El Goonish Shive VII: The Comic is 20 Years Old, but the Cast is Still 18

[Qwertystop]

All right! Keeping up the streak of actually-running-out-of-pages these days, here's the ninth El Goonish Shive (https://www.egscomics.com/) thread, immediately following the one officially numbered 5, and thereby numbered appropriately. For those new to it, this comic has a lot of magic action gender stuff, was at one point described as "the dirtiest squeaky-clean comic on the internet", and currently appears to be dipping its metaphorical toes into something resembling intrigue. It's got the sort of character development you only really get when the author's had time to develop alongside said characters; it might be a bit of a rough start, but it gets good pretty fast.

Previous Threads:
El Goonish Shive (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?115992-El-Goonish-Shive) (Late June 2009)
El Goonish Shive (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?137572-El-Goonish-Shive) (Jan-Feb 2010)
El Goonish Shive (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?191721-El-Goonish-Shive) (March 2011-May 2012; first thread to exceed one page)
El Goonish Shive (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?278783-El-Goonish-Shive) (April 2013-May 2014; first thread to be closed for length at... 45 pages?)
El Goonish Shive II - I stand by my ridiculous comic (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?350273-El-Goonish-Shive-II-I-stand-by-my-ridiculous-comic) (first thread to be numbered!)
El Goonish Shive III - Totally Adorkable! (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?411258-El-Goonish-Shive-III-Totally-Adorkable!)
El Goonish ShIVe - Dammit Dan, Stop Teasing Us (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?527596-El-Goonish-ShIVe-Damn-It-Dan-Stop-Teasing-Us!)
El Goonish ShiVe - Look! Squirrel! (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?583249-El-Goonish-ShiVe-Look!-Squirrel!)

Currently: Fungible morality?

[Celestia]

You have the wrong subtitle on the last thread. Though, that one is still relevant, so I understand your reuse of it.

[Rater202]

You ever play a JRPG and right after you defeat a boss midway through the game you unlock them as a party member and then the version in your party just kind of sucks?

That would be why going villain comes with power boost.

[Qwertystop]

You have the wrong subtitle on the last thread. Though, that one is still relevant, so I understand your reuse of it.

Good catch, thanks.

[Fyraltari]

You ever play a JRPG and right after you defeat a boss midway through the game you unlock them as a party member and then the version in your party just kind of sucks?

That would be why going villain comes with power boost.
*Angrily shakes fist* Damn you, dramatic tension! Damn you!

[Rater202]

So, thought...

Early on, part of the plan for Elliot was that he would, like many anime protagonists, struggle with semi-literal inner demons and a lust for battle and violence.

Like, in the exhibition match Greg had Elliot and Nanase put on when he found out that Elliot brought a guest to observe Geg flat out says "Nanase, don't use your magic powers* and Elliot don't summon your inner demons."

It was eventually declared that that was just Greg making something up to be dramatic... But we're flat out told that that was a retcon in one of th Q&A strips.

So... Maybe Dan is revisiting that concept? Elliot... Likes fighting. And when he gets angry, he wants to inflict violence on the people who made him angry. It's just that he has enough self-control not to do that.

So maybe villain Elliot is just Elliot... With his inhibitions and emotional filters removed. His "inner demon" laid bare.

*Which she did anyway. Color clone spell... She hasn't used that in a while.

[Anonymouswizard]

Yeah, this is likely a reworking of the old Inner Demons idea. Although if we're lucky it'll instead be used to dive into potentially questionable aspects of Eliot's morality.

Like, we're going to see this villain form at some point, probably in four decades, and its actions are going to be based on Eliot's personality (be else why else include it). It being a kind of inverted morality is much less interesting than smaller twists. Especially if (speculation time) the form can exist in it's powered state for extended periods.

[InvisibleBison]

Especially if (speculation time) the form can exist in it's powered state for extended periods.

Is there some reason to think it would be unusual if the villain form could last for a long time? I don't recall it ever being said that there's any limit to how long the Cheerleadra spell can last.

[DavidSh]

Is there some reason to think it would be unusual if the villain form could last for a long time? I don't recall it ever being said that there's any limit to how long the Cheerleadra spell can last.
There's been some information on how long transformation spells last, but I don't have the spare time to dig through the last couple of years of comics to find it. I believe it depends on how willing the subject is, and it probably changed with the magic change. It would be a bummer of most magical personality changes become permanent because the new personality doesn't want to change back.

[Kish]

Like, we're going to see this villain form at some point,
Hopefully not.

It would truly be painfully stupid of Elliott to go, "This gryphon is vastly more powerful than me and nearly killed me because she was tricked into thinking I was evil. I'mma be evil when I go to meet her."

I'll be much happier if his reasoning arrives at, "So...ever using that form would be a really dumb idea," and that's the end of it.

[Rater202]

Hopefully not.

It would truly be painfully stupid of Elliott to go, "This gryphon is vastly more powerful than me and nearly killed me because she was tricked into thinking I was evil. I'mma be evil when I go to meet her."

I'll be much happier if his reasoning arrives at, "So...ever using that form would be a really dumb idea," and that's the end of it.

1: Nobody said anything about Elliot using the form to meet the Gryphons. It could just as easily be a situation where... Say, an encounter with Lord Tedd later in the comic?

2: We've already seen Elliot at the meeting with the Grpyhons at the beginning of the arc, he's Cheerleadra but smaller.

[Maat Mons]

Looks like Tedd's going to be tricked into helping to build new superweapons for the government. Well, it was bound to happen sooner or later. It's sort of a rite of passage for genius inventors.

[Radar]

Looks like Tedd's going to be tricked into helping to build new superweapons for the government. Well, it was bound to happen sooner or later. It's sort of a rite of passage for genius inventors.
Not really superweapons. I would say quite the opposite as what Arthur needs are precise and safe weapons for field agents. Still weapon development though. Some inventors object to it very emotionally (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDcLKYg8ALg) and I think Tedd will not be happy either.

[Gnoman]

I don't think Tedd would object nearly as much to making non-lethal weapons as he will to Arthur going behind his back like this.

[Anonymouswizard]

Is there some reason to think it would be unusual if the villain form could last for a long time? I don't recall it ever being said that there's any limit to how long the Cheerleadra spell can last.

I was thinking along the lines of 'if it can be switched off at will a lot of drawbacks are mitigated', which admittedly might not be an actual issue.


While Tedd might be in theory fine with helping to build the kind of weapons Arthur wants at the moment, Arthur likely realises that others are going to want to use Tedd's research to build far more destructive stuff, and he probably thinks that there is a justification for doing so down the line. Hence the secrecy.

[DavidSh]

But once you have become evil, why would you ever want to become non-evil? Unless you could ensure that you would become evil again at a future time.

[Anonymouswizard]

But once you have become evil, why would you ever want to become non-evil? Unless you could ensure that you would become evil again at a future time.

Not sure, posted both of those posts at work, so double checking or noting my thought process wasn't a priority.

[mucat]

But once you have become evil, why would you ever want to become non-evil? Unless you could ensure that you would become evil again at a future time.
For the record, I will become evil at 3:15 pm on Wednesday, 11 June 2025. My power shall be unsurpassed.

Edit: Pacific Daylight time.

[Celestia]

Hopefully not.

It would truly be painfully stupid of Elliott to go, "This gryphon is vastly more powerful than me and nearly killed me because she was tricked into thinking I was evil. I'mma be evil when I go to meet her."

I'll be much happier if his reasoning arrives at, "So...ever using that form would be a really dumb idea," and that's the end of it.
That would be a clear violation of Chekov's Gun. You can't introduce something to the story only to then ignore it. If it's irrelevant and never used, then why even bring it into the story in the first place?

[InvisibleBison]

That would be a clear violation of Chekov's Gun. You can't introduce something to the story only to then ignore it. If it's irrelevant and never used, then why even bring it into the story in the first place?

Perhaps because it makes sense for the characters to discuss it. Perhaps because it's an interesting bit of information about how the new magic system works. Perhaps because the author wants us to worry about whether or not Elliot will be tempted to use the evil mode powerup in the next dangerous scene. Perhaps because there's going to be a new character using a similar phenomenon and the author wants to make their ability more understandable. Perhaps because contemplating this issue will lead Elliot to figuring out a different, morally acceptable, trade that he can do. In short, there are lots of ways to "use" something without having it directly appear in the story.

Also, Chekhov's gun is overrated. The most concise possible story is not necessarily the best story. And Chekhov was a playwright talking about using actual, physical props. The constraints are different for other media.

[Windscion]

As IB says, a gun can be used without being fired. The threat of force is a use for a weapon, even if it is never used with killing intent -- or even grasped.

[Maat Mons]

Regarding todays NP, I'm going to propose a few items before even knowing the scenarios. I'm interested to see if my items wind up being able to allow success.

My cell phone
A fat stack of cash
A gun
Duct tape

[Gez]

But once you have become evil, why would you ever want to become non-evil? Unless you could ensure that you would become evil again at a future time.

I think there are exceedingly few people who want to be evil. This kind of motivation is more the domain of comic book scenery chewers than real people. Far more common are those who just are evil because it's what seemed the most convenient path to their own gratification.

[Rater202]

Very few people think of themselves as the villain of the story.

Even in a scenario with a clear-cut bad guy, the bad usually thinks that the other guy is the bad guy.

The Highschool Bully doesn't see himself as the bad guy for teasing, pranking, or committing violence against his victim. He sees the victim as the bad guy for not being able to "take a joke."

If someone genuinely wants to be "evil" it's becuase they see the villain as "cool" or "relatable" or becuase there's something fundamentally wrong with them—sociopathy or psychopathy.

*and to be fair, sometimes it's easy to sympathize with the villain. I see Himiko Toga or Riley Davis and I don't see a serial killer, I see someone who could have and should have gotten help becuase it's pretty clear-cut not their fault that they're the way they are.)

...And Some people just want to wear flamboyant costumes and make bombastic speeches about how they're gonna show them, show them all!

[Vinyadan]

To tell the truth, I think Elliot is jumping to conclusions. We are kinda used to this sort of stuff for D&D epic spells -- to lower the difficulty of a very powerful spell, one that even an epic spellcaster would have trouble casting, you add certain drawbacks. For example, you can cast an extremely powerful spell, with much better chances, at the condition of dying.

Now, wouldn't that be a downer, and not really something teens should get near to! But, to tell the truth, I had a much less worrisome idea, which is: you give up the ability to turn the spell off, be it at will (you get a set duration) or at all (you will need external means of transformation to return to your normal form).

[Anonymouswizard]

Regarding todays NP, I'm going to propose a few items before even knowing the scenarios. I'm interested to see if my items wind up being able to allow success.

My cell phone
A fat stack of cash
A gun
Duct tape


I mean, the few times we did this kind of activity on school I hated them. Partially because it was always some kind of trick like "your best bet is to stay with the vehicle', but also because there would generally be some kind of bag or backpack but I wasn't allowed to put other items into it.

[Kish]

That would be a clear violation of Chekov's Gun. You can't introduce something to the story only to then ignore it. If it's irrelevant and never used, then why even bring it into the story in the first place?
Chekov's Gun, at least in the form it's presented here, is a terrible rule. It amounts to: Don't do worldbuilding, since implying that anything is happening that isn't all about this story's protagonists is a waste; no matter how intelligent your protagonists are supposed to be, if there's a mistake that could be made, they have to make it.

If Elliott applies a tiny amount of thought here and never turns into a super-villain, that does not make it irrelevant that he could, any more than, e.g., the fact that Ellen did not attempt to copy Not-Tengu's form makes it irrelevant that that's something she could have (disastrously) attempted had Zeus not pushed her in the direction of duplicating Nanase's guardian form instead.

[Lord Raziere]

Chekov's Gun, at least in the form it's presented here, is a terrible rule. It amounts to: Don't do worldbuilding, since implying that anything is happening that isn't all about this story's protagonists is a waste; no matter how intelligent your protagonists are supposed to be, if there's a mistake that could be made, they have to make it.

If Elliott applies a tiny amount of thought here and never turns into a super-villain, that does not make it irrelevant that he could, any more than, e.g., the fact that Ellen did not attempt to copy Not-Tengu's form makes it irrelevant that that's something she could have (disastrously) attempted had Zeus not pushed her in the direction of duplicating Nanase's guardian form instead.

Agreed, for example it is a well known fact in comic books that Superman could destroy the world if he really wanted to. But he never really does. all his plots involve him sticking to his rules and beliefs and presenting it as bad if he slips even a little bit, any mind control plots have him be saved/broke out of it before he can cause too much destruction, alternate evil supermen tend to stick to the world conquering route rather than giving up on humanity entirely. But no iteration of Superman actively tries to destroy the world or makes the mistake of doing so as far as I can recall.

The fact that he could destroy the world drives a lot of the motivations of the people opposing him however, such as Lex Luthor, Amanda Waller, Cadmus, or just some villain that recognizes "hey this guys really powerful, best take him out first if I want to carry out my plan on Earth". So just because it never happens, doesn't mean its not relevant.

also good storytelling/wordbuilding can use the mistake detail by making a villain do something similar but in their foolishness, haste or other flaw makes the mistake that the protagonist doesn't and thus gets defeated for it. for example if Elliot was facing some Elliot-expy villain who mirrored him most ways but was more reckless, you could use the fact that this villain-Elliot has a similar form to make them make the mistake of going villain for more powerful thinking they could somehow direct their villainy for maximum effect against injustice but be wrong.

[Qwertystop]

To tell the truth, I think Elliot is jumping to conclusions. We are kinda used to this sort of stuff for D&D epic spells -- to lower the difficulty of a very powerful spell, one that even an epic spellcaster would have trouble casting, you add certain drawbacks. For example, you can cast an extremely powerful spell, with much better chances, at the condition of dying.

Now, wouldn't that be a downer, and not really something teens should get near to! But, to tell the truth, I had a much less worrisome idea, which is: you give up the ability to turn the spell off, be it at will (you get a set duration) or at all (you will need external means of transformation to return to your normal form).

Eh. That doesn't seem like the sort of "bad trade" that the Emissary would warn against without saying what it is – situationally, "more powerful but time-limited" is perfectly fine, and in fact that's very similar to the "when it ends you burn out" tradeoff of guardian forms. "You die", or "permanent long-term consequences", or "reduced lifespan"... I can see times when it would be worth it, and I would caution heavily against it without hiding the existence of the option, but I suppose that he might want to discourage reckless undervaluing-the-long-term behavior by a teen.

[Anonymouswizard]

I admit it could be a red herring, and that Elliott or somebody else is going to work out another trade that'll be more important to the story. But I do feel like this is setup for an arc way down the line where Eliot decides them going villain is less problematic than whatever the current issue is.

Although considering Dan, Eliot's villain form might just steal puppies and put them on tall roofs. Which as a dogophobe I'd be in support of.

[Maat Mons]

The trouble with a temporary villain form is you'd know it was temporary. How can you get up to proper evil when you know you're going to feel bad about it later? If I were going to use a villain form, it would have to come with a built-in memory wipe for all the stuff I did while transformed. It would also need to wipe my memory of deciding to use the form, and leave me with some plausible false memories of what I was doing during all the forgotten time. I could use underhanded methods to set myself up for success, and I'd be none the wiser. I'd just think things happened to work out really well.

[Qwertystop]

The trouble with a temporary villain form is you'd know it was temporary. How can you get up to proper evil when you know you're going to feel bad about it later? If I were going to use a villain form, it would have to come with a built-in memory wipe for all the stuff I did while transformed. It would also need to wipe my memory of deciding to use the form, and leave me with some plausible false memories of what I was doing during all the forgotten time. I could use underhanded methods to set myself up for success, and I'd be none the wiser. I'd just think things happened to work out really well.

The thing is, how temporary is it? "When I change back, I'll wish I hadn't done it" is just incentive to figure out a way to make it last longer, and therein lies the problem – it's basically the aberration trade, giving up morality for power, at which point you care less about whatever morality you kept and are more willing to trade what's left of it away for even more power.

Actually, I bet it's not just similar – this is probably exactly the category of magic that produces vampires, in-setting. Use a spell that gives you power and is amenable to abstract trade-offs, trade your empathy or morality or some other aspect of your mindset to make it stronger, cascade.

[Vinyadan]

Now that you mention it, becoming an aberration is something very similar and which we have seen in-setting.

About aberrations, here's something I thought. While magic was still a secret, maybe some people thought that the only access to magic was becoming an aberration. More ways to access magic being readily available could have meant that new aberrations would have become rarer and rarer, as there likely would have been less sinister ways to reach the same purposes (being immortal, access to riches, and casting spells).

[Maat Mons]

Speaking of better forms of immortality, it's always seemed odd to me that Sirleck wasn't angling to make Adrian Raven his new host. Feeding seems like it must be the riskiest part of being an aberration. If Sirleck had managed to latch onto Raven, he'd have been set for eternity.

[Rater202]

Speaking of better forms of immortality, it's always seemed odd to me that Sirleck wasn't angling to make Adrian Raven his new host. Feeding seems like it must be the riskiest part of being an aberration. If Sirleck had managed to latch onto Raven, he'd have been set for eternity.

1: Immortals already hate Aberrations for some reason... Or maybe it's just that killing Abberations is one of the few ways they can screw with mortals without getting in trouble. Either way, taking an elf as a host is just painting a target on his back.

2: As an Elf, Adrian is bound by vaguely defined rules that, while not as strict as those that restrict immortals, still limit what he can and can't do. Unless it turns out that there's no inherent restriction and it's more "immortal will get pissy."

3: Sirleck knows Pandora.

[Maat Mons]

Sirleck instigated a plan that eliminated Pandora as a threat. He had every reason to believe she would retain no emotional connection to Raven after she was reborn. It really looked for a time there like he had deliberately gotten rid of the major obstacle to a plan to capture Raven.

I don't recall any indication that the Immortal community as a whole is protective of half-immortals. As far as I remember, Pandora is the only immortal who is established as giving a crap if Raven lives or dies.

All aberrations always have a massive target on their back. Sirleck is kill-on-sight for immortals whether he's possessing Raven or not. His only chance for survival is to remain hidden. Each time he takes a new host, he risks revealing himself. As time goes on, the chance that he won't be found out and slain as a result of one of his many, many possessions goes to zero. If he took Raven, he could lay low forever after and never again need to take any risks.

[Windscion]

It was Voltaire who targeted Pandora. Sirleck just wanted the Twins out of the way so he could take a shot at Magus. (And he would have gotten away with it, too, if not for those meddling kids. Well, mostly Ellen's unexpected resistance.) Sirleck didn't know what backing Raven had, and also Raven made a great distraction.

[Fyraltari]

We don't know what the process of possessing someone is like. Maybe it doesn't work on elves.

Or maybe Sirleck was afraid that someone with Raven's skill and experience could eliminate him when Magus made it seem he was more harmless than he actually was.

[PoeticallyPsyco]

Plus, Sirleck feeds on his host. We don't know whether Raven would live forever that way.

[Kish]

Yeah, I doubt very much that aberrations in general or body snatchers in specific are in a position of "I just need an elf once." And if they were...from their perspective, the only reason not to devour whole cities without hesitation is the negative attention from those powerful enough to be a threat to them drawn by doing so; taking over the body of an immortal's actual child does not sound like a way to reduce, avoid, or mitigate that.

[Rater202]

I've seen people make the argument that the purpose of homework isn't to evaluate of you learned the lesson or teach you anything, but that it's actually supposed to get you used to going to work and then coming home and still having work to do on your own time despite having spent all morning and a good chunk of the afternoon at a place where you should have done the work.

Considering that the purpose of school is to occupy your time and turn you into a productive worker, homework is just another tool to indoctrinate people into toxic work culture, according to these theories.

I don't know, it makes a lot more sense than most conspiracy theories.

[Fyraltari]

I like this password.

[Maat Mons]

I'd say it's the other way around. Homework is when you actually do things. Doing things is how you learn. The part of school that exists only to turn you into a good drone is the part where you show up at the building, sit at a desk, and interact with people.

[Rater202]

I'd say it's the other way around. Homework is when you actually do things. Doing things is how you learn. The part of school that exists only to turn you into a good drone is the part where you show up at the building, sit at a desk, and interact with people.

You've never had an employer give you extra paperwork to do at home? Or ask you to work unpaid overtime "just this once?" Homework is where it starts.

Instead of using class time efficiently, class time is used to drill in drone behaviors and you end up doing the real work on what is supposed to be your own time.

[Maat Mons]

Your second paragraph is exactly what I was getting at. I'm not saying homework doesn't lay the groundwork for unpaid overtime. I'm saying that at least it also helps you learn the subject matter. Sadly, most other aspects of school can't even boast that much. So if I was given carte blanche to redesign the school system, homework is the one thing I'd keep.

[Rater202]

Your second paragraph is exactly what I was getting at. I'm not saying homework doesn't lay the groundwork for unpaid overtime. I'm saying that at least it also helps you learn the subject matter. Sadly, most other aspects of school can't even boast that much. So if I was given carte blanche to redesign the school system, homework is the one thing I'd keep.

No, it's quite the opposite: I'm saying ditch homework entirely and instead use class time to actually teach the stuff in a way that's efficient.

[Maat Mons]

What's efficient about having a human being talking at you? You could just read an eBook and gain all that same information. I guess you might want to schedule a Zoom meeting with an instructor if you were confused, but I'm not seeing any need for a brick-and-mortar institution or set class times.

[Rater202]

What's efficient about having a human being talking at you? You could just read an eBook and gain all that same information. I guess you might want to schedule a Zoom meeting with an instructor if you were confused, but I'm not seeing any need for a brick-and-mortar institution or set class times.

You misunderstand.

Current system: Majority of the 6+ hours a day, five days a week, set aside for the sole purpose of educating children is deliberately wasted. Instead, children are made to do the majority of the work to educate themselves on their own time, normalizing the kind of behavior that, as an adult, becomes unpaid overtime and making them devalue their own time.

A more efficient system would be: actually using the 6+ hours set aside for education for the sake of education so the child doesn't have to do the majority of the work on their own time. The child learns that work is work and home is home and grows up into someone who values their time.

If you have time set aside for something, and the majority of that something is done outside of that time, time is not being used efficiently.

[Qwertystop]

What's efficient about having a human being talking at you? You could just read an eBook and gain all that same information. I guess you might want to schedule a Zoom meeting with an instructor if you were confused, but I'm not seeing any need for a brick-and-mortar institution or set class times.

Reading the information yourself means getting stuck if you misunderstand whatever static way things are presented in the book; a teacher can adapt. Putting too many different means of explanation in the book to try to avoid that risks becoming overwhelming and redundant, and a student may not know they are misunderstanding until much later and this may be unable to know which thing they need to find corrections on. I'm not going to claim school is perfect as it is, but I will say that both explanation of a concept by another person (who is actually there and can adjust their approach as necessary better than a recording) and working through examples are useful for absorbing different things and for different students, even if in some cases the ratio could do with adjustment. Outside of a few specific fields, I've never had as much success learning things through self-study and online learning programs (e.g. video lectures) as with an actual teacher, even with some of the worse teachers I've had.

[Anonymouswizard]

You have to take into account that Rater seems to have an unusually bad schooling history, and this seems to have tainted his views. He seems to believe that people become teachers to abuse power, to start.

As for homework,my understanding is that it exists so that teachers have free time. I do t know how much this applies to US schools, but in my experience more work is done in lesson than outside of it for the majority of compulsory schooling. Plenty of work done during class so that if you don't understand it the teacher can help, Then ideally 1-2 hours of homework to catch up the time teachers need to plan lessons/do admin/get gazeboed and get you used to the length of the working day.

Of course by the time I was 14 most homework was long term coursework that you had to manage. By the time I was Tedd's age it was all coursework and assigned reading (even accounting for the one year difference in schooling).

Of course the annoyance was there, just as it's there when my employer asks me to do additional stuff at home.

[Vinyadan]

Homework is essential for learning. A lot of things need you to go for it alone (translating, writing, studying at your own pace). Doing this during class would not work, because people perform these tasks at different paces, and some wouldn't have enough time, while others would waste a lot of it. The exception is when the school has resources you cannot expect the pupil to have, like a model for drawing class (faster people in this case can just add more detail) or room for a building project if you are studying at mason school. There isn't some obscure cabal behind this; every discipline needs practice. I also don't believe it conditions you in working from home, that's a matter of cost-reward for the worker and of the power relationship between employer and employee.

The one real problem I see with homework is that the environment at home is very influential on how well homework is done, so it further advantages people who already have it better. But, unless you can give everyone a real tutor and spaces at school to do homework, I don't see a solution.

However, I share Tedd's view that homework on top of full days doesn't make much sense, especially for an 18 y o, unless it is really light. (Tedd actually seems to be much more of a grown up in these last strips, making calculations and giving his own judgements.)

By the way, do US schools all teach the same things? Or are there different categories in the same age bracket, depending on the job they prepare you for? I would expect someone like Tedd to go to a more theory-driven school with fewer hours of class.

[Lord Raziere]

By the way, do US schools all teach the same things? Or are there different categories in the same age bracket, depending on the job they prepare you for? I would expect someone like Tedd to go to a more theory-driven school with fewer hours of class.

.......whats a theory driven school? /ignorant american.

in the US we have community colleges, technical schools, full on colleges....but I'm not sure we have anything else? thats all I can think of off the top of my head. the cliche in the US is that full on colleges are pretty much a lot of work even more than jobs are, and some put you deep into debt and such though.

[Rater202]

You have to take into account that Rater seems to have an unusually bad schooling history, and this seems to have tainted his views. He seems to believe that people become teachers to abuse power, to start.
I dont think teachers become teachers to abuse authority.

I think that teaching is a difficult job that doesn't pay what it's worth, therefore anyone who becomes a teacher is either an idealist or has a motive other than profit.

Generally speaking, there are three kinds of people who become teachers. Idealists who have no idea how difficult it's going to be, people who know how hard and unrewarding the job is but do it any way becuase they want to help people and make a difference... And people who crave power over people who can't fight back.

You see the same patterns among firemen, doctors, police officers... Anybody who is acknowledged as an authority. It's different ratios though. It's very rare that you'll find a fireman who wants to have power over people... Though when you do they're some of the worst.

And the idealists and a lot of the "want to make a difference" types tend to end up either quitting or getting jaded due to inadequate training and inadequate compensation for the cost.

couple this with corruption in the system as administrators become complacent and the bad ones end up either being the majority or dominating the work environment.

Not every teacher is bad, but the system is toxic. The theories I've seen suggest that homework, as it is now, is part of the toxic infrastructure.

Re: Homework, Homework doesn't give the teachers a break. It actually gives them more work becuase they have to take it home and grade it on their own time. They're doing mandatory unpaid overtime and a the same time normalizing it.

(Grading is another part of it that's problematic actually. There have been studies that say that grading isn't a good measure of performance, doesn't provide the motivation people suggest it does, and is biased toward kids with certain talents who come from certain kinds of homes.)

By the way, do US schools all teach the same things? Or are there different categories in the same age bracket, depending on the job they prepare you for? I would expect someone like Tedd to go to a more theory-driven school with fewer hours of class.

Public schools are nominally supposed to teach the same curriculum but in practice, it depends on where the school is and who they have on staff.

Charter Schools, Private Schools, and so on are supposed to teach the same stuff as public schools but with specialized treatments or additional coursed instead of or in addition to standard, but in practice how well that enforced varies significantly: Some charter schools have gotten away with teaching people that the moon landing was a hoax, for example.

Once you get to the university level is where it goes on; Different universities have different programs, there are two-year degrees, four-year degrees... You don't even need to go to a university, you could go to a two-year community college, pass there, and then transfer to a university which will save you a lot of money but isn't always a viable option, or you could just take the two-year degree and go. Or you could go to a trade school and spend a cole years learning a job.

There are gifted programs and schools for the gifted, but it's hard to get into those, and there's some evidence that they do more harm than good.

Ideally, Tedd would be in some AP classes... But Ideally, Tedd wouldn't be a neurotic, socially awkward mess with severe issues stemming from parental abandonment who until very recently wasn't confident in himself and embraced the idea of being an unashamed pervert and a jackass because it meant he wasn't weird.

All of which would result in grades being lower than they should be or being targetted, consciously or subconsciously, by the biases of less than good teachers and basically cost Tedd opportunities he should have gotten.

And well, we've seen directly that the Principal at Moperville North is an incompetent Manchild and that at least some of the teachers are the bad kind of teacher.

[Vinyadan]

.......whats a theory driven school? /ignorant american.

in the US we have community colleges, technical schools, full on colleges....but I'm not sure we have anything else? thats all I can think of off the top of my head. the cliche in the US is that full on colleges are pretty much a lot of work even more than jobs are, and some put you deep into debt and such though.

Various countries in Europe have secondary schools based on Napoleon's "lycée". These schools don't teach you a job and are meant to develop a person on a cultural level before he actually studies a job at a university. These are the school I called "theory-driven". They come in various flavours, but generally it's the basic baggage (literature, maths, history, geography...) plus philosophy and Latin followed by more specific teaching, depending on the school specialty (so Greek or technical drawing or many foreign languages). These schools don't need much supervised practice; instead, they require lots of theoretical study. So you get something like just 30-32 hours a week of school, sometimes less, but you will likely have to spend much more time on the books than in a professional school. (historically, Lycaeums were the schools of the elites; they were the only schools that gave you access university. Now there are ways to circumvent that, and some countries have done away with this rule altogether)

The other option are technical and professional secondary schools, which don't teach Latin or philosophy and instead teach and qualify you for a job. So you find technical subjects like informatics or mechanics and automation systems, or how to draw clothes, or how to raise cattle and value a terrain and so on. Technical and professional schools generally rely on students practicing their future jobs in laboratories or work settings, so they can own machines like lathes, or contain full-on farms. That takes quite a bit of hours, sometimes 40 h a week.

A big difference between continental Europe and the US is that in continental Europe students are often arranged in fixed groups of 15-30 students. Each group is made of kids the same age and has its own room, and its members will spend all the years at the school doing the same activities together (unless someone has to repeat a year and is moved to a younger group, or too many students leave and the group becomes too tiny and has to be disbanded). Teachers go from room to room.

Tedd to me looks like the kind of kid who'd have chosen a lyceum. But, as Rater observed, his situation might have hindered him a lot. And it's pretty odd to think of Tedd as part of a student class in the European sense, when he's always shown walking around corridors with just one or two people he knows.

[Gez]

To answer the question of "what good is a compass on the Moon? (https://www.egscomics.com/egsnp/jestful-09)", one needs to ask if the situation also involves time travel. Apparently (https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aax0883), two billion years ago, it would have worked just fine.

[Qwertystop]

Various countries in Europe have secondary schools based on Napoleon's "lycée". These schools don't teach you a job and are meant to develop a person on a cultural level before he actually studies a job at a university. These are the school I called "theory-driven". They come in various flavours, but generally it's the basic baggage (literature, maths, history, geography...) plus philosophy and Latin followed by more specific teaching, depending on the school specialty (so Greek or technical drawing or many foreign languages). These schools don't need much supervised practice; instead, they require lots of theoretical study. So you get something like just 30-32 hours a week of school, sometimes less, but you will likely have to spend much more time on the books than in a professional school. (historically, Lycaeums were the schools of the elites; they were the only schools that gave you access university. Now there are ways to circumvent that, and some countries have done away with this rule altogether)

The other option are technical and professional secondary schools, which don't teach Latin or philosophy and instead teach and qualify you for a job. So you find technical subjects like informatics or mechanics and automation systems, or how to draw clothes, or how to raise cattle and value a terrain and so on. Technical and professional schools generally rely on students practicing their future jobs in laboratories or work settings, so they can own machines like lathes, or contain full-on farms. That takes quite a bit of hours, sometimes 40 h a week.

A big difference between continental Europe and the US is that in continental Europe students are often arranged in fixed groups of 15-30 students. Each group is made of kids the same age and has its own room, and its members will spend all the years at the school doing the same activities together (unless someone has to repeat a year and is moved to a younger group, or too many students leave and the group becomes too tiny and has to be disbanded). Teachers go from room to room.

Tedd to me looks like the kind of kid who'd have chosen a lyceum. But, as Rater observed, his situation might have hindered him a lot. And it's pretty odd to think of Tedd as part of a student class in the European sense, when he's always shown walking around corridors with just one or two people he knows.

Ah. Yes, that category of school is not a thing in the US. At that age level, we have public schools (government-run, tax-funded, anyone of the appropriate age living in the relevant area can go there with no further requirements), and private schools (privately owned, generally some combination of entrance exams, tuition fees, religious affiliation, etc). Also some kids are home-schooled. In general, though, nearly everyone goes to public schooling. There are national educational standards, but the actual degree to which a given school meets or exceeds them or fails to do so will vary. Private schools and home-schoolers may diverge somewhat from the usual structure of things but are at least nominally still required to meet those national standards, and though I've never been to one my understanding is that they mostly still follow the same structure as public schools, but with higher standards or better-paid teachers or more extracurriculars or whatever. We don't really have different schools with different approaches and focuses (unless you've got rich parents and live near an appropriate private school) until the post-secondary level, colleges and universities and such.

[DavidSh]

Some cities, at least New York City, have selective "magnet" public high schools. The Bronx High School of Science is probably the best-known, at least among my circles.

[KillianHawkeye]

The characters haven't started college yet, have they? I know they're close...

Anyway, yeah, in American public high schools you're all basically learning the same curriculum unless you can test into an advanced class in a certain subject. Then there are a few extra-curricular classes that allow a student to start learning music or art or computers or foreign languages (well SOME foreign language is usually required but taking the advanced foreign language classes was optional back when I did it).

Private schools may be totally different, and of course there's a lot of variety in quality level in the public schools depending on where you are. But it's really in the post-high school era that American educations start getting really specific. Some go to community colleges, some go to big universities to get a more advanced degree, others go to a trade school, et cetera.

[Maat Mons]

Another fun fact about US schools: while some of the funding is federal, a school that relies only on that will be a terrible, underfunded place that provides a very poor quality of education. More local forms of government also contribute, but how much depends on where you live. If you live somewhere affluent, the local govern can afford to contribute substantially, and you'll have good schools. If you live somewhere poor, the local government can't afford to contribute much, and you'll have awful schools. So it's very important to your future success to be born somewhere with a high median income.

[Fyraltari]

THE AGONY!

That is all.

[Windscion]

So ... Edward is having trouble understanding/accepting Tedd == over the span of whole comic.
And now Arthur has to take on the role of being diplomatic/ambassadorial with Tedd. He doesn't seem to be doing badly, which is interesting but not really surprising. No surprising because Tedd is very open to being listened to. Lucky Tedd. Some of us learned not to volunteer info because it would be used against us.

[Gnoman]

To answer the question of "what good is a compass on the Moon? (https://www.egscomics.com/egsnp/jestful-09)", one needs to ask if the situation also involves time travel. Apparently (https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aax0883), two billion years ago, it would have worked just fine.

Funny thing about the team-building exercise this is referencing. I actually did this one in school, and remember one thing very clearly - on the list was two handguns, which everyone discarded as useless. Turned out the "correct" answer was to use them as a method of propulsion, the math of which never seemed right to me.


The exercise is a "palette swap" of one involving a plane crash in the desert, where both the compass and the pistols made more sense - the compass, while working, is useless because trying to walk your way out is suicide; while the pistols are a very useful signalling device.

[Rater202]

Funny thing about the team-building exercise this is referencing. I actually did this one in school, and remember one thing very clearly - on the list was two handguns, which everyone discarded as useless. Turned out the "correct" answer was to use them as a method of propulsion, the math of which never seemed right to me.


The exercise is a "palette swap" of one involving a plane crash in the desert, where both the compass and the pistols made more sense - the compass, while working, is useless because trying to walk your way out is suicide; while the pistols are a very useful signalling device.

I had the "stranded in the Canadian wilderness" variant in high school.

My group selected the map—if we could find a landmark we might be able to set up camp, the tent for shelter, and the bottle of high proof whiskey for the sake of 1: Something flammable in case we had trouble starting a fire with scavenged and 2: disinfecting water if we can't filter or boil it.

And then one of the asshats I was paired up with threw in "staying sane" with the whiskey(IE, drinking it straight to get drunk) after we agreed not too and we lost points. (It may have been on purpose... I'd turned him in after catching him dealing drugs out of his locker in middle school.)

I don't remember what the "right" things were, but we also lost points for taking the map becuase "they're dangerous, they'll make you think you can navigate to civilization" when... Our entire reason was "if we can find a landmark we can set up a camp somewhere relatively safe." Just ignored our reasoning, the maser list said the map was bad so choosing the map is wrong.

Oh. There was a mirror we were supposed to use to shine a light at passing airplanes coming to rescue us... But the way it was worded suggested that we'd be able to scavenge from the environment so I figured we'd use a ... fire for that.

[Fyraltari]

I'm not really sure what the point of the third panel is. Grace isn't being cuter than usual, is she?

[Taevyr]

I'm not really sure what the point of the third panel is. Grace isn't being cuter than usual, is she?

Clearly, a woman who clearly states how she intends her words is a gem rarer than any precious materila, and thus needs to be cherished.

Bit of a weird/stereotypical premise, but I can see where it stems from.

[Fyraltari]

Clearly, a woman who clearly states how she intends her words is a gem rarer than any precious materila, and thus needs to be cherished.

Bit of a weird/stereotypical premise, but I can see where it stems from.

I find it more annoying than anything, really.

[Anonymouswizard]

The exercise is a "palette swap" of one involving a plane crash in the desert, where both the compass and the pistols made more sense - the compass, while working, is useless because trying to walk your way out is suicide; while the pistols are a very useful signalling device.

This was the one we had, as well as one about being stuck in the desert after your Jeep broke down. Neither had any firearms for us, although I think the jungle one had a flare gun?

Again, both times a backpack was one of the options, but we couldn't use it to carry more stuff. This infuriates me to this day.

Both times the trick was 'stay with the vehicle', which to me isn't really fitting with the wording of the premise. Next time I'm putting the bloody plane on my list.

Also surely if you're already on the moon it's more efficient to just walk around instead of firing a pistol to move?

[Celestia]

Using a pistol to propel yourself around the moon is dumb. Best case scenario, you can jump a bit more which is completely unnecessary on a surface with no cliffs or holes. Worst case scenario, you propel yourself out of the moon's gravity well and launch yourself into space.

[KillianHawkeye]

Even with the lowered gravity of the moon, I can't imagine the energy used to propel a tiny bullet would be of any use in reverse-propelling a full sized human. :smallconfused:

I mean, it's simple physics.

F = m*a

The mass of a person is much MUCH higher than the mass of a bullet. At any given force F, the counter-force will have a much MUCH smaller effect on the person holding the gun than it does on the bullet.

It's feasible in zero gravity, where there are essentially no other strong forces at work on you. But on the moon? I'm doubtful.

[Celestia]

Even with the lowered gravity of the moon, I can't imagine the energy used to propel a tiny bullet would be of any use in reverse-propelling a full sized human. :smallconfused:

I mean, it's simple physics.

F = m*a

The mass of a person is much MUCH higher than the mass of a bullet. At any given force F, the counter-force will have a much MUCH smaller effect on the person holding the gun than it does on the bullet.

It's feasible in zero gravity, where there are essentially no other strong forces at work on you. But on the moon? I'm doubtful.
Don't forget about the a in that equation. Bullets may not have a lot of mass, but they have a lot of acceleration. Incidentally, you can achieve escape velocity on the moon with a bicycle.

[Ibrinar]

Yeah but since it isn't speed squared like with kinetic energy that still isn't enough to amount to much. A pistol bullet weighs about 1/10000th of an adult human. So if it goes 1000km/h that is just enough for you to go 0.1 km/h.

[Celestia]

Yeah but since it isn't speed squared like with kinetic energy that still isn't enough to amount to much. A pistol bullet weighs about 1/10000th of an adult human. So if it goes 1000km/h that is just enough for you to go 0.1 km/h.
Man, I didn't think the math was that bad. Yeah, looks like a pistol will do f*** all.

[Maat Mons]

I think we actually should be using the kinetic energy equation. Otherwise we'll need to integrate the acceleration to find our final velocity. And it's much easier to find info on the muzzle velocity of guns that it is to find anything about the instantaneous acceleration of the bullet inside the barrel.

No, wait. The equation full of v's and m's seemed tempting, since v's and m's are what we know, but I'm struggling to find a way to meaningfully correlate the kinetic energy of the bullet with the kinetic energy of the shooter.

[Aeson]

Even with the lowered gravity of the moon, I can't imagine the energy used to propel a tiny bullet would be of any use in reverse-propelling a full sized human. :smallconfused:

I mean, it's simple physics.

F = m*a

The mass of a person is much MUCH higher than the mass of a bullet. At any given force F, the counter-force will have a much MUCH smaller effect on the person holding the gun than it does on the bullet.

It's feasible in zero gravity, where there are essentially no other strong forces at work on you. But on the moon? I'm doubtful.
If it's speed you're looking for, why would you use reaction forces rather than conservation of momentum to do this? mme * v0, me + mbullet * v0, bullet = mme * v1, me + mbullet * v1, bullet; assuming that I and the bullet are initially stationary in my inertial frame of reference, mme * v1, me = mbullet * v1, bullet, or v1, me = (mbullet / mme) * v1, bullet.


Incidentally, you can achieve escape velocity on the moon with a bicycle.
Escape velocity from the surface of the moon is about 2.4 km/s, which on Earth is about Mach 7. The idea that you could achieve this speed under your own power on a bicycle seems somewhat suspect.

Incidentally, in order to achieve this velocity by firing a single bullet from a pistol with a muzzle velocity of 1000 m/s, a person would need to fire a bullet about 2.5 times as massive as they themselves are. Somehow, I don't believe that accidentally achieving escape velocity from the lunar surface by firing a pistol - or virtually any infantry weapon, for that matter - at the ground is a serious concern; more realistic concerns might include accidentally shooting yourself in the foot, damaging your spacesuit with a richochet or with fragments launched from the lunar surface by the impact of the bullet, or being knocked off-balance by the recoil of the pistol due to inexperience with firearms in lower-than-Earth-gravity environments.


I think we actually should be using the kinetic energy equation. Otherwise we'll need to integrate the acceleration to find our final velocity. And it's much easier to find info on the muzzle velocity of guns that it is to find anything about the instantaneous acceleration of the bullet inside the barrel.
While Energy is conserved, Kinetic Energy is not. If you wanted to do this, you would have to look at a total energy balance, which means you'd need to understand something about the losses in the system and possibly also potential energy. This, in my opinion, would be a more difficult way to approach the problem than either reaction forces or conservation of momentum given that we know nothing about the system other than that there is a human and a pistol.

Conservation of Energy would however be a relatively easy way to estimate how high up a single pistol shot could propel a person once you've computed how fast the person is moving immediately after firing the pistol, as the height above the lunar surface at which your lunar gravitational potential energy equals the kinetic energy that you'd have immediately after firing the pistol directly downwards while standing on the lunar surface is the height at which you stop ascending (assuming, at any rate, that your lunar gravitational potential energy is referenced to the lunar surface).

[Celestia]

Escape velocity from the surface of the moon is about 2.4 km/s, which on Earth is about Mach 7. The idea that you could achieve this speed under your own power on a bicycle seems somewhat suspect.
Damn. School lied to me.

[Maat Mons]

You might be misremembering a factoid about one of the moons of Mars. I seem to remember one of those being very easy to escape from.

[KillianHawkeye]

If it's speed you're looking for, why would you use reaction forces rather than conservation of momentum to do this?

Because I only remember basic physics? Newton's Laws are essentially what we're discussing when the subject is using a projectile weapon as propulsion, anyway. The force of shooting a bullet applies an equal but opposite force on the person shooting it, right? But it's likely not enough force, as I already pointed out, and it seems like you agreed with me...

[Vinyadan]

Escape velocity from the surface of the moon is about 2.4 km/s, which on Earth is about Mach 7. The idea that you could achieve this speed under your own power on a bicycle seems somewhat suspect.


I wonder, could you reach such speeds by jumping, if you're a doctor that trained with Batman?

[Aeson]

[Otherwise we'll need to integrate the acceleration to find our final velocity. And it's much easier to find info on the muzzle velocity of guns that it is to find anything about the instantaneous acceleration of the bullet inside the barrel.
Overlooked this part. If you know the muzzle velocity and the ratio between the mass of the shooter and the mass of the bullet, then as long as the ratio between the masses is time-invariant you don't need to know anything specific about the forces or accelerations involved and you don't need to evaluate any integrals the hard way even if you for some reason want to approach this using reaction forces rather than conservation of momentum.

vshooter = ∫ashooter * dt = ∫Fshooter / mshooter * dt

Fbullet = Fshooter from Newton's Third Law, and mshooter = (1/k) * mbullet where k is some constant, so vshooter can be rewritten as:
vshooter = ∫k * Fbullet / mbullet * dt

Since k is a constant, it can be pulled out of the integral, giving:
vshooter = k *∫Fbullet / mbullet * dt

∫Fbullet / mbullet * dt is the muzzle velocity of the gun, which we know, so:

vshooter = k * vmuzzle


Incidentally, since we're probably going to assume masses are constant for this problem:
vshooter = ∫Fshooter / mshooter * dt = (1 / mshooter) * ∫Fshooter * dt
vbullet = ∫Fbullet / mbullet * dt = (1 / mbullet) * ∫Fbullet * dt

Giving:
mshooter * vshooter = ∫Fshooter * dt
mbullet * vbullet = ∫Fbullet * dt

Fshooter = Fbullet, so:
mshooter * vshooter = ∫Fbullet * dt

Therefore:
mshooter * vshooter = mbullet * vbullet
or if you prefer:
pshooter = pbullet

Reaction forces is the less direct way of applying Conservation of Momentum to this problem.

(All of this post assumes an initial velocity of 0. A nonzero initial velocity would change some details, but the general idea is the same.)

[DavidSh]

...
Therefore:
mshooter * vshooter = mbullet * vbullet
or if you prefer:
pshooter = pbullet

Reaction forces is the complicated way of applying Conservation of Momentum to this problem.
Well done, except that these are vectors, and that the forces, velocities, and momenta are in opposite directions. So, for example, the final conclusion would be:
pshooter = -pbullet

[Aeson]

Well done, except that these are vectors, and that the forces, velocities, and momenta are in opposite directions. So, for example, the final conclusion would be:
pshooter = -pbullet
The reason that you believe I was working with vector quantities is...? I wrote everything as scalars, so I only care about the magnitudes; direction is irrelevant.

[DavidSh]

The reason that you believe I was working with vector quantities is...? I wrote everything as scalars, so I only care about the magnitudes; direction is irrelevant.
Because forces, velocities, and momenta are vectors. Since you asked.

[Aeson]

Because forces, velocities, and momenta are vectors. Since you asked.
But I wrote them as scalars, and when I applied Newton's Third Law I applied it in a way that is only true for scalar quantities, which I would think should make it clear to anyone who isn't looking to score cheap points in an internet discussion that I'm dealing with scalar quantities.

Fshooter = -Fbullet, pshooter = -pbullet, vshooter = -mbullet * vbullet / mshooter, but Fshooter = Fbullet, pshooter = pbullet, and vshooter = mbullet * vbullet / mshooter.

[Gez]

I wonder, could you reach such speeds by jumping, if you're a doctor that trained with Batman?

You could, but you would need a draculabot to surf safely down the surface of the Earth if you don't want to be incinerated upon reentry.

[Radar]

I wonder, could you reach such speeds by jumping, if you're a doctor that trained with Batman?
If you get some useful tips from Bruce Lee, than it might be possible indeed. Being a ninja also helps.

[Vinyadan]

If you get some useful tips from Bruce Lee, than it might be possible indeed. Being a ninja also helps.

I liked how the jump meant a considerable improvement, but left room for even greater achievements: Doc had jumped from the moon, but Bruce managed to reach escape velocity in a much more difficult jump from planet Earth.

[Windscion]

Now I wonder about Tedd's choice of variable names. Personally, I can be pretty random.

[Fyraltari]

Silly Tedd, programmers always judge each other's variable name choices.

Also you better have properly commented that code, child!

[Gez]

So what variable naming sin did Tedd commit?

The obfuscated? x1, x2, x3, etc. or some variant of that scheme where all variable names eventually just blur together.
The dummy? foo, bar, baz, etc.
The redundant? myInt, myFloat, myChar, etc. where the name tells you what any IDE would also tell you, but nothing about the variable's actual role.


Or perhaps it was something more like naming the variables after characters from some anime.

[Radar]

So what variable naming sin did Tedd commit?

The obfuscated? x1, x2, x3, etc. or some variant of that scheme where all variable names eventually just blur together.
The dummy? foo, bar, baz, etc.
The redundant? myInt, myFloat, myChar, etc. where the name tells you what any IDE would also tell you, but nothing about the variable's actual role.


Or perhaps it was something more like naming the variables after characters from some anime.
Most likely some incoherent variable names without particular convention. I would guess the whole code was written without any beforehand planning as it happens with a lot of non-professional programmers, so during revisions some functions and variables needed to be added, some were deleted and the whole thing is probably a patchwork of pieces written at different times with different level of expertise (Tedd learning as he went into the project) that somehow works together.

[DavidSh]

Maybe something like this quote from The Programmer and the Elves: "It has variables named Shamrock and Rainbow and Misty_Morning_Dew, and some of the most ferocious assembly language subroutines to be found outside the jungles of Borneo."

[PoeticallyPsyco]

On the subject of propulsion via pistol, Conservation of Momentum is I think a more useful metric than Newton's Laws. Firing a pistol will change your momentum by precisely as much as getting shot by a pistol (assuming the bullet doesn't go all the way through your body). Which is to say, barely (when Mythbusters tested this on a pig, it took a rifle at point blank to even cause it to fall off of the hook it was on, much less go flying backwards).

In microgravity (i.e. space), that little bit of momentum might be significant enough to help. It's certainly safer than what they did in The Martian movie adaptation; poking holes in your suit like that would propel you, but it would also almost certainly start you rotating uncontrollably (one of the many reasons they cited in the book when explicitly rejecting that idea).

[KillianHawkeye]

Given Tedd's feelings about getting the glove to work, and given that he never ever expected anyone else to read his code, I'm going to assume there was enough frustration involved in making it operational to invoke the usage of profanity-laced variable names.

[Anonymouswizard]

Nah, every variable is named Grace.

You've seen his Star Trek ship, you know it's true.

[Maat Mons]

And the program has terrible memory leaks because he can't bring himself to deallocate any of the Graces.

[Rater202]

Next NP: Rumors that Grace and Ellen are cheating on each other with Nanase.

[Anonymouswizard]

Next NP: Rumors that Grace and Ellen are cheating on each other with Nanase.

Likely.

On the other hand, I wouldn't be completely shocked if the group started becoming a big polyamorous web. So it's possible that by the end of the 3020s Nananse will also be dating Grace (who may or may not be dating Sarah and/or Sam by that time). Justin, Luke, Elliot, and Ashley will remain in monogamous relationships for representation purposes.

[Rater202]

So... Thought.

Tedd still has the other glove.

The one that shaves away a tiny bit of Tedd's magic and stores it so that it can be pumped back into Tedd later to trigger a Supermode.

The one used to power up the magic vision to see the presence of the whales.

the one that Tedd invented to use to fight alongside the others.

The one that looks suspiciously like the gauntlet that Lord Tedd wears.

Tedd might not be as opposed to weapons as Arthur thinks... And that might be a bad thing.

[Celestia]

So... Thought.

Tedd still has the other glove.

The one that shaves away a tiny bit of Tedd's magic and stores it so that it can be pumped back into Tedd later to trigger a Supermode.

The one used to power up the magic vision to see the presence of the whales.

the one that Tedd invented to use to fight alongside the others.

The one that looks suspiciously like the gauntlet that Lord Tedd wears.

Tedd might not be as opposed to weapons as Arthur thinks... And that might be a bad thing.
That is some Olympic level mental gymnastics there.

[Fyraltari]

Isn't that the same glove?

[Anonymouswizard]

Isn't that the same glove?

No, the enchanting glove stops at the wrist, has few or no visible outside modifications and differently coloured fingers. The gauntlet is longer, has a lot of tech bolted onto it, and is all one colour.

I'm not actually sure if Tedd's thought the implications of his gauntlet through. It's designed to boost his levels of magic energy up to full (ordinary) wizard levels, but it's other functions are unclear (firing beams is a safe bet though). It's possible that Tedd, at the moment, would be fine with less lethal weapons but not intentionally lethal ones.

It's also possible that this is what leads to Lord Tedd.

[Rater202]

That is some Olympic level mental gymnastics there.

Please explain how "Tedd already made a weapon" is a leap to "Tedd might be more okay with weapons than Arthur thinks."

Or how "the weapon Tedd made looks very similar to a signature item of an evil version of Tedd" to "you know, maybe it's a bad thing that Tedd made a weapon."

[Celestia]

Please explain how "Tedd already made a weapon" is a leap to "Tedd might be more okay with weapons than Arthur thinks."

Or how "the weapon Tedd made looks very similar to a signature item of an evil version of Tedd" to "you know, maybe it's a bad thing that Tedd made a weapon."
It's because you're starting out with a false premise. Tedd did not make a weapon. Tedd made a tool that could potentially kill people, and that distinction is significant. Tedd did not set out to hurt people. It's like how Alfred Nobel invented dynamite to aid in mining and construction. Sure, it also is very good at blowing people up, but that's not why it was made, and Nobel isn't a murderer for making it. Neither is Tedd.

The fact that am evil Tedd from an alternate universe uses something similar could not possibly be more irrelevant. They are different people, and bad people using something doesn't taint it forever. Iron Man isn't evil because some of his villains also use armor suits. You're taking a character who has never displayed any violent tendencies and claiming that they're totally ok with making magic weapons to maim and possibly kill people because something they made could conceivably be misused. The fact that you don't realize how nonsensical this is is hilarious.

[Rater202]

Tedd made that gauntlet with the intent of using it the next time someone messed with his friends. That makes it a weapon.

Likewise, Lord Tedd isn't a fully distinct individual. As far as we know, this isn't a mirror universe situation where good people are evil and vice versa: Lord Tedd is being built up as Tedd who started out the same but had different friends and made different choices.

[Gnoman]

I think Tedd would be much more comfortable with being asked to create weapons for the express purpose of protecting people (including the perpetrators, as even the big one's Arthur mentioned are intended for detaining superpowerful threats) than he will be with being tricked into helping them.

[Rater202]

So on a whim, I went back to reread the Escape From the Mall NP storyline(I started from Marker) and...

In Marker, it's strongly implied that Pandora marked Liz becuase, while she didn't find a transformation spell, Liz was able to get a spell that would be "useful" to Pandora's plans.

And this was before she found out that her plans were never gonna work out, so...

That... That's one hell of a Chekov's gun.

[Spamotron]

Today's EGS:NP

Whelp it looks like we're leaving Sillyville for a bit to visit Traumatown.

[Celestia]

Wait, Ashley's been around for seven years!? What the flock?

[Fyraltari]

What is even time?

[Rater202]

What is even time?

An illusion created by the correlation of humanity's imperfect perception of the curvature of space against our rationalization of fact that we're fragile existence hurtling towards our impending death by most likely a slow process of decay but also possibly horrible illness, lack of chemical input, the wrong kind of chemical input, random chance, or something just deciding that we need to be broken.

[Windscion]

Glamourpuss Mrs Dunkel chasing little ball-of-energy Elliot is cute!
Also: Part of why Elliot likes to fight is just burning off excess energy? Makes sense.
Also also: Challenge accepted! Elliot's face when he turn to meet Tony reminds me of the (EGS NP) graces.

[KillianHawkeye]

What is even time?

It's all the time that passes between the odd stuff. :smalltongue:

[Kish]

"Weren't limited to cuddles"? Is Dan actually implying that Grace has had dreams about sex?

[Windscion]

Obviously she means transforming into a fluffier form for better cuddles.

[KillianHawkeye]

"Weren't limited to cuddles"? Is Dan actually implying that Grace has had dreams about sex?

Are you implying that this wouldn't be completely normal for most eighteen-year-olds? :smallconfused:

Although I'd assume it's more like kissing than leaping to a sex assumption, personally...

[Celestia]

"Weren't limited to cuddles"? Is Dan actually implying that Grace has had dreams about sex?
With the commentary, it sounds like more than just implying.

Also, given her age, it would be unusual if she wasn't having sex dreams.

[Fyraltari]

She's clearly dreamt of kissing, which is how babies are made.

[Anonymouswizard]

"Weren't limited to cuddles"? Is Dan actually implying that Grace has had dreams about sex?

As others have said, it's completely normal for a girl her age. It would be more surprising if she hadn't.

Plus she's been in a relationship with somebody she's living with for a year. She's probably had sex, it's just not important to the comic (compared to pointing out that she has a normal thought process).

[Rater202]

As others have said, it's completely normal for a girl her age. It would be more surprising if she hadn't.

Plus she's been in a relationship with somebody she's living with for a year. She's probably had sex, it's just not important to the comic (compared to pointing out that she has a normal thought process).

I recall, many moons ago when I lurked on Dan's forum back on the old egs site, discussion of a post where Dan claimed that the whole main 8 were virgins... except Tedd and Grace, who he did not answer for either way.

This was in the middle of Sister 2, and I never saw the original post.

Two teenagers in a serious relationship are described by multiple people as "practically married" who are frequently without parental supervision.

Yeah.

Until stated otherwise, assume that Grace and Tedd have had sex.

[Anonymouswizard]

I recall, many moons ago when I lurked on Dan's forum back on the old egs site, discussion of a post where Dan claimed that the whole main 8 were virgins... except Tedd and Grace, who he did not answer for either way.

This was in the middle of Sister 2, and I never saw the original post.

Two teenagers in a serious relationship are described by multiple people as "practically married" who are frequently without parental supervision.

Yeah.

Until stated otherwise, assume that Grace and Tedd have had sex.

I mean, I'm also assuming it for Ellen and Nanase, that one's been actively hinted at IIRC.

But yeah, I've been assuming that it happened by the Grace's birthday party arc, if not right back at the beginning. It was pretty clearly telegraphed.llllllllll

[Gnoman]

Back when Elliot and Sarah were together, Sarah has an outburst about how nothing has happened "despite her best efforts".

[Anonymouswizard]

Back when Elliot and Sarah were together, Sarah has an outburst about how nothing has happened "despite her best efforts".

Yep (https://www.egscomics.com/comic/2013-02-22). Plus, while I'm not searching it out, the comic where Ellen asks Eliot for some superhero clothes implies that she and Nanase have been intimate.

These are Americans in their late teens, apart from the Eliot/Sarah years I'd expect any of them in long term relationships to not be virgins. As to the recently established relationships I honestly expect Luke and Justin to go that far first, Eliot and Ashley will dork around it for fifty dates and Sam is going to need time to both get used to his magic and realise that Sarah knows about it.

[Kish]

Are you implying that this wouldn't be completely normal for most eighteen-year-olds? :smallconfused:
I am implying that it would be unprecedented for one of Dan's characters. (Nanase and Ellen have been in a monogamous committed relationship for how long? And the closest the comic gets to spelling out that they've actually had sex is "I had sexy plans this weekend.") Which, don't get me wrong, actually causes me some immersion issues and I'd be delighted if he actually moved past it, but.

[Vinyadan]

So you're telling me she's not referring to ritual murder by strangulation? :smalleek:

[Lord Raziere]

Yeah I'mma be honest: I could list tons of stories more popular than EGS that mention sex less. Often the only indication you get the act occurred at all is that a child is there now. Generally frank and clear mentions of sex are confined to two or three things: adult comedies, porn and raunchy dark dramas that are considered "deep". EGS is none of those.

[Kish]

So which is OotS? An adult comedy, porn, or a raunchy dark drama?

Also, I am, for some reason I can't put my finger on, skeptical that you can list tons--or even one--story that mentions sex less than "not at all." Which you're essentially acknowledging two sentences after you made the claim, just with a goofy claim that "don't actually mention sex" is near-universal.

[Lord Raziere]

So which is OotS? An adult comedy, porn, or a raunchy dark drama?


adult comedy, simple. this is not a hard question. (its also other things. genres aren't mutually exclusive.)

as for pieces of media examples that don't mention sex, ahem: Dragonball*, One Piece*, Naruto*, Fairy Tail*, MHA* Mario, Legend of Zelda, Pokemon, A lot of Classic Disney works, Doctor Who, Bartimaeus Trilogy, Sonic, Halo, Tales of Symphonia, Final Fantasy, Star Wars, TWEWY, all the Spiderman movies, probably Power Rangers, probably Godzilla, Jet Set Radio Future, MLP, Megas XLR, and avatar the Last Airbender, and I'm sure there are more I'm forgetting.

*No amount of admiring the view is actually tasting the cake as it were. if viewing a scantily clad lad or lady counted for this, every time someone goes to the beach would count as sexual.

and no, romance by itself does not count as a mention. romance is not sex, nor is intimacy as Grace's "cuddles" demonstrate.

[Kish]

You said that mention sex less than El Goonish Shive, not that mention it the same amount. 0=0. And congratulations...you've supported "action animes, works for small children, and the Star Wars movies* rarely mention sex," which is a vastly less expansive claim than 'Generally frank and clear mentions of sex are confined to two or three things: adult comedies, porn and raunchy dark dramas that are considered "deep".'

But if you consider El Goonish Shive to be an action anime or something aimed at small children, well, that might explain why I'm boggling at the claim you made**.

*I am afraid I am not going to take your word that Dr. Who never mentions that characters in it have sex.

**It also would if "its also other things. genres aren't mutually exclusive" is meant to imply that you would shove the vast majority of all works into one of the categories you listed as mentioning sex--which one would any Star Trek series go into? I sure wouldn't consider any of them a comedy or a "raunchy dark drama"--but even if you consider El Goonish Shive aimed at a substantially younger audience than I do, or primarily defined by the occasional and usually Elliot-centric fight scene to a level that puts it in the same genre as Dragonball, that would still not justify the tone implication that mentioning "these characters are having sex" is actually rare in general.

[Fyraltari]

I am afraid I am not going to take your word that Dr. Who never mentions that characters in it have sex..
We know the precise night Melody Pond was conceived.

[Anonymouswizard]

We know the precise night Melody Pond was conceived.

To be fair, modern Doctor Who mentions this far more than Classic Who, argle blargle Susan blah blah Looms something something official word is that Gallifreyans have sex.

EGS has touched upon sex a couple of times. I'm not certain it's ever been more direct than this (https://www.egscomics.com/comic/2002-05-27) or the Sarah/Nanase discussion though. Honestly I'd rather have it not come up rather than have it handled immaturely. The comic has firmly established that characters are interested in sex and that Susan is not interested in participating. Unless We're going to have a plot about the characters having sex that's probably enough.

[Kish]

To be fair, modern Doctor Who mentions this far more than Classic Who, argle blargle Susan blah blah Looms something something official word is that Gallifreyans have sex.
I freely concede that if you go back half a century suddenly Lord Raziere's statement is not only accurate but doesn't go far enough. Not really seeing the relevance to EGS there though.

And I think we have different definitions of "immature."

[Vinyadan]

EGS has touched upon sex a couple of times. I'm not certain it's ever been more direct than this (https://www.egscomics.com/comic/2002-05-27) [...]

I think it's also a matter of style and genre. Early EGS was influenced by '90s comedy where being a pain was a viable shtick, and Tedd was one of those characters, plus a horny little pervert (there's actually a strip in which he discovers he grew out of it). Later it become very feel-driven and meditative.

[Maat Mons]

Looking at that old comic, it occurs to me that conception can occur up to a week after intercourse. So being in an infertile form at the time, may not be enough. But thinking about this too hard will raise unanswerable questions. Questions like "What happens if a pregnant woman transforms into a man?"

Also, whenever someone with children talks about the danger of unwanted pregnancy, the subtext I always imagine is "You don't want to end up like me. I had so many other things I wanted to do in life. I wasted my best years taking care of an ungrateful little hellion."

[Fyraltari]

Also, whenever someone with children talks about the danger of unwanted pregnancy, the subtext I always imagine is "You don't want to end up like me. I had so many other things I wanted to do in life. I wasted my best years taking care of an ungrateful little hellion."

Tedd is not even legally an adult in that comic. I think it's entirely fair to say that it's too early in his life for having a child. He's not responsible enough.

[Radar]

Also, whenever someone with children talks about the danger of unwanted pregnancy, the subtext I always imagine is "You don't want to end up like me. I had so many other things I wanted to do in life. I wasted my best years taking care of an ungrateful little hellion."
It does not have to be like that. The thing with pregnancy and child rearing is that it is a serious commitment usually for more than 20 years. You have to be really ready for this mentally. Otherwise you can easily mess up your life and that of your child. We got our children with my wife as we planned, but looking back at myself at an age of for example 20, I know it would have been a very bad idea to have children back then. Even more so for my teenage years.

[Anonymouswizard]

Guessing that this villain form is going to be important considering it's being brought up again. Most likely a trade of restraint in exchange for extra points, and possibly fishnet stockings. So Eliot won't go around destroying buildings for fun, but they will be more violent and confrontational.

[Taevyr]

Now starting a petition to call the villain form "Evilliot"

[Celestia]

Guessing that this villain form is going to be important considering it's being brought up again. Most likely a trade of restraint in exchange for extra points, and possibly fishnet stockings. So Eliot won't go around destroying buildings for fun, but they will be more violent and confrontational.
Interesting. I said it was going to be important a month ago, and everyone jumped down my throat to say how wrong I was.

[Lord Raziere]

Interesting. I said it was going to be important a month ago, and everyone jumped down my throat to say how wrong I was.

Whelp guess I better pick up the phone then, cause you called it. Kudos.

[Anonymouswizard]

Interesting. I said it was going to be important a month ago, and everyone jumped down my throat to say how wrong I was.

Yep. I talked about it as well.


Yeah, this is likely a reworking of the old Inner Demons idea. Although if we're lucky it'll instead be used to dive into potentially questionable aspects of Eliot's morality.

Like, we're going to see this villain form at some point, probably in four decades, and its actions are going to be based on Eliot's personality (be else why else include it). It being a kind of inverted morality is much less interesting than smaller twists. Especially if (speculation time) the form can exist in it's powered state for extended periods.

Although I shall take my hat off to everybody who called it being important I the near future. Hyperbole aside, I honestly thought that this was being set up for years down the line.

[Maat Mons]

If she's a sinister version of Cheerleadra, shouldn't her name be something like Agitatress, Instigatrix, Rabble-Rousette, Agente Provocatrice, or Ringleaderinna?

[Gez]

If she's a sinister version of Cheerleadra, shouldn't her name be something like Agitatress, Instigatrix, Rabble-Rousette, Agente Provocatrice, or Ringleaderinna?

I'd be partial to Jeerleadra or Sneerleadra. :smalltongue:

[Rater202]

Hey, Mama Kitsune. Papa Kitsune. Not cool. Never assume that your legally an adult child is willing to do things and then make demands at the last minute.

Especially you, Mama Kitsune. You were doing so well about easing off of the toxic behaviors. Granted, not by much, but...

I mean, they're still needs to be some kind of confrontation regarding Mama Kitsune thinking that Nanase's attraction to girls is just a phase and... Every other bit of Toxic parenting behavior that's never been addressed... And the keeping secrets that shouldn't be kept secret stuff*

So, place your bets: Tedd confronting Edward on Edward's disapproval vs Nanase confronting Mama Kitsune on Mama Kitsune's long history of toxic parenting. Which will come first.

*"We come from a long line of monster hunters, our family may have enemies. Especially your aunt" is information that Nanase and Akiko are entitled to.

[Fyraltari]

This is what you get for answering your phone without excusing yourself from the conversation, Elliot! Have you no manners? Your parents raised you better than this!

Edit:

*"We come from a long line of monster hunters, our family may have enemies. Especially your aunt" is information that Nanase and Akiko are entitled to.

Akiko is definitely too young to have to worry about that.

[Rater202]

Akiko is definitely too young to have to worry about that.

I'm not saying they need to know now but it's also not something that Nanase should have found out from a warlock attacking her to get revenge on Noriko.

Like, Mama Kitsune knows that Nanase has magic. This is something Nanase should have been told the second Mama Kitsune found out about Nanase's magic.

And if Akiko doesn't find out by the time she's 18, then Mama Kitsune has failed as a mother becuase "people might attack you over what your ancestors/aunt did" is, again, information that people are inherently entitled to.

[Kish]

Interesting. I said it was going to be important a month ago, and everyone jumped down my throat to say how wrong I was.
I don't agree with that characterization of what happened previously, and my position then--that I very much hope Elliott has the minimal brainpower to not actually use this "villain form", "violations of Chekov's Gun" aside--isn't shifting based on the latest few comics (indeed, demonstrating that Elliott has considered that he could become a villain and recoiled from it previously does not sound like evidence that at some point he'll assume the villain form). (Oh wow, Elliott's still thinking about what he was an hour ago! Clearly this is the new focus of the comic!) (Although, since you went and put the previous exchange on the table, I am going to comment to Anonymouswizard that, looking at two-for-two "it's something Elliott's going to do or it would never have been brought up/it's going to be important since it's been brought up again," I gather you really want Elliott to turn into his villain form for some reason--if that's what's meant by "it being important"; the equating of the exchange now with the previous one suggests it is, but I would not inherently treat those as the same statement.)


Akiko is definitely too young to have to worry about that.
Somehow I do not think Not-Tengu would be swayed by, "You can't do something awful to her! She's too young to have to worry about you!"

[Fyraltari]

Somehow I do not think Not-Tengu would be swayed by, "You can't do something awful to her! She's too young to have to worry about you!"

There's nothing Akiko could have done to Not-Tengu anyway. Telling her that people moght come and murder her and her family to a child wouldn't help make her safe, it would just terrify her and possibly harm her development.

[Rater202]

So the implications are that Bishop learned entirely the wrong lessons from Authur, right?

[Fyraltari]

So the implications are that Bishop learned entirely the wrong lessons from Authur, right?

Well, I think she got her fashion sense elsewhere, but otherwise yes.

[Maat Mons]

Oh no! The comic turned 20 today! The thread title is now inaccurate!

[Qwertystop]

Oh no! The comic turned 20 today! The thread title is now inaccurate!

Corrected, I think.

[Vinyadan]

I'm a bit late, but congratulations to Dan for sticking to it for twenty years!

[Rater202]

Okay, not gonna lie, having Tedd go wouldn't be a bad idea

Tedd is: Relatively friendly, intelligent, likely to get on good terms with science griffin... And ungodly powerful magically speaking, which, under the hypothesis that magic power correlates to authority and perceived authority may result in a more positive reaction.

...Though, as I type this it occurs to me that someone too powerful might be taken as a threat.

[Windscion]

If Ed Verres is even considering bringing the senior Dunkels along, that means that at some point they were highly trained in some field or other. Which is difficult to reconcile with Mrs Dunkel dropping out of college to raise a child.

[Gez]

I think it's just more of Ed's parental blindness. Fact is that bringing Grace and Tedd would be good ideas, and neither of them would have much to fear (Grace after all comes from a weird supersoldier program and she is absurdly powerful, Tedd could make a wand or watch of very expeditious retreat if needed), while bringing in the Dunkels would be a terrible idea. (Unless Dan Shives is going for the surprise reveal that they're overpowered badasses too but that wouldn't bring anything interesting to the story as well as contradict all their previous characterization.)

Adults that could be called in: Adrian Raven and Sensei Greg. Would be nice to see Greg again, actually.

[Kish]

Thank you for being the voice of reason here, Tedd.

("Let's make a ton of preparations for them to attack us!" is an excellent approach if you want to maximize the likelihood of your current amicable relationship breaking down.)

[Fyraltari]

If Ed Verres is even considering bringing the senior Dunkels along, that means that at some point they were highly trained in some field or other. Which is difficult to reconcile with Mrs Dunkel dropping out of college to raise a child.

There's a running gag of the Dunkels being bizarrely competent in supernatural matters for a while.

[Vinyadan]

Yep, first they were oddly lenient and unfazed about the whole Elliot-Ellen thing, then they turned out oddly well-organised when they mounted a search party to look for Ellen when she was possessed by Sirlek.

[Radar]

Yep, first they were oddly lenient and unfazed about the whole Elliot-Ellen thing, then they turned out oddly well-organised when they mounted a search party to look for Ellen when she was possessed by Sirlek.
And there is also the fact that Elliot is not even really sure what they are doing for a living.

[Maat Mons]

Clearly, spikey-haired girl should be named Barb.

[Fyraltari]

Clearly, spikey-haired girl should be named Barb.

My hatred for this idea is only matched by my desire for it to come true.

[Taevyr]

While I know the "has anyone ever named a character 'Spike' before" is likely in jest, the realization that Cowboy Bebop is likely no longer a mainstay of geeky anime kids/youths (beyond maybe the live action thing, if I remember correctly) hit me surprisingly hard there.

Probably will be rewatching it in a few days now. It's how these things tend to go.

[Mystic Muse]

While I know the "has anyone ever named a character 'Spike' before" is likely in jest, the realization that Cowboy Bebop is likely no longer a mainstay of geeky anime kids/youths (beyond maybe the live action thing, if I remember correctly) hit me surprisingly hard there.

Probably will be rewatching it in a few days now. It's how these things tend to go.

It's definitely in jest. I believe Dan has made references to Buffy the Vampire Slayer abd My Little Pony, both of which also have characters named Spike. That's just what I can think of offhand.

Land Before Time as another thing that immediately comes to mind, though no reference to that has ever been made as far as I recall.

[Gez]

Don't forget about Spike Lee and Spike Trotman. Yeah they're real people instead of characters but it totally counts.

[Anonymouswizard]

And yet everybody forgets Spike Milligan.

[Maat Mons]

According to Wikipedia, there's a character named Spike in the Dragonball franchise, and one from Happy Days.

[Rater202]

It's definitely in jest. I believe Dan has made references to Buffy the Vampire Slayer abd My Little Pony, both of which also have characters named Spike.

They also both have a character named Angel. Spike and Angel do not get along.

[Celestia]

While I know the "has anyone ever named a character 'Spike' before" is likely in jest, the realization that Cowboy Bebop is likely no longer a mainstay of geeky anime kids/youths (beyond maybe the live action thing, if I remember correctly) hit me surprisingly hard there.

Probably will be rewatching it in a few days now. It's how these things tend to go.
The Netflix adaptation did a lot to bring Cowboy Bebop into popular consciousness. Sure, it sucked, but the name is probably more recognizable now than it's ever been. Even bad live action has a wider spread than good anime.

[Maat Mons]

Did Mr. Verres just acknowledge Tedd as a (sometimes) woman? Or was he counting the Kitsunes as family? But Akiko never struck me as stubborn.

[Windscion]

She refused extra cookies & smuggled milk and cookies to Nanase against their mother's wishes. I'd say that shows backbone.

[Gez]

Did Mr. Verres just acknowledge Tedd as a (sometimes) woman? Or was he counting the Kitsunes as family? But Akiko never struck me as stubborn.

You forgot the woman who abandoned Tedd and him...

[Maat Mons]

I remembered her, but if she and Grace were the only two women in the family, the phrasing "every other woman" would be weird, "the other woman" would be the expected phrasing.

[Fyraltari]

I remembered her, but if she and Grace were the only two women in the family, the phrasing "every other woman" would be weird, "the other woman" would be the expected phrasing.

Mr. Verres probably has a mother, though.

But yes, I think he meant the Kitsunes.

[Anonymouswizard]

Mr. Verres probably has a mother, though.

But yes, I think he meant the Kitsunes.

Let's not discount Edward's potential siblings!

But yeah, he if he was just talking about himself, Tedd, and Grace he'd have likely used household instead of family. He's including Noriko at a minimum, and while we have no idea how wide a net he's casting he's from a line of powerful wizards and his wife's from a family of monster hunters. Both lend themselves to stubbornness.

[Kish]

It would be really weird if Edward said "family" and didn't mean his child's aunt who lives in the same town as him and her children. So...Noriko, Akiko, Nanase, and Nanase's-mother-who-doesn't-have-a-name (but sure has a lot of tortured apologetics on the fanwikis, sheesh).

[Rater202]

(but sure has a lot of tortured apologetics on the fanwikis, sheesh).

...What does this mean in context?

[Celestia]

...What does this mean in context?
I would assume it means there are lots of people (or a few really loud people) who try justifying Nanase's mother as not being that bad.

[Rater202]

Grace, you don't know what you're getting into.

With his exaggerated musculature and flamboyant poses and attitude, that guy *clearly* has a Stand.

[Lord Raziere]

Grace, you don't know what you're getting into.

With his exaggerated musculature and flamboyant poses and attitude, that guy *clearly* has a Stand.

No Rater, She is an idealistic young teen who doesn't get the social etiquette around her and has great power hidden within herself.

that is practically the most powerful thing in shonen battle anime to ever exist. it wouldn't matter if he had the best stand for dodgeball, or even the greatest most powerful Stand to ever exist, because mid way through the fight when all hope seems lost, she'd suddenly have a better one. worse, he is a smug arrogant jerk who is questioning her power and thinks she thinks too highly of herself- he's practically the shonen battle protag's normal prey.

[Maat Mons]

Then again, when that guy was surprised at the end of the previous strip, his hair indicates he was on the verge of going super-sayan.

Then again-again, Grace's hairstyle suggests she's somehow connected to Kurama. And he's not someone you want to mess with, lest you end up like Elder Toguro.

[Gez]

That guy would do well to wear a cup (https://www.egscomics.com/egsnp/jestful-29).

You know, just in case.

[Windscion]

Yes, yes, Sarah likes wands. We get it, she's the token het.

[Fyraltari]

Yes, yes, Sarah likes wands. We get it, she's the token het.

Take my approval and get out!

[Celestia]

Yes, yes, Sarah likes wands. We get it, she's the token het.
OMG :O

That's hilarious.

[Radar]

Yes, yes, Sarah likes wands. We get it, she's the token het.
Not quite as she considers herself 1 on Kinsey scale (https://www.egscomics.com/egsnp/2015-12-21), well... at most 2 (https://www.egscomics.com/comic/2014-08-06).

[Celestia]

Not quite as she considers herself 1 on Kinsey scale (https://www.egscomics.com/egsnp/2015-12-21), well... at most 2 (https://www.egscomics.com/comic/2014-08-06).
Yeah, I do get the impression that she's a bisexual in denial. She may be straight-leaning, but I don't think she's entirely straight.

Which does mean that this comic doesn't have a cishet main character. The closest is Elliot, and he's probably not het or cis.

[Rater202]

Yeah, I do get the impression that she's a bisexual in denial. She may be straight-leaning, but I don't think she's entirely straight.

Which does mean that this comic doesn't have a cishet main character. The closest is Elliot, and he's probably not het or cis.

Elliot has outright stated he identifies as "gender casual" and Susan postulates that he means agender when he saysthis after he explains it, so... No, Elliot is not Cis.

As for his seuxuality... If he doens't have a gender, I don't think that terms like hetero or homo accuratly apply to him.

I think. Don't quote me on that.

...This might be a question for the LGBTAI thread.

[Windscion]

Yeah, I do get the impression that she's a bisexual in denial. She may be straight-leaning, but I don't think she's entirely straight.

Which does mean that this comic doesn't have a cishet main character. The closest is Elliot, and he's probably not het or cis.

Finding Noah hot is ... kind of an unfair test of heterosexuality? I mean, Noah has the androgynous thing going, probably due at least in part to his Uryuom heritage. My point here is that he may well be NB, even if he presents as male. (Given his prehensile hair, he must have some Uryuom heritage, even if he isn't an alt of dream-verse Archie.) And yeah, Elliot isn't really cis anymore.

Sarah is maybe less in denial and more unwilling to (in her eyes) get between Grace and Tedd. For any value of "between" that you choose.

[Anonymouswizard]

Yeah, I do get the impression that she's a bisexual in denial. She may be straight-leaning, but I don't think she's entirely straight.

Which does mean that this comic doesn't have a cishet main character. The closest is Elliot, and he's probably not het or cis.

Yeah, Sarah is somewhere between hetereoflexible and bi/pan. Elliot is NB but his attraction leads female (same for Tedd, I think), we've got two clear cisgender gay characters, and whatever Ellen identifies as.

Grace, I think, is cis-het but also demi? I've never understood if uyrom-style attraction is supposed to be different to being demi or if Dan/Tedd just didn't know the term.

[Rater202]

Yeah, Sarah is somewhere between hetereoflexible and bi/pan. Elliot is NB but his attraction leads female (same for Tedd, I think), we've got two clear cisgender gay characters, and whatever Ellen identifies as.

Grace, I think, is cis-het but also demi? I've never understood if uyrom-style attraction is supposed to be different to being demi or if Dan/Tedd just didn't know the term.

Tedd is explicitly genderfluid, feeling more male or female on some days than on others or in different situations.. And not accounting for the effects of the TF gun, is exclusively attracted to females.

Grace has stated that she's attracted to Tedd regardless of form due to sensing his emotions but is otherwise attracted to boys when in female form and attracted to girls when in male form. Or well, at least she leans towards that way.

Grace's gender identity hasn't been specified. Dan has gone on record as stating that Will and Gill's "Uryuoms don't have genders" is becuase he didn't know the difference between sex and gender at the time and that Uryuosms do have gender identities and assume gender roles among cultures that have them, so... Since Grace is almost exclusively in female form I'm gonna assume she identifies as female until specified otherwise.

If only by default

[Fyraltari]

SO Kevin is disappointed in Ashley, confused by Grace, willing to train Sarah and can tell that Tedd needs no more training.

Do I have that right?

[Gez]

I'd tend to think it's more that Kevin accepts that Sarah is here for the lessons, but I'm not sure whether it will actually attempt to train Sarah because she's not a wizard. While Mittens is.

[Windscion]

He's disappointed in Mittens, and is willing to accept that Sarah is just a wizard groupie. And maybe Grace is a wizards familiar?

[Anonymouswizard]

Tedd meanwhile probably just registers as a fully trained wizard. They might not have a lot of power, and they might not be able to cast them, but they do know a lot of spells.

[Rater202]

Tedd meanwhile probably just registers as a fully trained wizard. They might not have a lot of power, and they might not be able to cast them, but they do know a lot of spells.

Tedd explicitly has an absurd amount of power. Luke wa blinded by Tedd's aura when Grace, "the most magically overpowered thing in Moperville," only had a slightly thicker and more defined aura than other users.

Pandora states that the reason the wand didn't detect Tedd's power is becuase Tedd was powerful enough to reflexively resist the detection spell and that Tedd is a font of power.

Also, Dan has stated more than once that Tedd prefers whatever pronouns match the sex of the form she's currently in, so... She.

[Anonymouswizard]

Tedd explicitly has an absurd amount of power. Luke wa blinded by Tedd's aura when Grace, "the most magically overpowered thing in Moperville," only had a slightly thicker and more defined aura than other users.

Pandora states that the reason the wand didn't detect Tedd's power is becuase Tedd was powerful enough to reflexively resist the detection spell and that Tedd is a font of power.

Also, Dan has stated more than once that Tedd prefers whatever pronouns match the sex of the form she's currently in, so... She.

We know there's something up with Tedd, we don't have any confirmation that they're a massive magical generator yet. I'd honestly been working under the assumption that Seer enchantment nullification powers were the reason the spell filed, it honestly felt like the simplest solution.

Plus I don't even know what year the comic's set in, Tedd could be in any form at 15:37GMT 4/2/2022 and I wouldn't have a clue.

[Rater202]

I think a guy who can see power levels as auras being blinded by Tedd's aura couple with Pandora explicitly stating that Tedd will never need to draw on ambient energy because she is a "Font of Power" is hard confirmation that Tedd is in fact a magical powerhouse.

Also, Dan edited the comic with a note in the commentary
EDIT - Kevin originally told Tedd "YOU PASS!" with the same intent, but that seemed to confuse readers, and I wasn't going for ambiguity. Kevin is reacting to Tedd's immense magic power as a seer.

Kevin now says "graduated."

[Kish]

Tedd has immense magical power. The text part of the comic says so.

Pandora also said that Luke's magic detection spell didn't "work properly" on Tedd. She didn't say why. Of course, that was back when "Tedd is a wizard with a quirk" hadn't been revealed.

[Maat Mons]

Elliot's there? And he's not in one of his female forms? I had been thinking all these girls hanging out with a magical instructor could be the origin story for a group of Magical Girls. But Elliot's ruining it. Elliot, stop being so selfish and transform into a girl!

[KillianHawkeye]

Well, we now know that Grace doesn't have Captain America's ability to predict where a bounced object will end up. :smallamused:

[Celestia]

Well, we now know that Grace doesn't have Captain America's ability to predict where a bounced object will end up. :smallamused:
I could be wrong, but I believe she has been stated as having enhanced intelligence and is particularly good at math. If so, she should actually be able to do just that. However, she didn't know how hard she'd hit the ball and, thus, didn't take the ball's trajectory into account. Intelligence only matters if you use it.

[Fyraltari]

I could be wrong, but I believe she has been stated as having enhanced intelligence and is particularly good at math. If so, she should actually be able to do just that. However, she didn't know how hard she'd hit the ball and, thus, didn't take the ball's trajectory into account. Intelligence only matters if you use it.

Math has nothing to do with that kind of ability.

Do you know how many Newtons of force you've exerced on a ball you punched? No, then it doesn't matter how good your are with equations, you won't be able to calculat its trajectory, you'll have to guess based on isntinct and experience, like the rest of us.

[Celestia]

Math has nothing to do with that kind of ability.

Do you know how many Newtons of force you've exerced on a ball you punched? No, then it doesn't matter how good your are with equations, you won't be able to calculat its trajectory, you'll have to guess based on isntinct and experience, like the rest of us.
What the actual f***? It's geometry. :smallannoyed:

[Lord Raziere]

What the actual f***? It's geometry. :smallannoyed:

Yeah but you don't have a ruler or anything, how could just tell the measurement by sight then match your throw to that? that sounds like fictional genius stuff not actual math.

[Fyraltari]

What the actual f***? It's geometry. :smallannoyed:

No, it's physics.
Edit: What's the weight of the ball? What's its air resistance? What's the immediate speed you're imparting to it? All the math skill in the world won't help you solve m*a = m*g - r*v if you don't any of those values.

[Celestia]

Damn. You all make some very compelling arguments. I guess that's why billiards is literally impossible to play. No one can possibly calculate the angles of a shot without knowing air resistance. :eyeroll:

[theNater]

Damn. You all make some very compelling arguments. I guess that's why billiards is literally impossible to play. No one can possibly calculate the angles of a shot without knowing air resistance. :eyeroll:
The point is that virtually no one is calculating the angles of a shot. They are roughly estimating them, and Grace's array of computational abilities are not helpful in making those rough estimations.

[Gnoman]

Billiards is also a bad comparison because you have all the time you need to plan out your shot and apply precisely the amount of force you intend to. You're not having to hit the ball in a split-second window.


Even then, if you put the world's greatest math genius who has never played before in front of a pool table and hand him a cue, he'll have a pretty difficult time succeeding on pure math.

[awa]

If all you needed was geometry than pro athletes would all be math majors, heck if math was even a little bit useful geometry would be a hard focus for every sports team but its just not useful not for this. Humans rely a lot on instincts and muscle memory for physical actions and in general athletes perform worse when they spend time thinking about the mechanics of what they are doing rather than just doing it.

I mean pick a ball and try to bounce it off a wall back into your hand, now go through what you actually did, did you consider the geometry at all or did you just eyeball it?

Fictional super genius often do that kind of stuff all the time but well its just fiction.

[Celestia]

The point is that virtually no one is calculating the angles of a shot. They are roughly estimating them, and Grace's array of computational abilities are not helpful in making those rough estimations.
What in the world do you think your brain is doing when you're "estimating?" It's calculating angles.


Billiards is also a bad comparison because you have all the time you need to plan out your shot and apply precisely the amount of force you intend to. You're not having to hit the ball in a split-second window.
"It's a bad comparison because you're doing literally the exact same thing just slower. Therefore, it's completely invalid to your argument that Grace is good at doing this thing quickly."


Even then, if you put the world's greatest math genius who has never played before in front of a pool table and hand him a cue, he'll have a pretty difficult time succeeding on pure math.
What's your argument here? Either you're trying to say that math is useless in billiards (proving you have no idea what you're talking about) or this statement is just irrelevant. Whatever the case, you're not winning any points here.

[Celestia]

... heck if math was even a little bit useful geometry would be a hard focus for every sports team ...
Except it is. It's just framed differently. They're not sitting in a classroom finding X, but they are practicing their kicks or throws or whatever to learn what force and angle works in what situation. But they're not just haphazardly guessing because then they'd never make any progress. Your brain subconsciously learns the math so you can apply it later.

[theNater]

What in the world do you think your brain is doing when you're "estimating?"
Mostly remembering, as I understand it.

Let me ask a question to check a definition: Would you say someone reciting a poem is calculating what word comes next?

[Celestia]

Mostly remembering, as I understand it.

Let me ask a question to check a definition: Would you say someone reciting a poem is calculating what word comes next?
Wow. This argument makes so little sense I don't think I can possibly address it without devolving into base insults. All I can say is that you clearly don't even understand what "thinking" is if you're confusing it with memories.

[Radar]

Except it is. It's just framed differently. They're not sitting in a classroom finding X, but they are practicing their kicks or throws or whatever to learn what force and angle works in what situation. But they're not just haphazardly guessing because then they'd never make any progress. Your brain subconsciously learns the math so you can apply it later.
It's less doing math and more creating a look-up table for the brain in a very specific situation so a conscious command of "send the ball there" is translated directly into specific commands for the muscles without doing any calculations whatsoever - that would only slow you down in a situation where you need an immediate response. The training is also very much about the precision of your moves.

So being able to calculate things quickly consciously does not have to have any bearing on being able to instinctively estimate where you send a volleyball - especially since Grace was not even sure how strong she is in this form and went all-out anyway just to be sure to win. Also, solving geometrical problems is very different from just crunching numbers and it was not established, if Grace can solve any mathematical problem quickly - just that she is fast in calculating numbers.

There is also another simple fact that math and moving the body are done by different parts of your brain, so even if we were to agree that semantically you are doing math while aiming a football or volleyball shot, this would still be completely unrelated to doing math consciously. This is also why thinking about what you are doing messes you up in sports.

[theNater]

Wow. This argument makes so little sense I don't think I can possibly address it without devolving into base insults. All I can say is that you clearly don't even understand what "thinking" is if you're confusing it with memories.
I'm starting to believe I don't understand the terms are you are using them, which is why I'm asking these clarification questions.

Is it your position that retrieving memories is not a form of thinking?

[KillianHawkeye]

Wow, didn't expect this to be such a hot topic.

Billiards is a bad example in this case, which is why I made a Captain America joke originally, because the 2D nature of the game doesn't take into account gravity, and the small heavy balls and soft surface minimize the influence of friction and air resistance. Also, you have a long stick to help you visualize the ball's trajectory for at least the first leg of its journey.

But I guess this forum is the wrong place to make a simple joke.

[Windscion]

... I guess this forum is the wrong place to make a simple joke.
Can I make this my new sig?

[KillianHawkeye]

Absolutely! :D

[Anonymouswizard]

New comic, and if Kevin was intentionally sentient him knowing the food pyramid would make complete sense. He obviously has a broad knowledge of what's beneficial to his pupil's recovery, and it allows him to make a rough guess without knowing the latest knowledge.

Of course, he was an unplanned child, so who knows what he knows or why.

[Fyraltari]

He'd need a broad knowledge base just to speak English anyway.

[Maat Mons]

It's much weirder that he recognized Arthur as his father. He shouldn't have any memories from before he gained sentience.

[Radar]

What I find even weirder is that Kevin does not have a mouth and yet he chews scenery like there's no tomorrow. :smallwink:

I particularly like his dietary comment: "whatever the best guess is for proper nutrition these days."

[Maat Mons]

Barb's name has been revealed to be Camelia. It is a sad day.

[Taevyr]

Well then, seems like Grace almost got Isekai'd.

[Radar]

I like Mr. Verres: being too enthusiastic is a bad sign for a potentially risky job. His comment on being glad he does not have to do the cover up was also good. I think being moved to a diplomatic position serves him well.

[Windscion]

Narratively, the griffins aren't the problem. But meeting Grace may well cause them to give our cast a heads up to the real problem: the pyro Uryuom who wants to kill/enslave humans and take over the planet, and who has access to magic again. (See https://www.egscomics.com/comic/2004-03-03 (prophecy) https://www.egscomics.com/comic/2018-05-04 Uryuoms blocked and https://www.egscomics.com/comic/sister3-299 Uryuom magic restored.)
After all, if Uryuoms do not come from outer space, logically they may well come from the "other half" of this world.

[Kish]

The "pyro uruyom" you linked is Damien. He blew himself up fighting Grace a long time ago.

"No, your optimistic attitude is all wrong, you need to go into this meeting with powerful and friendly people freaked out about the possibility of them attacking us" is a disastrously bad approach for a diplomat.

[Rater202]

The "pyro uruyom" you linked is Damien. He blew himself up fighting Grace a long time ago.
On the Contrary: Dmien was a Chimera created by religious fanatics who got tired of waiting for their "Master of Fire."

Much more recently, after Magic's not change, we saw an uryom light fires with magic while doing evil laughter.

[Kish]

Oh. You're both treating "Oh, and I guess there's an Uryuom pyromaniac or something. I dunno." as a sternly factual statement about who is lighting the candle and essential future plot points.

Well, it's better than forgetting the bulk of Paint it Black, I suppose.

[Rater202]

Oh. You're both treating "Oh, and I guess there's an Uryuom pyromaniac or something. I dunno." as a sternly factual statement about who is lighting the candle and essential future plot points.

Well, it's better than forgetting the bulk of Paint it Black, I suppose.

Dude...

Damien completly and utterly failed to live up to the prophecy. He didn't "unite the Chimeric outcastes of the world," he just killed a bunch of people and terrorized some child soldiers.

When we're told that there's an Uryuom language prophecy about a "being of power" and a "master of fire" that's still in play because the only posisble person so far that could have fulfilled it was 1: An active attempt at manufacturing the individual and 2: Died without coming close and then see an Uryuom giving into evil laughter after casting fire spells specifically...

Yeah, there's a connection there. If there wasn't we could have seen literally any other display of magic.

If that's not tied to the prophecy then that would be narratively unsatisfying.

[Vinyadan]

On one hand, I'd be happy if it's connected to the prophecy. On the other hand, we saw the uryom cast spells from a wand (https://www.egscomics.com/comic/sister3-299), which doesn't imply he's a master of fire in a special way, just that he can use a fire wand.

We also saw that an uryom army attacked Herak to gain access to human magic, and one of the golems used in the attack (https://www.egscomics.com/comic/2018-05-04) was at the Badly Guarded facility. It probably has something to do with the fire wand guy (at least, it must have been the reason why he earlier was severed from magic).

[theNater]

"No, your optimistic attitude is all wrong, you need to go into this meeting with powerful and friendly people freaked out about the possibility of them attacking us" is a disastrously bad approach for a diplomat.
Me, I would like her to be concerned enough about how the meeting will go that she doesn't do this (https://www.egscomics.com/comic/2011-12-20) again. I feel like that could be a problem.

[Gnoman]

The dialogue in panel 3 is really odd, and I can't tell if it is supposed to be.

"any dark clothes that need washing not back there" isn't a wrong sentence and has a meaning that can be parsed, but it isn't something I'd ever expect to hear.

[Rater202]

And Saturday's NP will have Grace asked if she is also magic.

Since, you know, everyone has seen Nanase floating in the halls.

[Qwertystop]

The dialogue in panel 3 is really odd, and I can't tell if it is supposed to be.

"any dark clothes that need washing not back there" isn't a wrong sentence and has a meaning that can be parsed, but it isn't something I'd ever expect to hear.

Tracks perfectly to me.

[Taevyr]

The dialogue in panel 3 is really odd, and I can't tell if it is supposed to be.

"any dark clothes that need washing not back there" isn't a wrong sentence and has a meaning that can be parsed, but it isn't something I'd ever expect to hear.

It feels like a normal sentence for everyday speech, but a bit oddly structured for use in a literary medium. Especially when it comes out of nowhere :smalltongue:

[webrunner]

someone should put this current arc in cronological order when it's done

[Gez]

someone should put this current arc in cronological order when it's done

What a silly idea!


When that part of the storyline is over, someone will have to put a list of all the pages in chronological order.

:smallbiggrin:

[webrunner]

What a silly idea!



:smallbiggrin:


Well obviously the next step is to go full Haruhi and come up with a completely separate also anachronical 'airing order'

[Wildstag]

The discussion in today's comic once again makes me sad for the English language and it's lack of gradient in speech. Scared implies passive and active fear, whereas a word for "healthy respect/fear" doesn't really exist, and putting it that way verbally sounds like an excuse.

A healthy amount of concern and risk mitigation kinda needs a different set of shorthand words than just "scared"; it's just such a severe word.

[Taevyr]

The discussion in today's comic once again makes me sad for the English language and it's lack of gradient in speech. Scared implies passive and active fear, whereas a word for "healthy respect/fear" doesn't really exist, and putting it that way verbally sounds like an excuse.

A healthy amount of concern and risk mitigation kinda needs a different set of shorthand words than just "scared"; it's just such a severe word.

"Wary" perhaps? It's the closest to that I can think of, but it might not carry the entire load. Not a native speaker.

[Kish]

I think Sarah meant what she said.

I also think she's right about Elliott's reaction and the people here attempting to paint said reaction as more reason-based than she did (plus Elliott, who immediately had the same reaction as some posts here seem to be) are wrong.

That said, I am somewhat confused. The comic seems to be setting up for a "see, the way you act legitimately scares other people" lesson for Elliott, but he has never struck me as thinking himself better than he actually is; on his first date with Ashley, he tried to convince her his fondness for fighting bullies made him a bad person.

[Gnoman]

I think Sarah meant what she said.

I also think she's right about Elliott's reaction and the people here attempting to paint said reaction as more reason-based than she did (plus Elliott, who immediately had the same reaction as some posts here seem to be) are wrong.

That said, I am somewhat confused. The comic seems to be setting up for a "see, the way you act legitimately scares other people" lesson for Elliott, but he has never struck me as thinking himself better than he actually is; on his first date with Ashley, he tried to convince her his fondness for fighting bullies made him a bad person.

This feels like the setup for Elliot having his own "Lord Tedd" moment - getting a strong look at what he would be if he became the Bad Guy. And, conversely, that he isn't a Bad Guy now.

[Fyraltari]

"You didn't like me at first?
-In my defense, the comic used to be way edgier. Remember when people called me "Shade Tail"? Like, unironically call me that?"

[Kish]

Gah. There's no ambiguity in the strip Dan links that Grace was (correctly, if you read the next few strips) concerned that Elliott was going to brush Sarah off with "it's a crush and I have a girlfriend." Unnecessary retcons, we hates them, my precious.

[Fyraltari]

Gah. There's no ambiguity in the strip Dan links that Grace was (correctly, if you read the next few strips) concerned that Elliott was going to brush Sarah off with "it's a crush and I have a girlfriend." Unnecessary retcons, we hates them, my precious.

I think Dan wanted to point out the specific "Ugh, I wonder why" reaction to the notion that Sarah wants to date Elliot rather than the concerns about Elliot's plans for the evening.

Also, what show is Ashley talking about? I forgot.

[Radar]

Also, what show is Ashley talking about? I forgot.
Movie review online show that Elliot and Susan produce together. The whole thing started here (https://www.egscomics.com/comic/2012-11-30).

[Fyraltari]

Movie review online show that Elliot and Susan produce together. The whole thing started here (https://www.egscomics.com/comic/2012-11-30).

Oh, yes, that's a show, I forgot.

[Maat Mons]

Who wants to engage in wild speculation about who's moving, and where?

I'm going to guess that Van, Tedd's half-brother, will be moving in with the Verreses (or however you pluralize Verres). You see, logically, if you relocate to a new home on the other side of an ocean, you rent a U-Haul and drive there. Everyone else we know lives in Moperville, so they'd just use a pickup truck and a pressgang of acquaintances. So by process of elimination, a minor taking trans-Atlantic road trip is the only reasonable direction this plot could go.

That and the comic outright says "a moving Van" will show up. So Van will show up, and he'll be moving (in).

[Celestia]

100% it's the Uyruom secretary lady that Mr. Verres has a thing with moving into the Verres house.