OOTS #852 - The Discussion Thread

[Math_Mage]

Dunno if anyone has brought this up so far, but: shouldn't Belkar be able to "tell by the smell" who "Thog" really is? He's just as close to Tarquin as he was to Nale in #383, when he noticed almost instantly.

Belkar has far more experience with Elan's scent, and as such the difference was more noticeable. Belkar hasn't spent much time with either Tarquin or Thog's scent.

[FujinAkari]

Dunno if anyone has brought this up so far, but: shouldn't Belkar be able to "tell by the smell" who "Thog" really is? He's just as close to Tarquin as he was to Nale in #383, when he noticed almost instantly.

Instantly? It took over a day, and he only noticed because he had been around Elan for like, a year or more. Knowing that someone doesn't smell like your best friend is a lot easier than knowing someone doesn't smell like a half orc you fought once. (I don't think Belkar was ever in close proximity to Thog other than the first fight)

[Murray]

It isn't so much that Belkar can identify Thog or Tarquin by scent, more if he can tell the difference between a half-orc and a human. And if he can tell, then Belkar certainly has to notice it, and not assume that Thog has just been wearing human clothing.

[Valyrian]

It's not entirely clear when Belkar saw through Nale's ruse if he identified him because he smelled like Nale or because he did not smell like Elan. Maybe it takes a while to get to know a smell, and Belkar doesn't know Tarquins, Thogs and Nales smell well enough to recognize it.

Deducing that Nale was Nale when you know it's not Elan was easy because, well, he could see his face and all.

[King of Nowhere]

maybe belkar just wasn't focusing on his nose during the few rounds of battle. maybe he would notice, given a bit more time.

[Scactha]

Which is, ironically, the very thing you incorrectly accused me of. You put words into the mouths of those who dislike Tarquin, calling them children &cetera. I'm going to assume you just got me mixed up with someone else and this whole thing was an untinentional slip; I realize my stance actually does come across as similar to Valyrian's. Did you get us confused? Understandable if so, since we do seem to be in the minority.

You are confusing yourself with the person who I originally responded to. I kindly refer back at his(or hers, who knows?) incessant and somehow emotionally evoked defense, as I apprehended it and how it appeared in at least one more more thread than this, of the order which I found grating. Thus I intended a retort in similar vein. Alas, failure was the result which is obvious from this persistent discourse.

[Jay R]

Dunno if anyone has brought this up so far, but: shouldn't Belkar be able to "tell by the smell" who "Thog" really is? He's just as close to Tarquin as he was to Nale in #383, when he noticed almost instantly.

It might be being overpowered by the nearby smell of dozens of mummified corpses. I suspect in that situation, I'd be trying to ignore the scents around me.

[factotum]

Instantly? It took over a day, and he only noticed because he had been around Elan for like, a year or more.

And Nale had to clean himself up first, too.

[Mynoduesp]

The mask looks more like a Kenny (Southpark) jacket/hoodie.
At least, that's what I thought it was until he mentioned it.

[rgrekejin]

Dunno if anyone has brought this up so far, but: shouldn't Belkar be able to "tell by the smell" who "Thog" really is? He's just as close to Tarquin as he was to Nale in #383, when he noticed almost instantly.

Well, "Thog" also said that Nale had stolen the armor and stuff from Tarquin. Belkar was originally thrown off of Nale's scent because he was wearing Elan's clothes, which were saturated with Elan's scent. So even if Belkar did smell Tarquin, maybe he's just assuming it's coming from the stolen armor.

[Omergideon]

By the goves it is annoying when the system eats a post just as you are trying to send it. Took 10 minutes to write as well.

Still it gives me another chance to enjoy the lively debate on Tarquin and his fight etc, plus Roy et al. For the record, as some know, I dislike Tarquin finding the character too smug to enjoy seeing around, and having none of the charm or humour of our other villains. I also find him to be a drama killer in some ways, for various reasons. This antipathy colours my view of this strip. I will comment on it more below. The strip itself though is fine, not much more than that. The action is decent, but for me there is a big issue that colours my overall perception of events. Still........

The Good:
1) I nearly always praise the art in the comic. In this one though it is more for strip construction than anything else. The Backdrop is of course very nice looking. The action is fluid and the expressions are great. But mostly this is just a solidly drawn, well paced and well constructed comic.
2) Belkar and Elan are hilarious in this strip. The Elan punchline is good. But most of all I loved the Roy/Belkar joke about the arrow. It was a callback done subtly, amusing in the way Belkar emphasised things and perfectly timed. Great comedy there.
3) The Roy/Tarquin interaction was good. Roy was clever and a good leader here (feeding into his "me not dumb fighty guy" character). Tarquin's response of trying to maintain a broken charade was interesting. One could interpret it in many ways based on your personal feeling towards the guy e.g. from "he was flustered and trying to cope" to "he was intentionally playing dumb" and more. Very clever writing.

The Bad:
1) As always this is very much opinion (as is the good). But for me the whole mask under helmet joke failed as humour. It failed for character. And it acted as a tease for a reveal that in turn undercuts one of our protagonists. I'll expand more next, but for now let me simply say I did not find Tarquin's "Nope" funny. This could be due to antipathy, but I think beyond as it is an old joke I never found funny elsewhere it is simply my taste in humour.
2) For me there is a big flaw though. The "reveal" and the regeneration seem to deliberately undercut the legitimate successes of the Order so far. In this fight it does seem like any time they build up steam they have something smack them down quickly and easily. The regeneration means their damage is ignored. The Helmet ruins the triumph of Roy's smarts somewhat. Added to the existing issues it....annnoys me. This is a personal opinion but as this is my personal reaction I feel fine explaining it.

So yeah. **1/2 for me. Decent strip, but with issues that annoy me. Personal ones of course, not objective. But I worry about the Order and my ability to follow and support them if this villain of Tarquin is able to defeat them comprehensively with nary a scratch. IF hurt by them then fine, if not.......I dissaporve.

[Lynn]

The mask looks more like a Kenny (Southpark) jacket/hoodie.
At least, that's what I thought it was until he mentioned it.

It looks more like Mysterion's hood to me.

[Gorm_the_DBA]

Nice "reveal".

But.
I'm not aware of any rules regarding ripping off helmets - HOW did Roy manage to do that? Anyone who ever wore a helmet will tell you that these things don't come off just like that, they're integral part of your armor!
Any helmet (regardless in which time and setting) includes straps or other measures to prevent the helmet from slipping, shifting or falling off. (At least, any helmet worth more than a carneval costume.) Helmets are not simple tin pots you put over your head!

You'd think....but you'd be wrong...

Watch the Youtube coverage of last week's "Battle of the Nations" (armored combat...full speed....steel weapons...about as close to Melee as you're gonna get without (much) blood), and note that roughly 1 in 5 fights features someone losing a helm...

Or watch the frequency with which NFL Helmets are taken off (a time or two per game).

Yes, it's not a constant occurrence, but it does happen, and it ain't *that* hard.

[Masamichi]

You are confusing yourself with the person who I originally responded to. I kindly refer back at his(or hers, who knows?) incessant and somehow emotionally evoked defense, as I apprehended it and how it appeared in at least one more more thread than this, of the order which I found grating. Thus I intended a retort in similar vein. Alas, failure was the result which is obvious from this persistent discourse.

I think I resent that implication; I'm clear on who I am, and you did in fact claim that I (specifically, as you quoted me) was 'putting words in other people's mouths'. So, to use your own words against you: I kindly refer you back to this same thread.

This is not me confusing myself for anyone else; this is you accusing me directly of something I have not done ... unless you were confused as to who I was.

Unfortunately, I cannot make this issue clearer for you. If you still don't understand, a policy of mutual avoidance is most probably the only reasonable way to proceed.

I apologize if I've been rude or made you uncomfortable. Must be my exceedingly lawful nature at work.

Very well. I can respectfully agree to disagree. I may have made myself unclear; it wasn't your responses that made me uncomfortable, it was how argumentative I feel I must be when I try and defend my own viewpoints that bothers me. As above, it's probably best to practice mutual avoidance (or you can reply to me, if you wish; I don't feel it's constructive on my part to reciprocate, however; apologies for that).

Well, that's your call. But that's pretty much the definition of dramatic structure. Google for what Tolkien called "eucatastrophe," or watch The Empire Strikes Back, which is a 100% victory-free movie.

Um, I missed this, actually, and only discovered it when verifying the points addressed to Scactha; you somehow got my comment as quoted to someone else? Perhaps the 'mistaken identity' issue is more common than I would have expected, and can actually be blamed on the forum itself....

I'll note that I don't consider Tolkien a particularly good storyteller -- though I do feel he was a brilliant world-builder. Anyway, the context seems to be a bit short; I don't think there's anything wrong with the heroes taking a beating on their path to victory, it's just that if nothing they accomplish feels like a genuine victory, then it comes across as more like a beatdown. I don't particularly care to watch a curb-stomp, no matter who's winning (either Boring Invincible Hero or Failure Hero).

I also think I disagree about the movie being victory-free. It did end on a downer, but there were at least some meaningful feeling short-term victories. The storytelling there was strong enough to overcome a feeling that the heroes were fighting a losing battle with no real hope of victory. Trying to bring things back in line ... but that's neither here nor there. The relevant point here (with regard to the comic) is that it feels like so much more time is devoted to watching the heroes get beaten down that it's difficult to maintain a real feeling of hope.

(Let's avoid 'pacing' arguments; the posting rate has no bearing on my viewpoint, personally. It may bother other people, but I'm patient enough to keep perspective even if updates are months apart.)

Going back to movie analogies, your Bruce Willis or Harrison Ford heroes will take a substantial beating on their path to victory, but they will overcome obstacles. Many obstacles -- not just the very final ones. They may have to walk across broken glass barefoot or survive the plane suddenly rolling to get through things -- but that doesn't happen while someone is delivering a diatribe about how ineffective they are at what they're best at (in the context of the narrative; presumable Harrison Ford's character was at least a competent president as well (or perhaps not, if he engendered such enemies ... but this is far from relevant)).

This is a bit hyperbolic, and I suppose parallels could be drawn between Thog v. Roy and one of these types of heroes; to me the personally most grating point in that combat was how drawn out it was (comics, not time between updates) and that it was in parallel to the Order being outmatched in pretty much all of their 1:1 fights, so that by the time Roy's victory did come around, it felt cheap and demeaned. The fact that the Linear Guild was ostensibly surprised and this was 'the best they could do on short notice' doesn't help matters at all.

So ... I feel that this story is slipping on the storytelling strength required to make me feel like the heroes are competent and accomplishing things. I don't have confidence that the cast will manage to overcome their difficulties; I anticipate that some surprise NPC or diabolous ex machina is going to resolve things, not any strength of the heroic cast.


Then again, it's been stated that I evidently don't know what term 'competence' means, as per this entire forum's understanding (bar me, obviously) so take that with a grain of salt. -_-

[sims796]

Well, that's your call. But that's pretty much the definition of dramatic structure. Google for what Tolkien called "eucatastrophe," or watch The Empire Strikes Back, which is a 100% victory-free movie.

Whe...when did I write that?

This would be a good point if it had any relationship with fact. However, the sand slaves, Thog, the Linear Guild (all three fights), the bandits, the island demon, kubota, Crystal...

When does the Order actually lose again?

A few inconsequential victories does not underscore the point. Sand slaves? Bandits? Those wimps?

Crystal is a valid one. Even more so if it had invoved anything to do with the story proper in more than a technical sense, but eh.

And the Linear Guild? That is the point that ti'esar illustrated. A near loss, until a contrived victory.

Don't think I'm hating on the comic at large, mind you, these are relatively minor road bumps for me, but they are road bumps non the less.

So ... I feel that this story is slipping on the storytelling strength required to make me feel like the heroes are competent and accomplishing things. I don't have confidence that the cast will manage to overcome their difficulties; I anticipate that some surprise NPC or diabolous ex machina is going to resolve things, not any strength of the heroic cast.


Then again, it's been stated that I evidently don't know what term 'competence' means, as per this entire forum's understanding (bar me, obviously) so take that with a grain of salt. -_-

This is how I feel about the state of our heroes so far. That is why the last round vs the Linear Guild was good - they seem to have won on their own initiative. Durkon had assistance, but it felt natural. Roy had a potion, but that isn't enough to cheapen his victory. V won purely by his own creativity, but how easily he won after finding out Z's weakness was a tad jarring.

And of course, Mr. Scruffy had the most cleanest victory in the entire series.

[ti'esar]

(Let's avoid 'pacing' arguments; the posting rate has no bearing on my viewpoint, personally. It may bother other people, but I'm patient enough to keep perspective even if updates are months apart.)

Okay, let me clarify that when I say people here have always had a problem with pacing, I'm not talking about the update schedule. Rather, I'm talking about dramatic pacing, and the way people always seem to get upset over anything going wrong for the good guys seems to display a lack of understanding of building tension. The update schedule has nothing to do with it.

Then again, it's been stated that I evidently don't know what term 'competence' means, as per this entire forum's understanding (bar me, obviously) so take that with a grain of salt. -_-

Also, when I said this, I did not mean that you don't understand what competence is. Rather, it's that what you are reading does not seem to match with what the vast majority of the people on here are reading (even the others complaining don't seem to have the same overwhelmingly negative attitude). If it did, I know I wouldn't be following this comic anymore. It was not meant as a slight on your intelligence, and I apologize if it came across that way.

[Math_Mage]

The reason why the update schedule might tie into the concept of dramatic pacing is that people are more likely to perceive a few strips as a long time if the strips are released slowly, cf. a previous poster complaining that OotS is 'sliding towards gag-dom' 10 strips after the Familicide revelation.

And of course, Mr. Scruffy had the most cleanest victory in the entire series.

And the messiest.

The ease of V's victory over Z once he Dominated the kobold is meant to underscore the weakness of a narrowly optimized build.

[Masamichi]

Okay, let me clarify that when I say people here have always had a problem with pacing, I'm not talking about the update schedule. Rather, I'm talking about dramatic pacing, and the way people always seem to get upset over anything going wrong for the good guys seems to display a lack of understanding of building tension. The update schedule has nothing to do with it.

I may be inferring incorrectly, but your stance seems to be that anyone who doesn't appreciate the story as it is does so because they lack proper understanding of dramatic structure. In that case, yes, the dramatic pacing recently has in fact been poor.

Obviously it's within the tolerances of the people who post in this forum, but I don't find that a meaningful argument. Consider:

Those who post in forums typically represent a token minority of those who participate in the content (readership in this instance), and naturally, almost everyone who came here did so because they enjoyed it (as I used to, and wish to be able to again). So, yes, almost everyone is here because they are fine with how things are.

I feel a need to play the role of devil's advocate, and as mentioned before, creators who are protected from criticism that could help them improve by presumably well-meaning fans are a pet-peeve.

As far as understanding dramatic tension, I edit dramatic works on a daily basis (frequently into the small hours of the morning). In this regard, as I have explained, I feel that the story is slipping and cheapening the character growth/competence of the heroes in favor of one-shot gags (which also accomplish almost nothing but demeaning the supposed heroes and don't move the story along).

Rather, it's that what you are reading does not seem to match with what the vast majority of the people on here are reading (even the others complaining don't seem to have the same overwhelmingly negative attitude). If it did, I know I wouldn't be following this comic anymore.

I don't like the implications that I'm wrong just because I'm more critical. As I've been trying to explain, there are simply different thresholds of tolerance. I'm sure there are others who agree and just wordlessly dropped the comic (perhaps only a handful, but I can't imagine I alone have the viewpoint that I do); how many people feel an obligation to try and let the author know where their viewpoints diverged?

This is fine if the author is only concerned with maintaining the readership evident in these forums, but what if he cares about more? It's on that assumption (that he would care about more than just the posters here) that I offered up a contrasting viewpoint.

I'm sorry if my inability to appreciate what you still do as much as I once did feels like something that needs to be corrected or is unacceptably negative. My intent was to try and provide constructive feedback. If it's that the author (and the forum at large) simply doesn't care, then so be it.

I just don't like the idea that the readership needs to be told that they should be patient and things will work out; if the work were (dramatically) well-paced, it would carry itself without needing to be reinforced by the community and other outside-context justifications. The fact that it doesn't (and this is seen as acceptable) comes across as a major failing to me. In simplest terms: "The work needs to carry itself without outside support."


Perhaps I'm hype-backlashing just because I see almost unilateral support, and even those who are willing to be critical seem to be afraid of upsetting the overwhelming majority.

Edit: Grammar.

[FujinAkari]

Perhaps I'm hype-backlashing just because I see almost unilateral support, and even those who are willing to be critical seem to be afraid of upsetting the overwhelming majority.

When you post an opinion in a hall of open debate, that opinion can, will, and should be challenged by anyone who does not hold it. The volume of the response merely speaks that a lot of people disagree with you.

As for your second "point," I am one of the most critical posters on the forums and take issue with a lot of things. I can promise that very few of us are honestly "afraid" of upsetting others, as anyone who survived the Miko Wars can attest :)

[ti'esar]

misplaced counterarguments

To clarify, I was not, in fact, saying you were wrong. I disagree with you, but I do not honestly consider myself qualified to say which of us is objectively right. I was merely attempting to clear up my points: that when I talk about pacing, I refer to dramatic structure rather then the update schedule, and that when I say you have a different understanding of competence (and so forth), it's not an insult but simply an observation based on the fact that almost everyone else disagrees with you. That doesn't necessarily make our understanding of things right - I think it is, but that was not something I was trying to say with my post.

[Masamichi]

When you post an opinion in a hall of open debate, that opinion can, will, and should be challenged by anyone who does not hold it. The volume of the response merely speaks that a lot of people disagree with you.

"Should" be? Kids these days.... I miss the concept of respect. :\

I also missed the 'debate' tag on the thread (or perhaps in the FAQ/rules); I had thought it was for civil discussion and feedback.

Thank you for clarifying that to me.

[rbetieh]

I would say that this is the Giants most ambitious story arc from a narrative standpoint. That seems to be causing some growing pains for the readership. For me, this arc has me questioning if this story isn't really a coming of age story for Elan (i.e. frodo), instead of a redemption story for Roy (i.e. aragorn). Funny thing is I have become invested in both characters to the point where I might be happy seeing both stories play out, but making them both play out at the same time seems like some crazy Joss Whedon wizzardry to me. And, to top this off, every other protagonist is getting "remembered". V has her 'consequences of power' theme, Haley has her 'family bonds/trust' thing, Belkar has his impending doom, and now we are seeing Mr. Reliable - Durkon get his effective meter knotched back (seems like a 'Crisis of Faith' arc in the works to me). But how do you keep a narrative burrito together without losing quality? I don't know, I read dead philosophers and programming manuals. But, considering just how big a bite this arc is trying to make, I have to say that I remain entertained and engaged in the story.

[WindStruck]

Ok, so you've been forced into a gladiatorial arena fight. What is the master plan supposed to be if you have been stripped of all your possessions, contact with members of your party is extremely limited or nil, and armed guards are everywhere to enforce the fact that you are supposed to hit the other guy till he dies? Make a cannon out of rock rubble and dirt?

[Math_Mage]

As far as understanding dramatic tension, I edit dramatic works on a daily basis (frequently into the small hours of the morning). In this regard, as I have explained, I feel that the story is slipping and cheapening the character growth/competence of the heroes in favor of one-shot gags (which also accomplish almost nothing but demeaning the supposed heroes and don't move the story along).

Regarding competence, all I can say is, the difference between a campaign and a story is that stories have less reason to stick to level-appropriate encounters. And the Order has been in over their heads practically since the story began. That the Order's martial prowess will not be the final word in defeating the long-since epic Xykon should be no surprise, and a strong indicator that this is not a story where the good guys are in control of events. That's not bad, just different. There's a continuum of hero-villain power disparities ranging from Superman (or Doctor Manhattan) to Frodo, and great stories can be told anywhere along that continuum.

Regarding the comic devolving into gags, I have to point out once again that we are less than ten strips from the major dramatic three-strip reveal that the Draketooths were killed by Familicide. Rich has done a consistent job of mixing plot advancement, drama, and gags, and I simply don't see a fundamental shift in the way any of these are treated. Contrast, oh, the shift from Dungeon Crawlin' Fools to NCftPB.

[Smolder]

I just don't like the idea that the readership needs to be told that they should be patient and things will work out; if the work were (dramatically) well-paced, it would carry itself without needing to be reinforced by the community and other outside-context justifications. The fact that it doesn't (and this is seen as acceptable) comes across as a major failing to me. In simplest terms: "The work needs to carry itself without outside support."

Perhaps I'm hype-backlashing just because I see almost unilateral support, and even those who are willing to be critical seem to be afraid of upsetting the overwhelming majority.

But you do recognize that reading a book cover to cover is a different experience than reading one page per week, don't you? With only one page to obsess over, the little details get overblown, picked apart and the larger story arc is obscured.

And I have seen very few participants on this forum who actually shy away from conflict. The problem is that they choose to conflict over things that don't matter, and threads devolve into entire pages of people shouting eachother down.

Let me explain, for everyone on the forum, the difference between a debate and an argument. In a debate, people exchange facts and correct eachothers facts until one side is conclusively proven and everyone agrees*. In an argument, you try to shout your beliefs over the other person, without seriously considering their side. Debates are healthy and lead to enlightenment for everyone. Arguments are wastes of energy and time.

*In modern life, it is often the case that one side is debating and the other side is arguing. The result is that the debater can provide any and all facts and the arguer will not consider them and just continues arguing. "You can't convince a man of the truth when his income depends on him not believing it" is the motto of modern politics. Since no one can win a debate, everyone reverts to arguing.

[Masamichi]

But you do recognize that reading a book cover to cover is a different experience than reading one page per week, don't you? With only one page to obsess over, the little details get overblown, picked apart and the larger story arc is obscured.

I think you miss my point that if the content isn't compelling/positive enough for me to continue reading it, whatever happens next is irrelevant to me (and ostensibly to anyone else who shares this viewpoint). All the belated backpedaling in the world makes no difference for readers that have dropped the story because it was already unsatisfactory, and I don't think it's terribly reasonable to expect the casual reader won't form any opinion at all until the work is complete.


Edit: Spelling. (Muscle memory, why do you betray me so?)

[Math_Mage]

I think you miss my point that if the content isn't compelling/positive enough for me to continue reading it, whatever happens next is irrelevant to me (and ostensibly to anyone else who shares this viewpoint). All the belated backpedaling in the world makes no difference for readers that have dropped the story because it was already unsatisfactory, and I don't think it's terribly reasonable to expect the casual reader won't form any opinion at all until the work is complete.


Edit: Spelling. (Muscle memory, why do you betray me so?)

All right, so let's go back to what makes the content not compelling/positive enough for you to continue reading it. After all, the point here is not that we're trying to make belated excuses for obvious flaws in the comic; the point is that we're discussing whether those flaws exist in the first place.

[Masamichi]

Math_Mage: Sorry -- the belated backpedaling would be from the author addressing the previous issues after they'd become grating, and trying to adjust the tone to compensate for the earlier poor delivery/pacing, not the forum or community. If that came across as an accusation to the community, then I apologize.

I've also explained I feel the work should support itself, so I think that much should be evident in context....

I don't think there's anything to say that hasn't already been covered as far as what didn't work for me.

But since you asked: The 'heroes' simply haven't been portrayed in a light that makes them feel 'heroic' to me lately; there's simply an excess of villainous competence, to the point where one wonders how the heroes can have meaningful victories in the face of what's gone before. And it's been heavily foreshadowed that the heroes can't succeed, and only the fact that incredibly competent villains are going to be busy fighting one-another will give them any leeway to move towards anything constituting a 'win'. Sure, the plot dictates that they'll succeed, so they will.

But will it feel like something earned, or will it just be something that underscores the irrelevance of the team's contributions in the face of major antagonists being too busy infighting? It'd be one thing if Tarquin and Xykon ran into one-another before the Order got to the temple (yes, as written, the Order had to get there first), and then the Order took the opportunity to sneak/charge past them. But as it stands, what's their meaningful contribution going to be?

Instead of the heroes being capable, we get major exposition on the Order getting beat up by someone who exists (much like the Linear Guild) pretty much to deconstruct the concept of the competent heroic team and humiliate them (which I have limited patience for). I anticipate that what happens next is that he will turn around and deal with a 'legitimate' threat so they can slink off and steal whatever measure of 'success' remains possible. Probably at that point, the Order will fight what remains of the Linear Guild, saved once again by infighting on the part of the villain cast (specifically, I expect that with Tarquin gone, Malak won't back the Guild up -- and in fact will likely take out whoever the biggest threat to the Order is himself ... if he isn't busy countering Redcloak while Tarquin squares off with Xykon).

That's not compelling reading, to me. "And the heroes finally (sort of) succeed because the villains can counter every conceivable threat ... except for other villains."

[Math_Mage]

Math_Mage: Sorry -- the belated backpedaling would be from the author addressing the previous issues after they'd become grating, and trying to adjust the tone to compensate for the earlier poor delivery/pacing, not the forum or community. If that came across as an accusation to the community, then I apologize.

Oh, you mean that if the author changes his tune in future strips, it won't affect your distaste for the fact that this section of strips dragged on. I see.

But since you asked: The 'heroes' simply haven't been portrayed in a light that makes them feel 'heroic' to me lately; there's simply an excess of villainous competence, to the point where one wonders how the heroes can have meaningful victories in the face of what's gone before. And it's been heavily foreshadowed that the heroes can't succeed, and only the fact that incredibly competent villains are going to be busy fighting one-another will give them any leeway to move towards anything constituting a 'win'. Sure, the plot dictates that they'll succeed, so they will.

But will it feel like something earned, or will it just be something that underscores the irrelevance of the team's contributions in the face of major antagonists being too busy infighting? It'd be one thing if Tarquin and Xykon ran into one-another before the Order got to the temple (yes, as written, the Order had to get there first), and then the Order took the opportunity to sneak/charge past them. But as it stands, what's their meaningful contribution going to be?

Instead of the heroes being capable, we get major exposition on the Order getting beat up by someone who exists (much like the Linear Guild) pretty much to deconstruct the concept of the competent heroic team and humiliate them (which I have limited patience for). I anticipate that what happens next is that he will turn around and deal with a 'legitimate' threat so they can slink off and steal whatever measure of 'success' remains possible. Probably at that point, the Order will fight what remains of the Linear Guild, saved once again by infighting on the part of the villain cast (specifically, I expect that with Tarquin gone, Malak won't back the Guild up -- and in fact will likely take out whoever the biggest threat to the Order is himself ... if he isn't busy countering Redcloak while Tarquin squares off with Xykon).

That's not compelling reading, to me. "And the heroes finally (sort of) succeed because the villains can counter every conceivable threat ... except for other villains."

All right. My two previous points regarding this argument (that the villains are now too strong for the Order to believably succeed against them and be 'heroic') were that this has been the case throughout the comic, and that this has been the case in other quite successful stories, especially if you consider particular checkpoints of a work in progress (The Empire Strikes Back was mentioned). Is there some particular aspect about OotS that makes it less appropriate to have the heroes repeatedly fail partway through the story? Or is there some other factor that makes their failures especially galling?

One additional point to consider is that "Evil turns upon itself" is by no means a poor literary theme to pursue, in the likely event that the Giant moves in that direction. We even have it explicitly drawn out by the IFCC during the Darth V arc: Evil isn't one big happy family, destructive unnecessary conflict has held the evil races back for all these years, and so on. Is it then dramatically inappropriate to have the foreseeable LG fracture and the foreseeable arrival of Team Evil breaking up the current fight?

[rgrekejin]

But since you asked: The 'heroes' simply haven't been portrayed in a light that makes them feel 'heroic' to me lately; there's simply an excess of villainous competence, to the point where one wonders how the heroes can have meaningful victories in the face of what's gone before.

Keep reading. You'll find out.

And it's been heavily foreshadowed that the heroes can't succeed, and only the fact that incredibly competent villains are going to be busy fighting one-another will give them any leeway to move towards anything constituting a 'win'. Sure, the plot dictates that they'll succeed, so they will.

But will it feel like something earned, or will it just be something that underscores the irrelevance of the team's contributions in the face of major antagonists being too busy infighting? It'd be one thing if Tarquin and Xykon ran into one-another before the Order got to the temple (yes, as written, the Order had to get there first), and then the Order took the opportunity to sneak/charge past them. But as it stands, what's their meaningful contribution going to be?

Instead of the heroes being capable, we get major exposition on the Order getting beat up by someone who exists (much like the Linear Guild) pretty much to deconstruct the concept of the competent heroic team and humiliate them (which I have limited patience for).

You keep referencing the Order's incompetence, but I haven't really seen much evidence for this in the comic. The Order is not incompetent. What the are is not omnicompetent. I hold that the Order has shown numerous and varied manifestations of their competence to this point, and if you desire I can enumerate them. I do concede that they make their share of errors, but failing to be omnicompetent is not the same thing as being incompetent. When the Order makes an incorrect tactical decision based on incomplete intelligence, that is not incompetence. They usually make the best possible decision based on what they knew at the time. If their information was incomplete at the time, well, that happens.

The entire rest of the complaint seems stem from how you anticipate future events unfolding, so I really can't say anything about it. I could speculate (and I have) that the current arc will end in a manner completely different from the one you are suggesting. But I'm going to reserve judgement until I see whether or not events actually unfold as I anticipated.