OotS 448

[Thunderfoot]

I have never really thought Rich has blown a script...until now. This one was a mistake.

It wasn't funny, the pally's were too weak and the end panel was just...meh.
Rich is getting tired, he needs a break for a few days, maybe the sickness has impaired his judgement, I am unsure, but this one fell flat.

 

[Professor Phobos]

One of the best in the strip's history. Definitely continues the evolution from a comic "just about D&D jokes" to one with actual characters we care about.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

that D&D doesn't have super bouncy balls.

It's a magic bouncy ball. Xykon has researched some new spells.

 

[Drowbane]

<snip>
Dunno what else to tell you, save move on. Getting a bunch of paladins to gleefully slaughter each other with a super-bouncy ball is funny.
<snip>

Not only is that funny. Its Joker funny.

 

[questing gm]

Maybe this strip is straining some of our suspension of disbelief ?

 

[Drowbane]

One of the best in the strip's history. Definitely continues the evolution from a comic "just about D&D jokes" to one with actual characters we care about.

QFT

 

[Grog]

No, it's not. Unless you can provide me an unambiguous definition of what "offensive" means in the rules,

"Offensive" is a word with a specific meaning in the English language.

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/offensive

The relevant definitions here are:

1 a : making attack : AGGRESSIVE b : of, relating to, or designed for attack <offensive weapons>

Xykon used the spell aggressively, as an attack. Therefore, he used it offensively, and thus, illegally.

then the only data we have to make that determination is the example given—and what Xykon did was not the same as that example. You could look at that example and detrmine that an attack roll is what makes it "offensive".

No, the data we have to make the determination is the definition of the word "offensive." As I said, the examples given are just that - examples. Not an exhaustive list of what constitutes an offensive use of the spell.

In short, stating that something is a fact doesn't make it so.

Nor does denying the obvious make it any less obvious.

 

[WhatGravitas]

"Offensive" is a word with a specific meaning in the English language.

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/offensive

The relevant definitions here are:

1 a : making attack : AGGRESSIVE b : of, relating to, or designed for attack <offensive weapons>

Ohhhkay... let's see:
Dictionary.com says:
1. causing resentful displeasure; highly irritating, angering, or annoying: offensive television commercials.

=> Therefore using symbol of insanity is not possible, if the spell is used in a "highly irritating, angering, or annoying" way, right?

Since, for the victim, the spell is always "highly irritating, angering, or annoying", it means that the spell always fails, because it is an "offensive act", right?

English is everything, but well-defined and clear-cut. You need to interpret it, therefore I think DM fiat is completely okay.

 

[LoneWolf23]

My question:

In a pseudo-medieval high fantasy world, where does one obtain a "super bouncy ball"?

Same place one gets a coffee maker, or giant crackers, or necktie wearing lawyers?

It's not like it's the first anachronism OOTS has shown, people...

 

[Pielorinho]

Moderator's Notes:

Folks, if you're getting worked up over a D&D comic, it's time to step away from the keyboard. Seriously. I don't care which side of the issue you're on. And I'm posting this because some folks have been reporting this thread for behavior. Everyone breathe deep and sing a chorus of Kum Bah Yah.

[/moderator's notes]

Daniel