Grrl Power #214 – Better than a lightsaber
The fights are starting to get tough. Math and Jabber are fighting just off camera, and Dabbler it seems got a tough seeds for her first fight. I wish I had drawn that first panel the other way around, even though it’d mean I’d have to cross the word bubble tails, which is generally a big no-no, but that way I could show that the crescent patterns on Dabbler’s arm is draining as she uses up her shield. Why her glamor would include that particular feature I couldn’t guess. It’d be like running around with a hologram over your head showing everyone how much ammo you have left. Glamor or no, her corset must be literally magic cause even with double sided tape she probably would have popped out of it already. It’s weird that women sometimes have to resort to double sided tape to prevent spontaneous indecency with certain outfits. I think a guy’s solution would be to wear a bigger shirt.
“Silver Age Rules” as Sydney defines them is not something that really happened a lot. Sure, villains used to be better about announcing themselves when they showed up back in the day, but I don’t think that usually included a rundown of their powers. I thought I’d have Sydney try it on Heavenly Sword though as a way of introducing her name into the comic without it sounding like slightly awkward dialog. (“Let’s see how you fare against Jabberwokky!” etc.) Announcing yourself in third person really only sounds natural if your name is King Snooty the Seventh, and you also tend to say “we” instead of “I.”
As always I will be at A-kon this year (June 6-8 in Dallas) and as I did last year, I’ll be doing a panel on Friday. Humor-Based Webcomics 1: Humor in Story. Be sure to stop by!
My fourth Gynostar Guest strip is up today. The current arc starts here.
<– Patreon, for those of you who haven’t heard of it before, is like Kickstarter for microtransactions. Instead of funding one off projects, Patreon is for giving ongoing support to independent artists you enjoy. It creates a steady source of revenue to help support their projects or even just pay their bills so they can concentrate on making more of what you love.
SuperheroThey're super, thanks for asking!
Meatspace ComicSeriously these are awesome. Check 'em out!
Not UpdatingNo longer updating or only updates sporadically, but definitely worth reading.
SeriouslySeriously you guys. If you like Grrl Power the check these out.
"Mature"Mature subject matter and occasionally something explicit but usually safe. Can't guarantee the ads are safe though.
Dongs Ahoy!Full frontal and backal. Lots of skin, sex on some or all pages, explicit or otherwise.
Sydney: Can I have one of those?
Heavenly Sword: What? We’re supposed to be enemies here!
Sydney: Please, please, pleeeeeeeeeeeease?
Heavenly Sword: Listen, kid, no!
Sydney: But….
Heavenly Sword: How many times do I have to tell… [by this time, Dabbler has snuck behind her and kiboshes her]… ooh, look at the purty birdies….
Wait, so you are implying the only way the ‘Good Guys’ can win is by distracting/using dirty tricks?
Misleading the enemy to win is still a win doesn’t make you good or bad just makes you smarter than the other guy. Nothing wrong with it at all.
Yeah, but if the only way you can win is by distracting, doesn’t make you very good, nor one of the ‘good guys’
But then again, your back is never safe around the ‘good guys’, there is always someone who will put something there giving the slightest chance, you are safer being amongst the ‘bad guys’
Yeah, with the bad guys, you know someone will stab you in the back at the first opportunity. When dealing with the good guys, it’s just battlefield expediencies.
Bad guys usually have rules and etiquette they strongly abide by: ie “don’t screw your team-mates unless you are prepared to be gangbanged in return”
Even the Joker sticks to the rules (remember, he’s psychotic, not stupid)
As I was taught many years ago by my martial arts instructor:
“What I teach you is not for attack, not for winning any stupid trophies. When you use it, be sure it’s really worth it; and then use it with all your power, else you dishonor yourself and the very reason you are using it.”
Short: No beating people up, no fighting for the sole reason of winning a tournament or such.
Fighting to help/protect/defend others and such.
Then, when fighting, we were supposed to use everything we could to win.
Long story short: he more or less taught us Anything Goes.
Sounds like a follower of the Saotome school… https://ssoagma.tripod.com/faction.html
Never start a fight, but always finish it. (Guess where that quote comes from without googling. ;))
oo ooo I know, It’s Babylon 5 right. My own motto have always been never start a fight out of anger or pride, and go no further than necessary to win.
On that note when it comes to stopping someone from causing harm, busting over the back of the head is totally legit, especially if your out numbered. If your fighting for the right reasons than a long drawn out battle is just gonna result in extra collateral, and if you do lose, that means the ass hole is gonna go right back to what they were doing before you intervened.
Doh. I should have gotten that one. It was so familiar that I just thought it was a general phrase. Or that it would, at the very least, have multiple occurrences of it.
Far too long since I last watched it. I remember seeing one episode on it’s live first broadcast at GenCon UK. Normally gaming would go on near enough 24 hours a day there. But every area emptied as it approached broadcast time. Except for those places, like the bars, which had TVs. And those were packed to the rafters. Plus it was a season finale, so the place was a nerdfest on steroids.
Every episode is on my list of ‘things to buy when I next have money’.
My Mom. Well a variant from my Mom, and this was 30+ years before Babylon 5
“Don’t start the fight, but if someone else does, you have my permission to finish it.”
I can personally attest to this one.
{I wonder if any readers up to date(storywise) read comments on olde posts :) }
Joker sometimes sticks to it, and sometimes not. He’s pretty random, and has been known to backstab someone tougher than he is. His superpower is getting away with it…
Even though the trope says that “good is stupid,” it’s becoming more common in comics to subvert that trope. If you’re smarter than the villain, it doesn’t mean you can’t take advantage of it.
Also, “good” doesn’t mean that you’re willing to eliminate all of your advantages just so you can “level the field” or have a “fair fight” against a villain either; do you think the villains will give up their advantages willingly, assuming they don’t fall into the same tropes discussed over at Evil Inc? Heroes that DON’T take their advantages when they can ARE stupid. Villains who fall into the “villain tropes” are just as stupid.
After all is said & done, if you’re the one who can walk away from the fight under your own power & the villain can’t, it means you’re still better than the villain.
Yes, but if the only way you can win is by cheating, how does that make you a good guy or even simply ‘better’?
By the very reason you’re fighting in the first place.
To quote Chen Stormstout:
“To ask why we fight is to ask why leaves fall: It is in their nature. Perhaps, there is a better question…
Why do we fight? To protect home and family, to preserve balance and bring harmony.
For my kind, the true question is: What is worth fighting for?”
And, yes, I know it by heart. XD
In sports, there’s a concept called cheating. In combat, it’s kill/beat or be killed/beat. With them being military, using a ruse to win is acceptable under the rules of engagement. It’s how WW2 was won, in part.
It’s a major theme in David Weber’s Honor Harrington series as well, such as in this excerpt from Ashes of Victory:
Considering the midshipmen were asking questions about some of her more desperate/insane tactics (Like diving “Out of the sun” without her primary means of both propulsion and defense and hoping that the task force at Hell didn’t spot her.)
While true, I can’t recall a single engagement that she had been involved in thus far (and several afterwards) that didn’t require the use of “desperate/insane tactics” due to generally being outgunned- but rarely outthought- by the enemy. The point, however, was that such “sneakiness” hardly marks her as a villainess.
Come to think of it, Avatar (from the link to the Wizards‘ clip I posted below) would be another good example of this.
so a weak but smart guy can’t be a “good guy” becouse he can’t take down the big strong killer like a D&D Paladin?
somebody’s obviously never played a good Rogue.
‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing’ – anonymous. Sadly that is no guarantee that the good men will survive battling evil. It is the attempt that defines the goodness. But failing in the act, although it affirms the goodness of the man (or woman) making the attempt, does not necessarily, in itself, ensure that evil will be defeated. Look at Tibet. Although Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela have shown that it can work.
So it is important to assess the merits and likely success of each approach. Here it is necessary to have some definition of the distinction between good and evil. Which is a very tricky thing to do, as much of it is dependant on cultural viewpoints. But, in order to proceed, I need something. So will go with:
An evil act causes harm to innocents.* Whereas a good act prevents harm to innocents.*
Obviously not all acts will be clear cut. Some may both cause harm and prevent it. Whereas others might have variable outcomes which could do either, or both. But, again, we can only use our judgement here. If it maximises the chance to prevent harm to innocents, whilst minimising the chance of causing harm, then it is a good act. Whereas an evil act will do the converse.
Does deceiving an evil person cause harm to innocents? No. The ones who will be harmed are villains, who are not innocent.
Does it minimise the chance of harm happening to innocents? Yes. In the immediate instance, the heroes, who we know to be innocent, will survive. Plus it will allow them to detain the villains, preventing ongoing harm to the heroes and other innocents.
But we must be mindful of unintended consequences, in addition to the obvious result.
Can the deception cause harm to innocents, in the long term? Yes. If the heroes’ reputation is harmed, such that people consider them to be untrustworthy or dishonourable.
And this is where we must make a distinction. Trustworthiness and honour are not one and the same thing. They are culturally often closely associated, true. However one is to do with someone’s ability to keep a deal and stand by their word. And the other is to do with maintaining the culturally-dependant standards of ‘fair play’.
It is this distinction which is causing you to disagree on the concept. But if you separate the two, and assess their merits separately it is easier to test it against my definition of good and evil.
Can deceiving a villain, by breaking one’s word, cause harm to innocents? Yes. The credibility of a good person is undermined, therefore reducing their future capacity to prevent harm to innocents.
Can deceiving a villain, without breaking one’s word, cause harm to innocents? Possibly. Future dealings with people who consider the deception to be dishonourable will be unfavourable. Therefore harming credibility and future effectiveness in combating evil. Whereas it will not harm relations with those who do not consider the deception dishonourable. And may even enhance it.
Hence it is necessary to ensure that the deception does not grossly violate the sense of fairness, of the majority of the society you are in. Or the most influential individuals, if that is not one and the same thing. This is a judgement call. Personally I feel that, in a modern Western society, clever tricks are very broadly accepted and even applauded. And even dirty tricks (the most basic being throwing sand in an opponent’s face) are tolerated and can even receive general acceptance.
The latter happening when it is clear that the risk of harm to innocents is significantly greater, without playing the trick. Ie the more a villain is outclassing a hero, the more acceptable society deems it for the hero to resort to dirty tricks. A strong hero using a dirty trick against a weak villain may be considered demeaning. Clever tricks do not suffer in this way. Especially if it reduces the chances of harm to the villain, compared to other means available to overcome them.
In this case Deof Movestofca‘s scenario is using the trick in a way which allows a deadly foe to be overcome without harm to them. Which is extremely laudable. Given that the alternatives would pose great risk of death to both a hero and the villain. I can find no fault with Sydney’s actions, were she to do this.
So, in conclusion, I would say that whilst Sydney restricts herself to pulling clever tricks, and neither breaks her word, nor makes her tricks too dirty**, she is doing good.
* And shall just leave “innocents” down to common sense to define.
** Castration/sterilisation of a villain through crushing may, just, pass scrutiny legally, via clever self-defence arguments, but it can potentially harm Halo’s reputation. It is certainly a very dirty trick. Although, in other quarters, it will enhance her ‘rep’.
“** Castration/sterilization of a villain through crushing may, just, pass scrutiny legally, via clever self-defense arguments***, but it can potentially harm Halo’s reputation. It is certainly a very dirty trick. Although, in other quarters, it will enhance her ‘rep’.***”
*** “What’s all this then? Faith and Begorrah!: OH the Humanity!!”
Ahh, possibly you are one of the folks who did not notice the second orb, in the excruciating ball-crushing scene? Hopefully the super-healer will be able to repair the damage, without permanent loss of function. With that help, Halo might not even get accused of any wrongdoing. Especially as Shadow Boxer may not wish to draw attention to his inadequacies – as a fighter.
Without it, and she could face an enquiry. Into whether her actions were proportionate to the threat, and whether they constituted cruel or unusual punishment. A single blow to the groin would be considered a fair act of self defence, in life-threatening circumstance. Creating a high-speed, crushing, vice-like effect, maybe not so.
to be fair, being trapped and on the floor with an obviously lethal threat standing over you and about to stick a knife in your back, most people aren’t thinking about “force levels” they’re thinking “remove threat, save life”
Oh absolutely. I certainly would side with her, if on the jury.
An untrained civilian, in a life or death struggle, can be forgiven for opting for a lethal response, with the benefit of hindsight, a non-lethal response can be found. Panic can easily make people overlook obvious options. But bear in mine that the injury she inflicted could easily result in death. Especially if he is bleeding, from the wound, internally or externally. This is not comparable to kneeing an attacker in the nuts.
Whereas a trained policeman, under similar circumstances, is held to a higher standard. If a non-lethal (or less likely to be lethal) option is available, then it should be used in preference. Assuming similar likelihood of success, of course. But if a lethal response is called for, then the one that causes the minimum of suffering should be chosen. Panic is harder to use as an excuse, because they are trained to avoid that.
In the event that Halo did go to trial over this, the prosecution would have one angle that they could pursue, to try and get her held to the higher standard of accountability. And that is the degree of control she showed. The fact that Halo managed, with apparent ease, to conduct such a complex attack could be used to argue that she was in full control. Which would also show the lack of panic.
Therefore showing that she acted with malicious intent to cause maximum pain and suffering.* Which would clearly be disproportionate to the stated objective of self-defence.
It is the kind of thing that can come to trail if Shadow Boxer dies or is rendered permanently impotent. I think she would win the case, but the outcome would not be a sure thing.
* She had better hope there was no recording of the incident, because the expression on her face would very much support their case.
Cheating? There are no rules in a fight. Only those imposed before hand, and then it’s not a fight, but rather a competition.
Titanfall has one memorable bit of dialogue:
Graves: No person is better than another, Blisk.
Blisk: I disagree, you kill me, you’re better, I kill you, I’m better.
I don’t find this to be a very good example since Blisk is using the term “better” ambiguously. Simply because one is physically better (his meaning) doesn’t mean that one is ontologically better (which I suspect is Graves’ meaning) as well.
… a great idea for a comic would be an average joe who fights supers almost solely by “cheating”.
they have that one, it’s called bat man.
It’s called tactics and strategy, otherwise known as a feint. Very Sun Tsu’ish… :-)
In Maxima’s Book, I’m pretty sure, any Win, is a good Win.
Not the only way. Just that Dabs would take advantage of the situation if it presented itself (especially since it would give her a “kill”).
Heh. That dialogue is very much in keeping with the character style and precedents. Just look at Halo in panel 3. She obviously will need to have a talk about “fraternising with the enemy”. Although successful use of mis-direction would also get her commendations for adaptive thinking, for both the above comic and your scenario.
I was specifically thinking about Sydney’s reaction to Dabbler’s hammerspace and rail gun when I wrote it. Probably the only thing preventing Heavenly Sword from having a diminutive Archon recruit clinging to her leg is Maxima’s order to Halo to keep her shield up.
Grrr…. messed up the tag. Hope I get it right this time: Super Twin powers activate, shape of a hammerspace link.
she may still get that reaction… depending on Halo’s ADHD kicking in and making her FORGET that order!
Dabbler was using a coil gun, not a rail gun.
I like physics, so now I will do some math:
M is the mass of the projectile(# probably between 100-1000g, so I will can it 100g)
D is drag force
Vi is the initial velocity of the projectile
Vf is the final velocity
g is acceleration du to earth’s gravity
r is distance from (center of) earth
t is time since shot
estimated numbers (N) will be shown as N(#)
most estimates derived from from https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/1070
Lots of rounding will be used, the numbers should all come out to within about 1 order of magnitude of true values though
Note: This turned into a very crude approximation, because proper data for calculations at these speeds really doesn’t exist.
To shoot a satellite, you need to approach escape velocity, which for earth’s gravity is about 11 kilometers per second (mach 32).
This doesn’t account for drag.
Me trying to calculate drag with insufficient data:
**
Air resistance (drag force) = 1/2*(velocity)^2*(frontal area)*(density of air)*(drag coefficient)
D=.5*V^2*(cross sectional area of projectile)*(1.25kg/m^3)*(.005(# this is an extremely aerodynamic projectile, and doesn’t take into account the drag from breaking the sound barrier))
D=.5V^2*.0003m^2(# half the width of the barrel^2 * pi)*1.25*.005
D=.000001V^2
The shot still has to carry enough energy at satellite altitude(100km) to take it down.
Based on what it did to the tank at max speed, 100m/s should be sufficient for the satellite.
End velocity=100m/s
End Velocity=Start Velocity-Acceleration*Time
Acceleration=9.81(# it decreases slightly at higher altitudes, but gravity is insignificant compared to drag anyways so it doesn’t really matter)+Drag force/Mass
Drag force at time t (Dt) = .000001Vt^2
Velocity at time t (Vt) = Vi-9.81t-(f(Dt/100){for t=0,t})/t/M
^
I have no clue how to make an integral sign, but isn’t recursive calculus fun?
v
Vt= Vi-9.81t-(f(.000001Vt^2/100){t=0,t})/t
OK so I can’t do recursive calculus on my calculator, it runs out of memory, so lets just look at a rough approximation of Vt for t=1
Vt=11000-9.81-.00001*11000^2/100
Vt=11000-9.81-1.21
**
The Vi of 11000m/s is for no drag. Since drag adds quite a bit to deceleration, initial speed must be increased. I’ll call it 15000m/s
E=1/2MV^2
energy to accelerate shot~=.1kg*15000^2
E=22500000J
Call the barrel 30cm
The shot averaged 7500m/s travelling down the barrel, so it took .00004s
The gun applied 562500000000J/s to the shot
This would liquefy a rail gun.
Also the shot carried the same energy as 5kg of TNT
Also the recoil on the gun (unavoidable due to equal & opposite reactions) would be the same as the energy applied to the shot.
Dabbler has very strong arms.
Ahh, sounds like you are in need of a mathematical challenge that will stretch you. How about working out Yorp’s Number? At the very least you should be able to uncover the Easter egg, before the next issue is posted.
Just saw this now. Can’t work on it now, sorry, teaching myself quantum physics.
Aww, and there I was hoping to find out how many universes worth of space it would take to write out the number :-(
In only a few seconds, i was able to establish a lower bound of 5.
For the sub-graph to have 4 co-planar vertices, the main graph must have more.
Take it up with Halo and Dabbler. That’s what they called and I’m certainly not about to argue it with them.
Funny, but following closer to the way people act, she would have snarled and layed one on Sydney with a flick of her wrist and arm. Or tried to with her force sword and gotten to see Syd’s shield in action.
With most people, I might agree. However, I think Halo’s unpredictability will make many opponents either stop to consider a seemingly innocent request or, as with Heavenly Sword, go along with it just so they can get back to business without realizing it’s not as harmless as it first appears.
Ah, a “top-tier swordswoman”? That might explain why Dabbler hasn’t been able to overcome her quite yet. Recall a while back she admitted she wasn’t an especially great swordswoman herself (and has the missing body parts to prove it).
She could always go the “I want to show you a trick that mother showed me when you weren’t around” route (alas, that’s pretty much all I remember from the movie).
Heh. I love how Avatar subverted THAT particular trope…
:D
Nice slight of hand.
I’ll admit, never saw THAT coming.
I got the video of the movie a long time ago & the first time I saw it, it was literally a double-take & an lol moment. I’m glad I wasn’t drinking anything at that moment, or it would have been a literal spit-take.
Even just watching the video clip, it’s like Syndrome in The Incredibles when he says that he was “freaking out” over Mr. Incredible hiding under the bones of another Super…So many years & so many viewings of that Wizards scene & I still facepalm the subversion of that trope.
Just out of curiosity how come the last two pages have left the facial damage off of Sydney?
Answer A: mystical healing powers.
Answer B: the artist forgot to draw it. These things happen. It becomes something of an “all in good fun” competition sometimes to see if we can catch any mistakes he may have made before he does.
Hrmm… Residual regeneration-ish effect from the healing after the noodle incident, perhaps?
Doc healing powers have not been clearly defined as far as i can remember.
I was starting to assume that point she picked in the talent/skill tree made her shield heal/ regenerate whoever was within its confines
That may be happening, of course (although the Easer egg is more likely), but I think that thematically it would fit better if it were one of the mystery orbs, rather than the truesight orb. But it would have to be something that has unocked recently. Sydney is an intelligent, experienced gamer. There is no way she would not have tested her orbs for healing capabilities months ago.
Corroborated by the fact that she ignored Maxima’s suggestion regarding testing it on paper cuts. In fact her over-reaction, to that comment, may be indicative of the painful memories of said experimenting. Note that the mystery orbs do have skill points in them already. But we do not know when that may have happened, so it is plausible that they have been auto-allocated for some reason, recently.
Perhaps as a sympathetic reaction to the doctor’s super healing power being used on her? As someone suggested again, just recently, one of the orbs could have super power emulating/copying abilities. In fact all of the orbs could be based that way, if it is a one off permanent change based on initial exposure to an effect or super power.
Let us say that the orbs originally fell to Earth from ‘somewhere out there’.
* The intense heat of re-entry invokes a sympathetic power over heat and fire. The PPO is born.
* That same heat and/or the impact with the ocean/ocean floor threatening to destroy the orbs. A force field springs into being to protect against the damage. The Forb acquires its powers.
* A flying fish picks up an orb, in it’s mouth, and, defying gravity, flies off. The Flight Orb comes into being.
* A deep sea relative of the angler fish later comes into contact with another orb. Although unknown to science, it has the ability to use it’s light generating appendage to create the illusion of it being offset from it’s current location. And evolution has evolved its eyes to see through such tricks being pulled by rivals. The truesight orb awakens.
* A curious octopus gathers up the orbs and carries them up nearer the surface. The tentacle orb waving goodbye to it, when they part.
You may bear in mind that both Maxima and Dabbler have come into contact with the orbs. Possibly the ability to see through Sucubus illusions being added in one incident. As regards the other, the orbs can already provide flight, defence and devastating fiery attack. But not super-speed or the ability to max out abilities to superman levels…
Within all technicalities, she already does at least have some form of super-speed.
As Maxima has tested, combining the Flight and Shield orbs allows Sydney to fly as fast as around 400mph that we know of, she could possibly fly faster.
To me the orbs would fit into a spacer’s kit bag of necessary tools. An advanced civilization that may have 100,000 years of continuous development or even much more. Who knows they may not even need to touch them. They, like the Blue Beetle’s armor, will be wanted back should they visit Earth again in a century or more.
She was forced to put the point into the Telepresence/Truesight orb. So, no additional abilities in force fields. Yet.
One Sydney icon and one long shot of Sydney where the details don’t show up.
what about panel 2 that is a medium shot at least
Ohh Dave…
standard superhero rules. unless an injury was caused to be debilitating, it will be gone the moment the character is no longer in panel
plus, she could have wiped her face, y’know ;)
I keep forgetting to include them. I’ve made some minor tweaks to the page including putting the bruise back on her.
When the adrenaline wears off, Sydney is really gonna be feeling that.
Come on peeps only 21k votes from #1.
We can do it!
Against TwoKinds? By the time we got 21k, they would have gotten 50K
22k at this time
There is no chance. Not after people found out the writer for twokinds is Markipliers brother.
Who? Tom Fischbach has a brother?
Regarding Heaven’s “Whos who’ pic, personally would have gone with panel 3
Also, liking how you squished her keyhole closed in the last panel :D
Awesome comic, but I’m pretty sure that isn’t how you hold a sword. Or anything of that kind. The thumb wraps around because otherwise you risk breaking it on impact.
You may have noticed a distinct lack of impact going on. Heavenly Sword may just use the weapon because it looks cool, as opposed to actually having training with it. Although the HuD disagrees with that presumption. And Dabbler would probably not have been fought to a standstill for this long, for that matter. But, even so, Heavenly could have simply fallen into lax habits because she can defeat her enemies without (physically) landing a blow.
People don’t typically call themselves a “top tier swordswoman” if they have no skill with a sword. Just sayin’.
I think, as you and Oberon have said, we can dismiss the idea of her not knowing how to use the sword. And I’d personally disagree with the ‘lax habits’ idea, because I play cricket, and holding the bat in that way leads to some very painful experiences that stay with you.
I’m more confused as to why Dabbler didn’t use HS’s overextension on the first panel to trap the sword with her magic shield and smash her in the face or whatever took her fancy. Just, you know, let the opportunity pass by because you want to stop and have a chat with your teammate. Ehh, I’m probably just guilty of overthinking this.
But if you had zero-range telekinesis, like Maxima, and the cricket ball never got to touch the bat, then you would not have those bad experiences. Even protecting the bat and your hands when you accidentally catch the ground. And therefore may, likewise, fall into bad habits.
Similarly, it is never wise to judge an enemy’s capabilities purely on what they claim to be able to do. It is extremely common for people to lie about having abilities they do not possess. Especially martial arts.
Note that I am just running with the ball here. I just like finding plausible excuses, if there are apparent discrepancies. Which can be a fun exercise, in it’s own right.
And on that vein, a common ploy of a good fighter, when engaging a foe who does not know their capabilities, is to deliberately appear to be less skilled than they are. Or even, if they can pull it off, making themselves appear incompetent. If the enemy falls for it, and tries to take advantage of an apparent mistake, they themselves fall into the trap.
So you’re arguing that HS has undisclosed abilities that allow her such incredible advantages in combat that she doesn’t need to exercise correct form? Possible, I’ll grant you, but that wouldn’t explain her character sheet. Even if you were completely invincible in sword combat because of a superpower, you could still be a crappy swordsman. And yeah, I take your point about the lying thing, but she has supposedly held off Dabbler for a significant amount of time and has the corroboration on her character sheet, as well as Leon’s rating of her.
I take your point about the false sense of security thing, but I still doubt any swordsman would be caught dead holding a weapon like that.
Yeah, this back and forth is enjoyable, I’ll admit :D
I totally agree. In my hypothesis, she would be a poseur, who had it as a fashion accessory.
Nope. Up until now she could have just been using a weak version of her power. Dabbler could see this, and is not fooled, but has been cautious because the possibility of loosing another limb has been freaking her out. And a rank amateur swinging a lightsaber would terrify even a master swordsman.
The reason why novice martial artists wear white belts is not to say ‘this person is weak’. In the orient white is the colour of death. The symbology says ‘this person is deadly’. They do not know what they are doing, so can kill you by accident. Like Sydney, their danger stems from their unpredictability.
As you say, the HuD is being updated by Leon. Who is not a master swordsman. He is a computer nerd, who is trying to make snap judgements on dozens of simultaneous fights. He can simply have made a mistake in assessing her. Her opponent is Dabbler, the one person on the team who can beat Maxima. Heavenly is just using a sword, and has held her off for a long time. So the snap call he would (incorrectly) make is that she must be expert.
Finally the Who’s who is a convenient summary to remind people of what a character appears to be. Harem seems to be a non-treacherous heroine, to all of her team-mates. And her entry reflects that. Heavenly Sword emulates being an expert swordsman, just as Maxima simulates having tough skin. Neither do, it is just their powers creating false impressions.
Also, she did appear to block the knife that Math threw a few pages ago (in the comments people basically said Math was not trying to hit, but maybe he wand she actually did block), that alone must count for something.
Err, lucky block?
Or maybe Trenas is right about Heavenly Sword being an expert swordswoman, with an unconventional grip.
Depends on the school of fencing. I’ve seen stranger grips.
1) You can change your grip around very quickly as you move around and swing. I assume your grip changes subtly all the time when you’re wielding a melee weapon to help control it.
2) I know almost nothing about swordfighting, so all the fencers and kendo… uh, kendoers reading the comic will probably be disappointed by some of the particulars. :)
Its not a club. The “diagonal grip” with the thumb extended along the handle is often used to give additional control. Generally used more in western styles where the shortened drawing cut isn’t used so much.
The sword would have to rebound to an extreme extent in order to risk damaging the thumb, at which point it has probably smashed back into the face or body anyway.
Why did I expect HS to yell something classic, like “Getsuga Tenshou!”…
Dabbler: Gesundheit.
She’s gonna flip to the ‘good guy’ side sometime, right?
I would guess probably not. Something about this girl has “team leader” written all over her.
Tell me, was it how she was so quickly ignored when she first started calling out advice to her team? Because all great superhero team leads have to deal with the prima donnas before they get any actual respect.
In defense of her leadership skills, most of her teammates did follow her orders (suggestion?). Stupid is just one of those things that’s (nigh) impossible to fix.
…As it was emphasized here…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZF3gYW9sFUY&list=PL66B60627ACBEF8BB
A highly successful sand up comedian. Now there is ADHD providing a positive benefit, through enhanced observation and mobile thinking.
I’ve lost track of my source about this, but I’ve read that the psychiatrist who first defined ADHD as quantifiable mental disease had, on his death-bed, confessed that it’s a diagnosis that was totally manufactured; that *everyone* has at least some degree of it, simply because of the way the human brain & human mind works…Especially in kids, who still haven’t learned much about focusing their thoughts in some form of linear manner.
Now look at the ratio of our population who unknowingly are being drugged into a mental stupor against their will. Then take a look at how much extra profit the pharm corporations have made because of anti-ADHD drugs…
tl:dr
(my attention must have been divert– ooh, look a squirrel outside…)
Source unknown, claim unverifiable, deathbed confession, -sounds about as credible as Darwin’s alleged “begging” to recieve Confession before he died. No witnesses, no record, no history, no foundation and perpetuated by a orthodoxy with an admitted stake in it’s acceptance. Hmm.
ADHD prevalence among children is 5-8%. Many, 30-40%, of them grow out of it. Number of adults in the US is around 10,000,000 with a 3:1 ratio of men to women. Actually diagnosed is about 15% of that -most undiagnosed adults self-medicate with coffee, energy drinks, etc to control the symptoms. Or end up in the U.S. corrective rehabilitation system.
Studies in China, Japan, India, Germany, Puerto Rico and New Zealand show comparable numbers.
ADHD diagnoses info. qEEG results provide a 90% accurate correlative tie between types of brainwave activity associated with ADHD and a diagnosis. MRI scans reveal slightly reduced brain volume in the frontal lobes, the corpus callosum, the caudate nucleus, and the vermis of the cerebellum.
All areas associated with attention span, time management, organization, decision making, impulse control, etc etc etc.
Treatment with drugs is 80-90% effective. “Zoned out”? Far more likely to be a symptom of ADHD then of medication. See your doctor, not the Internet. People claim all kinds of stupid shit they can’t source there.
Source: Delivered From Distraction; Hallowell M.D., Ratey M.D., (c) Ballantine Books 2005.
Also; love Grrl Power, and DB’s arc in Gyno-Star.
Character designs are excellent, would love to contribute one, and am considering Patreon (income is problematic). I appreciate the emphasis on procedure. RL is greatly governed by the Means Justifying the Ends -ARC SWAT/LIGHT would be as well.
All told I hope GP has a long and healthy life. It’s fun, funny, and intelligent. Moar Anvil. Don’t go too dark, never be stupid, Jay Ma Belisarda. <3
I think the problem is that the rest of the villains don’t exactly have “good listener” written all over them.
Why not just use ranged abilities to reduce the building to rubble? Well, that doesn’t make you look as cool as taking on foes one on one.
Villains can be recurring characters as well you know
I find Magneto to be one of the more interesting villains to be portrayed in films. Not because of his powers. But because he can make you empathise with him. He was a child survivor of the holocaust. He fights for the rights of a persecuted minority. And there is superb chemistry between him and Professor X. They really are good friends, who just happen to find themselves on opposite sides of a moral divide.
But make no mistake, even if Magnito’s cause may be a good one, * the methods he uses are those of an out and out villain. Who sleeps at night by thinking that ‘the end justifies the means’. You need merely see how he abandons his faithful sidekick Mystique, the instant she is ‘cured’ of being a mutant. Her loyalty and devotion to him counted for nothing. She became “one of them” (humans).
Likewise any actor who portrays Satan as being creepy or unempathic is failing at his job. Satan is meant to be the lord of lies and the master deceiver. If you watch a scene and come away thinking, ‘he made a good point there, perhaps I have been mis-judging the propaganda about him’, then you know you have a good actor (and script writer).
Of course converting villains to doing good is actually very beneficial to society, so I am not suggesting that it could not, nor should not happen. And much good can come from it. Look at Nelson Mandela. Terrorist turned statesman. But he was a good man, fighting for a just cause, who realised that he was using the wrong tactics initially. And embraced peace and reconciliation, at heart, not just as a cover.
But do not be fooled by pretty looks alone. Until we can find out why she is attempting to murder cops, it is probably best to treat her as a bad person.
* The not letting mutants be persecuted bit. Not the exterminating and/or ruling the rest of humanity side of the argument.
Writing a good hero is easy. Writing a good villain on the other hand, is actually really difficult.
A properly fleshed out villain doesn’t do evil ‘because it’s evil’.
He does it because, from his point of view, it’s the best thing to do.
Either he believes that the current way of things is wrong, and in order to change it, he has to be a villain. He could be conflicted about it, but feels that in the end, if his plan works, it would all be worth it, for the world (doesn’t matter if it’s right. If he believable beliefs it, he would make a very good villain).
Some people might just want to protect the people they love in a harsh world. But in order to do so, they might be forced to do evil things. Which would mean they get even more flak. Which would force them to do more evil things in order to protect the ones they love.
You can just write a really EVIL villain, and say they do evil stuff because they’re crazy (it works for the Joker!), but I agree that motive is normally vital, even if it only makes sense to the villain. Sure, it could be something honourable, but it could equally just be a selfish desire for money or power or fame or revenge. That seems to be what motivates most real life criminals.
This is kind of the main thing that I want to know about these villains: WTF is their problem?
Well, it’s just as I’ve always said: The end does NOT justify the means, the truth is that the means DEFINES the end.
what are you talking about?
x3?
whats that?
never happened.
:D
as to magneto.. read ‘god loves, man kills’
the other classic villain like that is dr doom.. who argues our current system of world government allows tens of thousands to die every year from disease and starvation; and not trying to overthrow that system is the evil point of view.
it’s canon at marvel that at some point he does win.. and starts a century long golden age.
now that’s a villain. :D
considering she was the leader of the supervillains, I’d guess no…
…unless this is a publicity stunt by ariana, in which case…
Ariana has already confirmed hat this was NOT one of her stunts: https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/1260 panels two thru eight.
But I like using theatrics in real life situations, including combat :D
… er is this an artistic mistake or has Sidney got wolverine healing now? …. i see no blood or bruising for the last two pages.
Yes.
No, its just that the battle’s been going on for several weeks now, so it makes sense for her to have healed by now.
ROFL.
Normally when something like this is pointed out Dave gets back to us and fixes it. The fact that he hasn’t might mean something.
Possibly. But we know Dave is busy, due to also drawing the guest strips in Gynostar. So it is understandable that he may not have had time to catch up with all the comments. There are over 500 just for this one issue, after all. And it is incredibly easy to miss minor details like the bruise. Just look at how much he does include on every character, in all panels, on each page.
But it would have very interesting implications if it was intentional. DaveB does have an eye for detail, and may well slide in clues, to new powers or unusual phenomenon, before doing an actual reveal.
DaveB has now updated the bruise. CTRL-F5 to update your image if it is not visible.
saw it just now.
I will admit Sidney did do something very good. She made Heavenly Sword play her trump card (your suppose to save those for later). Now Dabbler can figure out how to beat her.
Not only that, but she did so without having to reveal either her or Dabbler’s abilities. If Heavenly Sword hadn’t let vanity overrule sense, she would have replied something like, “I don’t have to tell you anything. If you’re that interested in knowing, you’ll just have to beat me to find out.”
That heart headband…
And keyhole boob-window…
…is she a Kingdom Hearts fan? Are she and Sidney (or Leon) going to share a geek-moment?
Regarding the first panel. If you flip the two you can stack the text boxes, and use the edges for the tails on the speech bubbles. As for the glamor and the ‘ammo’ thing, if it emits light it might be no good to use a glamor to hide it, as it would still show the light and the amount of glow would tip people off (and would tip people off to the fact it is a glamor). Alternately, since dabbler is a genius, having some of your powers turn off after a set period, with an obvious show means that enemies would assume that power is no longer active for you, which means that you could surprise them with it later in the fight.
i love your comic this is probably the one of a few i would read over and over
Something I really want to see by the end of this fight is for ArcSWAT to extend an offer for some of these superpowered jerks to join, at least the competent and potentially redeemable ones. Like at this point, I wouldn’t mind if by the end if Heavenly Sword joined.
I could possibly see Jabberwocky eventually being considered since she seems to just really want a good fight and hadn’t really been getting them until Math.
They could form a sort of “B” team as community service. They won’t be entirely trusted, but they’d be useful.
Or they could get broken out of jail and end up working for one of our many main villains.
Tour-guide (years in the future): .. and, children, that is how Arc-Twilight was born. Many of these heroes helped faithfully serve society for decades. And some of them even redeemed themselves completely, going on to become fully-fledged members of Arc-SWAT.
Now, if we move over to the other display, I will tell you about Arc-Dusk. This is the breakaway group, who rebelled at being considered second-class heroes. Sadly many of whom were also irredeemable, psychopathic, killers. Who of you can tell me about the worst abuses of the Dusk Age?
Just as long as there aren’t angst-ridden, teenaged, angst-ridden, “cool”, angst-ridden vampires in ARC-Twilight….
Man, that side bar is cool, cool, cool.
Just a couple of little comments here.
The whole “Trickery isn’t fair” thing…. The entire purpose of Police/Security/Superhero’s is to protect people, places, or things. You can’t do that if you’ve been beaten to a bloody pulp for standing tall and taking on an unknown opponent head on. Pure and simple, your out to accomplish a goal. Get it done and move on to the next threat before your opponent does the same to you.
The whole “No swordsman/woman would hold a sword like that” thing…. I would personally swear that a skilled fighter wouldn’t bounce around like a monkey, or launch flashy high-flying kicks during a street fight. I’ve seen some live examples of both and will admit without hesitation that I would get my arse kicked and be most of the way to lala land so fast by several of both styles I’ve seen. Different styles work for different people. I’ve seen demonstrations of 11 different, distinct european broadsword fighting styles. Each uses a slightly different grip (Including 1 that involves using two handed and one handed alternating grips in one of the advanced attack routines). So… lesson being: Don’t assume that because someone is holding a weapon in a way that YOU are not trained to hold it, they are doing it wrong. Keep your guard up and test their attack/defense capabilities before you declare them incompetent.
BTW: Great comic, I love reading this and seeing what you come up with. Keep up the great work :)
Nicely put.
In a nutshell, what you’re saying is that this is a world populated by distinct & different INDIVIDUALS…We all start with the same Human Genome, but the myriad ways that this DNA expresses itself through in a human lifespan leaves everybody with such a wide variety of physique. A martial arts technique that works for a 6′ 2′ 320 lb man is going to be different for a 4′ 9″ 90 lb woman. The musculature is different, the distance between skeletal joints is different, everything is different & martial arts is about training a person to make the best use of what their own individual physique can accomplish.
Any martial arts teacher that won’t take a student from another discipline because they would have to “unlearn” anything before learning a new style cannot be called a “master,” even in their own Art…If they’re not enough of a “master” to observe a student & adjust the training to fit the new student’s specific physique, then they don’t know enough ABOUT the Art in the first place.
Very well put, and that is an excellent observation about martial arts training/instruction
The way she’s holding her right hand would be closer to a Kali method of holding a knife for trapping purposes.
It also bears similarity to how the sabre, foil, and epee are held for vertical strikes, per the book modern fencing. Just not a typical way to hold a shinai or katana.
It wouldn’t break her thumb if she struck something like that if she was applying pressure the correct way.
PS: I would personally like to see more of Heavenly Sword as well. Most of the other villians so far havn’t caught my attention much (Even Jabberwocky), but the possibilities for Heavenly Sword are definitely interesting.
In regards to Heavenly Swords Who’s Who.
“Expert Swords Woman”
Wouldn’t that be swordswoman as a gender flipped swordsman? My auto correct tells me no but it seems a bit strange to randomly insert a space in there just because she’s a girl.
Also sportsman and sportswoman are both valid.
Well, valid in that they’re words anyway, not suggesting them.
There are innumerable* valid words which are not in auto correct dictionaries. Likewise there are vast numbers of words which do not appear in dictionaries, but which are correct English constructions. Simply because (in dead tree versions) there was not enough space to list every variant that can be applied to a base word. So you simply follow standard rules to make the one that fits your need, from a valid core word. Swordswoman is perfectly fine English.
It is simply not in common usage, because in the era that swords were being used, only the masculine would apply. In modern day usage the feminine can be applied to most gender-based professional or skill names. Although it is considered to be equally valid usage to use the historic masculine for a female too.
Halo can either be referred to as a hero or a heroine, for example.
* This word has been chosen advisedly. If you try to find out the exact number of words in the English language you cannot get it. The best that can be provided is an estimate. And that is typically made excluding all the standard conjugations of a word. Because that ramps up the number of words by a huge amount. And, due to the variability of rules, it is not easy to calculate how many of the words fall under each rule. Plus the language is evolving so fast that you could not complete the exercise, before it was out of date!
The ‘demon stuff’ incentive is still making me laugh, every time I vote. There is definite potential for it to be converted into an advertising banner. And yet another candidate for the T-Shirts and novelty mugs in the store.
For fan marketing, rather than general appeal. It does require a touch of insider knowledge to properly appreciate it. Just enough, mind you, to make it ideal to tempt a webcomic reader into assuaging their curiosity.
Just want to clarify something
Never said that a hero can’t ‘cheat’ to win, the question (that was ignored) was:
“but if the only way you can win is by cheating, how does that make you a good guy or even simply ‘better’?” (please to be taking the note of the word that is italicized)
Your goodness is independent of that act. Why you are fighting in the first place is what determines that. Being a good person does not, in itself, make you a good fighter. *
If you have an incompetent moralistic schoolboy standing his ground against a bigger, more muscular bully, who is used to fighting, he will get his arse kicked. But he is still the good guy. He is morally better, despite being worse at fighting.
However, if he has the option to use a trick, to avoid that defeat, then he should take it. It does not detract from him being the better person. His cause is still good. And he will have won the fight. Hence he will be both morally and combatively better.
If he uses a dirty trick it may cause him to loose the respect of his peers. Likewise he may be receive punishment, if he is perceived, unjustly, by the school authorities, as being the bully, as a result.
If he uses a clever trick however, his peers will appreciate that he managed to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat by using his wits. Some may hate him for it, because kids are mean. But even they will likely show him grudging respect. Others will applaud him for it. Especially if it looks like the bully will stop their anti-social behaviour as a result.
* Note that this is the modern view. If you go back to the middle ages, then the right to trial by combat was viewed as a way of determining if God is on your side. If you win then God was. If you loose then God has rendered judgement against you. Using a dirty trick to win a trial by combat, may be viewed as using the Devil’s tactics and therefore ungodly. That is rather a dated philosophy, which is no longer supported by either our society or our legal systems.
You are missing the point: if you can only win by cheating, regardless of intentions, hardly makes you a good guy, and certainly doesn’t make you better (unless you consider a first-class cheater to be ‘better’)
Who’s making the rules that declare you a cheater? That’s where the issue gets thorny.
Math declared “sticky air” to be cheating, but…so what? He’s awesome at plain ol’ martial arts, and Dabbler used what she’s good at when fighting him. If magic is inherently cheating, Dabbler might never win a fight against tech-powered opponents without “cheating.”
But this says nothing about her morals, or her capabilities. All it really talks about is the preferences of the people she’s fighting, and/or the moral preferences of the readership.
If you are really good at dirty fighting, and you can consistently beat clean-fighting villains to save innocent lives, then in my opinion you are both a good guy and ‘better’ than they are when it comes to fighting.
Now, if you can’t win a fight without expending innocent lives to save yourself several times – if you keep dodging behind the pet store and forcing the villain to choose between hurting innocent puppies or giving you a tactical advantage…sure, that gets morally murky. At that point you’re making a prideful claim that your long-term value is worth more than the lives you expend keeping yourself alive. Which means you’ve pretty much got to win every fight just to break even on the good-guy scale.
no, it makes you spider man
(well for the first 10 years_)
or Bat Man
(any time hes ina team book)
No you are missing the point, in three different ways.
“Cheating”
I don’t know why you keep insisting on using the word cheating. If somebody is trying to kill you, you do what you have to to survive. If all other means of doing it have been eliminated, then you literally have no choice. You ‘cheat’ or you die. There is no moral judgement to be made over that.
Besides which the trick proposed, that you are objecting to, cannot be classed as cheating. There is no law against it. The Geneva convention does not prohibit it. There is no battlefield code of etiquette which says you should not distract an enemy. To call it ‘cheating’ is utter nonsense.
Morality
Why would dying make you good? Why would allowing an evil person to carry on committing evil, because you chose to die, be good? Why would allowing the bad guy to claim that he is better than a good guy, because he managed to kill him be good?
Why would not being a powerful fighter make you evil? Why would you be evil if a villain tried to kill you without provocation? Why would taking the only action you can, to save your life, make you evil?
“Better”
The word “better” can be applied in two different contexts. And you are repeatedly mixing them up. Despite several attempts to point out the error.
Better fighter does not equal better morals. They are two different things.
Or are you insisting that if an evil person wins a fight that makes them a good person?
Ahh, I have finally cracked the reason why we have been disagreeing. You should forward this message:
“Dear God, it has come to my attention that, on Earth, good people are not always able to beat bad people in a fight. Please send more angels.”
pont taken, weak and untrained people are evil
but what you consider cheating?
a feing in duel? pull out a gun on 3 angry robber with knife? hit the head of a distracted bad guy before he hurt/kill/rape someone?
If it’s combat, there’s no such thing as cheating. Cheating is a concept that’s only valid in a competitive event.
Just an interesting point: cheating in the context you are using it does not, in fact, make you a good person or a better person (it might, arguably, make you a better fighter by the only measure that matters: you won the battle). The quality of being a superior combatant is mostly (although not entirely- see Karishi’s reply) separate from the quality of being morally superior.
Question: Is there a reason why Sydney’s bruise has healed/isn’t there? Is that an oversight…or, perhaps, an orb at work?
Hit CTRL-F5 and look at the images again.
Guesticus, what exactly do you mean by “can only win by cheating”? Please give a specific example of the situation by describing a specific scenario where winning is only possible by cheating.
This may have been said before, I just can’t wade through 500+ comments to find out, but speaking as someone who makes and wears corsets, even the biggest boobs are not going to come popping out
You are the first. Although it is a good point. But you are forgetting that Dabbler is not wearing a corset. Yes, it may look like it, but that is just an illusion. Furthermore the image is drawn from the subconsciousness of humans, who have been fixating on her breasts, as a result of Dabbler’s innate succubus powers. So it is a reflection of the unconscious unrealistic expectations of people.
Magnified by a self-perpetuating feedback loop. The more they fixate on her breasts appearing to be popping out, the more they fantasise about it. Which is then incorporated in the illusion.
I imagine Dabbler gets used to this, and periodically has to do a reality check on her illusions. Otherwise she would end up looking like she has a couple of Zeppelins in front of her.
How about every time Batman defeats Darkseid?
That qualifies doesn’t it?
Batman Brave and the Bold it was only the Question pulling the plug on darkseid’s invasion that thwarted his plan but as far as Darkseid was concerned the only foe he could see as being responsible was Batman so that does count as cheating doesn’t it?
I swear, you drop a pin in this comic and it doesn’t hit the ground till next year.
Four handed sword style? I would be worried.
For men, we can look at the way people have dealt with the fact that suits bunch up when the wearer raises their arms. Tailors and critics pushed a new cut where the armholes/shoulders are higher and wider and there’s extra fabric at the underarms since the 1850’s. While this briefly caught on in the 1920’s, it only ever became common in the classic American cut that’s also distinguished by its natural shoulder and lack of any darts (so that the shaping is limited to a slight taper purely from the seams). Both British Traditional (narrow sleeves, drapes from chest) and Continental (as tightly tailored and darted as possible, sometimes derided as giving the wearer a woman’s hourglass figure) say to just stop raising your arms.
To be fair to Halo, Dabbler was half naked under the illusion (since she was more or less at home) the first time Sydney saw her “beholder” spell. This time she got dressed before going out so there was no need to alter that aspect of her illusion.
The humor has been really good in this scene! I even like it better than the goofier “down-time” moments in the story.
So, basically, she can do a skyward strike. Jack Slash is still cooler in my opinion.
I’ve seen Dabbler curse like that twice now. Does Ealá have an english translation?
It’s a reference to a webcomic I used to follow on Fur Affinity. Yes, hyper-obscure I know. It’s just an exclamation, no direct translation I’m aware of.