OOTS #1151 - The Discussion Thread

[Caerulea]

Bah, it doesn't even have a dual number!

You want us to memorise more charts? I am quite okay with 10 or so large ones, please don't go increasing that number.

[Nion]

Haley is a human.
Possibly half-celestial
Grey Wolf

In my example Belkar's fighting Haley, so human.

I assume he has that, given how lethal he's been shown to be vs humans (see Thieves Guild Fight, for example) but it isn't proven in-game (where favored enemy undead is strongly implied to be picked up during the resistance phase). He has enough favored enemies by now to have several, in my headcanon most likely are goblinoid, human and undead, possibly giant (I think you get 4 by level 15). Class Geekery thread might have better breakdown.

Ah, yeah. I uncarefully read Hilgya instead of Haley.

[Seward]

Lastly, here's a thought: What if Durkon's "type" is... Small-sized?

Ogling Haley might be evidence against his attraction being exclusively to small-sized :)

We really do have very little information about what attracts his eye. I'm in the camp it doesn't matter much anyway except maybe as a tie-breaker for marriage partner ranking anyway, compared to all those other Lawful and perhaps Thor Religious considerations that would carry weight.

[Fyraltari]

Weird. Never heard of the short form "Carthago delenda est."

Really? I was surprised to learn there are other forms.

Then again I know english speakers quote "Et tu, Brute" rather than "Tu quoque, mi fili", so maybe we should remember the words of a wise man

"I never said half the **** the Internet keeps quoting me on."

Confucius

@Fyar: you sure? you sound sure

Fyra. And I sound surer than I am, haven't done any latin for five years, and I never got the hang of verbal adjectives. Ask Caerulea, they look like they got it together.

Not to be excessively pedantic, but I think you meant either misereo or miserete. The former is "I pity" and the latter pity! as a plural imperative.

There is only one of you, isn't there?

[Caerulea]

Fyra. And I sound surer than I am, haven't done any latin for five years, and I never got the hang of verbal adjectives. Ask Caerulea, they look like they got it together.

What I have is a latin quiz in a few days, the internet, Whitaker's words, and my notes.

There is only one of you, isn't there?

Miserere is to pity. You wanted Misere then. To form the singular imperative from a normal verb, remove the "re" from the infinitive. Misero te.

[hroþila]

You want us to memorise more charts? I am quite okay with 10 or so large ones, please don't go increasing that number.

Well, I could either mention a feature that would mean more charts, or mention the T-V distinction, and I couldn't hope to steer the conversation towards the awesomeness of Old English by doing the latter.

[Seward]

As noted, on the evidence of their success in fights so far (particularly the thieves guild where they both fought the same enemies) Belkar has a outperformed Hayley.

It really comes down to who gets to set up their kind of fight.

In a confined area where Haley can't use her mobility from boots or her flying wand, and where Haley doesn't bluff Belkar into a suprise+full attack sneak-attack-fest, Belkar wins.

Otherwise Haley wins, because she can do damage to him from out of reach, and he has no way to retaliate or heal, or because she kills him before he can react.

On balance, because Haley has much stronger social skills, (see walking Crystal right into a deathtrap after a full fledged fight) the odds that Haley could set up a situation to her avantage seems stronger than Belkar setting up a situation that favors him. Barring a random homicidal attack in a confined space that came out of nowhere, perhaps because of remote mind control (as with Nale back in the day).

This is the basic "thief class vs fighter class" rock-paper-scissors thing. Which is why Belkar did so well against the thieves (and Roy back vs the bandits at close range when they didn't surprise him). In a straight up fight, the d10-hit-die-full-bab, all-I-do-is-hit-things class is going to beat the d6-2/3 bab-skill oriented+sneak attack class every time, unless the latter gets suprise+massive numbers of sneak attacks or can set up a hit-and-run situation or gets an air-barrier (flying archer vs melee)

If Belkar was an archer-style ranger who actually kept up with his spot/listen skills, he'd beat Haley every time. But as a melee-type with low wisdom and thus low spot/listen/sense motive in spite of it being a class skill....she can set up situations where she reliably wins.

[Fyraltari]

Bah, it doesn't even have a dual number!

Sure it does, look: II

Miserere is to pity. You wanted Misere then. To form the singular imperative from a normal verb, remove the "re" from the infinitive. Misero te.

You're right.
Too many "re" at the end of that word.

[Caerulea]

Well, I could either mention a feature that would mean more charts, or mention the T-V distinction, and I couldn't hope to steer the conversation towards the awesomeness of Old English by doing the latter.

I know little of Old English. Any particularly interesting facts you'd like to share?

(Also, I learned the actual name for the T-V distinction today! Is the etymology tu-vous in french?)

Oh, also, Fyraltari. Permission to put this in my extended sig?

Ask Caerulea, they look like they got it together.

[Peelee]

I'm sure this is an autocorrect error, but it is "zimmerwald." A zimmermann is a carpenter, someone who works with timber. A zimmerwald is a timber wood - a forest where wood suitable for carpentry (whether by nature or because it wasn't e.g. a hunting reserve) grows.

TIL. I thought it was referring to something different.

You want us to memorise more charts?

I saw this, got all excited to make a joke about Latin, and then realized it was already talking about Latin.

[CriticalFailure]

Pretty sure people speculate on the sexuality of others for innocuous reasons in real life all the time, say when they’re trying to get a date and want to know if their crush is compatible. Also, a couple of people whining about minority characters is in no way equivalent to someone treating a real person different.

With regards to that, I wouldn’t assume that the author is writing with the assumption that the readers are all mentally deficient, bigots, and/or small children who need to be taught social basics, and that implications that a character is straight without explicit confirmation can be taken at face value.

[Fyraltari]

Oh, also, Fyraltari. Permission to put this in my extended sig?

It would be my honor.

[Pablo360]

Pretty sure people speculate on the sexuality of others for innocuous reasons in real life all the time, say when they’re trying to get a date and want to know if their crush is compatible. Also, a couple of people whining about minority characters is in no way equivalent to someone treating a real person different.

With regards to that, I wouldn’t assume that the author is writing with the assumption that the readers are all mentally deficient, bigots, and/or small children who need to be taught social basics, and that implications that a character is straight without explicit confirmation can be taken at face value.

What implications? There is a scene that can be used as evidence that a character is straight, but nothing in the comic is meant to imply that. Those are two very different things; to say that something in a work implies something else is to assert either intent or a level of certainty, neither of which can reasonably said to be present, especially when the source of this supposed implication is in DCF.

[zimmerwald1915]

Pretty sure people speculate on the sexuality of others for innocuous reasons in real life all the time, say when they’re trying to get a date and want to know if their crush is compatible.

And that would be wrong.

[Caerulea]

And that would be wrong.

Why? ......

[CriticalFailure]

I don’t find “he’s not implied to be straight if you ignore all the times he expresses interest in women and disinterest in men” convincing tbh, and I’m mostly confused why people seem to be indignant about others not ignoring the implications of those scenes

[Kish]

Probably because, unless Elan is pluralized, there are no scenes where he expresses disinterest in men.

[KorvinStarmast]

I was a professional gambler; I know what over/under is. I don't understand how it applies to the question "Was Durkon's line about who he would marry in the party just a throwaway joke?" It's a yes or no question; there's no total number to bet over or under against.

You can call it a variation on a theme, or a colorful usage. It for sure is not literal usage.
As I explained, "betting the under" indicates "not likely" and "betting the over" indicates "likely" ... in this usage (idiomatic?)
It has bloody fork all to do with gambling in that context.
Other colorful phrases you may be familiar with:
Putting something in the oven, and then "nuking it."
No actual nuclear reactions are in play.
Being so mad at someone than one exclaims "I'm gonna kill 'em."
No actual intent for homicide exists.


FWIW: It is quite possible that this bit of slang is unique to some parts of Texas ... it is certainly where I picked it up.

[Larre Gannd]

Are people unfamiliar with the game “sex marry kill?” It is a juvenile game in which 3 random people are chosen by another, and regardless, you have to choose which one you would do each of those things to. It doesn’t mean anything, it’s a just a silly game (that I have never played, but observed several youngins on my block play) that people play for fun. Based on Belkar’s reaction to Durkon, which was not “I now question your sexual preference,” but actually “heh,” I would heir on the side of “meant to be an offhand joke.”

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Well, I could either mention a feature that would mean more charts, or mention the T-V distinction, and I couldn't hope to steer the conversation towards the awesomeness of Old English by doing the latter.

We could also steer the conversation towards Quenya, which, if my memory doesn’t fail me, has dual plurals.

I think it has 4 plurals actually, I just don’t recall the last one.

[Pablo360]

I don’t find “he’s not implied to be straight if you ignore all the times he expresses interest in women and disinterest in men” convincing tbh, and I’m mostly confused why people seem to be indignant about others not ignoring the implications of those scenes

All the times? You mean the ONE time he showed disinterest in ONE man, because NOBODY is arguing that he isn't attracted to women.

[hroþila]

I know little of Old English. Any particularly interesting facts you'd like to share?

(Also, I learned the actual name for the T-V distinction today! Is the etymology tu-vous in french?)

I imagine they took it from tu-vous, yes, although according to Wikipedia it was taken directly from Latin tu-vos. Which is funny.

As for Old English, gawd, I'm not sure where to start, but lately I've thought a lot about how Modern English is relatively atypical in that it has a set of standardized contractions that have not only their own pronunciation but also their own spelling, and they're pretty distinct from the full forms, so there's typically a contrast in formality or emphasis: has not vs hasn't, was vs wasn't, is not vs isn't, would not vs wouldn't, you are vs you're, etc. The funny thing is that all those contractions are modern, but Old English had its own set of contractions, none of which survived into Modern English: ne hæbbe vs næbbe, ne wæs vs næs, ne is vs nis, ne wolde vs nolde, ne wat vs nat, ne ah vs nah, ne ic vs nic, etc. Although obviously we don't know so much about the exact nuances of using these contractions as opposed to the full forms.

So English has been relatively atypical in this particular way twice during its history, which is kinda cool.

(There's also many words that were contractions from a diachronic point of view but which shouldn't be considered contractions anymore from a synchronic point of view, like nawðer~naðor < na hwæðer, nealles < ne ealles, nawiht~noht < na wiht, nænig < ne ænig, etc.)

Sure it does, look: II

I hate that I laughed.

[Fyraltari]

I hate that I laughed.

A legionary walks into a bar, raises his pointing and middle finger and orders five beers.

[Caerulea]

Cool. Taking the name from tu-vos makes no sense though. (vos is plural, tu is singular, but you probably knew that.)

[Fyraltari]

(Also, I learned the actual name for the T-V distinction today! Is the etymology tu-vous in french?)

maybe the first person to write it down meant T-Y but had terrible calligraphy and everybody rolled with it?

[ScreamingGod]

This ranks up there in my most favorite OotS comics. I spent several minutes chuckling while guessing the three most likely candidates that beat out Belkar and why. Thanks Rich for making me work: lol. Also love the (possible) commentary on our nation's punitive system

[zimmerwald1915]

We could also steer the conversation towards Quenya, which, if my memory doesn’t fail me, has dual plurals.

I think it has 4 plurals actually, I just don’t recall the last one.

Afaik, the Quenya numbers are singular, plural, partitative plural (for some of a group), and dual (for a natural pair like eyes or arms).

[Liquor Box]

All the times? You mean the ONE time he showed disinterest in ONE man, because NOBODY is arguing that he isn't attracted to women.

He also looked appalled at Roy's nudity after Roy was raised, so that is the second instance.

The fact he's been shown multiple times to be interested in women is relevant because it contrasts with his lack of interest in (or clear aversion to) men.

I understand some people want representation of non-hetero characters, which is fine. But that doesn't mean every character has to be interpreted that way.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Afaik, the Quenya numbers are singular, plural, partitative plural (for some of a group), and dual (for a natural pair like eyes or arms).

Thank you, those make sense. It’s been forever since I attempted to learn the grammar and now I’m filled with a sudden urge to try again.

[Pablo360]

He also looked appalled at Roy's nudity after Roy was raised, so that is the second instance.

The fact he's been shown multiple times to be interested in women is relevant because it contrasts with his lack of interest in (or clear aversion to) men.

I understand some people want representation of non-hetero characters, which is fine. But that doesn't mean every character has to be interpreted that way.

I forgot about that Roy scene, but if you actually look at the page, Haley has the same reaction as Durkon, so I take that your interpretation with a grain of salt. (And don't say that Haley's reaction is because she's already in a relationship, we're both probably smart enough to know that's not how sexuality works.)