• 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  
hkmaly

NP Friday, Nov 15, 2019

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, hkmaly said:

http://egscomics.com/egsnp/parable-034

Soooo, this is specifically blonde Susan in that outfit, and definitely not Diane ...

The commentary confirms that's a blonde Susan, I'd imagine if Dan wanted to convey it being Diane, he'd have either given her Diane's current short hair, or the old long style, this is clearly Susan's hairstyle...well her main story hairstyle, not what her player character has at the moment.

 

Interesting that Susan finds her own form appealing, we know of two other's that canonically seem attracted to themselves, I wonder if we'll be getting a third in canon at some point.

Share this post


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

Soooo, this is specifically blonde Susan in that outfit, and definitely not Diane ...

The commentary confirms that's a blonde Susan, I'd imagine if Dan wanted to convey it being Diane, he'd have either given her Diane's current short hair, or the old long style, this is clearly Susan's hairstyle...well her main story hairstyle, not what her player character has at the moment.

Yes, the commentary is why I mentioned it. You have point that the hairstyle points to Susan.

4 minutes ago, Scotty said:

Interesting that Susan finds her own form appealing, we know of two other's that canonically seem attracted to themselves, I wonder if we'll be getting a third in canon at some point.

I'm not surprised. Imagine she may use her form as proxy for more touching ... it's quite likely SHE imagined that already.

On the other hand, her reaction to Diane touching stuff was worse just because Diane looks like her, so maybe not that much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if you produce a physical duplicate of yourself
Dress (or fail to dress) said duplicate in an indecent manner
Take the duplicate to the roof of a tall building
Push the duplicate off that building

Now, did you

Commit homicide?

Commit suicide?

Or...

Make an obscene clone fall?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

Make an obscene clone fall?

... that sounds like a pun. Unfortunately I'm not sure what it refers to.

13 hours ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

Commit homicide?

Commit suicide?

It might partially depend on the method used for making the duplicate, but ultimately it's very complicated philosophical question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2019 at 11:35 PM, Scotty said:

The commentary confirms that's a blonde Susan, I'd imagine if Dan wanted to convey it being Diane, he'd have either given her Diane's current short hair, or the old long style, this is clearly Susan's hairstyle...well her main story hairstyle, not what her player character has at the moment.

 

Interesting that Susan finds her own form appealing, we know of two other's that canonically seem attracted to themselves, I wonder if we'll be getting a third in canon at some point.

Two Susans, eh?

Share this post


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

... that sounds like a pun. Unfortunately I'm not sure what it refers to.

 

5 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Make an obscene phone call.

Way back in the day, when party lines and live telephone operators were still a thing, it was a crime to use offensive language on the phone

Making an obscene phone call could get you disconnected, fined, arrested, or worse...

Strange, it doesn't seem so long ago...

Share this post


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

Making an obscene phone call could get you disconnected, fined, arrested, or worse...

It still can, under certain conditions. Namely if you persist in making them to people who aren't happy to receive obscene phone calls specifically from you.

Share this post


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

It still can, under certain conditions. Namely if you persist in making them to people who aren't happy to receive obscene phone calls specifically from you.

Whereas, making an obscene clone fall would be at the very least manslaughter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:
14 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Make an obscene phone call.

Way back in the day, when party lines and live telephone operators were still a thing, it was a crime to use offensive language on the phone

Making an obscene phone call could get you disconnected, fined, arrested, or worse...

Strange, it doesn't seem so long ago...

I would say it is, but I'm sure there are people who would use this as argument why we shouldn't expect any privacy on phone.

3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
6 hours ago, Don Edwards said:

It still can, under certain conditions. Namely if you persist in making them to people who aren't happy to receive obscene phone calls specifically from you.

Whereas, making an obscene clone fall would be at the very least manslaughter.

Well, if the building wouldn't be THAT tall and if it's into water or cardboard boxes ... I mean, there can be no manslaughter unless someone dies.

And there could definitely be an issue with proving it in court.

And when we actually have ability to make physical duplicates, not just clones (because clones accumulate some differences even before being born), the law may change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Whereas, making an obscene clone fall would be at the very least manslaughter.

Or maybe cloneslaughter? *scratches head*

14 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Well, if the building wouldn't be THAT tall and if it's into water or cardboard boxes ... I mean, there can be no manslaughter unless someone dies.

I once fell three meters onto a lawn. It hurt a lot but I didn't even break anything. I was just sore for a day or so. Grass and earth do have a little give, and even a little give can go a long way toward absorbing impact.

Concrete or cobblestone, now, that's a different story.

(I once played a game of GURPS where two characters fighting one another tumbled out of a tower window and fell down onto a cobblestone courtyard. Falling damage dictated that both take 20D6 damage. The GM said they could make a contest of DEX to see who ended up on top of the other. The guy on top would take 20D6-20 damage, the guy on the bottom 20D6+20.)

(The guy on the bottom rolled a massive handful of fours, fives and sixes and ended up taking 113 damage. Given he was a squishy mage with a Health of 9, he was so dead it wasn't even funny. The guy on top -- the burly half-orc barbarian who'd launched them both out of the window by charging the mage -- rolled nothing except ones and twos. He took 9 damage, reduced to 7 by his Toughness, and the falling critical got the very most harmless result, 'bruised all over.' He got to his feet, dusted himself off and then ambled on his way looking for a beer...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

Are you suggesting that squishy mages should NOT engage barbarians in fisticuffs?

Yesterday I discovered that Death Tyrants (Beholder Liches) should not let a Vengeance Paladin with in ranged of them, particularly if said paladin is ready and willing to spend ALL his higher level spell slots on Smiting.  Combat lasted 3 rounds and he was the only one that did any damage to the beholder.  Didn't help that I couldn't score a hit with the beholder's eye attacks to save my (well, the beholder's) life.  Normally I have the beholder's just levitate on of melee range of the party and blast with eye beams.  Paladin has winged boots, aka boots of flying and was faster than the beholder so I couldn't get away.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

Are you suggesting that squishy mages should NOT engage barbarians in fisticuffs?

No no.

I am suggesting that they should not fall more than a hundred feet to land on flagstone with 300 pounds of barbarian on top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

I once fell three meters onto a lawn. It hurt a lot but I didn't even break anything. I was just sore for a day or so. Grass and earth do have a little give, and even a little give can go a long way toward absorbing impact.

Sure, but three meters is VERY small for building.

9 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

The GM said they could make a contest of DEX to see who ended up on top of the other. The guy on top would take 20D6-20 damage, the guy on the bottom 20D6+20.

I think falling on armored barbarian is even worse than falling on concrete. On the other hand, falling on concrete and THEN have an armed barbarian fall on you is still worse, so ...

5 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

I am suggesting that they should not fall more than a hundred feet to land on flagstone with 300 pounds of barbarian on top.

Isn't there some spell for that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In standard D&D there is “Feather Fall”, which slows the target’s descent such that they take no damage from hitting the ground, but a caster needs to be able to cast it at the right time—I expect that being tackled by a PC of much higher Strength and Constitution and falling out the window with him would involve a Concentration Check penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2019 at 6:29 PM, hkmaly said:

Well, if the building wouldn't be THAT tall and if it's into water or cardboard boxes ... I mean, there can be no manslaughter unless someone dies.

My Uncle once told me about the time he jumped off a mountain and landed without getting hurt - because the part of the mountain he jumped off of was a small rock at the base of the mountain.

Share this post


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

Sure, but three meters is VERY small for building.

It was a building. A one story house. Very common for the small township I lived in at the time. I was standing on the edge of the roof at the time.

18 hours ago, hkmaly said:

I think falling on armored barbarian is even worse than falling on concrete. On the other hand, falling on concrete and THEN have an armed barbarian fall on you is still worse, so ...

Depends on the armour. Plate armour, not good. Chain mail, still not good. Some sort of leather, even cuir boilli, and it isn't quite so bad anymore. And even the barbarian himself has some give to him. At least more than the cobblestones beneath him.

18 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Isn't there some spell for that?

Sure, but I think that getting bodyslammed out of a tower window and falling toward certain death may have distracted him from thinking of casting it -- if he even knew it.
He was mostly a necromancer and demon summoner. He might have skipped How Not To Fall 101.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ChronosCat said:
On 11/18/2019 at 0:29 AM, hkmaly said:

Well, if the building wouldn't be THAT tall and if it's into water or cardboard boxes ... I mean, there can be no manslaughter unless someone dies.

My Uncle once told me about the time he jumped off a mountain and landed without getting hurt - because the part of the mountain he jumped off of was a small rock at the base of the mountain.

That could work if it wasn't specifically mentioned it was from TOP of the building.

3 hours ago, The Old Hack said:
22 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Sure, but three meters is VERY small for building.

It was a building. A one story house. Very common for the small township I lived in at the time. I was standing on the edge of the roof at the time.

I stand by my statement. I can afford it as I don't live in three meter building and I have enough space above my head. (It's not like I'm three meter tall of course, it's that those three meters must include the ceiling and floor and suddenly you need to dodge the chandelier.)

Granted, I can touch the ceiling in my summer house ... that one might have around three meters.

3 hours ago, The Old Hack said:
22 hours ago, hkmaly said:

I think falling on armored barbarian is even worse than falling on concrete. On the other hand, falling on concrete and THEN have an armed barbarian fall on you is still worse, so ...

Depends on the armour. Plate armour, not good. Chain mail, still not good. Some sort of leather, even cuir boilli, and it isn't quite so bad anymore. And even the barbarian himself has some give to him. At least more than the cobblestones beneath him.

I was thinking plate armor, yes. How much give the barbarian himself has is not important when the plate armor doesn't. (It would matter in chain mail, true, and leather armor could be better than concrete.)

There is also additional issue of possible decorations on the armor. Various spikes and so.

3 hours ago, The Old Hack said:
22 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Isn't there some spell for that?

Sure, but I think that getting bodyslammed out of a tower window and falling toward certain death may have distracted him from thinking of casting it -- if he even knew it.
He was mostly a necromancer and demon summoner. He might have skipped How Not To Fall 101.

I'm sure he did regret skipping that class then.

2 hours ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

Isn't death a promotion for Necromancers?  From a certain point of view...

I suspect the correct kind of death needs some preparations. But yes, I can totally imagine necromancer casting "turn self into lich" instead of "Feather Fall” in such situation.

Share this post


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

I stand by my statement.

And I stand by mine. It is still a building. Anyway, it is utterly beside the point. My point was that the flexibility of the surface you land on can make a big difference.

People have been known to survive falls at terminal velocity or near it. Granted, not many, and usually with grave injuries. Not everyone can be as fortunate as the WW1 pilot who bailed without a parachute from his burning airplane, reasoning that death from fall would at least be less painful, or over faster anyway. He fell almost two kilometers, went through the straw-thatched roof of a convent and landed in a bed. Fifteen minutes later he left the convent walking under his own power.

21 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

There is also additional issue of possible decorations on the armor. Various spikes and so.

I am against spikes on armour for the exact reason of possible falls. Landing on a spike can prove embarrassing; besides, armour is supposed to disperse energy and not concentrate it. I leave that for the various pointy and/or blunt objects that people who don't like me try to hit me with.

22 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I'm sure he did regret skipping that class then.

Yes, but only very briefly.

23 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I suspect the correct kind of death needs some preparations. But yes, I can totally imagine necromancer casting "turn self into lich" instead of "Feather Fall” in such situation.

"It can sometimes be inconvenient." -- The Necromancer, speaking of death, in Steven Brust's Paths of the Dead.

Share this post


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

There is also additional issue of possible decorations on the armor. Various spikes and so.

Armor at its best causes blows to slide off. Spikes interfere with that and force the energy of the blow into the armor and potentially the wearer. You want the armor to be smoothly convex everywhere it CAN be smoothly convex without interfering overmuch with motion.

(The absolute best armor is to not get hit in the first place, of course.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don Edwards said:

Armor at its best causes blows to slide off. Spikes interfere with that and force the energy of the blow into the armor and potentially the wearer. You want the armor to be smoothly convex everywhere it CAN be smoothly convex without interfering overmuch with motion.

Indeed. Please note that I am not against equipping decorative armour with various frills; I merely note that I consider it the height of stupidity to put inertia traps on any actual combat armour merely for the sake of frill. (Don Edwards, wasn't it you who once mentioned that not very bright hero in A Practical Guide to Evil whose armour redirected an arrow upward from his chest into his throat? I have seen suits of armour that had a bit of raised collar apparently shaped to prevent exactly that sort of incident, be it from sliding arrow or blade.)

11 minutes ago, Don Edwards said:

(The absolute best armor is to not get hit in the first place, of course.)

I would say 'defence' rather than 'armour', but that is just me quibbling, I guess. I like my definitions and armour is stuck somewhere in my head as 'means of dispersing incoming energy' rather than any sort of avoidance. Bad me. :doom:

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