i noticed while reading through the old archives that when we first met aliyka she says that up until recently she wasn't a pheonix yet in some flashbacks including the current arc she still is :erk
This is hardly a new discovery. Several members have pointed this out as well.
I can't speak for Amber, but here's what I think:
In the first few... arcs or so for DMFA, Amber had based DMFA off of Furcadia, and therefore borrowed some elements of the game, along with her friends' characters. One option in Furcadia was the ability to turn your character into a Phoenix by paying a certain sum at Digo Market. Since DMFA has become its own creation over time, we can probably assume that the "Digo Market" reference used in the comic, which implied that Aliyka had changed her species using the Digo Market, has become obsolete.
Welcome to the forums, by the way.
~Keaton the Black Jackal
Its more poor pacing on my part than anything.
The story arc that explains Dan and Aliyka's injoke is basically Dan and Aliyka's second adventure together...which was originally going to be the first one I told. But I switched story arcs around to have Dan's first adventure be told first and unfortunately that meant the explanation behind the phrase got shuffled back as well.
But if people want a spoiler, I will let you know that the dialogue between the two is more based around an event and inside joke between them than Dan actually being astonished that she is a phoenix.
I figure I will just suck it up and deal with the 2 emails per week of people pointing this out rather than shove a question from the readers or simply tell people some excuse about the comic of the older times being less coherent and doesnt really apply. Sides, when so many people are busy patting themselves on the back for finding this supposed plot hole, they miss the real ones. *coughs*
And here I thought plotholes were what Amber used to push us all into with the steamroller... ;-]
http://www.bobandgeorge.com/archives/Oct01.php?date=19
(Amber could do it like that)
Just do a time travel arc and you won't have to explain anything. all complaints can be blamed on the time travelers like pyroduck bungling and no one will question the plot holes. You can say "Time Travel" instead of "magic" as the answer to a plot hole inquiry.
Really? I've always just assumed that plot holes in the DMFA-verse were caused by mischievous Fae playing a prank on everyone.
Quote from: Amber Williams on July 10, 2008, 07:54:53 PM
Its more poor pacing on my part than anything.
The story arc that explains Dan and Aliyka's injoke is basically Dan and Aliyka's second adventure together...which was originally going to be the first one I told. But I switched story arcs around to have Dan's first adventure be told first and unfortunately that meant the explanation behind the phrase got shuffled back as well.
But if people want a spoiler, I will let you know that the dialogue between the two is more based around an event and inside joke between them than Dan actually being astonished that she is a phoenix.
I figure I will just suck it up and deal with the 2 emails per week of people pointing this out rather than shove a question from the readers or simply tell people some excuse about the comic of the older times being less coherent and doesnt really apply. Sides, when so many people are busy patting themselves on the back for finding this supposed plot hole, they miss the real ones. *coughs*
ah, so you made a fake plothole to distract folks from any supposedly real plotholes, fuelling rampant speculation..
Bravo, Amber, Bravo.. :B
Shouldn't the correct terminology be "Amber dug a plothole"?
Quote from: Amber Williams on July 10, 2008, 07:54:53 PMSides, when so many people are busy patting themselves on the back for finding this supposed plot hole, they miss the real ones. *coughs*
Really? Huh. The only one other one I found was this one (http://missmab.com/Comics/Vol_119.php) where Wildy seems surprised to find out the Dan is a warrior despite it later being revealed that she knew him since childhood (and gave him the robe out of adventuring school).
Quote from: Sofox on July 12, 2008, 08:19:57 AM
Really? Huh. The only one other one I found was this one (http://missmab.com/Comics/Vol_119.php) where Wildy seems surprised to find out the Dan is a warrior despite it later being revealed that she knew him since childhood (and gave him the robe out of adventuring school).
I believe we covered that too. There's a difference between knowing that Dan studied Adventuring (and maybe did a few little hack'n'slash jobs on the side) and knowing that he had a career so successful that some people worship the ground where he walks...
**EDIT**
Here we are:
http://clockworkmansion.com/forum/index.php/topic,4149.msg176495.html#msg176495
Quote from: Amber
If you really want to view it as an error on my part, feel more than free. However I don't see how someone giving a friend a gift to help keep them safe and then later on thinking they are coming back weaving over-exxaggerated tales of their exploits [is] a continuity error.
That makes sense, actually. Of course, why Mab (who, if I recall the early strips, was his companion) never backed up his stories is the next question... but Mab is usually such a cloudcuckoolander than maybe they would have dismissed it without outside confirmation. This observation doesn't make much sense: I need more coffee.
Nah, I getcha Jairus.
Okay, so I guess that's that. Makes sense I would be wrong on that, I got the sense that the plot holes Amber was referring to were of a more general nature rather then a simple panel by panel comparison.
There was something else I noticed, but screw it, I love this comic too much to be nitpicking it, so I'll leave it at that.
Quote from: Amber Williams on July 10, 2008, 07:54:53 PMSides, when so many people are busy patting themselves on the back for finding this supposed plot hole, they miss the real ones. *coughs*
It worked pretty well for the government with those UFO rumors. :B
Of course, now they have to deal with all the people who believed them trying to get access to classified files to confirm it. :rolleyes
At least with fake plot holes, you won't have plot hole conspiracy nuts trying to prove it is a plot hole thirty years down the line. :P
Quote from: Reese Tora on July 12, 2008, 11:12:16 AM
At least with fake plot holes, you won't have plot hole conspiracy nuts trying to prove it is a plot hole thirty years down the line. :P
Oh, you never know...
I'm fairly certain that people have been obsessing over plot holes in... oh, say, the Bible... since the first chapter was written.
Quote from: Jairus on July 12, 2008, 10:30:35 AM
That makes sense, actually. Of course, why Mab (who, if I recall the early strips, was his companion) never backed up his stories is the next question... but Mab is usually such a cloudcuckoolander than maybe they would have dismissed it without outside confirmation. This observation doesn't make much sense: I need more coffee.
"Hey, Mab, did Dan actually do this stuff?"
"Fish! Furthermore, do you like my dress?"
... Take your pick. Either she backed him up, but nobody believed her because they didn't understand, or she never bothered to because nobody asked. Either is possible.
Methinks the real plot hole is in how the monster races are tried and pay a fine when they eat someone, but adventurers don't face any legal ramifications for the murder of the creatures that they kill. Seriously, if you consider how many times DP has been killed, you'd think someone would've filled charges.
Actually, it's not a plot hole, but the opposing mindsets of Creatures vs Beings. Creatures hold the view that only the strong have the right to live. If you die or are killed, no matter the cause, you weren't strong enough, thus, you don't deserve to live. Truth is, when Being adventurers go on Creature kill-sprees, the Creatures are, in a way, secretly cheering them on for trimming away weak and unfit Creatures. However, ordinary Beings, being weak little bugs, are nothing more than cattle to most Creatures.
On the other hand, Beings think it's wrong to kill a sentient person, and try to use the Creatue-Being Council to exact just. I say 'try' because, as we all know, it doesn't really work. (http://www.missmab.com/Comics/Vol_287.php) Thus, for Beings, adventuring is a means of getting revenge and protecting their own.
The only unusual part about all of this is the fact that DP has, to date, been resurrected three times. So far. there hasn't been an explanation as to why. By conventional Creature beliefs, he should have stayed dead the first time.
Quote from: techmaster-glitch on July 12, 2008, 05:27:16 PM
Actually, it's not a plot hole, but the opposing mindsets of Creatures vs Beings. Creatures hold the view that only the strong have the right to live. If you die or are killed, no matter the cause, you weren't strong enough, thus, you don't deserve to live.
Demons certainly hold that viewpoint, but I don't think it is the case for all Creatures. After all, Aary wanted to torture Dan to death for killing Destania. (Talking of holes, the discrepancy between Aary and Fi's description of her is interesting, but I'm sure that will be explained in due course.)
It's possible that part of the adventurer's reward is taken as blood money, but I think the real answer is very simple - intent.
Kria got into trouble because she murdered innocent people. Dan was rewarded for killing a criminal who had kidnapped the regional head of state and was preparing to take their soul.
If - for the sake of argument - Dan killed Kria out of the blue while she was shopping for clothes, I can well imagine that he would have had the book thrown at him. Whereas if he killed her while she was eating the shoppers, it would probably count as a job well done.
Personally I suspect that the reward business simply comes down to the fact that someone has put a price on someone else's head. This makes things interesting because it's likely that the adventurers also have prices on their own heads for collecting the bounty on a previous victim.
Quote
The only unusual part about all of this is the fact that DP has, to date, been resurrected three times. So far. there hasn't been an explanation as to why. By conventional Creature beliefs, he should have stayed dead the first time.
I think this is his second resurrection actually. Though it's not quite clear, I believe he has been thwarted three times, but only killed twice.
He might have been brought back by his followers/minions etc. Either out of loyalty or so they can get paid. Or it might be an act of (Dark) God - assuming the Dark God is real, of course.
Quote from: Jairus on July 12, 2008, 11:14:33 AM
Quote from: Reese Tora on July 12, 2008, 11:12:16 AM
At least with fake plot holes, you won't have plot hole conspiracy nuts trying to prove it is a plot hole thirty years down the line. :P
Oh, you never know...
I'm fairly certain that people have been obsessing over plot holes in... oh, say, the Bible... since the first chapter was written.
You might want to look up Ken Ham, Lee Strobel, or C.S. Lewis before you go dropping comments like that. Keep in mind that some people have spent over 10 years writing doctoral thesis trying to prove the Bible had plotholes for their Doctorates, only to convert to Christianity because they couldn't find any. Also, the next time you see somebody saying the Bible has plotholes or the like? Here's a simple question to ask: How is your Greek, Latin, and Hebrew? If the person responds that they don't know anything about the languages, you can be pretty sure they haven't bothered to actually research what-ever they are talking about.
Quote from: Saist on July 12, 2008, 06:08:29 PM
Quote from: Jairus on July 12, 2008, 11:14:33 AM
Quote from: Reese Tora on July 12, 2008, 11:12:16 AM
At least with fake plot holes, you won't have plot hole conspiracy nuts trying to prove it is a plot hole thirty years down the line. :P
Oh, you never know...
I'm fairly certain that people have been obsessing over plot holes in... oh, say, the Bible... since the first chapter was written.
You might want to look up Ken Ham, Lee Strobel, or C.S. Lewis before you go dropping comments like that. Keep in mind that some people have spent over 10 years writing doctoral thesis trying to prove the Bible had plotholes for their Doctorates, only to convert to Christianity because they couldn't find any. Also, the next time you see somebody saying the Bible has plotholes or the like? Here's a simple question to ask: How is your Greek, Latin, and Hebrew? If the person responds that they don't know anything about the languages, you can be pretty sure they haven't bothered to actually research what-ever they are talking about.
I was just making a general comment about the only book that immediately came to mind where entire religions have basically been founded because of how it's supposed to be translated. I wasn't really commenting about the Bible in particular. Besides, any book that old is going to have translation issues (i.e. the whole "poisoner vs. witch" debate). Anyway, it was a comment that in retrospect should have been phrased better. I apologize. Next time I'll be a little more awake when I make a comment like that.
ok so i say something about being a pheonix and we get a whole discussion about the killing of species :mowdizzy
Quote from: silentassassin on July 12, 2008, 09:29:21 PM
ok so i say something about being a pheonix and we get a whole discussion about the killing of species :mowdizzy
Welcome to the forum. ;-]
Quote from: Jairus on July 12, 2008, 07:27:13 PM
Quote from: Saist on July 12, 2008, 06:08:29 PM
Quote from: Jairus on July 12, 2008, 11:14:33 AM
Quote from: Reese Tora on July 12, 2008, 11:12:16 AM
At least with fake plot holes, you won't have plot hole conspiracy nuts trying to prove it is a plot hole thirty years down the line. :P
Oh, you never know...
I'm fairly certain that people have been obsessing over plot holes in... oh, say, the Bible... since the first chapter was written.
You might want to look up Ken Ham, Lee Strobel, or C.S. Lewis before you go dropping comments like that. Keep in mind that some people have spent over 10 years writing doctoral thesis trying to prove the Bible had plotholes for their Doctorates, only to convert to Christianity because they couldn't find any. Also, the next time you see somebody saying the Bible has plotholes or the like? Here's a simple question to ask: How is your Greek, Latin, and Hebrew? If the person responds that they don't know anything about the languages, you can be pretty sure they haven't bothered to actually research what-ever they are talking about.
I was just making a general comment about the only book that immediately came to mind where entire religions have basically been founded because of how it's supposed to be translated. I wasn't really commenting about the Bible in particular. Besides, any book that old is going to have translation issues (i.e. the whole "poisoner vs. witch" debate). Anyway, it was a comment that in retrospect should have been phrased better. I apologize. Next time I'll be a little more awake when I make a comment like that.
See, I was going to comment that you're wrong about the first plot hole appearing in chapter 1... I think all christians should be required to read Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, and be allowed to come to their own conclusions.
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on July 13, 2008, 04:46:45 AM
Quote from: silentassassin on July 12, 2008, 09:29:21 PM
ok so i say something about being a pheonix and we get a whole discussion about the killing of species :mowdizzy
Welcome to the forum. ;-]
Yes, I believe that the comic thread prior to the current rather quickly went into a discussion of Undead sexuality, so it's no real surprise that this thread derailed as it did.
Lesse.. we've covered 2 of the three topics I was always taught never to bring up.. Sex, Religion... so how about it. Let's talk politics. How about that US president? That one that came to Halifax and only thanked those of us who were waving all five fingers. I mean.. some of us put a lot of effort into waving that one finger!
Quote from: Mowser on July 13, 2008, 04:30:47 PM
I mean.. some of us put a lot of effort into waving that one finger!
*snerk*
Quote from: Mowser on July 13, 2008, 04:30:47 PM
Lesse.. we've covered 2 of the three topics I was always taught never to bring up.. Sex, Religion... so how about it. Let's talk politics. How about that US president? That one that came to Halifax and only thanked those of us who were waving all five fingers. I mean.. some of us put a lot of effort into waving that one finger!
Really? Hm, my parents never taught me any of that. That might explain a bit, come to think of it.
Can I put part of this in my sig? I love that line! BTW, which president was it?
Let me get this out of the way: In regards to religion, I feel that everyone has the right to choose their own beliefs, free from persecution. I believe that everyone has the right to practice their own beliefs, so long as they do not hurt anyone as a result of their beliefs. And I believe that so long as your beliefs make you feel happy and help you understand your place in the universe, more power to you. There, that's out of the way! Now, back to politics!
The current one, Bush. Credit to him though, he took it pretty welll and didn't seem to phased by the lot of us who were there flipping him the bird.
Quote from: Mowser on July 13, 2008, 06:51:42 PM
The current one, Bush. Credit to him though, he took it pretty welll and didn't seem to phased by the lot of us who were there flipping him the bird.
Are you sure he just didn't understand the expression?
Quote from: Reese Tora on July 13, 2008, 04:05:03 PM
See, I was going to comment that you're wrong about the first plot hole appearing in chapter 1... I think all christians should be required to read Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, and be allowed to come to their own conclusions.
So many perceived plot holes can easily be attributed to incomplete or incorrect translation and interpretation.
Quote from: the next time you see somebody saying the Bible has plotholes or the like? Here's a simple question to ask: How is your Greek, Latin, and Hebrew? If the person responds that they don't know anything about the languages, you can be pretty sure they haven't bothered to actually research what-ever they are talking about.
Exactly, you need to go back to the original languages it was written in to get the nuances of the written words, not just a surface meaning but also deeper cultural meanings (many languages have several words for what we use one word for depending on those nuances.
Quote from: TapewolfDemons certainly hold that viewpoint, but I don't think it is the case for all Creatures. After all, Aary wanted to torture Dan to death for killing Destania. (Talking of holes, the discrepancy between Aary and Fi's description of her is interesting, but I'm sure that will be explained in due course.)
Discrepancies between descriptions can be merely due to positional, racial or even temporal (time) differences in perception.
Quote from: Tapewolf on July 12, 2008, 05:44:37 PMTalking of holes, the discrepancy between Aary and Fi's description of her is interesting, but I'm sure that will be explained in due course.
This isn't a plot hole; Aary is smitten.
Quote from: AmigaDragon on July 13, 2008, 10:21:15 PM
Quote from: Reese Tora on July 13, 2008, 04:05:03 PM
See, I was going to comment that you're wrong about the first plot hole appearing in chapter 1... I think all christians should be required to read Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, and be allowed to come to their own conclusions.
So many perceived plot holes can easily be attributed to incomplete or incorrect translation and interpretation.
Generally speaking, that's very true, but there are two points where I would differ in this specific case. 1) I find it hard to believe that two such widely different stories of creation were arrived at due to translators' errors. 2) Many people consider their version of the bible to be the truth, without consideration of translation errors. I would primarily direct my original comment to people who are unwilling to consider that the bible may be allegorical rather than the complete and literal truth.
(One person I've read writtings from believes the two accounts are purposefully different in order to indicate to the reader that some of the stories within are not always meant to be taken as literal truth.)
Quote from: AmigaDragon on July 13, 2008, 10:21:15 PM
Quote from: TapewolfDemons certainly hold that viewpoint, but I don't think it is the case for all Creatures. After all, Aary wanted to torture Dan to death for killing Destania. (Talking of holes, the discrepancy between Aary and Fi's description of her is interesting, but I'm sure that will be explained in due course.)
Discrepancies between descriptions can be merely due to positional, racial or even temporal (time) differences in perception.
Perhaps, but while Kria considers herself to be evil and revels in it, and while Abel, Fa'Lina and Fi agree that what Destania was doing was evil (though their opinions differ on whether it's something to be proud of or not), Aary seemed to be quite adamant that Destania was
not (see 259 - "Not that anyone cares! After all, she's just a demon so she must have been evil.").
Flashbacks by their very nature cannot be plot holes. They're just the retelling of events from a particular point of view.
Any discrepancy you may run into from time to time is merely the figment of a deranged imagination.
(The character's, not Amber's. That's another thread.)
:mowninja :mowninjawell i guess it's just ones view of good and evil after all those things are just states of mind like able not liking dee and aary loving her you could think someone is evil for muder but with a certain mindset think they are admirable
I'm sure the feeling was clear. Especially since he took the time in his speech to thank "eveyone who came out and waved to [him]....with all five fingers." Singling out those of us who only used one. Means he didn't appreciate those of us who were only waving one.
Btw, I don't mind if you use any part of that Jai.
Back to the topic: Good and Evil are a matter of perception. This is the same for all opinions. What is good to one person is evil to another. What is cruel and torturous to one might be seen as strict and for their own good. Much like Silent has just said.
Back to the topic: Good and Evil are a matter of perception. This is the same for all opinions. What is good to one person is evil to another. What is cruel and torturous to one might be seen as strict and for their own good. Much like Silent has just said.
[/quote]
thank you
*Charline hmphs* The biggest plot hole is that I'm not in the comic as the ultimate evil villain yet! And I obviously should be! >:[
Quote from: Alondro on July 15, 2008, 10:44:16 AM
*Charline hmphs* The biggest plot hole is that I'm not in the comic as the ultimate evil villain yet! And I obviously should be! >:[
Yes, Charline. That is horrible. *idly pets Charlene on the head while doing the "crazy" sign to everyone else*
Come to think of it, we don't have one evil figure pulling all of the strings and controlling the various evil groups, do we? Or at least, not yet...
Quote from: silentassassin on July 15, 2008, 10:20:42 AM
Back to the topic: Good and Evil are a matter of perception. This is the same for all opinions. What is good to one person is evil to another.
In this case,
I don't buy that argument (http://clockworkmansion.com/forum/index.php/topic,4773.msg205086.html#msg205086). So far, DMFA has used a very fixed definition of 'evil' where Creatures are concerned. By your line of reasoning, Fa'Lina etc would define murder and rampages as 'good', and for example, helping people to be 'evil', but that isn't quite the case. They still refer to it as evil - the key difference in perception being that they know it's wrong and don't care / enjoy it.
Some references:
In strip 814, Fi says that Destania is evil. Again, we also see the difference in perception - since Fi thinks evil is cool and seems to be surprised because Dan doesn't.
Strip 341 is a really good example of this - Lorenda is suddenly exposed to the notion that evil is
not cool.
Again, in strip 493 Fa'Lina stops just short of saying that her academy teaches evil.
Now, the interesting thing is that Aary doesn't seem to think of Dee as evil, whereas everyone else(*) apparently does.
Though personally, I suspect KCA hit the nail on the head with their suggestion that she's seeing Dee through rose-tinted glasses.
(*)Dan being the obvious exception since he never knew about her past
In the context of the comic you're definitely correct there is a hard and true 'good' and 'evil'. Though I wasn't meaning it to be viewed that way. I was merely pointing out that one perceptions color them in a sense. Hence the differing views of Aary and others. I should have come up with a better way of describing it I guess. Either way, what I'm getting at has already been covered by what others have said.
so this is the dmfa forums 40 posts down the road your farther away from the topic then you ever could :spidey aw i wanted batman
Quote from: silentassassin on July 15, 2008, 08:44:33 PM
so this is the dmfa forums 40 posts down the road your farther away from the topic then you ever could :spidey aw i wanted batman
I haven't even been here two weeks, and already I'm having so much fun. I might even have to figure out a way to get to Anthrocon next year to meet some of these nut jobs in person.
Oh, and :batman
:batman dude i've been here for a few days and im having fun my brain has been partialy melted but fun none the less now i want a joker