wedgeski said:
I simply could not disagree more with this comment. As D&D players we're lucky to have a webcomic that is written with such skill. Just go and look at the WoW webcomics for some really good examples of what OoTS *could* have been in a world without RB. One flick of the reset switch does not make him a bad writer.
Just because he writes about D&D doesn't mean I should cut him any slack. There are countless good writers and bad writers out there for every kind webcomic genres. While Mr. Burlew is certainly above average for a webcomic creator in many respects (though not necessarily art and certainly not timeliness or layout), it doesn't make him a great writer who is above criticism.
Besides, it is not like Mr. Burlew has been doing the whole D&D thing particularly well, or is the only good comic out there that makes D&D jokes. from what I hear, Mr. Burlew has been trying to distance himself from D&D jokes and D&D references in order to "tell his story", and his vague statements regarding the 3E/4E transition just further that. Meanwhile, if you want a good D&D comic, or at least a comic that makes D&D jokes, I can name a few for you.
Goblins! for example handled the "joke comic to serious comic" transition a
lot more elegantly than OoTS (though it updates
much more slowly).
Vanuslux said:
While I agree this leg of the story has dragged on for far too long, I don't feel like one needs to insult the writer or dismiss the fact that it's had pretty good writing compared to the vast majority of other STICK FIGURE WEB COMICS. If the strip were so god awful as you're making it out to be (saying that it shouldn't even exist) people wouldn't care about the characters enough to still be reading it waiting for the plot to hurry the heck up. Rich definitely isn't at the top of his game right now, I agree...but that doesn't mean he should can the strip.
First off, the fact that Mr. Burlew is making a stick figure comic has no relevance on this. Just because he uses stick figures doesn't mean I should ignore bad writing. Actually, it means the opposite, since he needs good writing to make up for the loss of detail in the art, and in this case, he does pretty well. I won't criticize the man's ability to write dialog, and I won't criticize his art because he is using stick figures either (though I do question how much he has really achieved with his art within that limitation, and I certainly question his ability to actually lay out plots and stories).
Second off, I never said OoTS should not exist. I am saying that it did not transition from a "joke comic" to a "plot comic" very well, and that Mr. Burlew might have been more successful had he either kept OoTS a joke comic, ended OoTS as a joke comic and started a new plot comic, or just started OoTS off as a plot-heavy comic. Many facets of the comic in the beginning that helped it be a good joke comic were practically land-mines waiting for it when the comic became less about D&D rules jokes and more about a serious story. Belkar is one of those. He is a great character for a slapstick joke comic, but his total inability to undergo character development makes him a terrible character for any kind of ongoing plot where we are supposed to care about the characters.
It is not like I hate Belkar on a fundamental level, it is just that he is a terrible character for the kind of story Mr. Burlew is trying to tell. After all, I like the webcomic 8-Bit Theater and the character of Black Mage to be found in it, even though he is pretty similar to Belkar. The difference is that 8-Bit Theater has always been a joke comic and remains one to this day, and Black Mage is perfectly at home in the kind of ultra-violent slapstick to be found in that comic (though there are a few running jokes regarding Black Mage that I can't stand, it is more than made up for by the fact that the world of the comic exists to hurt Black Mage). That said, Belkar, is a character who has undergone
less character development and is less complex than Black Mage is being placed in the middle of fairly serious plot developments, including stories of romance, separation, falls into evil and atonement, battles against evil, and political backstabbing. He just doesn't
fit.
Anyways, I think it should be self-evident that, if any significant part of the fanbase
hates a character (and not in a "love to hate" manner, but rather the "I wish they were written out of the story" way"), then the author has made a mistake. It is possible to write a character like Belkar such that he is not hated by a large part of the fanbase that otherwise likes the rest of the story, but Mr. Burlew has simply failed to do so in this case.
Piratecat said:
Wow, that statement is chock full of hubris, as I think experience and sales data simply proves you wrong. I'd buy it if you phrased it as "I think" or "in my opinion," but stating it as unalienable fact? Not a chance.
Good sales does not excuse a comic creator from criticism. In fact, the fact that I actually
like the comic and keep it on the very short list of webcomics that I read does not excuse it from criticism.
Of course what I wrote was my opinion. At the same time, it is the conclusion I came to after examining a many of Rich Burlew's incredibly common mistakes. If you want to claim that he is a good writer or at least dismiss my claim that his skills are flawed, then go back through the comic and prove me wrong. Dismissing something as an "opinion" (implying a lack of validity) is the least constructive response to someone's sentiments, and one of the least friendly.
Anyways, the surest way for Mr. Burlew to become a really terrible writer is for him to be surrounded by a bunch of people who think he can do no wrong simply because he gets a few things right.
