controversies around the gaming table and never gets a consensus on just what is up with them.
obscurereader 26th Jan 2019, 1:57 PM edit delete reply
Pretty much agreeing with you, Digo. DiscordDM is a mystery wrapped in an enigma concealed in a puzzle.

It's arguably a clearer read when he's playing Discord - since we know DiscordDM knows Discord is a crafty and manipulative villain and DiscordDM is trying to play him accordingly at least. (If that makes any sense whatsoever).
Digo Dragon 27th Jan 2019, 7:46 AM edit delete reply
Digo Dragon
It is interesting how in this arc, Discord has held up a mirror for us to see how our own varying experiences have colored our perceptions of him. I would say that is some skillful writing to create such a varied spectrum of responses.
Boris Carlot 26th Jan 2019, 6:23 AM edit delete reply
While we're apologising, I wish to go on record as saying I'm sorry you guys are so full of wrong, bad opinions :p
Redwings1340 26th Jan 2019, 6:24 AM edit delete reply
I honestly have no idea how to interpret this page.

This was my favorite arc of the comic, I learned a lot about people in it, and have a lot to think about. It was such an awkward arc, yet it was also so relatable for so many people, in so many different ways.
GrayGriffin 26th Jan 2019, 8:14 AM edit delete reply
GrayGriffin
I think Fluttershy is empathetic enough to get worried/mad over DiscorDM obviously hiding his emotions behind the facade of "Discord." Main GM suggested he drop character and his response was to immediately vamoose while still speaking in a very Discordish manner.
Emptybee 26th Jan 2019, 9:14 AM edit delete reply
That was my take as well.
Norgarth 26th Jan 2019, 12:37 PM edit delete reply
Actually, ny take from Dicord not 'dropping character', is that he _wasn't_ putting on much of a character.

When they were discussing High School he mentioned he was described as 'the insufferable genius type'.

I can see his brushing off Fluttershy's apology if he just feels that 'when you're playing, you play to win and all fair.', in which case he wouldn't consider it a personal attack anymore than what he put the players through.
Grim 26th Jan 2019, 1:58 PM edit delete reply
I think Norgarth has the right of it here. Discord's not trying to be a manipulative jerk, or manipulate flutters. I think, based on his comment last page that was basically 'Oh yes, drop the 'character', of course... ummm... bye!' and this page which is basically 'yep, totally fine, don't worry, bye!' he's in a situation where he's been confronted directly with the fact that his personality isn't 'adorably insufferable genius' it's 'annoying insufferable genius.'.

in my experience, that kind of thing can be a huge blow to your pride, and when you don't want to show you've been injured and you're proud you retreat as quickly as you can.

I could be projecting, and it doesn't excuse his more jerkish moves in the arc, but I don't think this is meant to be one.
Cygnia 26th Jan 2019, 9:12 AM edit delete reply
Yep. Hackles are still up. He's still manipulating and game-playing -- and this time it's outside the table.
Kereminde 26th Jan 2019, 9:52 AM edit delete reply
Well as I said, the basis of communication is manipulation. If he was ever going to be polite to Fluttershy's player in this case, it was going to be manipulation and playing a game.

The "game" in this case being socially appropriate behavior of telling someone apologizing not to worry about it.
Guest 26th Jan 2019, 10:18 AM edit delete reply
Skin-deep, it appears to be socially appropriate behavior. But given the implied tone and Fluttershy's reaction, it appears DisccordDM is not sincere about it, which makes it rather less socially appropriate.
Kereminde 26th Jan 2019, 10:21 AM edit delete reply
So, should he not have made that approach? That seems to put him in a "lose/lose" situation. Either way, he's a bad person.
Newbiespud 26th Jan 2019, 10:36 AM edit delete reply
Newbiespud
Can we please get off this horse of "all manipulation is evil"? That's not anyone's actual, realistic position. We've somehow both muddied the waters and oversimplified things.

It's a compelling strawman, though, I'll give you that.
Kereminde 27th Jan 2019, 1:23 AM edit delete reply
@Newbiespud:

I'll leave it alone once people stop using "manipulative" as a pejorative in regards to this particular individual. Or in general. The main play group has had more than a few times of being manipulative, from the GM (Zecora arc) to players. Saddling this entirely on DiscordDM doesn't feel right, and making it about them being manipulative as the root and greatest piece of evidence . . . comes off as an excuse to grab onto.

From reading this, the worst thing which is in this whole arc thus far is the main GM miscalculating and the "guest" having a personality issue with Fluttershy's player. Everything else was minor and when hung off those two poles caused the breakdowns which tore the game a bit off aside.

But then, that wouldn't be compelling drama if things went well.

@Guest

Sincerity can be faked, apologies may be made in the entirely normal fashion without being sincere while seeming so, and it's my unfortunate conclusion nobody would believe it sincere in any case.

There was nothing he could have done, which wouldn't come off as manipulative, if Fluttershy's player was convinced he was being so. Hence . . . the response was exactly as it should have been. "Don't sweat it."

Honestly, the only fair play is to do exactly as they did - call it a night, leave, and only come back for the finale. And decline to do so ever again.
Mr Wednesday 27th Jan 2019, 3:02 AM edit delete reply
@Kereminde, it’s a stance you assumed to make any argument about DiscorDM being manipulative untenable. I believe the term is reductio ad absurdum. You latched onto the semantics of manipulation as an integral part of human interaction to separate the term from the more-commonly referred to negative practice.

For what it’s worth, I’m fine with not calling his actions manipulative. If you don’t like the use of the term, I’m just as happy to call DiscorDM arrogant, hubristic, obnoxious, or egotistical. As for his behavior, we can call it unpleasant, belligerent, or abusive.

Somehow though I’ve the feeling that wouldn’t be what you wanted.
Guest 27th Jan 2019, 5:07 AM edit delete reply
So your argument is "Fluttershy went in expecting to be me with insincerity and DiscordDM couldn't havd done anything to convince her otherwise so DiscordDM did the right thing by brushing her concern off".

Sorry, but that doesn't hold water. Unless you want to argue that Fluttershy didn't actually want to apologize to the guest DM she perceived as being upset. Nothing indicates that Fluttershy is the kind of person who would try to apologize if she didn't mean it and wanted to make DiscordDM less upset.

As for the whole "I'll stop when people stop using 'manipulative' as a negatively-conoted qualifier for Discord", it doesn't hold water either. Yes, we know, everyone is manipulative by the objective definition. But as you and everyone else already know, when people say "manipulative" with a negative connotation, they mean "harmfully manipulative". So please, let's not pretend that people have been using the objective definition incorrectly when it's obvious to everyone what is meant.

Also concerning the fact others have been (harmfully) manipulative, in this comic, you'll note that they generally get called out for being (harmfully) manipulative, like MainDM was for the Zecora situation you used as example.
Kereminde 27th Jan 2019, 11:22 AM edit delete reply
@Guest:
"So your argument is"

No, not really, but if you like you can call it such.

"But as you and everyone else already know, when people say "manipulative" with a negative connotation, they mean "harmfully manipulative"."

Quite. But is it harmfully manipulative? Or is it simply manipulative on the other level? Again, multiple people (inside of tabletop games and not) do things which could be considered "harmfully manipulative" when at the tabletop game. There are whole slices of games built on manipulation of the other players or the GM, including role-playing games.

And while people have been called out, they've primarily been forgiven - a component which has not been extended in this case beyond Fluttershy's player. The response, which is what I'd hear from a great many people in response - was seized on as being manipulative.

So, I would like to ask you what sort of response you would consider . . . sincere. Guaranteed, any response would have been seen as similarly maliciously manipulative by the audience, possibly by Fluttershy's player.

Since we can't see in their heads, we can't know for sure if these people believe what they say. Similarly, we can't tell if DiscordDM's intent here is - in fact - malicious, or "all in the interests of a good game".

For the record, that's what I think is in his head on this score: he wants it to be a suitably epic moment for them, and approached it with the understanding it's a one-time-thing. So show up, be mustache-twirling, get the players galvanized against you, congratulate them at the end and move on.

It ticks all the behaviors we've seen, without being actively seeking to do harm. The only difference in this case is DiscordDM is a person, not a caricature.
Balrighty 27th Jan 2019, 12:04 PM edit delete reply
"Is it 'harmfully manipulative'?" Just ask the other people at the table. Was Applejack's not taking the easy out to drop the curse harmful? Yes, and she apologized for it. Was Rarity's obsession with staying in-character? Fluttershy thinking she had to dive deep into "meanness" to convey "lack of a filter"? Pinkie doubling down on the turned-out-to-not-be-funny role in hopes of going around the bend into funny again? Twilight focusing on progressing the game and dismissing the other players (no matter how much their lack of contribution may have warranted being dismissed)? MainDM pursuing this whole scenario and pushing forward time and again after the players (and even he himself) were becoming increasingly uncomfortable with the whole mess?

All acknowledged as "harmful" and all apologized for. That DiscordDM's "harmfulness" was conveyed via being manipulative (that is, "harmfully manipulative" which I'm going to abbreviate as "manipulative") is immaterial. He drove wedges into the group and targeted their IRL relationships. It doesn't matter that he was asked to do these things by MainDM, nor the social machinery by which he accomplished it. The fact is he did these things. He tuned his empathy to close-to-zero when he didn't have to.

And maybe this all means that, way back before the session even started, DiscordDM should have just told MainDM "I can easily do what you're asking of me, and I'm even willing to, but it crosses a line which shouldn't be crossed" or even better "I can do these things, but I won't. Those are lines that shouldn't be crossed. If you still want a ruthless villian in your campaign, we can try to accomplish that, but it can't come from this direction." But he didn't.

"What apology could he possibly give that wouldn't be taken as yet-more-manipulativeness?" Wrong question. Once trust has been broken like this, it takes a long time to rebuild it again, if ever. That's... why one doesn't cross that line. The more appropriate question would be "What apology should he be giving, never mind whether it's ever accepted as genuine?" Easy. An acknowledgement of what he did. That he was A) manipulative from the beginning and B) (the more important part by far) that this was harmful and a line he shouldn't have crossed. Rebuilding the relationship after that point may not come or even be possible. That doesn't mean "Don't bother apologizing".
Kereminde 27th Jan 2019, 12:50 PM edit delete reply
@Balrighty:

"Wrong question. Once trust has been broken like this, it takes a long time to rebuild it again, if ever. "

I'm not talking about Fluttershy's player, on that one. I'm talking about the audience, who has also seen fit to give a pass to (or "forgive") the regular group for their behavior.

Sure this whole situation could have been avoided by DiscordDM saying "no". Strangely enough, the worst of this whole arc also could have been avoided by anyone at the table not playing into it in the same fashion.

But they didn't. They talked it out, and from appearances they explicitly did not involve the other person involved by design. Only the main GM did, and not in the same fashion of trying to talk it out. How can one rebuild trust with someone who is being held apart?

There is no apology being sought out, no discussion being put forth, with DiscordDM about how people felt about this, until he was already leaving. Leaving when it was clear he wasn't going to click, I might add.

So, he's given the table what they asked for, and not treated them abusively after the discussion. There's been an undercurrent of sarcasm, and levity, running through his whole time - he's letting off a vibe of not taking it too seriously, it is just a game and something to shake off after the fact.

When he's manipulating, it's explicitly intended to be for the game and not to hurt the people involved. As it became clear it was not working, he removed himself, in apparently good sportsmanship. Most of his behavior has been spot-on for someone being a malicious manipulator attempting to break people.

. . . or a guest GM who holds the view "what happens at the table is what happens at the table". Given some of the stories told about some particular games (Munchkin, Monopoly, Poker . . . Diplomacy), it's not problematic to consider it an attitude to hold tightly to avoid keeping grudges.

(There are about five people who were at one of my FLGS places who adamantly refused to ever play Catan again after "that game". Having seen other games they played together, it's . . . apparent the reason was some form of deception which was within the rules, but allowed one to win at other players' expense. The reaction of "that's terrible" versus "isn't that part of the game" is where I sit. On a bench with a milkshake, and the conviction I should definitely and absolutely not take part in games at all.)
Balrighty 27th Jan 2019, 1:12 PM edit delete reply
You're referring to the break they took to hash things out? The one that started with just MainDM and Twilight, and then had the rest join in unbidden (that is to say, their own consciences told them "Hey, this needs some real-world apologies; go in there and give them")?

What was stopping DiscordDM from going in there, as well? What kept him from turning his empathy back to normal (unless there really is very little difference between the Discord persona and DiscordDM himself, as the recent pages suggest), recognizing that what had occurred extended beyond just a single game session and therefore required apologies from him as well? I can see DiscordDM holding himself apart, but I don't see this being the doing of the rest of the table.

Then the game resumes, and DiscordDM goes back to business as usual (albeit, recognizing his personal contribution as having concluded), no apologies given. He didn't have to just go along with the table starting up the game again; he could have said "Hey guys, before we start, I have to apologize also, etc," beforehand, but he didn't. So who held him apart from anything besides his own unwillingness (though granted, this may be the sort of thing that just doesn't naturally click for him)?

And again, you're talking about whether his manipulations are intended for the good of the game. And again, that's irrelevant. Intended for the sake of just the game or not, they crossed lines beyond the game that they shouldn't have. Intended to not be harmful though they may have been, they nevertheless were.
Kereminde 27th Jan 2019, 1:45 PM edit delete reply
"I can see DiscordDM holding himself apart, but I don't see this being the doing of the rest of the table."

It's exactly that, though. They were making it clear by their little private meeting where they slowly filtered in, and nobody mentioned it to him . . . he was not wanted.

Tell me something, assuming he'd gone in there, and said "yeah I know that came off badly, I'm sorry about this turning out this way..." and delivered something to address them.

Would that not be exactly the sort of manipulation people were ascribing to him when they were throwing around "gaslighting"? And the sort of thing many people here would just use as an example of him continuing to manipulate the game for his own amusement?

This isn't about the comic, this is about here and what people are willing to read into this. You tell me you believe people wouldn't flag it as more manipulation.

"And again, you're talking about whether his manipulations are intended for the good of the game. And again, that's irrelevant."

It's not irrelevant if we're taking about a person's character, about what type of person they are. Is someone a terrible person because they adopt a persona of such for a purpose? Is that suddenly a view into "the real person"? That's where the heart of this issue is, for me - whether or not someone can reasonably say "this person is a terrible human being" for playing a role.

Of course, I fully expect the script to prove me wrong and make DiscordDM a terrible person by the end of this. That's the direction the wind is blowing, after all.
Balrighty 27th Jan 2019, 2:44 PM edit delete reply
What manner of IRL location do you believe this game to be taking place in that he cannot find where everyone else went to? I mean, we know this isn't taking place online where everyone else's apology powwow was in a private chatroom or somesuch (thanks to Tom). And even then, this eventually goes back to the game table anyway. Even in the inconceivable scenario where he could not find them at their secret apology lair, he could have found them at the game table and apologized there.

"What kind of apology could he give that would convince we the audience that he wasn't gaslighting even then?" More than what we got, which was a not-really apology to Fluttershy during the pizza break (though to be fair, I don't think her apology then was sincere either, but more saying whatever needed to be said to end the conversation as quickly as possible), no apology whatsoever during either the apology powwow that he's somehow incapable of finding or the resumed game that he definitely could find, and no apology after Fluttershy's second (I think for real this time) apology.

What is the magic number for "sufficient apology to guarantee acceptance by the audience"? No idea, other than to say that it is surely some positive amount higher than the nothing we got.

And the wind isn't blowing towards DiscordDM being a terrible person. He is as Spud had always written him and as was shown over a hundred pages ago. I can get not having all the information and not knowing what the outcome is supposed to be. But at this point, this is an episode of Wheel of Fortune where the puzzle has already been solved and a player is still arguing against Pat Sajak.
Kereminde 27th Jan 2019, 3:06 PM edit delete reply
"What manner of IRL location do you believe this game to be taking place in that he cannot find where everyone else went to?"

Ah . . . someone else's house, where they weren't invited into the room and by nonverbal appearance was explicitly not welcome?

I suspect even DiscordDM can tell when they're being left out, which is a problem since you apparently expected him to force themself into the room . . . an act which would definitely get them tagged as malicious, not to mention triggering a conversation about forcing themself on the main cast.

Is it any wonder what happened was a non-apology? Everyone else other than the GM in this pretty much made it clear they don't want DiscordDM present. If anything the solution should be for the next page to be a phone call where DiscordDM just goes "I'm out".

"And the wind isn't blowing towards DiscordDM being a terrible person."

No? Funny, that seems to be the taste many people are getting out of this. Or like a durian, smelling exceptionally offensive to the point where nobody wants it around.

And so that's where this is going to go. Maybe there'll be some slight variation, but it's already been implied there will not be "redemption" for DiscordDM.

That's where the conclusion is already made, and that's where the wind is going to take this.

"But at this point, this is an episode of Wheel of Fortune where the puzzle has already been solved and a player is still arguing against Pat Sajak."

No, if anything it's more like them having it just barely tick over to "Bankrupt", and spending the rest of the rounds peering very closely at the wheel and watching its spin.
Balrighty 27th Jan 2019, 4:53 PM edit delete reply
Had he knocked on the door, asked to come in so he could say his piece, only to be rebuffed then and there, then I could see an argument for DiscordDM arriving at the conclusion that no apology would ever be accepted and therefore he shouldn't bother to try. But I don't see the group being that unforgiving, either for real or just in DiscordDM's eyes, while still being willing to continue gaming with him (as opposed to MainDM saying "Alright folks, for the rest of the night, I will be playing the part of Discord so we can wrap this up"). Ergo, he could have tried to apologize at the powwow and his not bothering to is on him.

And again, even if his reading of the powwow room leads him to the twin conclusions that A) he is so unwelcome that he can't even try to apologize, yet B) they're perfectly willing to still game with him (at least to wrap up today), that still leaves the resumption of the game itself. He is clearly there, in the game room with everyone else. He is clearly not in the process of being booted out the door as they speak. So he clearly has that opportunity, if never at any other point, to say "Hey, before we start, I also need to say something". And he didn't.

And no, the wind isn't blowing towards DiscordDM being terrible. They're pointing as they were always meant to, towards him being someone who did harm, should have apologized for it, and didn't. So here, at least, intentions do matter. DiscordDM can be a person who is not a terrible person, merely a very poor fit for this group or someone who needed a far more gradual introduction, while still having done wrong that he needs to apologize for. The two are not mutually contradictory.

And you're really telling me that there aren't readers under the impression that Spud originally wrote DiscordDM one way who are now crying foul or claiming that he's rewriting the script just to accomodate a segment of the audience who insist on seeing him a different way? Because I'm seeing exactly that. In your own comments even.

"No? Funny, that seems to be the taste many people are getting out of this. Or like a durian, smelling exceptionally offensive to the point where nobody wants it around.

And so that's where this is going to go." No, it's not GOING to go anywhere, at least nowhere it wasn't already going to go from day one, had there never been a comments-flame-war to begin with. This isn't just watching a wheel that ticked over to Bankrupt, this is telling Pat he changed the puzzle halfway through.
Guest 26th Jan 2019, 5:29 PM edit delete reply
Your words, not mine.

What he should have done, if his intention was to do what fits the "socially acceptable behavior", would have been to be sincere. Or arguably to appear to be sincere, if you want to be cynical and go with the position that communication is based on seeming more than being.

Regardless, when someone tries to apologize, there is a realm of difference between "accepting the apology but thinking there is no reason for it" and "brushing off the apology to downplay how upset you are". Based on context clue, it seems Fluttershy think DiscordDM is doing the second.
SweetKaiser 26th Jan 2019, 10:15 AM edit delete reply
SweetKaiser
So wait, if there's still a whole multi-session arc before he comes back, how many more unicorn twilight screencaps are left to be used?
Guest 26th Jan 2019, 10:20 AM edit delete reply
About two season worth
SweetKaiser 27th Jan 2019, 10:15 PM edit delete reply
SweetKaiser
I mean, the math seems simple, but season 3 was a half season and 2&3 was when they started to pull back from having Twilight star in every episode. So, uh, who knows XD
Tempestfury 26th Jan 2019, 11:21 AM edit delete reply
Yeah... even a Discord fan, this last page leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
obscurereader 26th Jan 2019, 1:54 PM edit delete reply
DiscordDM is hard to get a read on for me, even when the game's supposed to be over. All I can say right now is: Oof. This feels bad, man.

Credit to Fluttershy, though - she apologized and was nice to DiscordDM OoC even when both actions were arguably unnecessary (and then DiscordDM kinda brushed it off. Not sure if it was a mean-spirited thing or a, "No biggie, we cool," type of deal for DiscordDM, or something else/something in-between - again, I can't get a good read on DiscordDM through the text). Still, empathy win for Fluttershy!
Mr Wednesday 26th Jan 2019, 6:34 PM edit delete reply
Yes indeed, obscurereader!

Credit to DiscorDM, even though I find it hard to trust what he says, I don’t think he’s got any bad motives here. I think this is a genuine response.
Mr. Guy 26th Jan 2019, 6:02 PM edit delete reply
Honestly I get why some people might think Discord is being manipulative or trying to get out quickly, but this would be similar to my reaction. I'm socially conscious enough not to brush her off quite like he did, but I quickly get over most anger I feel at a person, even if fully justified, and feel like their apologies can be unnecessary.
GrayGriffin 27th Jan 2019, 5:35 AM edit delete reply
GrayGriffin
The question is, is he actually over it? I can see this as him just trying to hide it/brush it off.
GrayGriffin 26th Jan 2019, 6:12 PM edit delete reply
GrayGriffin
Actually, looking at this page again, I get the feeling Fluttershy might have wanted to discuss both her and DiscorDM's behavior in more detail and is annoyed that he interrupted her before she could get to talking about his behavior.
obscurereader 26th Jan 2019, 8:54 PM edit delete reply
Plausible. The ambiguity of this situation is... hard to deal with.
Annd 27th Jan 2019, 11:02 AM edit delete reply
Awww, hate to see him go, as in the cartoon, he's always my favorite. So long you magnificent bastard :D
Aeshdan 27th Jan 2019, 1:13 PM edit delete reply
Hmm... I seem to be reading this a little differently than most of the others. I suspect that DiscordDM is used to playing at a table with a very strong IC/OOC divide, so he's basically saying "What happens in the game stays in the game. What you said about my character has nothing to do with me, so there's nothing to apologize about. Toodles!"
Kereminde 27th Jan 2019, 1:50 PM edit delete reply
Add to that a dash of being an old-school GM where the GM is intended to provide the challenges for the people at the table - with little division between "player" and "character". Older editions of tabletop games encourage it, by inference.
Mr Wednesday 27th Jan 2019, 5:06 PM edit delete reply
Yeah, that isn’t the final word on it, or the only philosophy of GMing.
HappyEevee 27th Jan 2019, 3:33 PM edit delete reply
Sorry this arc has been so stressful for you, Spud. I've enjoyed it a lot. I think you've done a great job with the complex social and emotional interactions of a tabletop game and I applaud your decisions to write the story/characters as you intend them and not let your comic be derailed by reader arguments. I don't mind a story I sometimes disagree with so long as it stays true to itself, and you've kept yours very internally consistent. :)
Balrighty 27th Jan 2019, 4:53 PM edit delete reply
Agreed, and I wish more readers had faith in that.
█████ 28th Jan 2019, 2:45 AM edit delete reply
Just commenting to say that I don't comment and this furore has just kinda passed by me.

Interesting story arc, looking forward to whatever's next.
Lunasmidnight 28th Jan 2019, 4:19 AM edit delete reply
Guys, I think some of you need to remember that this is just a slice of life comic about a D&D group, about people we know next to nothing about. We know more about their CHARACTERS than themselves. Just tiny snippets here and there. I think it's time everyone took their chill pills about any of them being terrible people, because you know NOTHING about what kind of people they actually are. People are FAR more complex than what little we've been shown, and by all means, feel free to disagree, but I'll be calling you a liar in my mind. ;p
belmontzar 28th Jan 2019, 10:02 AM edit delete reply
DiscorDm on hind sight reminds me alot of my dad actually. He and his story plot lines are raather wide and vast seeming, but at the same time, when you have the big picture, pretty calm and condensed. The goal is usually growth and test of character over just mindless battle. "Yes you can swing a sword, but WHY are you swinging that sword?"

I know it can hurt alot of peoples heads, but at the same time in humanises the protagonists, giving rise to character growth, change and evolution as the story progresses. Yeah your part of a merry band.. but why are you there? What brought you to that point... what is really stopping you from stabbing that bloody thief? Alignment only goes so far to determine who a character truely IS.