OotS 599 is up

[el-remmen]

there is nothing in the strip that backs it up.

If I ever get a chance to write a paper on this aspect of the comic strip for one of my graduate symposiums I will be sure to send you a copy, because I am fairly certain that if I sat down with the entire run (or even a sizable arc), I could come up with lots of things that indicate just that. . .

Personally, I think to say that "PC" and "NPC" just happen to mean something different here when every other game term is used basically correctly (even if the exact rules aren't always followed - heck, most tables have some house-rules or hand-waving ) is just a matter of convenience to avoid the double narrative suggested by any role-playing game. Heck, there may even be a triple narrative because the characters seem to also be aware of the fact that they are "in a comic strip".

 

[Wolfwood2]

Roy has been dead for about 150 strips now. Roy might not be coming back.

If Roy had been dead for 150 strips and we hadn't seen him in that time, I would agree with you. The fact that we've checked in with Roy in the afterlife more than once would strongly suggest that his story isn't over.

 

[Darkwolf71]

If I ever get a chance to write a paper on this aspect of the comic strip for one of my graduate symposiums I will be sure to send you a copy, because I am fairly certain that if I sat down with the entire run (or even a sizable arc), I could come up with lots of things that indicate just that. . .

Please do, I'd love the read. I'm not afraid to admit I was wrong in the face of compelling evidence. Be warned, though... it can take a lot to 'compel' me.

Personally, I think to say that "PC" and "NPC" just happen to mean something different here when every other game term is used basically correctly (even if the exact rules aren't always followed - heck, most tables have some house-rules or hand-waving ) is just a matter of convenience to avoid the double narrative suggested by any role-playing game. Heck, there may even be a triple narrative because the characters seem to also be aware of the fact that they are "in a comic strip".

That's actually my point, that there is no double narrative. We've never been shown evidence of a 'players' outside life affecting the PCs. Why would it suddenly show up now? Even if, and I think it's a big 'if', this is how it works in Rich's mind he's never indicated it to the rest of us.

 

[el-remmen]

How it works in Rich's mind is beside the point.

EDIT: OH! And again, I think the references to rules from a known role-playing game is implication enough of the double narrative.

 

[Edgewood]

I am at a loss why it cannot be both simultaneously. . .

I'll add a third layer to this. Some also mention being in a cartoon strip there by acknowledging an artist who draws them.

 

[el-remmen]

I'll add a third layer to this. Some also mention being in a cartoon strip there by acknowledging an artist who draws them.

I mentioned that above when I talked about the PC/NPC split.

 

[Edgewood]

I mentioned that above when I talked about the PC/NPC split.

And here I thought I was being all profound and witty. That'll teach me to read the entire post thread before adding my two cents.

 

[DogBackward]

I don't have the time to look right now, but hasn't Rich Burlew specifically stated that there are no players, and that it's just a world that follows D&D rules? I'm fairly certain I remember seeing a similar discussion to this one before, and that's exactly how that one ended.

And even if he didn't... while there are a few minor things that might be used to back up your theory, el-remmen, there is nothing that actually says "there are players controlling these guys". As long as this thing has been going on, and with all the other game-related things the characters mention, if there were people controlling the characters in a normal style game, the characters would have mentioned it explicitly at some point.

We'd see, for example, everybody stopping still in the middle of a rivetting battle, sitting there doing nothing while Elan pipes up "Sorry, my player's in the bathroom."

Or something like that, anyway.

 

[el-remmen]

I don't have the time to look right now, but hasn't Rich Burlew specifically stated that there are no players, and that it's just a world that follows D&D rules? I'm fairly certain I remember seeing a similar discussion to this one before, and that's exactly how that one ended.

And even if he didn't... while there are a few minor things that might be used to back up your theory, el-remmen, there is nothing that actually says "there are players controlling these guys". As long as this thing has been going on, and with all the other game-related things the characters mention, if there were people controlling the characters in a normal style game, the characters would have mentioned it explicitly at some point.

We'd see, for example, everybody stopping still in the middle of a rivetting battle, sitting there doing nothing while Elan pipes up "Sorry, my player's in the bathroom."

Or something like that, anyway.

Well, first off, I don't privilege the author's view of his own work. . . And while I agree that that kind of gag would make it explicit, that does not mean that the reference to game rules make the idea of there being players implicit. It is for this reason I used the term "slippage" - the level of awareness slides up and down a continuum, and so far has never seemed to get to the point of awareness of players - but in "immersive" D&D games (as opposed to those with a playing style more on the end of character as playing-piece) there is an assumption of assuming the persona of the character, so it is not so crazy to think that the OotS folks could be aware of game rules without being aware of being "controlled by a player".

 

[Tiberius]

Well, first off, I don't privilege the author's view of his own work. . .

Come again? Now I avoided taking as many English classes as possible, so bear with me here, but how can one fail to take the author's word on the matter, when theirs is the only truly authoritative view? Isn't that akin to saying "Well, the creator doesn't really know what he's talking about", when they are the only ones who truly know 100% of what they're talking about?