Comments on: Annotated 36-20

By: Blatherskite

Blatherskite — Sat, 31 Jul 2021 21:08:46 +0000

I agree, it's one of a few loose ends that never really felt well-explained to me. In particular, it exposes a lot of the hand-waving about how closely connected The Game really is to the world of Arkerra. I get that some of that obfuscation was deliberate, but in the end, I wanted some more solid answers and none ever came. Like you, I don't feel that it ruins the story by any stretch; it's very minor. But it still nags at me.

By: BM03

BM03 — Sat, 31 Jul 2021 11:16:37 +0000

All that link did for me was leave me in complete awe at the realization these annotations have been going for over two years. Hot. Dang. Never felt that long.

By: Pylgrim

Pylgrim — Sat, 31 Jul 2021 09:08:30 +0000

Since resurrecting is definitely not commonplace in Arkerra, we have to presume that the game’s rezzing mechanics are invisible to them. Some games have exploited this conceit where “lives” are merely possibilities that ended wrong so the “story” continues in a timeline where things went “right”(mostly because the player now knows better or is more skilled).

So Bandit being resurrected and remembering it is a special occurrence. If you check back the strip T linked, he says that the “Harky’s blood” theory is basically canon. Maybe Tectonicus deemed her worthy.

By: BM03

BM03 — Sat, 31 Jul 2021 06:22:18 +0000

Bandit’s death is that one bit of the story that didn’t quite click with me proper. The blurry line of “videogame but not really it’s more of a cosmic coincidence kinda thing” went weird there to me. The absolute only person to ever come back without straight up divine intervention was Bandit. Kinda nutty to thing nobody else, especially in this big ass pack of adventurers that are about to get destroyed, has a “player” counterpart to account for respawning.

Just something that felt odd to me. It’s not that missing a single beat ruins a song for me.