Ok, I didn't see this one in the list. Webinar is missing his radish in #69, panel 7.
Printable View
Ok, I didn't see this one in the list. Webinar is missing his radish in #69, panel 7.
Sorry, no. That's a common mistake. Affect = influence only when used as a verb. Here it's being used as a noun, and effect is correct. You'll find Merriam-Webster, the OED, and Cambridge Dictionaries are all on my side if you look them up, and I think you'll find the rest of the dictionaries are, too. (I checked before writing my original post, and before posting this. Did you?)
From the Compact OED:
http://www.m-w.com/Quote:
USAGE Affect and effect are frequently confused. Affect is primarily a verb meaning ‘make a difference to’, as in the changes will affect everyone. Effect is used both as a noun meaning ‘a result’ (e.g. the substance has a pain-killing effect) and as a verb meaning ‘bring about (a result)’, as in she effected a cost-cutting exercise.
http://www.askoxford.com/
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/
You'll be surprised by the definition of affect as a noun. It's not what's meant here.
You cannot.
affect (v) = influence (v), but
affect (n) = display of emotion
and here the word is used as a noun. Substituting affect in the noun meaning would make the sentence nonsensical. Effect is the correct spelling.
Edit: Ninjas! Grrr!
Page 36, Panel 12: "This monsterous, combination Findamancy/Lookamancy... thing"
Didn't Wanda say on page 5 that the spell that summoned Parson was created by Findamancers and Predictamancers? Or was Stanley yelling stuff at Wanda while she was casting spells a common enough occurrence for her?
Page 40, Panel 2: Parson "No but you were embarassed about it."
Not 100%, but I think that is should read: "No, but you were embarassed about it", with a comma after "no".
Page 60, Panel 11: Parson "In other words, he'll always assume he's smarter than you, and act on that assumption He can't imagine you laying a trap that he'd fall for."
Pretty sure that there should be a period after "assumption".
Page 68, Panel 7: Jillian "I'm free to make friends or enemies of whoever I please"
I think that that "whoever" there should be "whomever". Then again this might be deliberate, Jillian does not seem the type to be a stickler for perfect grammar.
This has been discussed before, though I don't remember the exact thread. The consensus seems to be that this was deliberate misdirection on Wanda's part. Wanda may have wanted to obfuscate the exact nature of the spell she cast. :smallyuk:
This is so anal, but I'm including it in the list. :smallsigh:Quote:
Page 40, Panel 2: Parson "No but you were embarassed about it."
Not 100%, but I think that is should read: "No, but you were embarassed about it", with a comma after "no".
Page 60, Panel 11: Parson "In other words, he'll always assume he's smarter than you, and act on that assumption He can't imagine you laying a trap that he'd fall for."
Pretty sure that there should be a period after "assumption".
This strikes me as just the kind of thing her father would have bugged her about. :smallamused:Quote:
Page 68, Panel 7: Jillian "I'm free to make friends or enemies of whoever I please"
I think that that "whoever" there should be "whomever". Then again this might be deliberate, Jillian does not seem the type to be a stickler for perfect grammar.
I would hope that the Titans would learn how to spell "Coalition"! :smallbiggrin:
Y'know, I was just going to mention that. Good eye.
The mistake is here, if you're looking for it.
Page 87, panel 1: “… got closest to the reaching the city.”
There are four metal golems shown in Erfworld 87, panel 7, but the roster list in Parson's Klog #7 lists four hard rock golems, one metal golem.
My take is, that there are four metal golems, and the mistake was in the unit roster listing.
Yes, but they may have had anoter three metals under construction. You may remember that Parson had No Idea what Stanly was building.
Although I do wonder if you are simply able to produce a certain amount every turn as a result of having a dirtomancer. Maybe Parson asked him to make them since they already have plenty of low level fighting forces.
Page 89, sixth panel, Charley's speech bubble does not have the jaggy edges around it like all his other speech bubbles. If thats on purpose no problem, but it confuses a bit who's actually speaking.
Also, the speech bubble in 9th panel on page 66 shouldn't be outlined in black.
Edit: Also, page 36, speech bubbles in panel 4 should not be outlined in black, in panel 6 sizemore's speech bubble should be outlined in black. on page 40, 6th panel,the "see!" bubble should be outlined in black.
Didn't know if I should edit my previous post and add to it or post another one, so oh well, posting another one.
The speech bubbles in the last panel of Page 92 should Not be outlined in black.
Also, Page 66, panel 9, speech bubbles should not be outlined in black.
With the coloration its difficult to tell, but the offscreen speech bubbles of parson in panels 4 and 10 on page 43 Should be outlined in black.
Sorry if these have been mentioned before.
What side of Vinny's face is his fang supposed to be?? In comic 103, it's left on panels 1, 4, and 6. It's on the right in panels 5 and 9! >_<;;;
Thanks, Kilmor. I've now listed all these as blooper #31 -- see the first post in this thread. :smallsmile:
He does have two fangs, as shown in Erfworld 65, Page 59. But, I'm not sure if Jami means for the same fang to be out all the time or not. It could be a mistake, or it could be on purpose.
In #107 Dora's got the radish on her chest, this wasn't there in previous strips.
A spelling thing (ie, super-minor): the standard Americanization is "tchotchke", not "tcotchke"
Oh and Steve, nice.
I side for sky, and oddly enough, the colors in Wesley's pic seem a bit different and it looks a bit bluer there
never mind me, accidently responded to something way back...
In the picture at the top of Klog 12, the grey shadow effect on people slops over their outlines.
In comic 117, Parson should have said about 2 to 3 odds, or 2/3. It shows 3 to 2, or 3/2.
Actually no, but this is a confusing point about "odds". His odds of winning are 60% (roughly), which means that if somehow the next turn were played repeatedly, he would win 60% of the time. Compared to how often he loses, this means 3 wins for every 2 losses (count it: 3 wins for every 5 total rounds is 60%). "Odds" of X to Y means a probability of X/(X + Y).
Duly listed as Blooper #32.
That's artistic license. Catching bloopers is one thing; telling Jamie how to blow our socks off is quite another; he can do without such advice. The effect you observe is probably inherent in the technique, and certainly intentional--with Photoshop, accurate cropping would have been trivial, IF he wanted it. Not listed.
It's "3 to 2" as in "60% vs. 40%" and so quite correct, as GoryCat noted. "3 to 2" is not the same as "3/2". Not listed.
Klog #2
Luckmancy is in the erf section when it is fate.
Healomancy is in the fate section and I am certain its erf.
I swore I saw someone post about this this along time ago but dont see it in the bloopers.