Just read the two issues that are out and I'm really excited to see where it is going. I currently prefer it to the pathfinder comic, though I have only just started reading it.
I just picked up the first couple issues. Seems like a lot of fun! And I agree, I enjoy it more than the Pathfinder comic (sorry Paizo).
|
I forgot to add it to my pull list at my local comic book shop and they sold out before 2pm on Weds. I had to go to two other comic book shops to find issue three!
My thing about the Pathfinder comic- I dont know if making the iconics the central characters was a help or a hindrance to an overall story. I can't help but wonder while reading it if there are real stakes to the story. Would they really kill an iconic in the comic? (Besides Lem)
I really enjoy the modern takes on fantasy dress and attitudes presented in Rat Queens. The elements of basic fantasy are there, but we also get people with tattoos, hipsters, hippies, goths, ect.
Not to forget to mention the entirely female main cast, huge plus.
I just want more sword n staff fantasy overall in my comics, I don't feel like I'm asking for too much
|
I got some of the older issues of "Rat Queens" last week. I was LOLing by the second panel! I'm not a regular comics reader, but I really dig this comic. Quite a bit more blood splatter than I'm used to (I'm more familiar with the super-hero type comic, where there's not so much blood/guts, e.g. kid-friendly Superman) but the banter and the hi-jinks of the Rat Queens makes up for that. I'm not sure which character I like the best yet, they're all so darn cool.
Rat queens, huh? With TMDQ rating it OVER Pathfinder comic? Hmmmm.....
I picked it up. I have converted.
I saw it online; I'm going to pick it up soon.
My local comic books shop is still out of the Rat Queens' "Sass and Sorcery" trade ppb! [eyesroll] Comics guy said they might have it in stock again in 2 or 3 weeks. That's what they said last time and I asked them to put me on their list for the next shipment! I can't wait that long! I want my FIX! [nerdrage]
I picked up Sass and Sorcery. It's gorgeous. Splendid. Charming.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Best quote ever:
I'm the f@*~ing alphabet.
My one problem with Rat Queens, to this day, is that it's "Wring" someone's neck. Not "Ring".
WRING.
Hehe. So I made a similar comment on Twitter a bit after making that post.
Apparently, Mr. Weibe (Kurtis J. Weibe, the creator of the book) shares my despair over that typo.
And apparently appreciates that I love his book so much that I bought my mom a copy of the first trade.
WHEN DOES THE NEXT COLLECTION COME OUT!?!?!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
WHEN DOES THE NEXT COLLECTION COME OUT!?!?!
January (I think).
And a reminder that whatever you're doing right now, it is not as much fun as reading Rat Queens.
Need...second...trade. Love this comic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks to this thread I just fell in love with this comic and I can't afford that right now :P
Bought the first trade on comixology and now I want to buy the physical copy as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's on comixology?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I keep asking Mr. Weibe for an officially licensed Orc Dave Bluebird Beard, but he never answers. :(
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rat Queens Special: Braga #1 is releasing on January 15th.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
BRAGA BRAGA BRAGA BRAGA!
I want that issue so bad. SO. BAD.
Love Ratqueens, love the Pathfinder comics.
I also started reading the D&D 4ed comics. I recommend them. They're hilarious. It really sounds like a group of players around a table jokingly RPing as they play.
Did anyone get the Braga special issue? I couldn't find it at my local comics shops, and I went to two different stores!
I did. Got it at Westfield's in Madison (if you're in Madison).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I got it. It was a pretty good slice of all right!
|
|
The whole Roc Upchurch arrest is making me feel uneasy about the series going forward. Will Wiebe having a new illustrator change the content? Is it temporary or will Upchurch return to illustrating it at some point down the road? It also makes me super sad that a series that is so positive/entertaining about women kicking @ss has a corollary in real-life violence that is as far as one can get from "entertaining."
I was wondering what other readers on here thought about the issue, or if y'all don't want to touch it with a 10 ft. pole.
The whole Roc Upchurch arrest is making me feel uneasy about the series going forward. Will Wiebe having a new illustrator change the content? Is it temporary or will Upchurch return to illustrating it at some point down the road? It also makes me super sad that a series that is so positive/entertaining about women kicking @ss has a corollary in real-life violence that is as far as one can get from "entertaining."
I was wondering what other readers on here thought about the issue, or if y'all don't want to touch it with a 10 ft. pole.
I, too, was troubled by the Upchurch situation. Obviously, if he did what he's accused of doing, that's a serious problem. But replacing an artist with such a specific style is going to have an effect on the book, and I'm already not enthusiastic about the updated character designs that Stepjic has posted so far. I want to see the current storyline through to its conclusion, but I'm unsure of how long I'll be continuing after that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I, too, was troubled by the Upchurch situation. Obviously, if he did what he's accused of doing, that's a serious problem. But replacing an artist with such a specific style is going to have an effect on the book, and I'm already not enthusiastic about the updated character designs that Stepjic has posted so far. I want to see the current storyline through to its conclusion, but I'm unsure of how long I'll be continuing after that.The whole Roc Upchurch arrest is making me feel uneasy about the series going forward. Will Wiebe having a new illustrator change the content? Is it temporary or will Upchurch return to illustrating it at some point down the road? It also makes me super sad that a series that is so positive/entertaining about women kicking @ss has a corollary in real-life violence that is as far as one can get from "entertaining."
I was wondering what other readers on here thought about the issue, or if y'all don't want to touch it with a 10 ft. pole.
I've thought about replying to this. spectrevk, I don't mean to seem as though I'm calling you specifically out here. This is directed at the royal "you," and it's not personally directed your way.
I'm just really tired of people trying to excuse Upchurch's behavior and cast some kind of doubt over the cycle and history of abuse that he displayed toward his wife and others. As though his being an artist makes up for it.
So, I realize that as a survivor of domestic abuse, I am grossly biased, here, but:
The guy got arrested because he had a history of abuse and was caught red handed. He's going to go to trial, and if his wife is very lucky, he will go to prison.
Frankly, I don't care what his defense is. I want nothing more to do with his art. I want him to never get a job in this or any other industry ever again.
And if you really do love Weibe's story as much as you claim, the art shouldn't matter. And saying that you're going to quit a book just because an artist you love has turned out to be abusive and shown his true colors is no longer going to be on the book?
I honestly can't take that as anything but a defense of Upchurch's actions. Maybe that's not how you mean it. Maybe you just wanted to say "I don't like Stepjic's art that much, so I don't know if I can keep up with the book with him on it."
I don't know.
What I do know is that if you are saying you won't support the book any longer because a violent abuser is no longer part of it, then you might want to step back and reconsider a few things.
Weibe addressed the issue of Upchurch's arrest in an intelligent and thoughtful manner. He decided that he still has a story to tell, and that he no longer wished to associate with Upchurch. He no longer wanted Upchurch to be associated with the story going forward. That was the best thing he could do.
Personally, I take his stance against Upchurch's behavior and his resolve to continue the story to be a positive thing. I will be continuing to buy Rat Queens (and Weibe's other books) because I support that positivity.
Again, I'm not targeting anyone specifically, and I apologize if my words cause inflamed nerves and tempers, but I will not apologize for having a stance that punishes the abuser rather than excusing them or quitting a comic just because they're no longer on it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I, too, was troubled by the Upchurch situation. Obviously, if he did what he's accused of doing, that's a serious problem. But replacing an artist with such a specific style is going to have an effect on the book, and I'm already not enthusiastic about the updated character designs that Stepjic has posted so far. I want to see the current storyline through to its conclusion, but I'm unsure of how long I'll be continuing after that.The whole Roc Upchurch arrest is making me feel uneasy about the series going forward. Will Wiebe having a new illustrator change the content? Is it temporary or will Upchurch return to illustrating it at some point down the road? It also makes me super sad that a series that is so positive/entertaining about women kicking @ss has a corollary in real-life violence that is as far as one can get from "entertaining."
I was wondering what other readers on here thought about the issue, or if y'all don't want to touch it with a 10 ft. pole.
I've thought about replying to this. spectrevk, I don't mean to seem as though I'm calling you specifically out here. This is directed at the royal "you," and it's not personally directed your way.
I'm just really tired of people trying to excuse Upchurch's behavior and cast some kind of doubt over the cycle and history of abuse that he displayed toward his wife and others. As though his being an artist makes up for it.
Who in this thread has been doing any of this? Nobody has come to his defense, or suggested that he should be treated differently because he's an artist. Unless you were interpreting my comments on the difficulty of replacing him as an artist that way. I realize that the nature of his departure from the book makes this more sensitive than usual (and again, I understand that domestic violence is a serious problem), but my point was specific to the book, not the man or the incident.
So, I realize that as a survivor of domestic abuse, I am grossly biased, here, but:The guy got arrested because he had a history of abuse and was caught red handed. He's going to go to trial, and if his wife is very lucky, he will go to prison.
Frankly, I don't care what his defense is. I want nothing more to do with his art. I want him to never get a job in this or any other industry ever again.
You seem to know more about his background than I do; I was unaware of any previous incidents of abuse, as the only stories I could find about the incident implied this was a first offense. Regardless of whether he's done it once or repeatedly, it's a crime, and he's going through the legal process for it, which is good.
As for the rest...well, I understand that you're angry with him, and other abusers (understandably so), but unless we're going to start executing people for domestic violence, blacklisting them from working "in this or any other industry ever again" seems like it's going to hurt the rest of us as much as it hurts the person being punished. What do you expect a person who can't get legitimate work to do with the rest of their life? How would they eat, or live? This is the kind of attitude that has turned America into a country with the highest incarceration rate in the world. We release people from jail into a society that won't hire them, and expect them not to re-offend. If we don't want to give people second chances, then why are we releasing them from prison? Either admit that you want to throw people into a black hole for any violation of the law, or actually give former inmates a real chance to redeem themselves. I realize that this is a digression from the Upchurch/Rat Queens issue, but your rant here is touching on one of the things that really bothers me about modern culture.
And if you really do love Weibe's story as much as you claim, the art shouldn't matter.
If Rat Queens was a series of novels, sure. But it's a comic book, specifically a creator-owned book that was a collaboration between Wiebe and Upchurch; it's unrealistic to expect that the departure of one of them isn't going to change the book, not just in appearance, but in narrative. I'm not asking for Upchurch to be forgiven, or released; I'm simply being realistic about the effect of half of the creative team leaving the book during the climax of a pretty big story arc. I'm also being realistic about how much I dislike Stephen Sejic's art style.
What I do know is that if you are saying you won't support the book any longer because a violent abuser is no longer part of it, then you might want to step back and reconsider a few things.
I think that's what you *want* me to be saying, so that I can become a convenient straw man for you to vent your anger upon. But this makes no sense. If I was only interested in Rat Queens because a "violent abuser" was part of it, then how would I have started reading it in the first place? Roc Upchurch's domestic violence issues didn't come to light until after they'd already published 8 issues of the book. If I was only interested in the book because of its link to domestic violence, I wouldn't have bought the Braga issue, and I would have removed the book from my pull list already, rather than sticking with the book through the current storyline and giving Sejic (whose art I've already stated I don't like) a fair chance (which I clearly stated I was doing in the text that you quoted).
Weibe addressed the issue of Upchurch's arrest in an intelligent and thoughtful manner. He decided that he still has a story to tell, and that he no longer wished to associate with Upchurch. He no longer wanted Upchurch to be associated with the story going forward. That was the best thing he could do.
Personally, I take his stance against Upchurch's behavior and his resolve to continue the story to be a positive thing.
Agreed. He also sent his best wishes to both Roc and his wife and children, hoping that they could all find healing, which is a bit more positive than your "I hope this man never works anywhere ever again" response. Wiebe did the right thing, not trying to excuse his partner's behavior, but not speculating either; he took care of the book and his readers. It's worth pointing out that Image books are creator-owned, however, so he wouldn't have been able to replace Upchurch on the book without either obtaining Upchurch's permission, or taking him to court for ownership of the IP.
Again, I'm not targeting anyone specifically
That is demonstrably untrue. You specifically targeted me, and deliberately misinterpreted by statements about the new art direction of the book as some kind of support for spousal abuse.
but I will not apologize for having a stance that punishes the abuser rather than excusing them
Literally no one in this thread has tried to excuse any sort of abuse, or even Roc Upchurch in particular. Assuming that his guilt is still in question prior to his trial isn't excusing anyone; it's the way our society is supposed to work.
Your anger at Roc Upchurch and spousal abuse is nothing to apologize for; your views on the American justice system, on the other hand, are appalling. Guilty until proven innocent, punishing criminals after they've served their time by blacklisting them from any and all employment, and painting anyone who disagrees with you as an apologist for domestic violence? That's something to apologize for.
Firstly, I am not endorsing a guilty-until-proven-innocent narrative here. What I am doing is saying "there is ample physical evidence to prove that he did what he is accused of, now we simply have to figure out what to do about it. Personally, I hope they throw the book at him."
Which is different from your statement of "if he did what he is accused of doing."
We know he did it. He's freely admitted to doing it. His guilt is no longer up for question.
I know you won't believe me when I say this, but if there had been any doubt about it, I would have readily taken a "wait and see" stance. But there is no doubt, here.
You're also correct: My reaction to this scenario is extreme, but it one born out of frustration, exhaustion, and a large helping of "I hope his wife is treated more fairly and respectfully than I was, and that she gets justice, because I surely didn't." I am saying that I will never endorse him as an artist again. I honestly do hope he suffers for his actions. In part this is because of my anger at the way that our society treats abusers, particularly those in visible fields (sports, anyone?). We send them to a few therapy sessions, they say they're cured, and they're allowed back into the world as though they've done no wrong. And they do it again, and again, and there is so little accountability that it honestly makes me wonder what the real purpose of that reformation is supposed to be. More often than not the victims are the ones reprimanded, the ones taught that they "must have done something." I certainly know that in my scenario, as a man being abused by his female partner, I always got cross examined by the police when I would call them out to my home to try and get some kind of legal help. Surely, I must have done something. We blame the victim unceasingly, and say of the instigator "well, if they really did what they did," and we let them go based on flimsy criteria that allow them to get out there and abuse again - and that's terrible. It happens all the damn time and I'm sick of it.
So, you're right. Did I react extremely? Yes. Did I make several gross generalizations? Yes. I'm sorry. Honestly.
Have I seen numerous people coming to Upchurch's (and other abusers) defense? Yes. Did I take "if he did what he's accused of doing" as part of that? Not intentionally, but it definitely set off my concern about such things.
I tried very hard to phrase my reply in a way that would be clear that my larger issue was with the way we treat abusers in our society - and honestly I think on any other issue, you and I would be violently agreeing with one another (seriously, talk to me about my issues with the prison system in the US and its for-profit crime engine, some time). I do see that I failed there, and I apologize. I promise that if something like this ever comes up again, I will bust my butt to not use the "royal you" but will instead refer to "people who apologize for this" or something similar. I hope that's sufficient. :)
My issue is not with you at all. It's with the people who watch a video proving that their favorite sports figure punched his wife in the back of her head, leaving her unconscious, and try to apologize and excuse him. But that is not a topic for this thread.
I was unaware that the creator-owned caveat at Image extended to Artists - everything I've read on their submissions guidelines for writers say "you own your work, but we won't find an artist for you, you need to find one yourself." This to me has always implied that the writer owned the scripts, characters, and narrative - while the artist was contracted to the work with the writer, by the writer. So from that perspective, Weibe would be able to swap the artists as he wished. His letter on the subject indicated he was working with a new artist, not that he was talking to Upchurch about transitioning. If I missed a step in there, well, I'll do more research so I don't miss it in the future.
I think that's what you *want* me to be saying, so that I can become a convenient straw man for you to vent your anger upon. But this makes no sense. If I was only interested in Rat Queens because a "violent abuser" was part of it, then how would I have started reading it in the first place? Roc Upchurch's domestic violence issues didn't come to light until after they'd already published 8 issues of the book. If I was only interested in the book because of its link to domestic violence, I wouldn't have bought the Braga issue, and I would have removed the book from my pull list already, rather than sticking with the book through the current storyline and giving Sejic (whose art I've already stated I don't like) a fair chance (which I clearly stated I was doing in the text that you quoted).
I wasn't using you as a straw man to vent my anger on. I've already re-explained that my problem is with the larger portion of the venn diagram. Let me try to explain the rest.
I'm absolutely positive that no one went into this saying "That Roc Upchurch guy, he's an abuser, I want to read what he draws!" That's ridiculous and it is nonsensical. My point is that there are numerous individuals out there (and I have run into many of them in my Friendly Local Comic Store) who now spend a large portion of their time lamenting that he is leaving Rat Queens, casting aspersions on the legitimacy of the charges, and saying in no uncertain terms that now that he is gone, they will no longer read the book. Rather than saying "I don't like the new artist," they are saying "I don't believe he did that and if he's not on the book, I won't buy it."
There's a huge difference there.
Now, in my defense, I did say that I could have totally mistaken your intent. It's evident that I did. And I again apologize. I didn't take your statement about having issues with the character designs as being so unhappy with his artwork, or not liking it in general (personally I think he's too fond of orange hues, but not so much as to make me not buy his work on books I like).
Honestly, I just want to love this comic book and have fun talking about it, maybe figuring out how to model it in Pathfinder. I don't want to listen to people at my comic store behave as though his wife is the one who ought to be on trial. And I'm sick of society at large being so broken that we (as a whole) try to figure out any and every other answer to the problem other than "this person needs serious help and we need to adjust our penal system to give them that help, rather than attacking the victim and trying to figure out all the possible ways the abuser maybe possibly perhaps didn't do what was done."
As I've said multiple times already, that's my problem. Not with you, but with the scenario as a whole.
This bit here, though, I have to address:
painting anyone who disagrees with you as an apologist for domestic violence?
I do not believe that I did this. I believe I was very specific and stated that I found certain statements a support of his actions. Saying "I don't like the new artist" is completely different. If I'd said "I love the new artist and I can't wait to see his work!" and someone replied "I really don't like the new artist and I'm going to drop the book" I would not take that disagreement as a support of Upchurch or an apology for domestic violence. I was very clear - and I think it's important to defend myself on this. People angrily quitting the book simply because Upchurch isn't going to be on it any more - not for otherwise valid reasons ("I dislike Sepjic's artwork immensely") - that's where my problem lies, and I don't think it's far-fetched to view that as support of his actions. And again (I know it's repetitive but it's important to say) I did misread your statement, and I am sorry.
In all honesty, thank you for your reply. You made your case well, and I really appreciate it. I hope I've returned just as well and I hope we see better on this.
And I'm really happy you bought the Braga special. How awesome was that thing?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It looks like I misjudged you, and I apologize. I had initially taken your "not calling you out" line to be somewhat sarcastic, and I'm a bit sensitive regarding the way people discuss issues like this online, particularly the presumption of guilt and dog-piling. It's clear now that this wasn't your intent, and I jumped the gun.
I share your disdain for many of the public reactions to clear proof of wrongdoing by celebrities. At the same time, I'm also concerned about the presumption of guilt based on the severity of allegations, particularly since the fallout doesn't end up being equal (Roman Polanski is still considered a "genius" after being convicted and escaping his sentence; Bill Cosby is a social pariah over numerous allegations that never went to court).
But I digress; any conversation about the various iniquities and failures of the U.S. justice system and the media/entertainment machine that reports on it could easily consume an entire forum, let alone a single thread.
Back to Upchurch, it's funny that you should mention running into his defenders at your comic shop, as I was just talking to the (female, if it matters) co-owner of my local shop about Rat Queens. She told me that immediately after the news hit (shortly after issue 8 came out) she had a lot of female readers say they were quitting the book, who then came back to it as soon as they heard Upchurch was being replaced). I didn't find out about it until a while after that, because Rat Queens has always had a pretty inconsistent schedule, and I just figured Upchurch was slow.
For me, I fully understand people not wanting to be involved with him under the circumstances. My initial point was that his art style is unique enough that he'd be hard to replace, and since the art was such an important part of the book, I was concerned about the future. I fully understand the necessity of him paying the consequences for his crime, and I expect that to happen.
I was unaware that the creator-owned caveat at Image extended to Artists - everything I've read on their submissions guidelines for writers say "you own your work, but we won't find an artist for you, you need to find one yourself." This to me has always implied that the writer owned the scripts, characters, and narrative - while the artist was contracted to the work with the writer, by the writer.
I am not privy to the contract details between Wiebe and Upchurch; it is possible that he retained full rights to the IP, but it seems unlikely; modern comic artists are all too aware of what happened to Jack Kirby, Bill Finger, and other silver/golden age artists who made huge contributions to the characters we all know and love, but were robbed of both the financial gains and historical recognition for what they did. Artists typically get co-creator rights for characters that they help develop, so it seems likely that Upchurch has some kind of continued stake in Rat Queens, but the only way to be sure would be to ask Wiebe. And even if I'm right, I imagine it wouldn't be too hard for Wiebe to buy Upchurch out of his stake, as I'm sure both parties are aware of how much damage Upchurch's continued involvement would do to the IP.
Lastly on to more pleasant topics: Yes, the Braga one-shot was fun, and actually speaks very well of Wiebe's work with other collaborators.
|
|
Hi all. I finally got around to reading the Braga comic. [my life has been too busy to hunt all over town for one comic] I really liked it, especially Tess Fowler's take on orcs. Very tribal-punk. I hope she gets to do more guest artistry on the series, or at least that her orcs are the style going forward. I think we need another Braga issue, too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Oh, Brad. Brad, Brad, Brad, Brad."
Yeah.
That was exactly the right reaction for a mid-level NPC to have when the PC's come up the road looking for a fight, right there.
Loved it. :)
|
|
I got Issue 9. Paizo website munched my long post so I'll put the highlights of my thoughts here:
1. The mental manipulation of the abyssal monsters/scene-jumping in the plot confused me. Seeing stuff happening "in media res" is exciting, but it plays havoc with my sense of "WTF is going on."
2. I don't think Violet's explanation to Orc Dave (while filling me in on the gist of what's going on) satisfied my need for a more visual exposition.
3. That probably means I'm slow...or something.
4. Sejic's art is IMO neither better nor worse than Upchurch's, just different. I think he's worse at drawing Dee's hair, but better at drawing Betty. YMMV.
5. Both artists have been bad at drawing the characters' noses consistently. What is up with comic artists and noses? You'd think it would be easy since they are right in the middle of the face! At least with the orcs, they don't have to worry about that.
|
|
I picked up issue 10 during Free Comic Book Day today. I was planning on waiting for the collected volume but my will power is weak.
I liked how the issue and the plot arc resolved. Especially because
I liked how they wrapped up the story arc, but issue 11 left me kind of disappointed. Anyone else?
Who else darn near spit up their drink at "Like a hurricane in a pole shop"?