Grrl Power #550 – Stealth oh hi there
So a lot of people were a little confused by the last page. I don’t blame them, after doing this comic for so many years, I haven’t had actually done many transitions. I mean the first nearly 300 pages were just consecutive moments all strung together. The intent of the page was that it was Crimson’s perspective, which is why the first panel comes in midway through Maxima’s sentence, as Crimson is coming to. Anyway, I added a caption to the first panel so hopefully it plays better now.
Maxima allows gambling among her squad, but placed a $5 limit on all wagers. Since all the supers there make serious bank, someone could bet $100,000 on something stupid without it being posturing, and that sort of thing can get out of hand real fast. She has the same rule for poker night.
So yeah, on this page, Crimson was just trying to add a little drama, and honestly if she could get a leg up on all the Supers, it would soothe her supernatural ego after Max and Co. wiped the floor with the manekillers and the Super Husk at the cost of just a few articles of clothing. Obviously it didn’t work out quite as she planned.
I updated the very stale vote incentive finally, with a commission I got at A-kon from Fred. The bra shop is almost colored, but it’s not ready yet cause I was trying some different coloring techniques and programs which is good to do but obviously isn’t the most streamlined process. I haven’t updated the thumbnail on the vote box thingy on the side bar, because the last time I updated something since WordPress changed their Text Widget, it screwed something up which is why the cast page is down for now, and I didn’t want to get into that as I’m posting this at 2 am.
Double res version will be posted over at Patreon. $1 and up, but feel free to contribute as much as you like.
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.
Weren’t those vampires all humans first, anyway? Vampirism transferred to a medical condition, a parasitical host body. In “The Strain” they manage to have it both ways as a mystical kind of thing and as a construct scientifically examined.
They look like conventional vampires that are more beautiful and the more loathsome ones either of a reanimated corpse or something else living. Younger the vampire the weaker they are. Unlike humans. Very old ones may get decrepit, but they are still strong.
The ones we know about were human initially, yes. Power can change people though, let alone dying and having to live a totally different lifestyle. So it would not be surprising to find their world-view shifting enough to make predicting humans harder.
Especially when they are perceived as monsters. There are not many humans used to being on that side of the fence.
Marvel’s Blade (comics, movies, or short show, even spiderman cartoon Blade short) and his vampires never fully explained how the X-men had to counter traditional Dracula who was not Blade’s enemy type.
its a usual trope that when someone gains power that puts them “above the rest of simple mortals” they star believing they are unstopable, invincible or just above everyone else and they cant be harmed just to then be taken a couple of notches down like i supposed it happened here
what is sydney’s problem with the magical part of her universe?
Maybe she doesn’t have a problem with it exactly but considers it an interesting topic warranting investigation. To a curious mind, magic is just undiscovered science. Sydney’s curiosity isn’t exactly scientific, but it pushes in the same general direction.
I don’t know if we will go as far as Sufficiently Analyzed Magic but maybe just a corollery of Clark’s Third Law. Warning: many links to TvTropes.org.
Shes a very trope orientated girl and since humans tend to write storys most popular story tropes show supernatural beings as evil monsters and even the ones that dont tend to show the good ones as the odd ones out.
Up until she started training all of her knowledge was a mixture of tropes and real world training. Even her analysis of the battle with Vehemence in order to figure out how to stop him, involved a lot as she confirmed slightly later.
I don’t think Sydney’s shown any problem with the magical part of the universe. She seems to love it, actually.
Sydney doesn’t have a ‘problem’ with the magical side of her universe, the magical of her universe has a problem with Sydney :P
lets be honest here. Sidney is a challenge for the more mundane parts of her universe too.
Lol.
I dunno dispite how much she seemed to be trying to start a fight at the council meeting until the murdergolems turned up the council seemed to be doing a champion job with putting up with her and a couple even seemed to like her =).Course I doubt any of them would want to be locked in an elevator with her for twelve hours but that experience would drive even Sydneys parents to murder lol
That was fairly much the point: their ‘problem’ is that Sydney is too much of a curious fangirl who wants to know everything and not much fazes or scares her (remember her reaction to both Ingie and Mr Barkley? :D)
Small details check:
Notice how the orbs are orbiting behind Maxima (Halo has none in her hands, and there are there are two out of sight). The last time they were in a similar situation (when Sydney was clinging to Maxima’s butt due to her fear of heights) they only orbited Sydney;s head and avoided going around Maxima.
How sweet, they are starting to get used to ‘auntie Maxima’!
Give it another week and they will probably start giving her a rub, as they go past her.
Twice tonight while watching TV, my sister discovered a cat sleeping in her lap. Both times, my sister hadn’t noticed when her lap had manifested the cat, just had discovered the buzzfuzz after some minutes there. One of my cats has decided she trusts Sis enough to reveal her stealth teleport ability.
maybe the orbs are like that with people they begin to trust.
The cat story you mentioned makes me want to share my own from this morning:
I fell asleep last night on the downstairs couch. My cat was on the second floor and there’s a gate that’s too high for him to jump over. He was also in a room with the door closed.
I don’t now how, but this morning he was sleeping on my stomach when I woke up. Got him off me, went upstairs, the gate was still up… which is okay – maybe he jumped over the gate… if he somehow figured out how to open the door by learning how to use a doorknob. Which would be hard since the doorknob is above his ability to reach, plus he has no opposable thumbs.
The door was also still closed, though. So either one of two things happened.
1) My cat learned how to use doorknobs and open the door, close the door behind him enough so that it would lock, which would be quite a feat since the door opens INWARD, then jumped over a gate he’s never been able to jump over, to land a huge distance down stairs….
2) My cat learned how to teleport.
Usually I am active at night, and have two or more kittens asleep on my lap. I insist that they come in at midnight, and they insist that they go out at dawn.
On the odd occasion that I sleep though, all four often join me. Choosing to sleep on my chest. With Miss Kitty Fantastico hugging my neck and rubbing her face against mine, until she falls asleep.
It is very hard to sleep with four kittens purring like engines, and the loudest one right by your ears.
I’ll see your loud purring and raise you “lays on your chest and purrs while flexing claws into your neck.”
based on comments from the mundane half. (spouse does not share my interests- learn from my mistake you young kids!) cats are not mass-less and well they do get heavier as they age. of course the laying on top habit does not stop….
Hard to sleep? There are few things that soothe me like a purring cat. That sounds lovely.
It is. But all things in moderation. Kittens do have a volume control, and in that situation they do not go below a ten.
Not until they start to doze off. Which is then a really nice way to go to sleep.
Her head’s jammed up against Maxima. The orbs found a work around
True. Last time though they did it by shifting their plane more to the vertical, so that they did not need to transit behind Maxima.
This looks better mind, so it was a good artistic choice. Mind you the other one looked amusing, so that worked too.
I just enjoy seeing what could be inferred from minor details like that, even if tongue-in-cheek.
Who’s tongue in who’s cheek though? o_O
So I have a question about Sydney’s powers more specifically the forcefield. Since matter can’t pass through it does that mean if someone stood at the edge where it formed would they be cut in half
No, because we have seen the force field deflect when a table was too close to it. Likewise it can form smaller in confined areas, such as indoors. So these safety features would stop that happening accidentally. And I cannot see Sydney trying to do that to a person deliberately, as she is much too squeamish.
might be an interesting experiment with a vampire that can turn into a flock of bats.
Accidental defence attack. “AHHHH!” *figure gets slingshotted through a wall*
We saw that happen at the start of the bar brawl.
Sydney grabbed her shield while under attack, and the shield automatically formed around both of them, rather than cutting the guy in half.
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/1286
Very good point. His arm was in the way, when she raised it, leaving no gap to form it between them. Yet you can bet that it was her intent to put the shield between herself and her assailant. So the safety feature must have overridden that.
“Yeah, sorry. This building has surprisingly good security.”
Arc-AEGIS will be glad you approve, Crimson. ;-D Maybe the General will give them a “Well Done” and some Yorpie Snax. (If he was an Admiral, it would be a Bravo Zulu and some gedunk.)
Which puts me on another tangent. Since Archon is the eighth uniformed service of the United States (along with Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard, Public Health Service, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) I wonder what General Falk’s title is?
Commander in Chief Archon (CinCArc), Chief of Staff of Archon (like the Army/Air Force), Commandant of Archon (like the Marines/Coast Guard), or Director of Archon (like NOAA)? Since they are a military police unit, they could use Archon Provost Marshal General (an army title for the highest ranking MP) in a similar manner to the Surgeon General for the Public Health Service. The Navy equivalent would be Chief of Super Operations, which I don’t think would be chosen.
Since the Coast Guard is the only other uniformed service with broad law-enforcement authority over civilians, perhaps Commandant would be most appropriate.
ArcCom?
Cat herder in chief?
This one!Im still convinced his current jobs a backhanded form of punishment from his higher ups!
Cat Herder in Chief? Arc-CHiC? People would be awfully confused to see the General when told they’re going to meet the leader of the superhero group and are expecting “Arc Chick.” Or they mistakenly think Maxima’s code name is Arc Chick and get punched to the moon. Or pronounced the other way, they think it refers to superhero fashion.
:-D
Looking at some previous images, I believe he is Brigadier General Faulk, designated Commander, Archon. Other nicknames and titles may be applied as needed. He answers directly to the Secretary of Defence who in turn answers to the President of the United States, Commander in Chief of the United States military.
“So many years?” Hey, all respect, but from the perspective of someone who’s been at this since the turn of the century your comic’s still a newborn. Feels like you’re just getting warmed up!
So cool to see the rabbit guy here Joe.
When I first saw this https://davebarrack.deviantart.com/art/Spectrum-Gals-mk2-563539506 I thought, “Where does my favorite black and white gal fit in on this chromatic character montage?”
All along it and in the dark places where it is not.
Sorry, I still don’t see Sandra in that image.
I want to know what Crimson’s tee shirt says.
The Unholy Masquerade
New Zealand [a year]
Vampire: Masquerade reference. No that would be an interesting way to play Dark World. “I am just going to play myself and see how long it takes these guys to question if i am really a vampire?”
“Day thirty, they still think I am an emo goth chick. The food is good, thanks to all the promotional t-shirts bringing in new snax.”
“the people here taste really sad.”
Someone remind me when Crimson got caught? I can’t seem to remember her sneaking onto the base.
It happened on a page that has since been deleted and we all saw the page but you didn’t, and we’re all under orders by DaveB to not let you know what happened, but it involved ninjas and taser nets.
(actually, the capture happened off camera) :)
Oh, I thought for a moment that you were part of the secret society.
Psst. over here Pander
Welcome young apprentice, to the Secret Society of page 2586. *demonstrates secret paw shake*
[Thank you brother. All hail Jack Kirby and Stan Lee]
Dangit I dont know how to do spoilers. Everyone who is not a member of the secret society, ignore that.
[spoiler]Totally_boring_text_that_nobody_would_want_to_read_goes_here[/spoiler]
Which displays like:
But_you_are_really_cunning_and_will_put_interesting_secret_stuff_here_instead
So now no one will be able to casually read about our plans to take over this forum and rule it as tyrannical overlords? Gooood….. goood…. *rubs hands evilly*
I am sure that everybody is far too polite to eavesdrop on a private conversation.
*wags tail faithfully*
Most assuredly.
There are no secret societies *3 robed figures wearing Mickey Mouse ears tiptoe behind* Nope, none at all
And also, vampires apparently become a cloud of mist in the Grrlverse. Taser net a mist cloud, I dare you!
Also, you can no longer taser someone. It is simply not possible. You have to axon them instead.
Bah…
apparently can’t become
Don’t worry, it happens to the best of us.
Do note that different groups of vampires have different powers (per Dave). So Ingsol and the vamps he sired are all able to shift into bats,* and are therefore probably fairly closely related to the traitor elder vampire working with Sciona. Maybe the same clan or a similar one.
Whilst a different group may not have any shapechanging ability, can only feed by violently ripping open a victim (thus always killing them), but can walk from any shadowed area, to any other, no matter how far away, in the blink of an eye.
* Which does not preclude them from being able to become mist, we just have not seen that. For instance the mist may be able to overcome even mild air currents. Or may run the risk of being sucked into air conditioning units. As such the bat form may have seemed the safer or quicker option. And for someone who can get burnt to ashes in daylight, quicker is going to also often mean safer too.
Or shes simply too young to be strong enough or skilled enough to pull off a trick as exotic as that =).I imagine that given enough time to learn that even two vampires from the same sire would wind up developing widely different abilities from each other along with a platter of skills completely unassociated with vampire lore in general.
Already underestimating humans? Really? My problem is always overestimating humans. Like Trump voters, or Guesticus. I give them far too much credit for being an intelligent life form, when their very actions show me constantly that it simply cannot be the case.
How dare you insult Guesticus!
He is a hobbit
Plus can y’all try to take a chill pill or something?.Guesticus should not have insulted you and Pander in the first place. Whilst responding in kind only makes the atmosphere even worse. With a wee bit of effort, from all of us, we can get back to our usual state of affairs and focusing on the debate rather than the participants.
Meh. I don’t care that I was in an argument with Guesticus. It’s the internet. Arguments abound. Plus…. lawyer. I’m literally a professional at arguing. I’m happy to be nice to him when he’s not starting with calling people who disagree with him an idiot and ending with telling me to take the law and shove it up my arse. That tends to put a damper on debate.
Still, I have no hard feelings to him as I’ve responded to several of his posts on THIS page, and there were many smiley emoticons and not a single time of being called an idiot.
Just to be clear, I have no hard feelings against anyone I ever argue with, including Guesticus. And I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt that he is not carrying over his posts from the Krona argument to other threads, since he hasnt done that.
PS – I was totally right about Maxima doing something illegal and tortious against Krona. :) (just wanted to stick that in there) :)
Just to be clear, I do realize I’m using ‘Just to be clear’ way too much to start my posts in this thread.
How did Maxi ‘torture’ Kronachrome? By forcing her to spend time with Dabbles? o_O
…. not torturous. Tortious.
Torts. It means wrongdoing.
Sorry, it’s a legal term and sometimes I forget that not everyone knows what torts are. They mess your mind up in law school with different terms to the point that we think they’re in common usage.
They are fairly common. I suspect that Guesticus may have been making a play on words. But I have enough of an interest in legal matters that my perception of how well known the terms are may likewise be skewed.
Actually, no, thought Pander had simply mis-spelt the word :(
But either way, the Prosecution has still failed to provide any proof that a crime actually was committed
Yup, Pixel and Maxima have stated that a crime has been committed and could be committed again. It is up to the opposing counsel to prove that assertion wrong, if they want to claim it was “illegal imprisonment”.
Have a tort :D
No Yorp, neither Pixel nor Maxima have ever claimed that Krona committed ANY crime. What crime? Page number please, of either of them saying a crime had been committed?
Here and here. And if you are looking for a police transcript saying ‘you have committed reckless endangerment (which is a crime)’ you have come to the wrong site, this is a comedy comic. However the intent is very clear.
Pixel is absolutely fuming mad at Krona, for the risks she took, and Maxima believes that Krona risked ‘shattering reality’. Again do not fixate on the latter being in the future tense, as Maxima would not be drawing this conclusion without feedback from Krona on the initial offense.
Maxima is correctly prioritising the prevention of the nonoccurrence. However if you wish to dispute that they consider Krona to have already risked that then your judgement is severely flawed.
nonoccurrence = recurrence
Effing stupid spell-checker correction.
I just looked at the pages, and in NEITHER of them did anyone ever accuse her of a crime at all.
Also no, Krona did not do the crime of ‘reckless endangerment’ since no one was actually endangered. Like a lot of laypeople, you’re not understanding what the crimes are because you’re assuming that any reckless act is reckless endangerment. If the mere act of being reckless was a crime, then Sydney would be serving a life sentence already, as would Maxima, as would Harem, as would Dabbler, as would most of Archon actually. As would the irritating customer from the beginning of the comic. As would all people who have ever worked in the circus. As would anyone who works with wild animals. As would every person in professional contact spots. Etc.
Reckless Endangerment has a specific legal definition, as does False Imprisonment and Unlawful Detainment. Reckless Endangement is defined as a crime consisting of acts that create a substantial risk of physical injury to another person.
Why did Krona NOT do the crime of reckless endangement?
1) She did not commit a crime. Having powers is not a crime.
2) There was no substntial risk of serious physical injury to another person. In fact, she PREVENTED serious physical injury to TWO people (Pixel and Sydney).
1) You can stop repeating that. It is boring. Nobody has ever suggested that it is. Including Maxima. It is what Pixel was doing with the power that was and is the problem.
2) We know that Pixel was injured during the time loop. Krona was recklessly endangering her being repeatedly injured, for all eternity, stuck in an inescapable time loop.
That is punishment of the gods level of injury. And you wonder why Pixel was so angry at Krona’s actions?
Yorp said:
This is the worst part about this debate. One the one hand we have pictorial evidence of Maxima laying hands on Krona and insisting that she will be going to Archion HQ to be interrogated.
And on the other hand we have thought crimes and just plain old-fashioned bullshit invented from an overactive imagination. Krona recklessly endangered Pixel how again? Technobabble about an endless time loop that you pulled out of your ass?
No. Fuck no. Krona probably saved Pixel’s life. You idiots and fools who think the committed a crime have only the hope that her blood draining might not have resulted in her death to hold out as the potential counter to that fact. She certainly saved Sydney’s life, since we have the stated intent of the villain to drain every last bit of her blood, and it was the knife incoming to do just that which triggered the reset.
But you fucking ignoramuses can’t stop yourselves from inventing crimes that Krona did not commit in order to prop up your completely baseless positions. It’s really a sad commentary on willful ignorance. Stop being so willful ignorant. But for some people you just can’t cure stupid.
Do I hear some insignificant gnat buzzing?
Guesticus, that’s the thing. I did show that she committed a crime. False imprisonment. I told you the requirements for the crime, and then showed how a prosecutor (or any lawyer if we’re just talking the tort) could hold Maxima (and by extension Archon itself) guitly of false imprisonment. Just to be clear, police are held to a higher standard, as a non-layman in the area of the law. What Maxima did does not come under any of the immunities that police normally get, MAINLY because Maxima admitted that Krona had not done anything illegal, nor had she been suspected of doing anything illegal. That’s what’s required to even HOLD someone for 24-72 hours (the time for that changes depending on the jurisdiction). And anyone arguing that Krona’s powers themselves could be dangerous (like Yorp did) is missing the simple point that, in that fictional world, Maxima and Archon itself have repeatedly stated that the archon charter and laws state that merely HAVING powers is NOT illegal. So the only reason at all to hold Krona would be for potential future crimes. And that’s unconstitutional and illegal for the government to do, of which Archon is a part.
“MAINLY because Maxima admitted that Krona had not done anything illegal, nor had she been suspected of doing anything illegal.”
Bollox she did.
Since you said bollox, I’ll have to show you the exact pages. Then I’ll appreciate an apology :)
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/2506 – panel 2 – she thanks Krona for her help in SAVING Pixel and Sydney. Nowhere on the entire page does she actually accuse Krona of having committed (past tense) a crime or wrongdoing, althougn inp anels 3, 4, and 5, she does threaten her, and on panel 7, she threatens to cuff her for another non-crime of using her powers, despite the official statements by Archon that being a super is NOT a crime.
Examples where Archon says that being a superi s not a crime.
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/955 – Panel 1 – by Arianna – Arianna stresses that Archon’s creation is not created to villify being SUPERS. And on panels 6 and 7, she specifies that the ONLY thing illegal in relation to using superpowers is to be a vigilante. NOTHING ELSE.
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/962 – Panel 2 – Maxima argues AGAINST the concept of a ‘superhuman registry’ (like the Superhuman Registration Act in Avengers or the Mutant Registration in X-Men), Panel 3 – Ariana stresses again that having powers does not automatically mean you’re using them for committing crimes, and in fact they can often be used to HELP (like how KRONA helped)
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/457 – Panel 4 and 6 and 7 – Maxima assures Sydney that they will not lock her up just if she has superpowers.
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/675 – Panel 9 – the General states that people with powers have them whether they are on the team or not. In other words, even if a person is not on the team, they’re not going to be arrested just for having powers.
There’s actually more. A lot more. Mostly speeches made by Arianna or Maxima, usually after or during the press conference.
You can tell me I’m right, now :) I’ll give you another Yorpie snax for being a good sport.
Um…. why is my response to Yorp under moderation? There’s nothing mean of offensive in it. It’s just posting a bunch of links to earlier grrlpowercomics strips.
Anything more than three links automatically goes into moderation. Probably an anti-spam measure under WordPress. Any moderation regarding offensiveness is only undertaken retroactively, and in vanishingly rare circumstances. Dave has the tolerance of a saint.
As Dave is doubtless finishing off Monday’s comic at the moment, and usually goes to bed right after that, I am afraid we shall have to wait to hear your wisdom.
*keenly waits by screen, tail wagging*
Nope, no update yet. Aww, no comment from the mostly-wise Pander.
Ooh, I wonder if Pander is about to confess that it has been her evil twin making all these arguments? And all the links are to nice funny things in the comic!
*wags tail hopefully*
“Anything more than three links automatically goes into moderation. Probably an anti-spam measure under WordPress. Any moderation regarding offensiveness is only undertaken retroactively, and in vanishingly rare circumstances. Dave has the tolerance of a saint.”
Ok, yeah that makes sense. Thanks for alleviating my worries :)
“*keenly waits by screen, tail wagging*”
*tosses you a Yorpie Snax for cuteness, because you deserve it even if wrong about the law and I think you’re adorable in general*
“Ooh, I wonder if Pander is about to confess that it has been her evil twin making all these arguments? And all the links are to nice funny things in the comic!”
No, I told you, you’d be able to tell if it was my evil twin by the telltale goatee and midriff-baring dress. You’ve been arguing with Lawyer Pander instead, who you can argue and she still will like you and feed you snacks as long as there’s no slinging of insults and namecalling :)
“*wags tail hopefully*”
*tosses you another Yorpie Snax, even if we don’t agree on this legal debate, because this is just a webcomic forum argument and we’re adults (and an adult doggie*
Two Yorpie Snax?
*looks guilty*
Here, we better share.
*passes one back and wags tail happily*
Munch munch gobble gobble
Gusticus said:
Only the blind believe this.
Unlike the thought crimes attributed to Krona, we saw Maxima tell Knona that she had no choice but to accompany her back to Archin HQ. We saw Maxima lay her iron crushing hand on Krona’s shoulder as she described how this wasn’t an option for Krona. We saw Krona react with the “oh shit” teardrop, recognizing that she was being coerced.
Only the blind or an idiot such as Guesticus would ignore all this visual evidence and instead invent an alternate history based upon things which were not shown in the comic.
That is not your call to make. Deciding if something is being used dangerously is up to the industry regulator assigned by the government. Which, in the case of super powers is Archon. Meaning that the people who are authorised to make such calls are… Pixel and Maxima.
They have made their judgement. Maxima is enforcing it, legally, in her capacity as a police officer. Just the same as with any other such enforcement Krona has the option of contesting it in court. She chose not to.
Perfectly legally.
Argumentative. Anybody’s hands are capable of killing. Stipulating “iron crushing” is implying a threat is being made to inflict violence. I move that it be struck from the record. You have nothing to substantiate your implication.
Maxima has a perfectly innocuous reason for doing that, on the grounds that Krona was not paying attention, and Maxima needed to ensure she listened to the important legal information she was about to say.
Further may I point out that Krona was manipulating a device that Maxima believed capable of ‘shattering reality’. It is entirely appropriate to halt her doing anything which might risk that. Laying her hand on Krona’s shoulder is entirely justifiable.
For somebody claiming to be trained in the law you should know better than to make claims you cannot substantiate. There is nothing about Krona’s reaction which proves that she felt “she was being coerced”.
Crying, when being accused of risking ‘shattering reality’ would be more appropriately considered to be a sign of remorse. Which we could substantiate with Krona’s subsequent confession:
As it happens though you seem to be unaware of basic anatomy, so your interpretation is even more flawed than that. You see tear drops come from ducts in the eyes. Whilst that is well away from her eyes, on the side of her head. It is a sweat drop.
Which is entirely accountable for as a normal reaction to being accused of a crime of such a magnitude.
Guesticus has very politely restrained himself since I asked everyone to focus their attention on the debate, rather than the people. By attacking him you discredit your whole argument, by indicating that it is so unsubstantive that you are unable to prove it, so have to turn to insults instead.
We saw Pixel accuse Krona of being reckless. We saw Maxima say that Krona is risking shattering reality.
You are the one “inventing an alternate history based upon things which were not shown in the comic”. Which I guess also makes you blind, by your definition. Even though the logic of your claim is about as messed up as the rest of your case.
None of Krona’s subsequent actions or dialogue since have even so much as hinted that she was at Archon against her will, or that she felt resentment at being obliged to be retrained. I suggest you accept your failure to prove your case graciously.
“That is not your call to make.”
He’s entitled to his opinion (especially considering his opinion on this is correct :)
“Deciding if something is being used dangerously is up to the industry regulator assigned by the government. Which, in the case of super powers is Archon. Meaning that the people who are authorised to make such calls are… Pixel and Maxima.”
Actually, Pixel and Maxima did not make the regulations. They’re supposed to FOLLOW the regulations. Especially when the regulations are things like Federal and State statutes and the Constitution. Maxima is what you’d call, at BEST, part of the ‘executive branch’ (actually she’s not even that, that would be the General if he’s the head of Archon, or the President if they answer directly to the President… She’s effectively a high ranking soldier that’s been authorized to JUST bypass some aspects of the Posse Comitatus Act (due to a loophole that’s actually been described during the press conference) …. not the Constitution and all federal and state statutes.
“Perfectly legally.”
No, it’s not perfectly legal. Please, I’m asking you to believe me on this, as an actual practicing attorney, that what she did was not legal and violated Krona’s civil rights. And in addition, in real life, Maxima would be charged with a crime (as well as open up Archon to a tort lawsuit by Krona, which requires a preponderence of the evidence standard as opposed to the ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ standard. There are different standards required for police and federal agents.
“For somebody claiming to be trained in the law you should know better than to make claims you cannot substantiate. There is nothing about Krona’s reaction which proves that she felt “she was being coerced”.”
Actually there is. The widening eyes when Maxima puts her hand on her shoulder while making that ‘insistent’ order to her. The teardrop (which does NOT signify crying – it’s a typical representation for apprehension in anime and anime-influenced cartoons, not depression)
“Crying, when being accused of risking ‘shattering reality’ would be more appropriately considered to be a sign of remorse.”
The teardrop is not about depression, it’s about worry and apprehension and feeling threatened. It’s VERY typical in anime, and DaveB does seem heavily influenced by anime style, especially with stuff like teardrops, Sydney’s hair, and chibi stuff.
“Which we could substantiate with Krona’s subsequent confession:”
That is CLEARLY not a confession. It’s nervousness and apprehension and even possibly fear from Maxima’s action, which is why she’s stuttering. You cannot act like acquiescence at the point of coercion is the same as a confession (which it wasnt even if there had been no coercion).
“Which is entirely accountable for as a normal reaction to being accused of a crime of such a magnitude.”
For the…. umpteenth time that I’m explaining, where no one’s been able to show otherwise, she has NOT BEEN ACCUSED OF A CRIME.
“Guesticus has very politely restrained himself since I asked everyone to focus their attention on the debate, rather than the people. By attacking him you discredit your whole argument, by indicating that it is so unsubstantive that you are unable to prove it, so have to turn to insults instead.”
In all fairness, while Oberon shouldnt be calling anyone idiot (it does hurt the debate a LOT), Guesticus has called people who disagree with him idiotic as well, and you sorta did too, although I’m very sure you didnt intend it like that. I think people really might need to relax with the namecalling on all sides and just stick to the points they’ve made. If they don’t agree, they’re not going to agree.
(I’m still right, though:) And Oberon is also right on the merits of the argument, not the insults which he clearly shouldnt do any more than anyone else arguing in this topic)
“We saw Pixel accuse Krona of being reckless.”
Pixel was reckless as well. So was Hiro. So is Sydney on an almost hourly basis. So is Maxima alarmingly more often than should be comfortable considering her level of authority and knowledge to know better. Usually because of overconfidence, like in the Vehemence fight -before- he got too massively powered up.
“We saw Maxima say that Krona is risking shattering reality.”
Not to be a ‘grammar nazi’ (I’d hope no one uses that term again btw), but she didn’t say that. She said that Krona might be risking shattering reality, whether accidentally or intentionally’ clearly indicating ‘in the future.’ Which brings me back to the point that you can’t detain someone for a possible future crime, and you can’t detain someone if there is no suspicion of having committed a crime (I’ve gone over soooo many times why she has not committed a crime, and what reckless endangerment is, and why she didn’t do that either, and why Maxima’s own words show that Krona hasn’t committed any crime).
“You are the one “inventing an alternate history based upon things which were not shown in the comic”.”
He’s not. He’s using what’s in the comic itself. Admittedly he’s getting frustrated about it because of having to repeat the same point which Guesticus and you had been ignoring, although that’s admittedly not an excuse to namecall. But he still is using the comic, not stuff that did not occur in the comic. To be honest, you’ve also said things which have not happened in the comic, or made assumptions of things that were not said.
“Which I guess also makes you blind, by your definition.”
Again, lets not do any insults on either side please. Yorpie snax are involved.
“Even though the logic of your claim is about as messed up as the rest of your case.”
Seriously, I agree that there should be no namecalling or insulting, so you need to do the same k? Yorpie snack?
All have asked has been: show where Kronachrome has been the subject of false imprisonment
Still waiting on that proof
Yorp has done a most excellent job of explaining things much better than me
Guesticus said:
You’ve had this explained for you in great detail multiple times.
At this point it is clear that you are either incapable of comprehending the proof you have been shown or you are deliberately failing to comprehend it since it destroys your entire position.
So you’re either an idiot, or are pretending to be one. And I’m not sure which one is worse in this case.
There goes that useless buzzing again.
One way to look at it: tortious means financially torturous. :)
I admit that having to study Torts in law school was sort of boring sometimes, but I wouldn’t call it ‘torturous’ :).
I meant for the client, not the lawyer. Remember the (supposed) law school quiz question:
If the rentacop shoots a person to prevent them from commiting suicide, and sparks an explosion in the person’s car which fails to kill anyone but leaves the suicidal person scarred, who gets sued and who wins?
answer: everyone gets sued (suicide, rentacop, rentacop’s employer, property owner, property mgt company, carmaker, gun maker, etc), and the lawyers win.
(I may have gotten some of the details mixed up)
I never heard that joke. But I like that joke :)
The only time I enjoy torts nowadays is in the morning, when they pop-up in my toaster.
:P
In my defense, just let me say that although I’m NOT a lawyer, my father WAS, & our family shamelessly collected all of this topic’s jokes/puns that we could get our grubby little paws on.
When did insult you?
Only shouted at Pander because she was leading a witch-hunt prosecution towards Maxi without providing proof that there was a case to answer for (her arguments were probably completely within the Law, but she repeatedly failed to provide evidence of a crime being commented on Maxi’s behalf in the first place to warrant such vehement persecution)
Just to be clear, I did provide evidence that there was a crime being committed. That’s what false imprisonment is. It’s a crime AND a tort. I wrote almost a novel on that but you had ignored it (or maybe just skipped past it since I did write a huge amount on it. It’s just a bit disingenuous to then say I didn’t provide evidence.
But, you failed to prove that Kronachrome was imprisoned, in any way, thus, no false imprisonment
Did agree that what you wrote would have been enough if Maxi had committed the crime you accuse her off
The evidence you failed to provide was that of an actual crime taken place on Maxi’s behalf
And Maxi did something very similar with Sydney after the Bank Job, and in that situation, Sydney was afraid of being locked up and ‘experimented’ on
Oh, my ‘concentrate on the debate’ was meant to be about the comic in general, rather than the specific one that was getting heated. It has dragged on months past its best-before-date. I think this is a good instance of something that is best left as ‘we agree to differ’. I doubt any of us will shift from our entrenched positions.
Even though one camp is “Risk destroying the universe? Yay, go ahead, you have super powers and that grants you the right to do whatever you want, regardless of the consequences to everyone else!” and the other is “Destroy the universe? No, don’t do it again. That would be a bad thing!”
NOOOOO! You fiend! You sucked me into it! Where is that ‘edit comment’ button? Woe is me!
Sailed right past the “best before” date and overtook the “worst after” date.
No, the ‘debate’ is whether Maxi committed a crime including false detainment and forced imprisonment of Kronachrome, with zero evidence of either of those happening
Which all hinges on whether Maxima had justifiable grounds to make an arrest (if such was needed). A police officer using the word ‘insist’ has far greater meaning, in such circumstances, than you are giving credit for.
Going up against two trained lawyers (and one practicing one, at that) on such an issue is a hopeless cause. They have years of training in such matters. Cops can and have tried to abuse due process, in such ways, in the past, and the courts do not allow them to get away with it.
Hence why I restrict my argument to showing that a crime had been committed, by Krona’s initial use of the power. There they have strayed out of nice safe situations where they have hundreds of years of precedent to draw upon. Because they then stray into super hero territory.
Here it becomes ‘does using a time-manipulating super power,* without proper knowledge of how it works, constitute recklessly endangering lives?’ This is not a matter that a lawyer would decide. It would be in the paws of a jury (provided a judge would permit that, and I contest that they would). And I am eligible for jury duty so my opinion is equally valid to theirs.
Not only that but their obsessing over the wrong point (whether the arrest is legal or not) puts them at a disadvantage. Because they are then not focusing on how a jury would view the actual key part. If the judge and jury agree that it is a crime** then Maxima’s actions are wholly legal.
Further I am pretty sure a majority verdict would be found the way I propose. Especially when the prosecution points out that every one of their lives would have been endangered. I do not see a jury agreeing that Krona’s right to play super hero supersedes their right not be stuck in a time-loop.
Hence why I phrased it the way I did, in the post you are contesting.
* Which is what it appeared to be, and was supported by the suspect’s own testimony. As such remains the grounds on which it must be judged by, regardless of what we learnt since.
** Seeing this item in the news today serves as a reminder that lawyers who argue ‘there is not a law to cover this, ergo it is not a crime’ are not infallible. Common sense can override such blinkered views given by legal professionals.
Arguing with lawyers is like mud wrestling with pigs – everyone ends up covered with mud, but they actually enjoy it. Not worth bothering with unless you’re absolutely passionate about the topic.
I’m not sure if I should feel insulted or say thank you.
Again, Krona did no crime. As Maxima has said, MULTIPLE times, having powers is not a crime.
At no point have I ever argued that. It is her use of it, in setting up the checkpoint, which I contest to have recklessly endangered lives. And I am simply repeating the opinion Pixel, so this is not headcanon, but the basis on which Maxima was acting.
Clearly Maxima had been briefed by Pixel (or otherwise had the information provided to her) or else she would not have known enough to take the actions we saw.
So what prompted the scene where Maxima decided to intervene was thecrime that Krona had committed. Preventing her repeating that crime is likewise of high concern.
That however does not constitute making possession of a super power a crime. Nor does using it. Only using it in a dangerous manner elevated it to that status.
“At no point have I ever argued that. It is her use of it, in setting up the checkpoint, which I contest to have recklessly endangered lives”
She didn’t though. Reckless Endangement requires an actual crime, and requires the risk of actual physical injury. What Krona did is LITERALLY the opposite of that, since she actually PREVENTED actual physical injury. All you can say is she was recklessly efficient. Or recklessly protecting. If you run into a burning building and save a person without wearing a fire retardant suit and save the person, that’s reckless of you. That’s not a crime, though. That’s also not reckless endangement.
“So what prompted the scene where Maxima decided to intervene was thecrime that Krona had committed. Preventing her repeating that crime is likewise of high concern.”
Again… KRONA COMMITTED NO CRIME. Having Superpowers is not a crime. Saving a person through an act which was reckless is also not a crime.
Btw, when I say ‘requires a risk of physical injury’ I mean a SUBSTANTIAL risk of physical injury. Substantial is another definition which is pretty well codified in the law. It doesn’t mean just any amount of risk.
Yorp said:
Krona committed no crime. As has been covered a very many times previously, having superpowers is not a crime. A non-powered person with a pistol can also commit a crime, but they are not arrested out of hand for such potential. Having the ability to commit a crime is not a crime. Having the ability to do something someone else is afraid you might do is not a crime.
You argue from the position that fear justifies everything. You are an idiot.
Oberon, I really do appreciate that someone else is understanding what I’m saying from a legal perspective, and you are definitely correct that they’re being mistaken and using the idea that ‘fear justifies what they did’ but we don’t have to call Yorp an idiot. He’s a nice person.
Plus in the end, we’re just arguing over a comic anyway. It’s a silly argument (one that we’re correct about but still it’s a comic book scenario).
No need for namecalling from either side. Either from when Guesticus said it, or when Yorp sort of implied it, or when you just said it. Everyone friends k?
A crime does not have to be on the statute books in order to be a crime.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40817255
Placing the universe in an eternal loop is undesirous to myself, and I daresay to the majority of the public, and thereby the pool of jurors. Likewise recklessly endangering the same. I feel that your contention that it is not a crime will not be upheld by the court.
“A crime does not have to be on the statute books in order to be a crime.”
I’m sorry Yorp but… what?
In order to be a crime, a crime has to…. well…. be a crime. How do you tell that something is a crime or is not a crime? Is it based on people’s changing opinions, absent of anything written down? No. It’s based on ACTUAL laws, written down, that the criminal charge can be traced to.
“The case appears to set a legal precedent, as there is no Massachusetts law that criminalises telling a person to commit suicide.”
Actually, there is. It’s a crime called reckless indifference to human life. Also known as ‘depraved-heart murder or depraved indifference murder, where the defendant acts with a depraved indifference to human life, and that act results in a death.
It’s an actual crime, and the only thing that is precedent setting about it is that it’s causing someone to commit suicide by convincing them to do so. It’s not the first example of depraved indifference to human life though. 60 NY2d 273, 469 NYS2d 599 (1983).
This was part of the Opinion:
“to bring defendant’s conduct within the murder statute, the People were required to establish also that defendant’s act was imminently dangerous and presented a very high risk of death to others and that it was committed under circumstances which evidenced a wanton indifference to human life or a depravity of mind. . . . . The crime differs from intentional murder in that it results not from a specific, conscious intent to cause death, but from an indifference to or disregard of the risks attending defendant’s conduct.” 60 NY2d at 274.
Which is not on the statute books as a crime. Yet she has gone to jail.
Likewise there is not a crime for ‘messing with time’ But if it can result in anything which is a crime then Krona’s actions were a crime. I have given numerous examples of such. I will repeat one here.
Krona has wiped Pixels memory thus preventing her from being able to testify against Sciona. It also constitutes assault, as memories are physically laid down in the brain, and those connections have been destroyed.
As the intent of the power is to do this to everybody, yet it is working in a flawed and unpredictable way, it is entirely justifiable for this to be one aspect of what Maxima is referring to as ‘shattering reality’.
The fact that this crime was committed whist attempting to be helpful does not stop it from being a crime. Speeding to take a pregnant woman to hospital is intended to be helpful. But the driver would still be accountable if a pedestrian is killed on the way.
Yes the arresting officer may say “thank you for helping the delivery” but they will still have to go on an arrest them for the hit and run killing. You do not get to trade doing a good deed as exemption for a greater misdeed I am afraid. Even with the officer saying “I realise that it was not your intent to run the person over, and you may not have noticed hitting the person you killed”.
Incidentally, when making that arrest, the cop is entitled to lay hands on the suspect, if they feel it is necessary, for instance to put handcuffs on them. Or to get their attention, if they are not listening to important legal information.
A human likes me!
*wags tail contentedly”
Life is good.
“A human likes me!”
Of course I do :) Always have. You’re still wrong about this argument, but that doesn’t make me not like you.
“Life is good.”
Yorpie snax.
Judge claiming that a person’s mental illness did not affect the person’s actions is callous and ignorant. if mental illness didn’t affect behavior, it wouldn’t be mental illness.
It’s called false imprisonment and unlawful detainment, not forced imprisonment and false detainment….
Whatever you call it, you have still failed to provide evidence that it happened, which means, Maxi has nothing to answer for
What are you TALKING about Guesticus? I have even told you the exact page and actions that Maxima did to show that it happened, right after describing to you in a very long, detailed post what false imprisonment and unlawful detainment means.
Prove that no crime took place. Prove that Maxima is not of the belief that a crime took place.
Until you have done that your claim of ‘false’ imprisonment is unproven.
Prove that no crime took place? Okay. No crime took place.
Innocence until proven guilty. It’s up to YOU to prove there WAS a crime. It’s not up to me to disprove there was a crime. That’s literally the cornerstone of american justice. Unless you want to go back to something like the Salem Witch Trials. They had the idea of accusing people of crimes, then you had to prove that there was no crime that took place. Although there’s no proof of any crime taking place.
Maxima, on the other hand, DID commit a crime. I already pointed it out now about 5 times, and in fact one of your own links showed Maxima doing the actual crime in three continuous panels.
Only the blind believe this.
Unlike the thought crimes attributed to Krona, we saw Maxima tell Knona that she had no choice but to accompany her back to Archin HQ. We saw Maxima lay her iron crushing hand on Krona’s shoulder as she described how this wasn’t an option for Krona. We saw Krona react with the “oh shit” teardrop, recognizing that she was being coerced.
Only the blind or an idiot such as Guesticus would ignore all this visual evidence and instead invent an alternate history based upon things which were not shown in the comic.
Correct. You accused Maxima of committing ‘false arrest’. She is the defendant. She contests that a crime has taken place. You prove that she is wrong in that assertion.
Maxima is innocent until you prove her guilty.
“Correct. You accused Maxima of committing ‘false arrest’. She is the defendant.”
1) False imprisonment. She did false IMPRISONMENT and an unlawful detainment. It’s different than false arrest. She clearly did not ARREST her because she did not place her under arrest. She detained her. Unlawfully. That’s why it’s unlawful detainment.
2) Yes, she would be innocent until proven guilty, but she would still be charged with the crime, and as a responsible police officer (who is held to a higher standard btw), she should know better than to DO that in the first place. If a police officer unlawfully SHOOTS a civilian, they’re going to be charged with murder. They’re still going to be ‘innocent until proven guilty’ but they’re still going to be charged, and they should know better than to go murdering suspects. Same deal here.
“She contests that a crime has taken place.”
Where did that happen? Where did she contest anything?
1) Meh, whatever.
On what grounds? Maxima believes that a crime has taken place. She is acting in good faith.
We have already gone over that ‘risking shattering reality’ . I am not changing my interpretation. Maxima’s intentions were clear, even if you are persisting in being pedantic over her using the future tense. It is illogical to assume that Maxima thinks that is a future risk yet was not one in the previous instance.
We shall just have to continue to agree to differ.
However as I am fighting grammar Nazism, please note Maxima’s choice of ‘shatter reality’. This is not restricting Krona’s risks to just placing us in a time-loop. Her incompetence at using her power was such that it was having unpredictable results.
As time is fundamental to all life operations, messing with time, but doing so erratically, is risking causing injury or death in innumerable ways. My contention of ‘reckless endangerment’ remains good. Your ignoring that Krona has already done this does not stop it from being a fact, regardless of how Maxima phrased it.
Likewise anyone reviewing her actions in universe, and able to cross examine her, would be able to confirm her intent.
“What did you mean by ‘shatter reality’?”
“Did you consider this to be a crime?”
“On what grounds?”
“Oh, OK I agree, that constitutes reckless endangerment.”
“Why were we even having this conversation? Krona tells me she wanted to get the training. She agrees that she had risked shattering reality. And mentioned she said as much to you at the time.”
“Personally I am relieved that we no longer face that risk. Thank you for doing your duty officer.”
“1) Meh, whatever.”
It’s a massively different thing to argue, Yorp.
“On what grounds? Maxima believes that a crime has taken place.”
No she doesn’t. She has not said anything about any crime. There has been no crime for the so-many-times-now-that-I’m-repeating-myself. Please, please, please read any of the times that I’ve described what would be a crime. I don’t mind discussing it at all – I like talking law – but it does get a little repetitive to have to answer the same question with the same answer so many times.
“Maxima’s intentions were clear, even if you are persisting in being pedantic over her using the future tense.”
It’s not being pedantic. It’s being logical and using the law. That requires knowing what actually was said, as opposed to what you would prefer was said.
“It is illogical to assume that Maxima thinks that is a future risk yet was not one in the previous instance.”
No it isn’t illogical. It’s based on what is ACTUALLY written in the dialogue.
“However as I am fighting grammar Nazism, please note Maxima’s choice of ‘shatter reality’.”
You seem to focus on ‘shatter reality’ without focusing on that Krona has not shattered reality, and Maxima not saying she HAS shattered reality. Replace ‘shatter reality’ with ‘murder someone’ and the argument is still the same.
“This is not restricting Krona’s risks to just placing us in a time-loop.”
Future risk is not a past act, since they were NOT trapped in a time loop in the first place, or they wouldn’t be able to worry about being in a time loop, since she already had shut the checkpoint down.
“Her incompetence at using her power was such that it was having unpredictable results.”
She’s hardly been incompetent. She’s actually extremely cautious about it, and has put a LOT of redundancies and protections in her programs. Far too many to be called incompetent at least.
“As time is fundamental to all life operations, messing with time, but doing so erratically, is risking causing injury or death in innumerable ways.”
You must really hate the experiments they did with trying to prove the existence of tachyons in real life a few years ago in France. Or the creation of microscopic black holes for a fraction of a second at Cern. Based on your belief, they commited crimes, even though they didn’t.
“My contention of ‘reckless endangerment’ remains good. Your ignoring that Krona has already done this does not stop it from being a fact, regardless of how Maxima phrased it.”
You ignoring what the crime of reckless endangerment actually means doe not change what the crime of reckless endangerment actually means.
“But, you failed to prove that Kronachrome was imprisoned, in any way, thus, no false imprisonment”
No, I did NOT fail to prove that. The law states that false imprisonment just needs to mean the person does not feel free to leave. It’s literally a crime. It doesnt require ACTUAL imprisonment within 4 walls.
“The evidence you failed to provide was that of an actual crime taken place on Maxi’s behalf”
I think the reason we’re not agreeing is mainly because you don’t understand the difference between false imprisonment as a legal term and as a criminal definition, and what laypeople would consider ‘imprisonment.’
If you are unable to leave, because of an implied or actual threat by a person, or by any sort of physical restraint where, if you defy that restraint, you risk injury or worse, that’s a very clear definition of false imprisonment, according to the law.
I put forth the reasoning about why she was not free to leave, the implied threat, the use of Maxima’s hand on her shoulder DURING the implied threat and statement that she was INSISTING (in a way where it was not a request, it was an order), and you seem to have glossed over that. Mainly, I suspect, because you are looking for a point during which she was put in handcuffs or in a prison (which is not required for false imprisonment and unlawful detainment charges).
You are correct in all your points about what constitutes false imprisonment.
To cite an example, from the UK, a shopkeeper got charged with that, when he blocked customers from leaving his shop. One of them had shoplifted (and he had identified which one), so he felt justified in detaining all of them (no locked door involved, simply him standing in the way).
Whilst he had the right to detain the shoplifter, he did not have the right to do so with the other customers. So yes, handcuffs and locked doors not required.
However it does not apply here as a crime was committed. Ergo, as a police officer, Maxima was legally permitted to detain her.
You’re referring to police immunity, which does not actually meet those requirements here. For police immunity, there has to be either a crime or wrongdoing (tort) suspected. Maxima already admitted to Krona that what she did was HELPFUL, not harmful, and not wrongdoing (past tense). She also has admitted, many times, that having powers alone is not a crime. So the only thing she could possible be worried about is potential future illegal or wrongdoing uses of Krona’s powers…. which you can NOT detain someone over, and you can not use the police immunity to defend against a charge of false imprisonment for that.
(Also we can’t use any UK laws for this, since this is happening in the US and the UK and US have multiple different protections and criminal statutes that do not cross barriers except in cases of comity.)
“Maxima already admitted to Krona that what she did was HELPFUL, not harmful”
Incorrect. Maxima has thanked Krona for helping Sydney & Pixel. Maxima has not said that her actions were not harmful. Stipulating that Krona was risking shattering reality gives the lie to that.
Going grammar nazi on it being phrased in the future tense is pedantic to the extent of being idiotic.
“Maxima has thanked Krona for helping Sydney & Pixel.”
So Maxima thanks people for harming people? Maxima thnks that helping Sydney and Pixel = harm?
No.
“Maxima has not said that her actions were not harmful.”
She has also not said it was harmful. She is concerned about a future risk. Future risks being harmful is trying to tell the future based on nothing. She’d be detaining someone based on a GUESSED future crime. Unlawfullly. She’s unlawfully detaining Krona.
I’m not sure why this is so difficult to understand.
“Stipulating that Krona was risking shattering reality gives the lie to that.”
Since you ARE accusing me of going ‘grammar nazi’ I’m going to have to do the same with you. Also, I’d like an apology for you implying that I’m idiotic please. That’s wrong of you.
Maxima’s SPECIFIC WORDING is this (while her hand is on Krona’s shoulder and Krona OBVIOUSLY looks intimidated by that:
“I can’t ignore the fact that you might be able to shatter reality, accidental or otherwise”
You are saying that she said that Krona was risking shattering reailty. If she meant that, she would have said ‘You were risking shattering reality.’ Not ‘You might be able to shatter reality, accidental or otherwise.’ In other words, she is specifically saying that she has NOT done that, but MIGHT do that in the future. That’s a future crime.
By the way….. Hiro acted recklessly as well when he saved Maxima. And with him there actually WAS a substantial risk of injury to at least a few people in the area who are not invulnerable or encased in an invulnerable shield. Go arrest him.
Your argument is idiotic. I apologise if you feel that it implies you are too. Even clever people can have idiotic ideas and be too stubborn to admit that.
Incidentally that is intentionally implying that you are clever. And quite sweet. When you do not have that big throbbing vein going in your forehead.
*offers a nice cool compress*
Thank you for admitting that you were making a false claim previously.
No what you are doing is perpetuating your Nazi behaviour. Krona HAS already taken an action which risked harming the universe. Pixel and Maxima are reacting to that. AND they are tanking preventative steps to stop it occurring again. So your quibbling is ALL about how Maxima has phrased this. Whereas I am speaking to her INTENT.
And do bear in mind that I have pointed out previously that the relevant page already has a large amount of dialogue on it. There would not be enough room to put all the legalese in that you are demanding. This is a comic not a court transcript.
Stop being pedantic and go with what is the clear intent of the scene.
Especially bearing in mind that Krona HAS been retrained. And has NEVER indicated that she considered herself to have been under duress. So you are arguing pedantically over a bit of dialogue which has no bearing on the dynamics in the comic.
Krona did wrong. Maxima confronted her about it. Krona agreed. Retraining took place.
Not:
Tyrannical cop perverts course of justice and crying Krona is enslaved by Archon.
That is some other comic that only exists in your and Oberon‘s heads. Krona was chilled about this. I suggest you do the same. Ambulance chasing her, to get your fees, will not make her look favourably on you. Every indication is that she likes Archon and may well want to join them. Without her hiring you, or some other lawyer, your opinions are irrelevant.
“Your argument is idiotic. I apologise if you feel that it implies you are too. Even clever people can have idiotic ideas and be too stubborn to admit that.”
Yorp, you know, when you say stuff like that, it makes it really hard to take you seriously when you tell Oberon not to say the same thing, and it makes it hard to consider you to be a nice person. My argument is based on the law. Something I’m actually very well versed in arguing about. I’m sorry if you don’t understand the basics that I’ve been trying very hard to explain to you, but it’s not idiotic. I will not call your ideas idiotic though. They’re wrong. That’s a critique. Idiotic is an insult.
Wrong = critique
Idiotic = unnecessary insult
“Incidentally that is intentionally implying that you are clever. And quite sweet. When you do not have that big throbbing vein going in your forehead.”
Why did you have to say the last sentence. You’re not really helping your argument when you insult and make ad hominem attacks like that :/ You’re a nice person – you shouldnt resort to that.
“Thank you for admitting that you were making a false claim previously.”
I did not admit to my making any false claims previously. Please do not make claims on what I said. If you didn’t understand what I am saying, you don’t understand what I’m saying. It doesn’t change that I’ve been very consistent in my argument.
“No what you are doing is perpetuating your Nazi behaviour.”
*sigh* Yorp, I’m really trying to be nice to you. So I’m asking you right now to please apologize for saying that, and for calling my behavior that of a Nazi. If you can’t do that, there’s no point in talking to you anymore.
I can’t even bother to finish responding to your post after reading that. :/ There’s no point until I get an apology.
My sincere apologies, I had not realised that I had omitted ‘grammar’ there of course it was not my intent to compare you to a member of the 3rd Reich. I would not think that for a minute and feel dreadful that my error put a dampener on your weekend.
I do stand by my insistence that you are misreading the intent of the pages in question though. I do think that it is idiotic to consider that endangering the universe is OK and not a crime. Sorry but I am not going to lie about that.
As that is the key point, on which our debate hinges, and I have no intentions of shifting my opinion on that, there is no point continuing.
I do wish to reiterate that I respect your intelligence and had no intentions of insulting you personally, in any way. A line of argument that would prevent the duly authorised organisation from protecting the universe, yes, but not you.
“My sincere apologies, I had not realised that I had omitted ‘grammar’ there of course it was not my intent to compare you to a member of the 3rd Reich. I would not think that for a minute and feel dreadful that my error put a dampener on your weekend.”
Apology accepted. Although this really did kill my enjoyment of this particular line of debate. People are beginning to take the debate waaaay too personally (I’ve been mainly talking about it because my major three things which I’m knowledgeable at are comics, tropes, and the law. It’s sort of gotten very un-fun though on this particular discussion.
Fortunately, next update we’ll be able to discuss something else.
“I do wish to reiterate that I respect your intelligence and had no intentions of insulting you personally, in any way.”
Thank you for apologizing. Yorpie snax incoming.
I felt we had argued it into the ground the last time. I should have stuck with my ‘agree to differ’ suggestion, rather than giving in to the temptation to tag on a cheeky comment.
*ears droop, flopping body dejectedly on floor*
Yes Guesticus, I did prove that Krona met the requirements for false imprisonment. AGAIN… it does not require ACTUAL imprisonment within 4 walls – just that she is not free to leave and say no to being detained and held against her voluntary will. Key word being voluntary, as in not coerced by threats.
Did Kronachrome feel that way? Please, show me the page where she felt she was being held unwillingly? Remember, she agreed that what she did was dangerous, and voluntarily decided to go with Maxi, just like with Sydney after the Bank Job
Agreed. The only person who can state whether it was voluntary or not was Krona. At no point since has she stated or even implied that she was not OK with the retraining. Disappointed that she turns out not to be able to destroy the world, but not in a nasty way. She is just less powerful than she thought.
Whilst it is appropriate to defend someone’s rights, and the defense counsel must do so strongly, we must not forget that the court also has to consider the impact on society. Compelling somebody who has been shown to be dangerous, to be retrained so that they are not a threat to society, is appropriate.
Having the police convince them to do that voluntarily, without a court order, both avoids Krona risking getting a criminal conviction and saves all parties concerned the costs involved in a court action.
Doing that with a naive member of the public would be a concern, if their rights were not adequately explained. However Krona is a federal agent so is fully conversant with such matters.
Thank you, have a Yorpie :D
A key aspect of is something is legally voluntary, like I’ve said multiple times now, is if the person was coerced by threat of violence or an inability to otherwise say no. If there is coercion like that, then it’s not voluntary, even if you agree to go along with someone.
I point a gun at your head, and ask you politely to get in the car and drive me across town. I tell you ‘I am insisting that you do this for me.’ But I make no other actual statements, like ‘I will shoot you if you do not do what I say’.
You agree to drive me across town, and might even agree that I have a good reason to need to get driven across town.
Doesn’t matter. Your agreement was not made in a voluntary manner. You were forced.
See now this is where you are the one who is making the possession of a super power a crime. Maxima has not pointed a gun at Krona’s head. Nor has she made a threat of death. We have seen Maxima training Sydney in how to make this very clear. Yet Maxima has not done any such thing here.
You are equating Maxima having the potential to kill someone with a police officer having drawn a weapon and pointed it at someone’s head.
Is it not ironic that you are accusing Maxima of persecuting Krona for the potential to do harm, by using the same logic yourself?
Yet Maxima has not done anything, whereas Krona has. Pixel made very clear about her risking a time loop.
So your analogy is a total inappropriate to the situation. A closer, and fairer one, would be a traffic cop, with a holstered sidearm demanding that a driver step out of the car.
Under your definition the cop should be tried for unlawful arrest. Because he has insisted on someone perform an action, against their will, whilst under the threat of death.
I am sorry but you have not established that Maxima’s “insistence” equates to a threat of death. To the contrary Maxima is asserting her legal authority as the reason for her insistence.
Further she goes on to reassure Krona that nothing untoward is intended. Giving the lie to your claim that she is making a threat of death.
“See now this is where you are the one who is making the possession of a super power a crime. Maxima has not pointed a gun at Krona’s head. Nor has she made a threat of death. We have seen Maxima training Sydney in how to make this very clear. Yet Maxima has not done any such thing here.”
Maxima putting her hand on her shoulder IS the threat. And while we’re at it, police and government officials are held to a higher standard of duty than civilians. Especially after Maxima showed, on national TV, what she can do with that hand. A threat IS about a future action. If you do not come with me, I will ‘blah blah blah.’ Krona did not say she was going to do anything. Maxima did say she insisted on her coming – while again still keeping her hand on her shoulder. What was Krona able to do. Say no?
Also, afterwards, in Panel 6, MAXIMA ADMITS, her specific words:
“I don’t believe that you have nefarious intent.”
“What was Krona able to do. Say no?”
As it happens, yes. That is the normal thing to do when a police officer does something you are unhappy with. Either that or say “I would like to consult with a lawyer”.
At that stage the cop can clarify the situation. So in this case it would be, for the former “I am hereby placing you under arrest for assault commuted on PIxel … ” (that being the easiest case to prove, other charges can be added later). Or for the latter it would be “certainly”.
As opposed to “no I am going to use a nuclear-like attack on you if you do not come with me. Despite the fact that this would be a totally illogical thing for me to do to a national asset that I have tried to reassure will not be imprisoned against her will in a secret facility”.
No offense, but I don’t feel like responding to this until there’s an apology for the thing you said comparing me to a nazi. Going to go afk now.
Sorry. It was unintentional.
“I am sorry but you have not established that Maxima’s “insistence” equates to a threat of death. To the contrary Maxima is asserting her legal authority as the reason for her insistence.”
It doesnt even HAVE to be a threat of death. It’s a threat of not allowing her to leave. That’s enough. That’s literally unlawful detainment. I don’t understand why you’re having a problem with this definition. It’s been shown in precedent after precedent, and in the specific laws on the subject.
You are the one who made the gun pointing at the head analogy, not me. I was the one refuting it.
I have already indicated that Krona has committed assault. Your ignoring my point does not stop if from being true. Once a crime has been committed it is not ‘unlawful detainment’.
Bear in mind that Al Capone was convicted on tax evasion. If proving that ‘risking putting the universe into a time loop’ is too hard to do, Maxima can fall back to any number of lesser charges, should it be necessary to make the arrest formal.
The one I stated being irrefutable. Which is why I suspect you have ignored it three times now.
Sorry, but I can’t really get past the whole nazi / Godwin’s Law crack with no apology on that. It’s sort of not worth debating this anymore after you said that. It’s not fun now.
My bad. I should have picked up the error, in my checking. I suspect that I did a last-minute bit of editing that must have snipped off ‘grammar’. I can’t see how I would not have spotted that otherwise.
If I see Nazi-like behaviour, I do not hesitate to call it as such. I would never even think that with you though. You are far too nice a person. And here you are arguing for an individual person’s rights, which must be championed. You are doing your job and doing it well.
Plus I would not want such a lovely person as yourself to feel that such an insult would purposely be directed your way here. I feel mortified.
Apology accepted, and all the requisite hugs and paperwork for hugs and whatnot.
I could, if you want btw, just replace ‘gun’ with ‘my friend, the 240 lb scary looking guy who is an MMA fighter as the hypothetical. Or taser. Or stun-gun. You’re getting a bit hung up on the ‘gun’ aspect.
I am a bit hung up on you making an analogy where a clear threat is made. As opposed to a situation where it can be read perfectly innocuously.
This comic has a scene which illustrates the threat of death from pointing a gun at someone’s head. So I am surprised that you fail to appreciate the distinction between an unmistakable threat and one which can be interpreted perfectly innocently.
Holding cops to a higher standard is fair. But you need some basis to start from. A hand on the shoulder, on its own is not sufficient.
Likewise a taser is a ‘less lethal’ weapon. The pointing of it is an unmistakable threat. That is still not an appropriate analogy.
Being a 240 lb scary looking guy who is an MMA fighter is not a crime. Whereas turning it into “my friend the…” is making a threat, where you are implying that your friend will commit violence on the person. There is no innocuous reason for mentioning that in such circumstances.
So you are repeatedly trying to escalate a normal action into a threat of violence. Whereas I keep countering your contention by saying that Maxima is invoking her role as a police officer. These are two distinctly different things.
You are failing to prove that Maxima is making any threat, other than to do her duty as a police officer.
Guesticus said:
A crime does not require the victim to feel that there has been a crime committed. Feelings are not relevant to facts.
Only an idiot such as yourself would try to argue that gravity isn’t real because you don’t feel heavy.
Yet again I must point out that since I requested that we debate the issues, rather than attack the people, Guesticus has politely restrained himself from speaking his mind.
Whereas you are persisting in repeatedly insulting people. I am afraid that behaving like a troll does not enhance your arguments. Rather the opinions of an anti-social person can be dismissed out of paw, when discussing social matters.
Your words are but the persistent buzzing of a gnat, which I shall ignore.
The only people who claim a crime has been committed, are you and Pander, and that Maxi is the guilty one
Maxi never claimed that what Kronochrome did was illegal, what she said was that her powers are dangerous and it would do her good to talk to others about what she can do
This is EXACTLY WHY detaining Krona was illegal.
And yes, I know you think Maxima’s hand is perfectly innocent, and Krona’s sweatdrop is totally unrelated to that powerful hand. Think what you like. It really doesn’t matter.
Pander is right, because if it could be interpreted the way she is describing, that’s all it takes for someone to be charged. Even if it is totally innocent, as some in this discussion believe. That’s what judges are FOR, to decide which argument is correct.
But that ain’t gonna happen, since the bottom line is this: if Krona had wanted to, she could have charged Max with a crime. But she decided it really wasn’t worth it, either because, as some think, she believed that Max was only gently asking her to come along for her own good, or as others believe, she totally was coerced but isn’t gonna hold a grudge (or a tort), since in the end she got some useful intel on her own powers, and besides she works for a shadowy secret cabal of monsters and probably doesn’t want to be on public display in court as plaintiff against the most recognizable superpowered individual in the world. Max lucked out there, I think.
Breaks even till she has to pay syd back double
Hello? Dave? Someone who knows Dave? There’s still no HD upload on the Patron site, and I notice that there hasn’t been any comments by Dave for this entry either. It’s not that I’m impatient. Well, probably a little bit. But with no life signs from Dave since yesterday, I worry. Is everything all right?
There have been upload glitches with the regular comic before, I guess the same can happen with the Patreon version too. I would not be concerned, now that you have pointed out the problem, I am sure that Dave will sort it (when he checks the comments).
If you have a beak and wings, you can always try twittering. There is a convenient button above. That would increase the chances of Dave spotting the message sooner rather than later.
Whoops! I guess I forgot to do the Patron post. Never did that before. Sorry about that, it’s up now. https://www.patreon.com/posts/13662092
What does it say on Crimson’s top?
The Unholy Masquerade
New Zealand [a year]
A year that has yet to appear in comic…
Possibly, if it has been interpreted correctly as that.
But a T-shirt can have anything on it that it wants. Perhaps it is just wishful thinking, on fans’ behalf, that the event will occur? Or they were promised that something extra special would occur, in a forthcoming occurrence. Which, being dedicated, they then chose to commission a t-shirt accordingly.
Alternatively the event is organised well in advance. This would make sense if dealing with attendees who may choose to go dormant, in their coffins, for a number of years at a time.
2014. Best $1 a month I’ve spent.
He he. Nice to have that confirmed. Patreon status does have a good benefit. Over and above the altruism of keeping the comic going.
Well, looks like the requests to include the Carolina Reaper might not be as unfeasible as expected then. Stupid anachronisms.
The Patreon comics are provided with spicy peppers? Highly appropriate, but wow, technology sure has advanced fast. Nearest I have experienced to that is ‘scratch and sniff’ smellavision. To jump straight to providing foodstuffs must involve some kind of replicator technology?
Or do they just get posted out, in time for update day?
Annnd here’s another Yorpie snax for you.
Yay!
*buries it in the garden*
https://chilli-shop.co.uk/lick-screen-chilli-app
Mmm, I would only rate that as three chilies out of five potential. Fairly hot, but not overwhelming. Bit of an aftertaste of screen-cleaner mind.
Unfortunately, it’s not consistent across devices. Were you to browse the internet via an old school CRT display, the sensation may well rival some of the milder Scotch Bonnets.
Thank you!
My pleasure. Although I must admit I had not made out the “New Zealand” bit myself. Credit for that goes to prior commentators. Likewise a link to a similar T-Shirt.
I know that getting a book out would probably be a huge undertaking but I really hope Dave is able to get one out in the next few years. I know at least 5 ppl that don’t follow web comics I could gift that to that would read the hell out it.
Also, first one would be for me, because screw everyone else :D
:-D
I’d buy it :)
As the art style has been mentioned before about the recent differences, I’ve been comparing the more recent pages to older ones, and I think I have hit on what the changes are – hard lines, or rather a lack of them.
The hard lines give us outlines of the 3d figure, but a lack of distinct line then softens the image, and sometimes to the point of flatness. This particular page actually is an excellent example of what I’m talking about:
The first panel with Max, her face has no hard lines (neck is the exact opposite), the hair shadow cast on her face is soft and even though there is a really slight gradient of colour washing across her face, it still looks flat, not something that is curving round.
Compare that to the middle and bottom left panels, and there are multiple sections of large hard contrasting colour sections across her face, highlighting Max’s face definition – and this is what gives Max her hard look – the hard lines of extreme colour differences
Of course it isn’t just Max, this softness is across all the characters, but with similar (though not as extreme) results. I haven’t been able to pinpoint what was different until I just thought to study your work to see if I can work out your construction lines… and then realised that I was looking at a distinct lack of lines overall – on the edges or in shading.
I know you are always trying different styles to improve your ability, and I look forward to seeing this new method of colouring that you are working on :)
Correct.
Personally I am very satisfied with the results for Sydney and Crimson (in either form). Maxima has improved yet again, but I don’t think she is quite there yet. But someone with a glossy skin is very hard to capture, so the differences, compared to my expectations, based on prior quality, are quite subtle.
I suspect that it is down to trying to emulate the hard lines, with shadows, but slightly changing Maxima’s facial features as a result. Why this would stand out more on a normally shiny person though (or if that is just co-incidence) I cannot pin-point.
I find myself overestimating humans pretty much constantly.
I overestimate and underestimate myself regularly, depending on the action being taken.
*thinks*
Sydney could learn how to make the Goof Ball (I mean Air Ball… bean ball since it makes gas? Plus, Syd’s the goof ball) generate helium, but walk around with no shield. Everyone around her would sound ridiculous. That could be fun!
Even if it was constantly creating the Helium, it rises too quickly and only those above her would become chipmunks (hmm, what would happen to a chipmunk that got helium’ed? o_O)
That’s when her size would finally become an advantage.
Unless the Bean Ball locks the gas’s location and disobeys buoyancy rules. Or as it rises outside its sphere, it un-exists or teleports to the bottom so the sphere shape is maintained.
We did see the first air bubble remaining in place, in contravention of normal hydrodynamic behaviour, for a gas in a liquid. So it is entirely possible that a bubble of helium could be created in a fixed location (and if that is in air it would be invisible).
There are a few problems though:
1) We do not know if it can create anything other than normal air yet (as in the standard atmospheric mixture of gasses).
2) We do not know if the gas can be created at a range. When Sydney did the prank the gas was emitted from the orb.
3) Pure helium kept in a fixed location around someone would be deadly. When they breathed the helium in, it would replace the air in their lungs. Without any oxygen in their lungs they would start to suffocate and would die in short order.
People can get away with making squeaky voices at parties because they have a mix of helium and normal air (unless they are foolish enough to administer it via a mask, thus preventing any normal air being breathed in). Plus, when they speak they are exhaling hydrogen and replacing it with oxygen. Which is why the squeaking fades after a relatively short time.
Even then though there are a number of deaths from helium inhalation every year. It may be funny but it is dangerous. Best only undertaken under the supervision of someone who knows how to minimise the risks.
Not that these points are insurmountable. 1) & 2) may turn out to be things that Halo can do. If not she may be able to unlock them with upgrades. Or even learn to do them through power stunts. Whilst 3) could be solved by giving the air a safe mixture of helium and oxygen. Once Sydney has been trained in such matters.
Lots of prank potential with air. But it is vital to maintain life, and things can go wrong very easily and very fast.
I am interested in whether the air orb can be used to imitate Marilyn Monroe.
+1
Doubtful.
But perhaps a Metro air vent… :p
The A Team wouldn’t be as affected, but all them giant supers would. I didn’t think of that :)
Chipmunks on helium would get very very squeaky. Possibly to the point of being inaudible to humans.
One of our biologist/ zoologist readers should test this, and report the results to us!
Little known fact Yorp, chipmunks ALWAYS already use helium. Without it, they all sound like Barry White.
This is a fact.
LOL!
Now I want someone to make a gif of a chipmunk and dub in some Barry…
Okay, I just visualized that as a Chipmunks Valentine special and started cracking up…
Can hardly blame her; the AVERAGE human is as dumb as chicken.
We now live in an age where most people can live under the benefits of what the smartest 1% of humans have built. (And in this Archon building, the smartest .001%)
I think you’re being very offensive to chickens.
There are some smarter chickens but, in my experience, they all seem at least a little bit malicious.
Only because they know how keen you are on a chicken vindaloo. Whilst you may focus on the spice content and flavour, they are malicious over another key ingredient!
+1, though I do find that the focus on heat leaves the curry quite variable in quality.
Crimson wasn’t around for the Inquisitions, was she?
:D
That’s the time that vampires learned that humans should NOT be underestimated & why the “status quo” became all about secrecy. The first thing vampires should remember is that we vastly outnumber them & once aware, will organize & stop at nothing to eliminate a threat.
On the other paw vampires have all those traits too (barring the outnumbering bit), plus they have a whole bunch of powers. And each clan has different ones, so humans will have a very hard time trying to counter all the different techniques they can use. Especially those which can control minds and thereby interfere with the human’s command and control capabilities, in fundamental ways.
Imagine if you had a PotUS who supported the persecution of humans, for example?
As for the numbers issue, we can actually check out scientific studies on this. I have seen more than one epidemiolgy study made on zombies. Which come back with the following conclusions.
1) Slow moving classic zombies – these can be stopped, if decisive and strong counter-attacks are made early. Failing that even the slow 1960’s style shamblers will invariably drive humanity into extinction.
2) Modern fast-running zombies – humanity is doomed. Nothing can be done to prevent such a pandemic, once it has started.
The vampires portrayed in this comic are clearly not only closer to 2) above but far exceed their capabilities. What with also being intelligent and having supernatural powers over and above the ability to convert humans into their own kind.
The one consolation being is that they will have to prevent an extinction event, in order to preserve their own existence. So they will need to keep farm stocks of humans.
Plus they will probably want faithful trustworthy furry daytime guards. But those werewolves look far too shifty and likely to try and steal foodstocks.
*proudly shows off guarding capabilities*
Psst, we can still be friends. But we have to prove useful to our overlords, if we wish to survive!
Hmm, except that the Vampires require an Arcane source of energy to live. Humans don’t.
They wouldn’t have to figure out a way to counter everything, but rather just create something that either unravels the Arcane to its base energies, or destroys it altogether.
Just like there are Ley Line nodes that amplify Arcane energy, there are also nodes that completely devour the Arcane. They might be able to build a city on one of these to avoid the supernatural altogether.
It’s the whole Yin and Yang thing.
Or would you call it Arf and Bark? Arf and Meyow?
I may have to consult the Wolfram Alpha computing complex to solve this intelligence debacle.
(Holy Alpine Swiss Carp. My computer bluescreened, but somehow held all the text in this post… Thank You Firefox)
WAlph’s joke section taught me of the molecular detective Sherlock Ohms. Because everyone knows that Molecules are “elementary my dear Watson(OS)”.
is it just me or does it seem as though the art style has changed? it’s subtle, but it seems more rushed and less detailed than in earlier pages. Maxima especially seems much different.
You are not alone. A lot of folks have commented on the changed art style. What you are failing to put your finger on is the lack of a definable border, for instance around the edges of faces. We are used to seeing the result of a black and white sketch being inked in but leaving the edges (I am summarising this as a non-artist unfamiliar with the tools, so am only saying it in layman’s terms, as best I can understand it).
Whilst DaveB may have been experimenting with this in the hopes of working faster, I would not call it rushed (and I imagine this is more for artistic reasons, as the style has changed in other subtle ways too). Rather I imagine it is probably quite a tricky technique to master and is probably taking more time (whilst developing it) rather than less.
Hopefully once you have gotten used to the change, that will no longer draw your attention, and you will find the art to be as good as ever. I say that having gone through the process myself. Plus have observed how rapidly Dave improved the style, to the extent that I now feel that Dabbler is better than she had been portrayed before.
I do agree that Maxima is not quite there yet though. She has lost some of her lustre (which may not change, if I interpret a recent comment of Dave’s correctly, regarding her having been overdone before) and her facial features seem a bit too undefined still. The lack of sharpness being particularly noticeable on her.
The lack of shiny does make Maxima look like a relative of Homer Simpson.
“Honestly I was doing it 40 minutes before as well, my town did not contain the sharpest spoons in the drawer.”
Just wait until Maxima finds out that money is just a store credit to Syd’s comic shop.
He he