Giant in the Playground Forums - Powered by vBulletin
.
  1. If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You will have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Page 38 of 38 FirstFirst Previous ... 132829303132333435363738
Results 1,111 to 1,122 of 1122
  1. Yesterday, 03:51 PM (ISO 8601) - Top - End - #1111
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date:
    May 2015

    Default Re: OOTS #983 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Falbrogna View Post
    Wha? But I must have said it twenty times now that... ....know what? whatever.
    Glad we got that out of the way.

    The problem with the line is not that it promotes different sexual orientations but that it does so in a in-your-face teachingly kind of way (at least to some readers) so it feels awkward and detracts from the comic.
    That's the one and main thing that's being addressed here, the one and main problem, the delivery. The subject doesn't matter. Could be anything.

    This is in response to Pixie too.
    I'm sorry, but I still don't understand. If the delivery of a political message being forced elicits a stronger reaction than the botched delivery of Durkon's change of deity, how can that be separated from a judgment of what that message is? I should also, at this point, note that we're talking the about the effect of less than a full sentence, in comparison to problems that affect multiple panels.

    Certainly, I can think of many things I've read where the inclusion of a political element harmed my enjoyment of the product - but it was always a case where I disagreed with the politics in question. If something I agreed with fell flat, I just rolled my eyes and continued reading, same as with a joke that was stretched too thin.

    Quote Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
    Yeah, exactly. We're ranking it slightly differently on the continuum from "feels totally natural" to "feels totally forced".
    You indicated elsewhere that you were a native speaker of French, if I'm not mistaken? Perhaps that is part of what causes us to read this line in a different manner... If memory serves correctly, doesn't French have a much greater emphasis on gender?

    The line in question to me doesn't flow much differently if she were to say "lass or whatever", "lass or lion", or "lass or laddie", so I find it to be a very natural construction from a mechanical perspective. From a cultural perspective, it flows pretty naturally to me if we assume a greater acknowledgment of gay and lesbian relationships than most media, which seems to me to fit very naturally into how I generally assume Dwarven societies operate.

    I do think "person" would fit better than using three words to accomplish the same purpose, but, well... They're dwarves. They've always spoken differently from how I would speak, so that's not really something worth noting.
    .
  2. Yesterday, 04:02 PM (ISO 8601) - Top - End - #1112
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    RedKnightGirl
    Join Date:
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: OOTS #983 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by PlaygroundPixie View Post
    I'm sorry, but I still don't understand. If the delivery of a political message being forced elicits a stronger reaction than the botched delivery of Durkon's change of deity, how can that be separated from a judgment of what that message is? I should also, at this point, note that we're talking the about the effect of less than a full sentence, in comparison to problems that affect multiple panels.
    Because Durkon's change of deity didn't pretend to teach anything.
    .
  3. Yesterday, 04:08 PM (ISO 8601) - Top - End - #1113
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy
    Join Date:
    May 2015
    Location:
    Germany
    Gender:
    Male

    Default Re: OOTS #983 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Falbrogna View Post
    Because Durkon's change of deity didn't pretend to teach anything.
    „Don’t trust vampires. They are not the same person anymore.”
    .
  4. Yesterday, 04:11 PM (ISO 8601) - Top - End - #1114
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date:
    May 2015

    Default Re: OOTS #983 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Falbrogna View Post
    Because Durkon's change of deity didn't pretend to teach anything.
    But it did - it taught us an important plot point. I'll assume that "teaching us about the plot" doesn't count, then. How about the following three things:

    - What about a questionable comic revolving around games Dwarves play for fun?

    - What about a questionable comic that included a lesson on etymology?

    - What about a questionable comic reminding people ought to vote?
    .
  5. Yesterday, 04:32 PM (ISO 8601) - Top - End - #1115
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date:
    May 2009

    Default Re: OOTS #983 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by PlaygroundPixie View Post
    - What about a questionable comic revolving around games Dwarves play for fun?
    - What about a questionable comic that included a lesson on etymology?
    - What about a questionable comic reminding people ought to vote?
    What was questionable about them to you?
    Last edited by dancrilis; Yesterday at 04:33 PM.
    .
  6. Yesterday, 04:34 PM (ISO 8601) - Top - End - #1116
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Jasdoif's Avatar
    Join Date:
    Mar 2007
    Location:
    Oregon, USA

    Default Re: OOTS #983 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by PlaygroundPixie View Post
    I'm not entirely clear on whether it's just an argument To Prove A Point, based on the original phrasing, or if it's just an argument for the heck of it because the other topics have been repeated ad nauseum. But no, I'm pretty sure he's not really arguing in defense of Evil.
    If I remember the chain of posts correctly....The point being made is that a Good neighbor is not necessarily a better neighbor than an Evil neighbor simply by virtue of alignment, so declaring all Good neighbors better all than Evil neighbors is unduly biased, so declaring a Good creature inherently better than an Evil creature is unduly biased, so condemning a creature solely on its alignment is unjust, so declaring a Good vampire better than an Evil vampire solely on alignment is unjust, so declaring a Good vampire in a formerly-Evil host to have a greater right to exist than an Evil vampire in a formerly-Good host solely on the alignments of all involved is unjust.

    Quite a chain, I admit.

    Quote Originally Posted by M84 View Post
    Yeah, sorry about that. That got really out of hand. Last time I post anything while drunk.
    But that could be the most interesting-to-observe exchange in this thread so far! It's in the running, at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by happycrow View Post
    ::looks at the empty popcorn bowl::
    Sorry, Mother's Day has taken up a bunch of my time. Here you go, topped with gouda and bacon salt.

    Quote Originally Posted by asorel View Post
    I don't mind seeing political opinions in stories, as long as I'm sure I'm hearing the voice of the character and not the author.
    I'm curious, because this answer varies wildly from person to person: How do you, personally, decide if you're hearing the character or the author?

    Quote Originally Posted by Keltest View Post
    Now can we please talk about something more interesting? Like speculation on that mechanical gnome leg? I would love to speculate on the gnome leg.
    I still think the idea that don't have anyone high enough level to cast regenerate, but have a Staff of Life with which to cast resurrection, is on the table.
    Feytouched Banana eldritch disciple avatar by...me!

    The Index of the Giant's Comments IV - A Rich Source of Quotassium
    .
  7. Yesterday, 04:37 PM (ISO 8601) - Top - End - #1117
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date:
    May 2009

    Default Re: OOTS #983 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasdoif View Post
    If I remember the chain of posts correctly....The point being made is that a Good neighbor is not necessarily a better neighbor than an Evil neighbor simply by virtue of alignment, so declaring all Good neighbors better all than Evil neighbors is unduly biased, so declaring a Good creature inherently better than an Evil creature is unduly biased, so condemning a creature solely on its alignment is unjust, so declaring a Good vampire better than an Evil vampire solely on alignment is unjust, so declaring a Good vampire in a formerly-Evil host to have a greater right to exist than an Evil vampire in a formerly-Good host solely on the alignments of all involved is unjust.
    Extremely well summed up - kudos.
    .
  8. Yesterday, 04:40 PM (ISO 8601) - Top - End - #1118
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lissou's Avatar
    Join Date:
    Jul 2007
    Location:
    California

    Default Re: OOTS #983 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
    It's a bit like being right-handed or left-handed. It's not an immediately visible characteristic of someone, unlike gender or race. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the latter, but if in the comic, every time there's a pair of scissors shown, it just happens to be a right-handed model, will you start a crusade to get the author to diversify that? Or will you just accept that it's simply the "default" and that there's no negativity towards what's not "default" implied in there?
    I think it heavily depends on the context (culture-wise). I think that, certainly, if there had never been any intolerance towards gay people in the first place, just saying "someone" would have been fine (and I feel that eventually, after the stage of actively accepting several options has been established, we'll evolve towards that too). To be clear, if the Giant has used the word "someone", I wouldn't have complained about it. I just don't think it's better than the current version.
    So I think in a society were left-handed people weren't allowed to write and were sent to prison (or had been, until recently) for being left handed, then yes, inclusion of them would be very important. Still, I have indeed tried to include left-handed people in my various work, even though they are not a hot subject because, as you say, they exist.

    Quote Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
    Saying that you hope your kid will find a nice person of the opposite sex to settle with is still the one most valid guess of a possible outcome, by far. It definitely should not imply that it's not okay to deviate from that.
    It should not, but I believe at this point in our society and culture, it does. With gay people still being actively rejected by a large portion of the population, and bi people being erased to the point it's not uncommon for people to doubt their existence, a kid who hears this sentence and isn't straight is not likely to assume their parent will accept them as they are. I think the risk of accidentally telling your kid you won't accept them warrants saying something that, to a straight kid, is merely unnecessary at worst, and still good to know at best: that you'd love them just as much if they weren't straight.
    Coming out is already hard enough as it is. Anything that can make it easier, if necessary, is a good thing in my opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
    You think that the classic storytale ending line in our native language will ever sound natural when it gets updated to something like "et ils vécurent heureux et eurent beaucoup d'enfants, ou en adoptèrent beaucoup, ou n'en eurent pas mais vécurent heureux quand même" ? I don't think we'll ever get used to that. "We" generally speaking here.
    To people that don't speak French, let me explain this: the French version of "and they lived happily ever after" is "and they lived happily and had many children". Lio45 is asking if I think it should instead be "And they lived happily and had many children, or adopted them, or had none but were happy anyways".

    First, I've always thought this last sentence was stupid. I preferred the subverted "and they lived happily despite having many children", just because it made fun of the established one (but I would dislike it if it were standard, too). I much prefer the English version, "and they lived happily ever after". Why does the French version include children at all? Why imply that it's what should happen in every happy ending? I think it would be improved by your changes, quite honestly. Although I don't see why you'd specify adoption as it's already included in "having children". It never specified they were genetic children. So that part kind of sounds to me like telling a little boy "I hope you meet someone. Or a boy." Not need to include something that was already included a second time.

    Still, this is kind of a different situation, though, isn't it? You don't write a story by saying "they did this. Or not." You say what did. Diversity occurs by having different people do different things or acknowledging that they have options. A story that ended with "And then he married a woman. Or a man. Or he didn't marry at all" would be unsatisfying because the author should know what actually happened to the main character.
    So I think the fairy tale ending should depend on the situation, and vary. Sometimes they'll have children (one, a few, many), sometimes they won't. making it a compulsory part of the ending line is definitely something I've always hated about fairy tales in French.

    Using an example closer to the strip, if a parent told their kids "I hope you have many children", well, I would think it reflected poorly on them if they didn't include something like "if you want them" or something. I do think parents should acknowledge their kids may not want children, and not pressure them to have any, let alone many of them.
    Check out my webcomic, The Meddlers!
    .
  9. Yesterday, 04:41 PM (ISO 8601) - Top - End - #1119
    Orc in the Playground
     
    asorel's Avatar
    Join Date:
    Nov 2014
    Location:
    Michigan
    Gender:
    Male

    Default Re: OOTS #983 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasdoif View Post

    I'm curious, because this answer varies wildly from person to person: How do you, personally, decide if you're hearing the character or the author?
    In this particular instance, I happen to possess knowledge that the author has said that he fully intends to include this sort of content out of personal desire, and that this is given priority over story quality (As far as I know, at least. It's been a while since I have seen the quote in question). In other cases, it depends on the character speaking. If, given the knowledge of the character's previous experiences and personality, I can see them having such an opinion with minimal contrivance, I'm fine with it. This doesn't quite apply here, because the character was introduced relatively recently, and has had somewhat sporadic appearance on-panel since then.
    Forum Avatar courtesy of Chd
    I am: Absolute Neutral: -2 Chaos, -5 Evil, and +22 Balance!\


    Quote Originally Posted by Slipperychicken View Post
    There are laser guns in the DMG, brain-eating green aliens in the MM, and the PHB has a whole character archetype built around making a deal with Cthulhu to get magic lasers.

    I don't think lightsabers are much of a stretch here.
    .
  10. Yesterday, 04:47 PM (ISO 8601) - Top - End - #1120
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kish's Avatar
    Join Date:
    Nov 2004

    Default Re: OOTS #983 - The Discussion Thread

    I doubt Rich was under the impression that putting that line in the comic would educate anyone who disagreed with the politics in it. Though "educate people who think I'm going to resume writing the meaningless humor comic they never noticed I stopped writing a very long time ago that they cannot have that wish" may well be on Rich's list of reasons for writing it.
    Spoiler
    Show
    "You are what you do. Choose again, and change." --Miles Vorkosigan

    "The really unforgivable acts are committed by calm men in beautiful green silk rooms, who deal death wholesale, by the shipload, without lust, or anger, or desire, or any redeeming emotion to excuse them but cold fear of some pretended future. But the crimes they hope to prevent in the future are imaginary. The ones they commit in the present--they are real." --Aral Vorkosigan

    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    This, in a nutshell.
    Yes, exactly.
    .
  11. Yesterday, 04:49 PM (ISO 8601) - Top - End - #1121
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date:
    May 2015

    Default Re: OOTS #983 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by dancrilis View Post
    What was questionable about them to you?
    They felt a bit unnatural in such a way as to draw undue attention to the element cited.

    Please note that these are hypothetical strips created for the purpose of exploring this discussion, not strips currently in The Order of the Stick.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasdoif View Post
    If I remember the chain of posts correctly....The point being made is that a Good neighbor is not necessarily a better neighbor than an Evil neighbor simply by virtue of alignment, so declaring all Good neighbors better all than Evil neighbors is unduly biased, so declaring a Good creature inherently better than an Evil creature is unduly biased, so condemning a creature solely on its alignment is unjust, so declaring a Good vampire better than an Evil vampire solely on alignment is unjust, so declaring a Good vampire in a formerly-Evil host to have a greater right to exist than an Evil vampire in a formerly-Good host solely on the alignments of all involved is unjust.

    Quite a chain, I admit.
    Eh, I'm basing that statement on the following two quotes from the first reply:

    That sounds awfully bigoted - sure the person has done no wrong and has no control over who they are but wipe them all out anyway regardless of their behaviour because their very existence is offensive to me.
    This is very alignmentist of you - you are dehumanising Evil people and discounting their suffering as less than that of a good persons and their very right to exist as lower.
    Questionable elements highlighted, that I feel were characteristic of an attempt to imitate an overly PC person.

    That said, I don't particularly care what the actual explanation is - however you interpret the chain of events, nobody was arguing that people should be Evil.
    .
  12. Yesterday, 05:09 PM (ISO 8601) - Top - End - #1122
    Giant in the Playground Administrator
     
    The Giant's Avatar
    Join Date:
    Aug 2003
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    Gender:
    Male

    Default Re: OOTS #983 - The Discussion Thread

    You have got to be kidding me. This is what you're arguing about? Again??

    The more often people tell me that the inclusion of something they disagree with is "awkward," the more I am inclined to include it again in the future only much more blatantly. You don't like me teaching you? Then stop showing up to my class.

    You can all sit and wait for the next comic without a Discussion Thread.
    Rich Burlew
    .

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
.
.
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:29 AM.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2015 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved. Digital Point modules: Sphinx-based search
Usage of this site, including but not limited to making or editing a post or private message or the creation of an account, constitutes acceptance of the Forum Rules.
0%
 
10%
 
20%
 
30%
 
40%
 
50%
 
60%
 
70%
 
80%
 
90%
 
100%