Guest Comic - Part 3 (Brax) in Intermission 3
first Latest
Guest Comic - Part 3 (Brax)


first Previous Next Latest
Average Rating: 5
Number of people who have voted: 1


By the same author as Grand Line 3.5
Author Notes:

DragonTrainer

DragonTrainer



4th Jul 2017, 12:00 AM

This guest comic was created by Brax, author of Sword Arts and Skill Points. It's a Campaign Comic based on Sword Art Online.

Go check it out when you have the chance.

edit delete

Comments:

Kaze Koichi




4th Jul 2017, 2:37 AM

Totally agree. Red eyes means warning. That's evil character trait.
Or golden eyes. My evil character mentioned at previous strip had golden eyes.

edit delete reply

animalia

animalia




7th Jul 2017, 9:39 PM

Train from Black Cat has golden eyes

edit delete reply

Rastaba

Rastaba




4th Jul 2017, 8:16 AM

...to be fair nothing saying a guy with red eyes can't help orphaned puppies subverting the trope of those with red eyes being utterly evil. He could still be evil just not kick the puppy evil.

edit delete reply

Super_Big_Mac

Super_Big_Mac




4th Jul 2017, 9:24 AM

Exactly. Plus, there's Sae and Makoto from Persona 5. They've got red eyes, and Makoto joins your party. Totally not evil.

TBH while I don't like red as a color, red eyes have always been an intriguing trait to me.

edit delete reply

Brax




4th Jul 2017, 4:06 PM

But do they help orphan puppies? DO THEY? I never said anything about kicking any puppies, just not helping orphaned ones. *Lawful* Evil.

edit delete reply

Halosty45

Halosty45




4th Jul 2017, 11:49 AM

There's no reason an evil person can't like things too. Maybe he just happens to like puppies. Why would he kick them?

In one d&d setting my friends and I have created, there's an evil guy who likes kids. Not in the way you're probably thinking, he just actually likes kids. However, he expresses that like poorly, such as one time he brought an orphanage full of children heads of their racial enemies (dwarves and elves, etc) and was completely baffled when they weren't happy.

edit delete reply

Poker




6th Sep 2017, 5:32 PM

Ok, now that i think about it, next time i play a evil character, i'll play a evil character who never let a orphaned puppy unhelped. (i'll probably have this character be a jerk in every other regards)

edit delete reply

Otaku

Otaku




5th Jul 2017, 10:14 AM

Joke aside, isn't the big issue the stereotypical alignment system? While it can be a great shorthand for character motivations it...

...has anyone reading this other than me played using an RPG system that does not use alignments? >.>

edit delete reply

Tempest_Fennac




6th Jul 2017, 3:08 AM

Not really apart from a Homestuck system which is based off 4th Edition D&D (I've never really tried any other systems).

edit delete reply

Otaku

Otaku




6th Jul 2017, 4:28 PM

I was mostly looking for people who could answer "yes", so I could maybe move onto my next point, but thanks for answering. :)

If you enjoy the role-playing aspect of RPGs, I recommend finding a system more like GURPS. It does not have to be GURPS, but instead of broad character alignments, you can take Disadvantages that let you know how your character ought to behave (in terms of role-playing). Then it is up to you and the GM to handle what that means when it comes to ethics.

edit delete reply

zomg




25th Jul 2017, 8:38 AM

They can always play freeform.

For those not familiar with it, freeform is a roleplaying style that basically translates to 'less rules'. Ie when you play a game with less rules you are freeforming it.

In the most extreme variants you play with no rules, but most still use some randomization and at least basic character generation.

Also since it's a bit subjective you can end up in the funny situation where someone used to tons of rules freeforms a bit, and they're still using more rules than normal.

edit delete reply

Otaku

Otaku




25th Jul 2017, 5:08 PM

Freeform seems more like "Almost no rules" than "less rules", but you're right, that would be an option.

Still prefer designing my own character or even just letting the GM decide than making it random, though. While that can add to the challenge, it isn't always in a good way. ;) Since I keep plugging GURPS, I'll mention that the system does indeed have rules-lite variants.

edit delete reply

Halosty45

Halosty45




6th Jul 2017, 2:52 PM

Dark Heresy (Warhammer 40k roleplaying) doesn't have any sort of alignment system... Though it does have Sanity and Corruption. You're intended to *stop* the Dark Heresy, btw, not be a part of it. Though, there are rules for that. Anyway, there's not really any sort of alignement at all involved, but there are reasons to do things certain ways. Specifically, usually you work for an Inquisitor doing stuff, and they can wipe you out with a single backhand, so you should at least somewhat follow whatever code they have.
Anyway, I've also played World of Darkness, which has a different kind of alignement system. Basically it's just general morality. Crimes are at different thresholds, and if you commit a crime/morally bad thing you might degenerate to a lower level, which might also gain you a mental issue. If you hit 0 (which is basically only going to happen if you go around mass murdering and stealing souls, and somehow haven't gotten killed by any of the secret societies of vampires/mages/werewolves/hunters) your character is taken away.
I've also played Star Wars Saga, in which you're meant to play good guys. Everone has a dark side score, and doing bad stuff ups that, until when you hit a threshold equal to your wisdom score you are fully dark side and not playable anymore. Though, GMs can still let you play dark side characters if they want to, but it's a good way to get rid of a character that's continually going around slaughtering innocents and such without implicating the entire party in a giant criminal takedown by the planetary cops or jedi or something.

edit delete reply

Otaku

Otaku




6th Jul 2017, 4:33 PM

Old World of Darkness gave you a bit more leeway if I recall. For example, Vampire: The Masquerade eventually had paths that would seem rather evil but didn't leave you worried you degenerate into a mindless, blood-sucking beast. You also had a bit more and less leeway in some of the subgenres; Werewolves might all be excepted to protect the Wyld, but even if Glasswalkers might be mistaken about the Weaver, you didn't have to worry about them losing Gnosis for it. I think. It has been quite some time since I read, let alone used, those rules. ^^'

As stated in my reply to another, I like systems where the specifics of my character's personality and behavior are owed less to a general alignment and more to specifics. Either my specific thoughts on how they would behave, or customizable traits that make it obvious the character should do "x" or never do "y", and only sometimes do "z".

edit delete reply

Leave a Comment