Archer & Armstrong #0 Discussion

[hawkeyeps]

Is it just me or did lead Dino-dude not totally look like a V1 Spider-Alien?

And the whole bit about moving around life force and the Boon...Necromatic energy?

Also if the Lycuem was the dimension with all knowledge of everything would Darque not also be aware of the Faraway and the Boon?

5/5 really good issue...rife with possibility ( royality to Chiclo).

All of these zero issues have been stellar and real cornerstones of universe building.

[lorddunlow]

Is it just me or did lead Dino-dude not totally look like a V1 Spider-Alien?

And the whole bit about moving around life force and the Boon...Necromatic energy?

Also if the Lycuem was the dimension with all knowledge of everything would Darque not also be aware of the Faraway and the Boon?

5/5 really good issue...rife with possibility ( royality to Chiclo).

All of these zero issues have been stellar and real cornerstones of universe building.

I thought he was a little too close to the VH1 spider alien design to note an homage character.

[MarrowMan]

It's probably come up already, but is it just me or is The Faraway The Lost Land?

[DrSoup007]

Is it just me or did lead Dino-dude not totally look like a V1 Spider-Alien?

They should quickly throw out the name "Spen" at him. That's what I'm calling him if he comes back.

[BugsySig]

It's probably come up already, but is it just me or is The Faraway The Lost Land?

Yes. It is. They just dont have the rights to the name "Lost Land" so its now called "The Faraway".

--> Per FVL

[erwinrafael]

so this thread is not in the spoilers section...can we talk spoilery stuff?

I love this book. Clayton Henry is showing that he is the premier artist of VEI so far. And FVL balances the action, emotional weight and the fun. Better than Harbinger #0, still trying to decide if I like this more than Shadowman #0. This book would have been perfect if not for this...grammatical error?

"We keepers of the timeless word, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."

The sentence is missing a "Neither" right? Because the primary sentence would read "We keepers of the timeless word...require food or drink." is the opposite of what FVL is trying to say. It lack a negating term.

Anyway, I also love that there is a Pere Perez-drawn A&A preview in this issue because it shows that Perez is the perfect complement to Henry. They have different layouting styles but the character work is very stylistically close. Amazing.

[MoonChild]

I'm conflicted with this book. On one hand I really enjoyed it, on the other I felt I wasn't really hearing the true voice of Ivar or Gil. I guess I am just too tied to the originals but it seems Armstrong is the one solid stand out as representative to how I identify these characters. There was def. some good stuff in there but some things just left me baffled like when they took the boon. Why didn't those guys try n stop them? Why would the brothers just try and take it like that? They all have their own nobility although different than each others yet here they are just stealing something that is not theirs. It just felt kinda forced to me like ok we want to take the story in this direction so...come up with a way to make that happen and what they came up with was just not that believable to me. Again, i'm sure a big part of this for me is I still identify these characters with the original incarnations but another part just feels like it could have been written better. Also, when someone says something in parentheses what does that mean? They didn't really say it out loud?? I read it late last night, I think I should give it another solid read but first impression had me give it a 6.5 out of 10.

[greg]

This book would have been perfect if not for this...grammatical error?

"We keepers of the timeless word, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."

The sentence is missing a "Neither" right? Because the primary sentence would read "We keepers of the timeless word...require food or drink." is the opposite of what FVL is trying to say. It lack a negating term.

The negating term is in the prior sentence, connected to the quote, "We do not."

It's a little clunky, but the "nor" follows the "not" in the full (uninterrupted) statement.

The next sentence starts with "Rather", so the whole (short) monologue is strongly connected.

[bygranddesign]

I'm conflicted with this book. On one hand I really enjoyed it, on the other I felt I wasn't really hearing the true voice of Ivar or Gil. I guess I am just too tied to the originals but it seems Armstrong is the one solid stand out as representative to how I identify these characters. There was def. some good stuff in there but some things just left me baffled like when they took the boon. Why didn't those guys try n stop them? Why would the brothers just try and take it like that? They all have their own nobility although different than each others yet here they are just stealing something that is not theirs. It just felt kinda forced to me like ok we want to take the story in this direction so...come up with a way to make that happen and what they came up with was just not that believable to me. Again, i'm sure a big part of this for me is I still identify these characters with the original incarnations but another part just feels like it could have been written better. Also, when someone says something in parentheses what does that mean? They didn't really say it out loud?? I read it late last night, I think I should give it another solid read but first impression had me give it a 6.5 out of 10.

This is taking place in ancient Sumeria. Morality is different back then - Life is much more brutal and its the survival of the fittest. 5000+ years ago, before the Boon, before they became cursed and blessed with immortality, the Anni-Padda brothers had nobility for that time but they were also full of themselves, head-strong, i'm sure Brutal and Ruthless, they didn't even care that the Alien-spider guy was tortured... . This to me is just part of the fable, the mythology of the Anni-Padda's - they were some ways the same but in some ways much more different at that time. I think all of us would be slightly different morality wise if we were placed in a different time period... The gusto to survive and be great and to bring this all powerful Boon back to their people was more important then anything else for them during that time... and of course part of this parable is that a great, devastating lesson is learned. I think the Sages knew better then to fight the Anni-Padda's because evidently there are multiple Boon's to be found in the Far Away.

[MoonChild]

True and I take this into consideration but it somehow just felt anti-climatic to me. Especially the end. It just felt crammed in, could have used a few more pages. Good points though, takes away some of what I felt upon my first read. So the brothers are totally mortal in this book huh. Just tough dudes. Ok. I was questioning that as I read it as well.

This is taking place in ancient Sumeria. Morality is different back then - Life is much more brutal and its the survival of the fittest. 5000+ years ago, before the Boon, before they became cursed and blessed with immortality, the Anni-Padda brothers had nobility for that time but they were also full of themselves, head-strong, i'm sure Brutal and Ruthless, they didn't even care that the Alien-spider guy was tortured... . This to me is just part of the fable, the mythology of the Anni-Padda's - they were some ways the same but in some ways much more different at that time. I think all of us would be slightly different morality wise if we were placed in a different time period... The gusto to survive and be great and to bring this all powerful Boon back to their people was more important then anything else for them during that time... and of course part of this parable is that a great, devastating lesson is learned. I think the Sages knew better then to fight the Anni-Padda's because evidently there are multiple Boon's to be found in the Far Away.

[greg]

I like the theory that the sages are possibly the brothers themselves in the future! (plus Mary-Maria "dance and be merry")

When you re-read the story with that in mind, the dialogue ("What is this place? And who are you?") seems
very "futuristic" in the responses and the mortal brothers seem like the least powerful people in the story.

[bygranddesign]

I like the theory that the sages are possibly the brothers themselves in the future! (plus Mary-Maria "dance and be merry")

When you re-read the story with that in mind, the dialogue ("What is this place? And who are you?") seems
very "futuristic" in the responses and the mortal brothers seem like the least powerful people in the story.

Yeah, I think the Far Away is more then just a "mystical land" with no need for further explanation. This is far out, crazy scifi *SQUEE* going on here and I would expect nothing less from FVL who is all about pushing the envelope of sci-fi storytelling! The fact that the inhabitants do not need food and water ... the water itself Mercury(!), the algae is Jade, these are huge clues of a world that feels artificially created. No need to drink, so no need to fear Mercury poisoning, and Mercury perhaps might be an element that when mastered and developed over centuries could be used as a self sustaining energy source for the Far Away.

[bribri]

I may have completely missed this, but on the last page why does it say:

"The Epic of Gilgamesh by Aram the Strong (as told by Obadiah Archer)"

Isn't Armstrong the one telling the story...?

[BugsySig]

I may have completely missed this, but on the last page why does it say:

"The Epic of Gilgamesh by Aram the Strong (as told by Obadiah Archer)"

Isn't Armstrong the one telling the story...?

It says, "As told to Obadiah Archer."

[bribri]

I may have completely missed this, but on the last page why does it say:

"The Epic of Gilgamesh by Aram the Strong (as told by Obadiah Archer)"

Isn't Armstrong the one telling the story...?

It says, "As told to Obadiah Archer."

Dammit. I should have double-check the book before posting that question. "To" makes a hell of a lot more sense.

[BugsySig]

I may have completely missed this, but on the last page why does it say:

"The Epic of Gilgamesh by Aram the Strong (as told by Obadiah Archer)"

Isn't Armstrong the one telling the story...?

It says, "As told to Obadiah Archer."

Dammit. I should have double-check the book before posting that question. "To" makes a hell of a lot more sense.

Wasn't just you. There actually was an error in one of the solicits, or an interview, or something, that said "as told by Obadiah Archer"...and I was very confused. So I made sure to double check that when I read the issue.

[erwinrafael]

This book would have been perfect if not for this...grammatical error?

"We keepers of the timeless word, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."

The sentence is missing a "Neither" right? Because the primary sentence would read "We keepers of the timeless word...require food or drink." is the opposite of what FVL is trying to say. It lack a negating term.

The negating term is in the prior sentence, connected to the quote, "We do not."

It's a little clunky, but the "nor" follows the "not" in the full (uninterrupted) statement.

The next sentence starts with "Rather", so the whole (short) monologue is strongly connected.

Well, the prior sentence "We do not" is a response to Aram's question of whether they have water. If we write it in full, it would be:

"We do not (have water). We keepers of the timeless word, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."

[BugsySig]

This book would have been perfect if not for this...grammatical error?

"We keepers of the timeless word, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."

The sentence is missing a "Neither" right? Because the primary sentence would read "We keepers of the timeless word...require food or drink." is the opposite of what FVL is trying to say. It lack a negating term.

The negating term is in the prior sentence, connected to the quote, "We do not."

It's a little clunky, but the "nor" follows the "not" in the full (uninterrupted) statement.

The next sentence starts with "Rather", so the whole (short) monologue is strongly connected.

Well, the prior sentence "We do not" is a response to Aram's question of whether they have water. If we write it in full, it would be:

"We do not (have water). We keepers of the timeless word, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."

You are right..."neither" should be inserted between "require" and "food or drink". If you remove what is between the commas the sentence should still make sense...and it doesn't.

[greg]

This book would have been perfect if not for this...grammatical error?

"We keepers of the timeless word, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."

The sentence is missing a "Neither" right? Because the primary sentence would read "We keepers of the timeless word...require food or drink." is the opposite of what FVL is trying to say. It lack a negating term.

The negating term is in the prior sentence, connected to the quote, "We do not."

It's a little clunky, but the "nor" follows the "not" in the full (uninterrupted) statement.

The next sentence starts with "Rather", so the whole (short) monologue is strongly connected.

Well, the prior sentence "We do not" is a response to Aram's question of whether they have water. If we write it in full, it would be:

"We do not (have water). We keepers of the timeless word, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."

You are right..."neither" should be inserted between "require" and "food or drink". If you remove what is between the commas the sentence should still make sense...and it doesn't.

What if the period in "We do not." was a comma?

"We do not, we keepers of the timeless word, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."
Removing the comma'd phrases, you're left with: "We do not require food or drink."
Inserting either phrase back, you'd get
"We do not, we keepers of the timeless word, require food or drink."
and
"We do not, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."

All possible meanings still make sense if the period is a comma.

So, the fix would not be that another word is needed, the error would only be the super-slight difference between . and ,

[BugsySig]

This book would have been perfect if not for this...grammatical error?

"We keepers of the timeless word, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."

The sentence is missing a "Neither" right? Because the primary sentence would read "We keepers of the timeless word...require food or drink." is the opposite of what FVL is trying to say. It lack a negating term.

The negating term is in the prior sentence, connected to the quote, "We do not."

It's a little clunky, but the "nor" follows the "not" in the full (uninterrupted) statement.

The next sentence starts with "Rather", so the whole (short) monologue is strongly connected.

Well, the prior sentence "We do not" is a response to Aram's question of whether they have water. If we write it in full, it would be:

"We do not (have water). We keepers of the timeless word, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."

You are right..."neither" should be inserted between "require" and "food or drink". If you remove what is between the commas the sentence should still make sense...and it doesn't.

What if the period in "We do not." was a comma?

"We do not, we keepers of the timeless word, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."
Removing the comma'd phrases, you're left with: "We do not require food or drink."
Inserting either phrase back, you'd get
"We do not, we keepers of the timeless word, require food or drink."
and
"We do not, nor any of the lost creatures who have been found here, require food or drink."

All possible meanings still make sense if the period is a comma.

So, the fix would not be that another word is needed, the error would only be the super-slight difference between . and ,

Isn't the English language a ?

Yes, if it is a comma, and not a period, then the sentence would be grammatically correct.

[jakgrimm]

It would be grammatically incorrect but for different reasons now. We do not, we who whatever.. lol. Thats not how commas are used.

[lorddunlow]

It would be grammatically incorrect but for different reasons now. We do not, we who whatever.. lol. Thats not how commas are used.

Yes, this would still be grammatically incorrect, as that would then be a comma splice. A semicolon would fix it.

[Bone-A-Fach-ee]

It would be grammatically incorrect but for different reasons now. We do not, we who whatever.. lol. Thats not how commas are used.

Yes, this would still be grammatically incorrect, as that would then be a comma splice. A semicolon would fix it.

It read fine to me.

On another note, the artwork was simply beautiful. Some of the best of any Valiant since the re-boot. Just goregous. I could gush all day about Clayton Henry, but this was a masterpiece.

Loved the story, and the Faraway feels like it could be the Vine's homeworld, or a perfect setting for the upcoming UNITY.
Ummm, do the brothers know how to get back to The Faraway? Or have any reason to go back?
Having no water, and algae, but merely a facade is fascinating. Why have a facade?
Well done by FVL as well! Loved the story. The opening exchange between A&A was priceless! "44", my new hockey jersey number!

[Ras the future fan]

Just loved this book, really looking forward to the next A&A arc.

[Blood of Heroes]

Just loved this book, really looking forward to the next A&A arc.

Welcome to the board.