• Announcements

    • Robin

      Welcome!   03/05/2016

      Welcome, everyone, to the new 910CMX Community Forums. I'm still working on getting them running, so things may change.  If you're a 910 Comic creator and need your forum recreated, let me know and I'll get on it right away.  I'll do my best to make this new place as fun as the last one!
Sign in to follow this  
Scotty

Story, Monday December 4, 2017

Recommended Posts

Here's something to think about: Has Pandora talked to Helen and Demetrius? Her current incarnation is at least a hundred times older than theirs, and I think that makes it fairly likely she can find them if she ever bothers to look for them.

If Pandora has talked to them, perhaps she has persuaded them to allow Magus to regain a body all his own. But once that's accomplished...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tom Sewell said:

Here's something to think about: Has Pandora talked to Helen and Demetrius? Her current incarnation is at least a hundred times older than theirs, and I think that makes it fairly likely she can find them if she ever bothers to look for them.

On one hand, that's a big if. On other, she MAY be looking for other immortals based on what she heard about Voltaire in mall. In such case, she would mainly consider them sources of information about Voltaire.

2 hours ago, Tom Sewell said:

If Pandora has talked to them, perhaps she has persuaded them to allow Magus to regain a body all his own. But once that's accomplished...

That would require Pandora to KNOW they were sabotaging Magus attempts - oh wait. That's quite likely, isn't it? First, she likely knew when she was advising him, second, he certainly complained ...

... yes he totally complained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ProfessorTomoe said:

Which he did not do, thanks to outside interference.

A detail that really doesn't point against his fighting skills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ProfessorTomoe said:

'Struth.

Melisa's total confidence in Noah definitely suggests he's good at what he does.  At least "good" according to Melissa's experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Vorlonagent said:

Melisa's total confidence in Noah definitely suggests he's good at what he does.  At least "good" according to Melissa's experience.

You know, I wonder if Adrian knows that Melissa knows, though we're not entirely sure how much Melissa knows. She at least knows that Noah can use magic, but it's unclear if she knows about his heritage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Scotty said:

You know, I wonder if Adrian knows that Melissa knows, though we're not entirely sure how much Melissa knows. She at least knows that Noah can use magic, but it's unclear if she knows about his heritage.

That may be the one thing she doesn't know.  She probably knows that his parents are dead.  She just about has to know Raven is his guardian and she's seen him in a fight enough times to have total faith in him.  Heck Noah even made good on his promise to slay the dragon.  It just didn't have the courtesy to stay slain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Vorlonagent said:

Noah even made good on his promise to slay the dragon.  It just didn't have the courtesy to stay slain.

Dead things that won't stay dead have always been a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, mlooney said:
On 12/6/2017 at 0:49 AM, hkmaly said:

Noah likely isn't THAT good figher

"I will slay the dragon"

I'm sure if he would meet REAL dragon and not some stupid summon he wouldn't have it that easy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, hkmaly said:

I'm sure if he would meet REAL dragon and not some stupid summon he wouldn't have it that easy.

If magus survives Friday night, we can find out.  They have "Dragon sirens" where he comes from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, The Old Hack said:
17 hours ago, hkmaly said:

I'm sure if he would meet REAL dragon and not some stupid summon he wouldn't have it that easy.

I find it interesting that you define 'unkillable' as 'easy.'

I was referring to the fact that aside of being unkillable, the buldog dragon wasn't really dangerous. Real dragon would destroy half of Moperville if not careful. Whole if she wanted to.

Also, Noah only tried to break his neck. He didn't tried any attack spells - some might disrupt the summon in way it wouldn't be possible to resummon him.

10 hours ago, Vorlonagent said:

If magus survives Friday night, we can find out.  They have "Dragon sirens" where he comes from.

Even if he gets back home, I doubt we will see much of his world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I was referring to the fact that aside of being unkillable, the buldog dragon wasn't really dangerous.

It very nearly killed Elliot with one fireball and would have destroyed a segment of major road during heavy traffic if Elliot hadn't sacrificed herself. This is an odd definition of 'not really dangerous.'

6 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Real dragon would destroy half of Moperville if not careful. Whole if she wanted to.

Okay, you got me. I never heard of any such thing as a real dragon before. I thought they were just creatures of our imagination. Mind giving me a source for them so I can see how tough they are?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:
58 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Real dragon would destroy half of Moperville if not careful. Whole if she wanted to.

Okay, you got me. I never heard of any such thing as a real dragon before. I thought they were just creatures of our imagination. Mind giving me a source for them so I can see how tough they are?

http://midkemia.wikia.com/wiki/Ryath is nice example.

But the usage of "real" was based on this:

Vol1735.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:
5 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

http://midkemia.wikia.com/wiki/Ryath is nice example.

But the usage of "real" was based on this:

Okay, so they are as real as your prejudices about what makes a dragon. Got it.

Do you really want to discus what constitutes real or is discussion of our world religions still forbidden?

6 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:

Now, could you explain why everybody else has to accept your definition as the true one and that their personal ones don't count?

I find much easier to get along with people with different opinions if we establish some basic shared framework, sort of common ground, like "there are multiple universes and universes of shows, books and whatever I like are as real as universes of shows, books and whatever you like".

The "real dragon" note was not meant as "I've met a dragon when I was returning from shoping today", nor it was meant as "I ignore your dragons" (mainly because noone proposed any other dragon than the buldog dragon summon, who, being summon, is little less real than something which is not summon). It was meant as "I know dragons (from different book/universe) who would be more dangerous and would call this dragon fake". Sorry if the dragons you imagined took it personally.

And if we look at EGS, there are three dragons: Taurcanis Draco summon, the one behind Pandora here and the ones sirens from Magus world warns about.

The informations we have about them are limited, but it seems to me Taurcanis Draco summon is the least powerful of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Do you really want to discus what constitutes real or is discussion of our world religions still forbidden?

No. I simply reject your apparent position that your definition of reality is the only true one and that all others must yield way.

3 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I find much easier to get along with people with different opinions if we establish some basic shared framework,

Then I suggest you do so by means of compromise rather than simply baldly setting forth your own and saying that you will reject any position that differs from it. Which is what you did the same moment you spoke of 'real' dragons without considering that the Taurcanis might just as well serve as the baseline as anything else.

There are numberless different kinds of dragons out there ranging from the komodo dragon (which actually exists, and therefore has a MUCH better claim to being 'real' than any of your personal idealized 'dragons' do) through Terry Pratchett's innocuous swamp dragon (one of which still managed to best the far larger and more powerful Draco Nobilis) to Ancalagon the Black (greatest of all Tolkien's winged wyrms, and supposedly Smaug didn't hold a candle to Ancalagon's power). ANY of these dragons might be a 'real' dragon in the context of any given story. Your position that the Taurcanis isn't a 'real' dragon is as absurd as your claims to it being easily killable (it wasn't) and that it was not dangerous (it almost killed Elliot, and might have if Noah had not appeared to run interference. Let alone that it might have killed at least one and possibly a large number of innocent drivers on that road if Elliot hadn't blocked its blast.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Old Hack said:

There are numberless different kinds of dragons out there ranging from the komodo dragon (which actually exists, and therefore has a MUCH better claim to being 'real' than any of your personal idealized 'dragons' do) through Terry Pratchett's innocuous swamp dragon (one of which still managed to best the far larger and more powerful Draco Nobilis) to Ancalagon the Black (greatest of all Tolkien's winged wyrms, and supposedly Smaug didn't hold a candle to Ancalagon's power). ANY of these dragons might be a 'real' dragon in the context of any given story.

My list was not supposed to be exhausive, which I considered obvious given I provided just one example and directly said it's an example.

And yes, the Draco Nobilis from Pratchett, Ancalagon the Black and even the Smaug would be capable of doing considerably more damage than the buldog dragon. Nevertheless, the komodo dragon might be the one presenting most danger to EGS from this list, at least if it gets near Dan's computer. It has it much closer than Draco Nobilis, being in same universe.

1 hour ago, The Old Hack said:

ANY of these dragons might be a 'real' dragon in the context of any given story.

They definitely are real in context of the story they are in. And I suspect that most Draco Nobilis would prove my point by not considering swamp dragons real dragons ... with that single exception of one Draco Nobilis and one swamp dragon which got along surprisingly well ...

1 hour ago, The Old Hack said:

Your position that the Taurcanis isn't a 'real' dragon is as absurd as your claims to it being easily killable (it wasn't) and that it was not dangerous (it almost killed Elliot, and might have if Noah had not appeared to run interference. Let alone that it might have killed at least one and possibly a large number of innocent drivers on that road if Elliot hadn't blocked its blast.)

I explained how I meant the 'real'.

I never said it was easily killable.

I didn't said it wasn't dangerous either. Just that it could've been more dangerous.

You talked about my prejudices and ask questions attacking positions I never held.

Seems that "real" is word you react too aggressively not based on how it's used but based on your bad experiences with it being used in past.

My formulations might not be best, but I don't deserve this reaction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I explained how I meant the 'real'.

I never said it was easily killable.

Really? Then who wrote this?

20 hours ago, hkmaly said:

I'm sure if he would meet REAL dragon and not some stupid summon he wouldn't have it that easy.

Oh. You did.

3 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I didn't said it wasn't dangerous either. Just that it could've been more dangerous.

Oh, I see.

2 hours ago, hkmaly said:

I was referring to the fact that aside of being unkillable, the buldog dragon wasn't really dangerous.

Wait, no, I don't. You claim that it wasn't really dangerous, then you say that you never said it wasn't dangerous, and that this means 'it could have been more dangerous.' I am now completely lost.

5 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

You talked about my prejudices and ask questions attacking positions I never held.

Oh, I am terribly sorry. The positions you never held only as shown above you did hold them?

And yes, I was talking about your prejudices as you described them in your attempt to delegitimise the Taurcanis as a dragon.

7 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Seems that "real" is word you react too aggressively not based on how it's used but based on your bad experiences with it being used in past.

Ah yes, I suppose I am a child of the elder generation where reality could not be easily changed merely by declaring it fake. I apologise for actually going with the dictionary definition of the word where, if used in the way you used it above, it is a means of deligitimising opposing opinions.

8 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

My formulation might not be best, but I don't deserve this reaction.

I would feel really sorry for you if you showed even the slightest sign of wishing to meet me halfway. Until you do, enjoy your martyrdom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:
25 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I explained how I meant the 'real'.

I never said it was easily killable.

Really? Then who wrote this?

20 hours ago, hkmaly said:

I'm sure if he would meet REAL dragon and not some stupid summon he wouldn't have it that easy.

Oh. You did.

I didn't mentioned the word "killable" at all.

But reviewing the fight, I agree that he didn't have it easy. I meant that it could be harder (the dragon didn't even used the fireball), but I see how it wasn't fair to him saying it that way.

16 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:
25 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I didn't said it wasn't dangerous either. Just that it could've been more dangerous.

Oh, I see.

3 hours ago, hkmaly said:

I was referring to the fact that aside of being unkillable, the buldog dragon wasn't really dangerous.

Wait, no, I don't. You claim that it wasn't really dangerous, then you say that you never said it wasn't dangerous, and that this means 'it could have been more dangerous.' I am now completely lost.

Wasn't dangerous versus wasn't REALLY dangerous. I though the difference between those two is bigger.

16 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:
25 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

My formulation might not be best, but I don't deserve this reaction.

I would feel really sorry for you if you showed even the slightest sign of wishing to meet me halfway. Until you do, enjoy your martyrdom.

I showed them, although they might be too slight for you.

(Too say it more clearly, yes they were just slight. Mainly because I'm not sure what you really want. I wanted to talk about cool dragons.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I didn't mentioned the word "killable" at all.

Scroll up. Or look below. You said:

20 hours ago, hkmaly said:

I'm sure if he would meet REAL dragon and not some stupid summon he wouldn't have it that easy.

in response to mlooney's quote:

On 06/12/2017 at 8:39 PM, mlooney said:

"I will slay the dragon"

Put them together, and it comes out as 'Noah had an easy time killing the dragon because it is not actually a real dragon according to my definition, which trumps everything else.'

7 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

But reviewing the fight, I agree that he didn't have it easy. I meant that it could be harder (the dragon didn't even used the fireball), but I see how it wasn't fair to him saying it that way.

Thank you.

8 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Wasn't dangerous versus wasn't REALLY dangerous. I though the difference between those two is bigger.

It is the difference between 'harmless' and 'mostly harmless.' The latter indicates that it takes a great deal of either bad luck, incompetence or both to manage to be harmed by the involved factor.

9 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I showed them, although they might be too slight for you.

Ah, so now you attack my linguistic competence? Thank you very much. And here I thought you were actually interested in settling this fairly. My mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:
20 hours ago, hkmaly said:

I'm sure if he would meet REAL dragon and not some stupid summon he wouldn't have it that easy.

in response to mlooney's quote:

On 12/6/2017 at 8:39 PM, mlooney said:

"I will slay the dragon"

Put them together, and it comes out as 'Noah had an easy time killing the dragon because it is not actually a real dragon

Oh. Right. That's truly my mistake. The "it" was supposed to refer to "fight" but in context it really matched the "slay".

(Also, as I already admitted, I remembered the fight easier than it was.)

28 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:

according to my definition, which trumps everything else.'

Sigh.

28 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:
38 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Wasn't dangerous versus wasn't REALLY dangerous. I though the difference between those two is bigger.

It is the difference between 'harmless' and 'mostly harmless.' The latter indicates that it takes a great deal of either bad luck, incompetence or both to manage to be harmed by the involved factor.

I can just repeat that I though the difference was bigger.

Like a difference between tornado with F1 and F4 on fujita scale.

28 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:
38 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I showed them, although they might be too slight for you.

Ah, so now you attack my linguistic competence? Thank you very much. And here I thought you were actually interested in settling this fairly. My mistake.

No I - ... there isn't really GOOD way to reply to this, is it? Well, one try. Remember this question?

2 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

Now, could you explain why everybody else has to accept your definition as the true one and that their personal ones don't count?

I tried to answer it. I probably shouldn't, as it's pretty close to "when did you stopped beating your wife". But I though that if I try to explain my position in reply to this, it will show I want to discus.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this