Check out Belkar paying Durkon a compliment.
Is it one, or is he disappointed that Durkon isn’t like she says?
Kudzu?!?
What’s the significance of the kid’s name?
Now that I won’t be accused of disappointing people with a non-update post, let me ask an old, old OotS question: In strip one, the gang goes from 3 to 3.5 rules. The gag is that Belkar gets nothing aside from his short swords (?) shrinking into daggers. Is there an actual 3.5 reason why this would happen? Did rangers somehow lose short sword proficiency or were no longer able to dual wield short swords or something?
Well, kudzu is a type of quick growing, invasive vine. Which is why it’s be such a weird name for a dwarf (or anyone, really). Why she named him Kudzu is anyone’s guess right now.
Jophiel, one thing that changed between 3.0 and 3.5 was the way weapons worked for characters of different sizes. In 3.0, a longsword was a longsword, a short sword was a short sword, and a dagger was a dagger, but a small character wielding a longsword took the same amount of effort as a medium-sized character wielding a greatsword, and a small character wielding a short sword took the same effort as a medium character with a longsword, and a small with a dagger was as easy as a medium with a short sword. Hence, if 3.0 Belkar wanted to wield two of the same weapon, a dagger was his heaviest choice available. In 3.5, though, every weapon was sized to its wielder, so a dagger made for a halfling is smaller and does less damage than a dagger made for a human. A halfling’s short sword and a human’s dagger are about the same size and do the same damage, but they’re still different weapons. Now, if the Order were optimized, then when they changed editions Belkar’s weapons would have become halfling-scale short swords… but they didn’t, so they stayed daggers, and so they shrank.
You people clearly don’t live in the South. Or else in Dwarvenland.
Who do dwarves hate more than anything else?
Trees.
Who does Hilgya hate so much that she’ll analogize him to a tree?
Durkon.
What does kudzu do?
Grows up real fast and strangles trees to death.
It’s an aspirational name.
Never mind. Chronos’s answer was first, and more accurate.
Thanks. That was pretty esoteric if you’re not familiar with the changes between editions (versus “bards can wear chain” or “get skill points”)
That’s nothing. The kudzu reference hearkens back to table 83C on page 129 of the first edition DMG, “Theological properties of vines.”
Either way, I’m with Belkar. This is not the Durkon I expect. What’s the back story?
Hilgya and Durkon spent a night together in the first dungeon way back when. Durkon assumed she was single and instead found out that she was married and had ran away from her clan to escape her marriage. Durkon was all about clan honor and duty, etc and said she had to go.
Plot aside, it seems a little strange that a priestess of the Chaotic Evil deity Loki would be offended by a “Love 'em and leave 'em” attitude or consider it depraved. But I guess Hilgya took it personally.
Thanks!
Well, she’s the one been carrying the consequences of their night together. Single parenting is enough to get on anyone’s nerves.
Plus, the Chaotic Evil stuff strikes me as only funny when it happens to someone ELSE.
Indeed.
“I espouse a self-centered, out-for-myself-and-screw-everyone-else philosophy, and now I feel like someone else treated me that way, and I respect that,” is the kind of thought that doesn’t show up much.
I’m not surprised that she would want to kill him. I’m more surprised by her judgmental use of the word “depraved”. The former is a normal evil response, the overarching moral judgement not so much.
This strikes me as potentially leading to a more useful answer than implied in your post 3988.
Can you enlighten us as to the contents of Table 83C wrt kudzu?
I believe that was a joking reference to the fact that the 1st Ed DMG had tables for EVERYFREAKINGTHING.
I checked, page 129 of my 1st ed AD&D DM’s guide was listing out descriptions of magic rings.