You're getting better with your line-splosion style. Learning how to keep it in control in order to add emphasis to key elements (often the open areas left) and keeping the drawing/comic SMOOTH and cohesive in spite of the style itself. 7 pages in and already you've improved dramatically!

Thanks. It's one of my goals. Self-improvement is helpful, after all.

...i almost thought you anul vore some one...my apology. Fine work miss assassian

What the hell does "anul vore" mean?

It's when you legally absolve a species of their scientific dietary classification.

Is that even possible? I didn't think the law could change someone from a carnivore to an herbivore, or vice-versa. Are you sure your definition is right?

It doesn't actually change the diet of the creature in question, it just changes our classification. Like changing a cow from 'herbivore' to 'omnivore' if it is discovered they eat baby chickens.

Aha.

...And why did the original commenter think I had that kind of legal power? There isn't even anyone else in this page.

O.O...i think i lost this conversation

I just wanted to know why you thought I had the legal power to change a creature's classification, and why you brought it up in this page.

its not that, its something else, and its better to drop it...i need to talk to the rat for a moment XD

Okay. You go ahead and do that. Whoever this "rat" is. Haven't shown a rat in the comic yet...

oh god i screwed it up

you're pretty :3

Uhm. Thanks I guess.

A bit violent for my tastes, but no worse than Assassin's Creed, and I love those games.

Sometimes violence is necessary, and it is rarely pretty. Most of the time quite the opposite.

I would argue that violence is a last resort after all civilized methods have failed, but I am not in your world, and even if I was, I'd just try to talk you out of it. I'm more of a pacifist, myself. I will only fight to defend those who need my help, and even then I would never intentionally use lethal force. Your victims... Do not qualify for my assistance, if your principles remain as they appear. No, I would not help them without good reason, but I know things much worse than death that their kind can be subjected to...

You sound like my best friend. She refuses to kill anyone, and she frowned when I did it in front of her once (I haven't done it again in front of her since then). I think it's just a temporary solution and that she's being idealistic, but I really do respect her, so I try to keep her in the dark about what I do.

Your best friend sounds like someone I might get along well with. If my travels ever take me into your world as more than just an outside observer, I'd be honored to meet her. And you, too, of course. And is killing them any more permanent of a solution? More of them pop up all the time. I can see no permanent way to keep people from becoming criminals without removing their free will or forcibly altering the base emotions that lead to such acts, and I'm against such interference, even when it is actually possible.

More are going to pop up anyway. Doing this curbs the population of terrible people and sends a strong message that if you do awful things, you won't be safe. As for permanence? It is. Nothing more permanent than removing a person's ability to do anything at all. It may not prevent them from becoming criminals, but it prevents them from doing any more criminal acts.

...I've already had this argument once. I'm not sure why I'm rehashing it now. Let's just agree to disagree.

There are other ways to ensure the same thing, if you know where to look...

Like I said: Done talking about this. It's a bit of a sore spot for me.

Very well.

You talk too much.