The Demigods, yay or nay?
The Demigods, yay or nay?
Something I noticed from the fan base (at least if TV Tropes articles are anything to go buy) is that some readers seem split on how the comic added supernatural elements to the comic. Some liked it just fine, while others thought it was needless.
I found myself only slightly leaning toward the latter crowd, but probably for slightly different reasons than most.
Those reasons are the Demigods and their celestial bureaucracy.
Between the hefty exposition dumps, that whole tabletop game subplot with Pete and Dragon, and the whole cosmic balance mumbo jumbo. Am I the only one who thought their addition only really made the story needlessly complicated and hard to follow.
If not for King's whole character arc and how much that involved the demigods (and even then I think there are simpler ways it could've been approached) I argue that you could've removed their involvement almost entirely and wouldn't really lose much in the story.
I'll admit I might be biased from my experience reading the comic, as even after I cleared the "Heaven Is Not Enough" arc, I couldn't really much proper likeability in any of the demigods. Pete's an garment bag, Dragon seems to be a spoiled woman-child, and Kitsune a troll that likes speaking in riddles and testing the patience of the main cast (and me as I read through his dialogue). If there were any redeeming traits I was to gather from them, they were likely drowned in a sea of arbitrarily heavy exposition and bureaucracy. I found the politics of The Witcher Games easier to follow than this.
Any of the other Demigods I found were either aloof at best or too in-the-background to have any personality. The only one I found slightly likable oddly enough was the whale guy, and I think that's only because he was the only god character I found so far that at least tried to be concise and to the point in his dialogue.
Am I the only one who feels this? Or did any of you find anything of value in how the demigods were portrayed?
I found myself only slightly leaning toward the latter crowd, but probably for slightly different reasons than most.
Those reasons are the Demigods and their celestial bureaucracy.
Between the hefty exposition dumps, that whole tabletop game subplot with Pete and Dragon, and the whole cosmic balance mumbo jumbo. Am I the only one who thought their addition only really made the story needlessly complicated and hard to follow.
If not for King's whole character arc and how much that involved the demigods (and even then I think there are simpler ways it could've been approached) I argue that you could've removed their involvement almost entirely and wouldn't really lose much in the story.
I'll admit I might be biased from my experience reading the comic, as even after I cleared the "Heaven Is Not Enough" arc, I couldn't really much proper likeability in any of the demigods. Pete's an garment bag, Dragon seems to be a spoiled woman-child, and Kitsune a troll that likes speaking in riddles and testing the patience of the main cast (and me as I read through his dialogue). If there were any redeeming traits I was to gather from them, they were likely drowned in a sea of arbitrarily heavy exposition and bureaucracy. I found the politics of The Witcher Games easier to follow than this.
Any of the other Demigods I found were either aloof at best or too in-the-background to have any personality. The only one I found slightly likable oddly enough was the whale guy, and I think that's only because he was the only god character I found so far that at least tried to be concise and to the point in his dialogue.
Am I the only one who feels this? Or did any of you find anything of value in how the demigods were portrayed?
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
I like how most of the ones we’ve seen are just as flawed as the mortal characters. One thing to note, it’s been stated that the likes of Pete, Dragon, and Kitsune are the celestial equivalent of teenagers, so they’ll be having issues while figuring things out, too. As for “the whale guy,” that’s just one of Bahamut’s seen forms.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Well, even with this in mind, I'm sorry to say that simply labeling them as "celestial equivalent of teenagers" doesn't strike me as them being rounded, likable, or three-dimensional characters. As a self-taught writer myself, I'm pretty sure those characters need a little more than that. Ideally presented in concise and straight-forward matter if possible.D-Rock wrote: ↑Fri Nov 27, 2020 2:16 am I like how most of the ones we’ve seen are just as flawed as the mortal characters. One thing to note, it’s been stated that the likes of Pete, Dragon, and Kitsune are the celestial equivalent of teenagers, so they’ll be having issues while figuring things out, too. As for “the whale guy,” that’s just one of Bahamut’s seen forms.
Simply saying they have the personality of "Teenager" just strikes me as running on Katie Ka-Boom writing logic, and there's a good reason those shorts didn't last very long.
-
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2013 5:38 pm
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
The supernatural elements have been in the strip from pretty much the beginning, and it is (and has been) clear it is a major focus of the strip.
The strip started on June 2, 2008.
Pete showed up on November 19, with the arc starting on November 17.
The telepathic dolphins showed up even before that.
The strip was deliberately set up with some mundane stories at the get-go for us to get used to the characters before launching off into the weirder adventures. While I can understand some people might be annoyed by it changing, it was necessary to set up the setting he was going to execute on - we needed to see what "normal" was like so we would appreciate the abnormal better.
TBH, the main writing issue is that Grape and Peanut were the original main characters of the story, but the major themes of the story - the game of the demigods and Keene's struggle for equality - don't really involve them at all. Sometimes they get drawn into various shenanigans, but it wasn't really until Temple Crashers that Grape and Peanut actually *did* something proactively there - Peanut got drawn along with some adventures, but he wasn't actually the protagonist of them and was basically an observer. He didn't really do much.
This has led to the somewhat awkward issue where Grape and especially Peanut have kind of ended up being simultaneously main characters and peripheral to the main story. Grape has had a better time of things because of Res and Maxwell, but Peanut has kind of been a bit peripheral to the plot for a very long time. King ended up becoming the main character for a long time, and then Keene, so it felt a bit odd that Peanut and Grape were so unimportant despite being the original main cast.
The strip started on June 2, 2008.
Pete showed up on November 19, with the arc starting on November 17.
The telepathic dolphins showed up even before that.
The strip was deliberately set up with some mundane stories at the get-go for us to get used to the characters before launching off into the weirder adventures. While I can understand some people might be annoyed by it changing, it was necessary to set up the setting he was going to execute on - we needed to see what "normal" was like so we would appreciate the abnormal better.
TBH, the main writing issue is that Grape and Peanut were the original main characters of the story, but the major themes of the story - the game of the demigods and Keene's struggle for equality - don't really involve them at all. Sometimes they get drawn into various shenanigans, but it wasn't really until Temple Crashers that Grape and Peanut actually *did* something proactively there - Peanut got drawn along with some adventures, but he wasn't actually the protagonist of them and was basically an observer. He didn't really do much.
This has led to the somewhat awkward issue where Grape and especially Peanut have kind of ended up being simultaneously main characters and peripheral to the main story. Grape has had a better time of things because of Res and Maxwell, but Peanut has kind of been a bit peripheral to the plot for a very long time. King ended up becoming the main character for a long time, and then Keene, so it felt a bit odd that Peanut and Grape were so unimportant despite being the original main cast.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Rick is actually quite forward that a big flaw in the over-arching plot was the lack of involvement from most of the cast, so the criticism is certainly valid.
On the other hand, in my experience, the Celestial characters seem to suffer less from flaws in writing and more from readers' personal biases toward morality as it relates to god-like beings. If you cannot reconcile a good person with a being of god-like capability who allows XYZ that happens in the Housepets! universe, then yeah, the Celestials are gonna look like pretty terrible people. If you can only view a god-like being as evil if they don't solve XYZ problem that exists in the Housepets! universe, then you will never get past that. And while that may not fully explain anyone's distaste for the Celestial characters, I find that it often seems to contribute.
As to their actual character separate from their god-like abilities, I don't really know what to tell you other than that, yes, they are flawed characters, but flawed characters can be compelling. Pete's egotistical and hates losing, but his own ego is often his downfall. Some people enjoy that kind of story. Dragon feels entitled and whines to get her way, but she's also clearly trying to find herself. Some people can really symapthize or empathize with her. Kitsune is eternally laid back and likes to think he's the smartest guy in the room (not entirely without warrant when he's with Pete and Dragon
), but he's always working toward a good outcome and trickster characters are just particularly compelling to me personally
People have complained about the storyline being confusing, but to me it's always been pretty straightforward. Pete and Dragon are playing a roleplaying game in the Housepets! universe where they train up an avatar (usually to fight archdemons and the like but this time...) to fight in a duel. The best way for avatars to build in strength is over many successive generations of avatars passing on the torch, but Pete took every advantage in the rulebook he could find to try to even out Dragon's 5000 year head start. The winner of this game was to be leader in their gaming group and the loser was to live out a mortal life as a mortal. And they both lost. Not a lot of details to keep track of from my perspective (though I will admit that memorizing trivia is a specialty of mine)
Others complain that they prefer the slice of life stuff and that the overarching plot was unnecessary. And, okay, but a lot of other people like the overarching Celestial plot, and Rick apparently enjoys writing it. IDK what else to say about that. I like both pretty equally. Maybe I'm just easy to please. Who knows?
On the other hand, in my experience, the Celestial characters seem to suffer less from flaws in writing and more from readers' personal biases toward morality as it relates to god-like beings. If you cannot reconcile a good person with a being of god-like capability who allows XYZ that happens in the Housepets! universe, then yeah, the Celestials are gonna look like pretty terrible people. If you can only view a god-like being as evil if they don't solve XYZ problem that exists in the Housepets! universe, then you will never get past that. And while that may not fully explain anyone's distaste for the Celestial characters, I find that it often seems to contribute.
As to their actual character separate from their god-like abilities, I don't really know what to tell you other than that, yes, they are flawed characters, but flawed characters can be compelling. Pete's egotistical and hates losing, but his own ego is often his downfall. Some people enjoy that kind of story. Dragon feels entitled and whines to get her way, but she's also clearly trying to find herself. Some people can really symapthize or empathize with her. Kitsune is eternally laid back and likes to think he's the smartest guy in the room (not entirely without warrant when he's with Pete and Dragon
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
People have complained about the storyline being confusing, but to me it's always been pretty straightforward. Pete and Dragon are playing a roleplaying game in the Housepets! universe where they train up an avatar (usually to fight archdemons and the like but this time...) to fight in a duel. The best way for avatars to build in strength is over many successive generations of avatars passing on the torch, but Pete took every advantage in the rulebook he could find to try to even out Dragon's 5000 year head start. The winner of this game was to be leader in their gaming group and the loser was to live out a mortal life as a mortal. And they both lost. Not a lot of details to keep track of from my perspective (though I will admit that memorizing trivia is a specialty of mine)
Others complain that they prefer the slice of life stuff and that the overarching plot was unnecessary. And, okay, but a lot of other people like the overarching Celestial plot, and Rick apparently enjoys writing it. IDK what else to say about that. I like both pretty equally. Maybe I'm just easy to please. Who knows?
![Image](http://i.imgur.com/wc2wJb6.jpg)
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
In a way, if you think about it, the way Rick did the celestial parts with the slice of life was genius. He started out with a very large cast of unique and fun characters. None of them were serious, or evil, they were all fun to watch and see. It drew people in who had read it from the start, and hooked people who began reading it at a later date. When the celestial stuff first kicked on, it involved what seemed to be the favorite characters of the majority of the fandom at the time. They also happened to be the 2 main characters (Peanut and Grape). So it hooked people even more! From there, we slowly start to see more of the old cast get involved until Pete breaks free. Then we go to King, meet Pete for real, Dragon, Kitsune, Tarot, Sabrina, Fox for real, etc. He hooked us using the characters he knew everyone liked, and then attempted to make a story with new ones, or ones we knew little about. The result of this is the technical main 2 characters becoming background characters and main ones at the same time.
Not to say this is a bad thing, and for a while up until like the end of 2013, they had starred in a multitude of arcs that weren't celestial ones. Imaginates mainly, but they still existed. Then we even got an arcs for Tiger, Zach, Jess, and Sabrina. But once King ended his overall story with Heaven's Not Enough, they along with King began to fade, and Keene began to take center stage. It's just hard to continue to include 2 specific characters in every arc. And yes, they actually got off the couch and did something in TC2, go them. While they do usually appear in larger arcs, this was the first time in a while they had starred in one. After this, they faded again. In Hot Springs, they were background again. It's just the signs of an aging comic. It's sad, but sometimes necessary.
Back to the topic of the demigods and my personal opinions on them...
Kitsune- Overrated by a lot of people. He's funny, a trickster, and a cool character I suppose. But he doesn't have traits I would deem to make him a top tier or high tier character. Unfortunately many people don't look at who he is trait wise, just other...things about him...
and no I don't agree with them.
Pete- The best one of the group. The whole cosmic game, he was behind, and was able to out maneuver Dragon's attempts to stop him. He doesn't like to lose, and fails to understand mortals just like all the other gods, but seems to be the most in-touch. He knows what they value, what they like to do, etc. It makes sense he's the most upset about losing the game, having been trapped in a temple for 5,000 years, and tried his gosh dang hardest to win, just to be screwed over by Kitsune in the end. Because let's be honest, no way Bailey was gonna lose to Tarot and Sabrina, we've seen what she can do
Dragon- The evil one. Everyone looks at Pete as the villain. But the whole mess with King and rules and Pete stealing Bailey wouldn't have happened if she would've just played fairly. She traps Pete immediately. She manipulated Sabrina and Tarot to date specific pets, just so Pete couldn't get an avatar. And if this game has been going for THAT long, that means Dragon has been forcing people to hook up with other people for over 5,000 years. She also tries to steal Peanut from Tarot, after she forced Tarot to date him, and doesn't understand why a mortal would choose someone they've been with for a year over a random god. She doesn't seem to understand mortals at all.
Cerebus- No comment, she's fun sometimes and kinda exists for plot convenience.
Bahamut- I HATE BAHAMUT. Ok hate is a strong word....but he sucks. He is the most dumb smart person of all time. He's oblivious to the mortal world, oblivious to the cosmic game, and oblivious to pretty much everything else until demons show up. But apparently he doesn't have the power to remove them himself. Or is too lazy to. He hasn't done anything useful in my opinion, and despite being seemingly all powerful, he just doesn't do anything period. He doesn't even realize locking Pete in a dungeon won't do anything because time works differentl for demigods and celestials.
TLDR; Ok I typed out a lot more than I expected to. But those are my thoughts. Pete is best. Bahamut is worst. Dragon sucks. Kitsune is overrated. Cerebus exists. And Peanut and Grape not being at the forefront anymore was genius on Rick's part.
Not to say this is a bad thing, and for a while up until like the end of 2013, they had starred in a multitude of arcs that weren't celestial ones. Imaginates mainly, but they still existed. Then we even got an arcs for Tiger, Zach, Jess, and Sabrina. But once King ended his overall story with Heaven's Not Enough, they along with King began to fade, and Keene began to take center stage. It's just hard to continue to include 2 specific characters in every arc. And yes, they actually got off the couch and did something in TC2, go them. While they do usually appear in larger arcs, this was the first time in a while they had starred in one. After this, they faded again. In Hot Springs, they were background again. It's just the signs of an aging comic. It's sad, but sometimes necessary.
Back to the topic of the demigods and my personal opinions on them...
Kitsune- Overrated by a lot of people. He's funny, a trickster, and a cool character I suppose. But he doesn't have traits I would deem to make him a top tier or high tier character. Unfortunately many people don't look at who he is trait wise, just other...things about him...
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_e_wink.gif)
Pete- The best one of the group. The whole cosmic game, he was behind, and was able to out maneuver Dragon's attempts to stop him. He doesn't like to lose, and fails to understand mortals just like all the other gods, but seems to be the most in-touch. He knows what they value, what they like to do, etc. It makes sense he's the most upset about losing the game, having been trapped in a temple for 5,000 years, and tried his gosh dang hardest to win, just to be screwed over by Kitsune in the end. Because let's be honest, no way Bailey was gonna lose to Tarot and Sabrina, we've seen what she can do
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
Dragon- The evil one. Everyone looks at Pete as the villain. But the whole mess with King and rules and Pete stealing Bailey wouldn't have happened if she would've just played fairly. She traps Pete immediately. She manipulated Sabrina and Tarot to date specific pets, just so Pete couldn't get an avatar. And if this game has been going for THAT long, that means Dragon has been forcing people to hook up with other people for over 5,000 years. She also tries to steal Peanut from Tarot, after she forced Tarot to date him, and doesn't understand why a mortal would choose someone they've been with for a year over a random god. She doesn't seem to understand mortals at all.
Cerebus- No comment, she's fun sometimes and kinda exists for plot convenience.
Bahamut- I HATE BAHAMUT. Ok hate is a strong word....but he sucks. He is the most dumb smart person of all time. He's oblivious to the mortal world, oblivious to the cosmic game, and oblivious to pretty much everything else until demons show up. But apparently he doesn't have the power to remove them himself. Or is too lazy to. He hasn't done anything useful in my opinion, and despite being seemingly all powerful, he just doesn't do anything period. He doesn't even realize locking Pete in a dungeon won't do anything because time works differentl for demigods and celestials.
TLDR; Ok I typed out a lot more than I expected to. But those are my thoughts. Pete is best. Bahamut is worst. Dragon sucks. Kitsune is overrated. Cerebus exists. And Peanut and Grape not being at the forefront anymore was genius on Rick's part.
- SeanWolf
- Keeper of the Sacred Fics
- Posts: 3181
- Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 4:51 pm
- Location: The Realm Of Metal...near Valhalla
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
I don't mind Cerberus as I always thought she was the best and cutest Celestial.
It's Pete and Kitsune I have problems with (The Heaven's Not Enough arcs I've made it clear almost killed my love of Housepets) as, whenever they or, as of lately Kitsune, appeared, I always felt they hijacked the stories they were in and always changed the overall tone of HP (this current arc included). Pete, even in his early days, I never liked as he came off as unlikeable from the start and, even when he broke down at the diner (which I felt was him just acting like a spoiled brat not getting his way, which in turn meant his words were empty sounding) and this goes equal for his mortal form. Personally, I always dread when either him (as Celestial or Mortal) and/or Kitsune appear in an arc as there's that part of me that still fears for the rest of the cast as to what those two will or end up doing.
With Kitsune, I just hate characters who are written to be a smart-alleck and be some sort of fourth-wall breaker of shorts (I'm pretty sure he broke said wall in the spa arc at one point, I don't recall). His talk with Tarot at the end of Temple Crashers 2, while nice, I felt that it was nothing more then his 'I SO SMARTER THEN Y'ALL' side coming out once more. I'll also have to agree with Hagus as he is overrated.
Dragon, however, I'm in a weird area with. Yes, she was as bad as Pete during the early years but, I dunno, she always came off as the more 'sane one of the trio, to me at least, and I always felt she, deep down, actually wanted to do good things for the mortals but Kitsune and Pete kept pushing her to do the things she ended up doing. Again, I'm just indifferent with Dragon and that's all I got with her.
As for Bahumat...Again, I agree with everything Hagus said so I have nothing more to add.
It's Pete and Kitsune I have problems with (The Heaven's Not Enough arcs I've made it clear almost killed my love of Housepets) as, whenever they or, as of lately Kitsune, appeared, I always felt they hijacked the stories they were in and always changed the overall tone of HP (this current arc included). Pete, even in his early days, I never liked as he came off as unlikeable from the start and, even when he broke down at the diner (which I felt was him just acting like a spoiled brat not getting his way, which in turn meant his words were empty sounding) and this goes equal for his mortal form. Personally, I always dread when either him (as Celestial or Mortal) and/or Kitsune appear in an arc as there's that part of me that still fears for the rest of the cast as to what those two will or end up doing.
With Kitsune, I just hate characters who are written to be a smart-alleck and be some sort of fourth-wall breaker of shorts (I'm pretty sure he broke said wall in the spa arc at one point, I don't recall). His talk with Tarot at the end of Temple Crashers 2, while nice, I felt that it was nothing more then his 'I SO SMARTER THEN Y'ALL' side coming out once more. I'll also have to agree with Hagus as he is overrated.
Dragon, however, I'm in a weird area with. Yes, she was as bad as Pete during the early years but, I dunno, she always came off as the more 'sane one of the trio, to me at least, and I always felt she, deep down, actually wanted to do good things for the mortals but Kitsune and Pete kept pushing her to do the things she ended up doing. Again, I'm just indifferent with Dragon and that's all I got with her.
As for Bahumat...Again, I agree with everything Hagus said so I have nothing more to add.
Host Of The Realm Of The Metal Wolf: Where Metal Is King
Creator of the ongoing fic - HousepetZ: Survivor Tails
Game Master of Apollo City
Creator of the ongoing fic - HousepetZ: Survivor Tails
Game Master of Apollo City
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
As they'd say at Quaker meetings, "that speaks my mind" so I'll be uncharacteristically brief and say "Obbl, speaks my mind" on these matters.
Life and comics, especially good ones, evolve. The Housepets gang began as one-dimensional types (The dumb one, the weird one, etc.) and, over time, many of them developed fairly complex personalities (Grape, Fox, Sasha). Others remained limited and faded into the deep background (Rex, Daisy, Marvin) while new characters emerged and have hung around, claiming the spotlight from time to time. That's called narrative depth; you see that in good (and not so good) comics, TV comedies, and dramas. Not all of the "newbees" or the plots around them are durable or may even become grating (like Snoopy's relatives in Peanuts). Certain characters, however, seem to own center stage (like Lucy, Charlie Brown and Snoopy in Peanuts and can claim it as flagship personalities (Peanut, Grape, Maxwell and - not so much - Tarot).
Cosmic issues interest Rick and, apparently, always have. The themes of "the nature of the gods" (good, bad, rational, emotional, kind-hearted, overbearing jerks), "mortal-divinity relationships", and how relations between godlings affect us mortals are as ancient as Gilgamesh - so why not Housepets? If you read Greek or other mythologies (or a lot of superhero stuff), the godlings are basically over-energized people with enormous physical and mental powers we don't have and emotional vulnerabilities we do have. Many of them also enjoy messing with the mortal world and display (like Pete and Dragon) a blithe indifference to the damages their little games create for we who dwell there. "Final-Authority" beings - like Bahamut - reside higher in the hierarchy of power and display more authority, more emotional maturity, but also more aloofness than the friskier (or meaner) types. The patterns are not original with Housepets - just a bit funnier.
I hang around Babylon Gardens because I love the characters (most of `em), love the stories (most of `em), and Rick delights me with his art, his wit, and his insights. At my age and my stage, I read enough heavy stuff. If there's a story I find heavy going - and there's been a couple - I know it'll end and I'll enjoy the next one more. Maybe it'll even have Daisy in it.
Warmest regards and stay safe.
Life and comics, especially good ones, evolve. The Housepets gang began as one-dimensional types (The dumb one, the weird one, etc.) and, over time, many of them developed fairly complex personalities (Grape, Fox, Sasha). Others remained limited and faded into the deep background (Rex, Daisy, Marvin) while new characters emerged and have hung around, claiming the spotlight from time to time. That's called narrative depth; you see that in good (and not so good) comics, TV comedies, and dramas. Not all of the "newbees" or the plots around them are durable or may even become grating (like Snoopy's relatives in Peanuts). Certain characters, however, seem to own center stage (like Lucy, Charlie Brown and Snoopy in Peanuts and can claim it as flagship personalities (Peanut, Grape, Maxwell and - not so much - Tarot).
Cosmic issues interest Rick and, apparently, always have. The themes of "the nature of the gods" (good, bad, rational, emotional, kind-hearted, overbearing jerks), "mortal-divinity relationships", and how relations between godlings affect us mortals are as ancient as Gilgamesh - so why not Housepets? If you read Greek or other mythologies (or a lot of superhero stuff), the godlings are basically over-energized people with enormous physical and mental powers we don't have and emotional vulnerabilities we do have. Many of them also enjoy messing with the mortal world and display (like Pete and Dragon) a blithe indifference to the damages their little games create for we who dwell there. "Final-Authority" beings - like Bahamut - reside higher in the hierarchy of power and display more authority, more emotional maturity, but also more aloofness than the friskier (or meaner) types. The patterns are not original with Housepets - just a bit funnier.
I hang around Babylon Gardens because I love the characters (most of `em), love the stories (most of `em), and Rick delights me with his art, his wit, and his insights. At my age and my stage, I read enough heavy stuff. If there's a story I find heavy going - and there's been a couple - I know it'll end and I'll enjoy the next one more. Maybe it'll even have Daisy in it.
Warmest regards and stay safe.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Sorry to break it to you, but my complaints about the Demigods this time have nothing to do with the the pro-human oppression the Housepets Anthros go through.Obbl wrote: ↑Fri Nov 27, 2020 5:30 am Rick is actually quite forward that a big flaw in the over-arching plot was the lack of involvement from most of the cast, so the criticism is certainly valid.
On the other hand, in my experience, the Celestial characters seem to suffer less from flaws in writing and more from readers' personal biases toward morality as it relates to god-like beings. If you cannot reconcile a good person with a being of god-like capability who allows XYZ that happens in the Housepets! universe, then yeah, the Celestials are gonna look like pretty terrible people. If you can only view a god-like being as evil if they don't solve XYZ problem that exists in the Housepets! universe, then you will never get past that. And while that may not fully explain anyone's distaste for the Celestial characters, I find that it often seems to contribute.
As to their actual character separate from their god-like abilities, I don't really know what to tell you other than that, yes, they are flawed characters, but flawed characters can be compelling. Pete's egotistical and hates losing, but his own ego is often his downfall. Some people enjoy that kind of story. Dragon feels entitled and whines to get her way, but she's also clearly trying to find herself. Some people can really symapthize or empathize with her. Kitsune is eternally laid back and likes to think he's the smartest guy in the room (not entirely without warrant when he's with Pete and Dragon), but he's always working toward a good outcome and trickster characters are just particularly compelling to me personally
People have complained about the storyline being confusing, but to me it's always been pretty straightforward. Pete and Dragon are playing a roleplaying game in the Housepets! universe where they train up an avatar (usually to fight archdemons and the like but this time...) to fight in a duel. The best way for avatars to build in strength is over many successive generations of avatars passing on the torch, but Pete took every advantage in the rulebook he could find to try to even out Dragon's 5000 year head start. The winner of this game was to be leader in their gaming group and the loser was to live out a mortal life as a mortal. And they both lost. Not a lot of details to keep track of from my perspective (though I will admit that memorizing trivia is a specialty of mine)
Others complain that they prefer the slice of life stuff and that the overarching plot was unnecessary. And, okay, but a lot of other people like the overarching Celestial plot, and Rick apparently enjoys writing it. IDK what else to say about that. I like both pretty equally. Maybe I'm just easy to please. Who knows?
My problems are the hefty bureaucracy-exposition dump that made their story difficult for me to follow, especially when I started reading because it's the main cast that interests me. If you were able to get through these walls of text just fine, good for you, but sorry if I'm someone who thinks this should've been made simpler.
And yes the demigods are flawed, that's not my issue. My issue with them is that I couldn't find anything likable about them that balances these flaws. Let's try to put this in perspective;
Beerus from Dragon Ball Super is a jerk, but has his own sense of decency and a laid-back personality.
Piper from the webcomic Tamberlane is a brat, but has a heart of gold underneath and her bratty moments are usually played for laughs and/or stem from her being a child that doesn't know better about certain things.
Eric Cartman from South Park is an evil brat, but there's usually a darkly humorous edge to his behavior.
Those demigods in the Housepets universe, I couldn't find anything other than their jerkish behavior in their personalities. And yet the comic presents moments where I'm supposed to sympathize with them and yet, I can't. Why is that?
This brings me back an admittedly radical question from my first post that's left unanswered;
How do any of you think it would affect the comic if the Demigods (not all the supernatural elements, just the gods) were either removed from the story entirely or were reduced to downplayed roles?
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Then we wouldn’t have King. We wouldn’t have Keene’s effects on the world. We wouldn’t have Marion or Lois. We may not have seen Peanut’s loyalty to Tarot. Zach and Jess may not have come together.
And yeah, I mostly see these things as Obbl sees them.
And yeah, I mostly see these things as Obbl sees them.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Then perhaps a better solution would be to keep the presence of the Demigods as downplayed and mysterious?
With King's involvement, I argue Rick could rewrite it so that Pete is a mischievous entity who polymorphed King because he finds humor in the irony of his predictament, have King's character development be an incidental yet fortunate by-product of his transformation. Have it made clear to King there's no going back to his human life so already has incentive not to tell anyone his human name or situation because there's nothing anyone can do (plus it'd be unlikely anyone would believe him) and worse-case-scenario may harm any friendships he developed after his transformation.
I'm not familiar with Marion or Lois, but if they're polymorphed animals too, same thing could likely apply.
And I'm pretty sure there are other, if slightly more mundane ways Peanut's loyalty to Tarot can be tested as well as bringing Zach and Jess together.
Heck you could have Zach's "Opener of Ways" deal be just a superstition the Ferals have taken on. It would certainly help provide further incentive for Zach to keep rejecting the title as he'd be left with no reason to think humoring the Ferals will accomplish anything.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Consider that Rick possibly wanted to make characters of these characters, rather than just a driving force.
Seems you missed a lot recently, a curse made by Pete was weaponized to give us Marion and Lois, further connecting the gods to the current plot.
Zach being opener of ways IS superstition. He opened a temple belonging to Pete.
Seems you missed a lot recently, a curse made by Pete was weaponized to give us Marion and Lois, further connecting the gods to the current plot.
Zach being opener of ways IS superstition. He opened a temple belonging to Pete.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Well forgive me if I'm failing to see much character in these demigods other than at least 3 different flavors of single-noted selfish jerkishness. Even the Greek Gods had redeeming traits that balanced out their being arrogant jerks, and Daedric Princes in the Elder Scrolls franchise were able to quickly get across who they are and what they're about with just their titles and a few choice sentences.D-Rock wrote: ↑Fri Nov 27, 2020 2:32 pm Consider that Rick possibly wanted to make characters of these characters, rather than just a driving force.
Seems you missed a lot recently, a curse made by Pete was weaponized to give us Marion and Lois, further connecting the gods to the current plot.
Zach being opener of ways IS superstition. He opened a temple belonging to Pete.
Does anyone know if Rick had a beta-reader review the script of his comic before he put it online? Did he have editors? Bottom line is I'm pretty sure there are better ways he could've written these demigods.
Last edited by D-Rock on Fri Nov 27, 2020 10:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Mod edit: be mindful of your language.
Reason: Mod edit: be mindful of your language.
- Amazee Dayzee
- Posts: 26190
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 6:24 pm
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Huh I thought that I would have already posted my opinion in the topic. Best I better out my opinion here now then.
I am all for them but I would like there to be a lot of balance when it comes to using them and then doing slice-of-life stories that the comic is known for. I have to admit I WAS getting fatigued with the "Heaven's Not Enough" arc because of how much focus it was putting on them but OBVIOUSLY Rick had to because what else could he do which would make sense in that arc. Anyway in recent years Rick has found a very good balance and the cameos of Kitsune have been really good. So I don't have a complaint about this. I just hope that this arc doesn't drag as long as the other arc did. I will say it was amusing to see Kitsune worried for once.
To end this post, my favorite Celestial is definitely Kitsune and there definitely was never any doubt with me.
I am all for them but I would like there to be a lot of balance when it comes to using them and then doing slice-of-life stories that the comic is known for. I have to admit I WAS getting fatigued with the "Heaven's Not Enough" arc because of how much focus it was putting on them but OBVIOUSLY Rick had to because what else could he do which would make sense in that arc. Anyway in recent years Rick has found a very good balance and the cameos of Kitsune have been really good. So I don't have a complaint about this. I just hope that this arc doesn't drag as long as the other arc did. I will say it was amusing to see Kitsune worried for once.
To end this post, my favorite Celestial is definitely Kitsune and there definitely was never any doubt with me.
- Harry Johnathan
- Posts: 2067
- Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2020 12:10 pm
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
I thought they were entertaining. Yeah, they were pretty flipping evil, but the funny kind of evil, ala 90's Addams Family. To be quite honest, their actions were pretty mild compared to some of the mortal villains, Kitsune really being the only one not to be an outright pyschopath.
Sarah was afraid, so she lied and said, “I did not laugh.” But [The LORD] said, “Yes, you did laugh.” - Genesis 18:15 (NIV).
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
He has run things past betas in the past. Don't know much about that. Housepets! is an ongoing experiment that Rick puts out 3 times a week and tends to write on an arc by arc basis. He readily admits that there are tons of things he would have done differently if he knew at the start what he knows now. So feel free to criticize, but it's not like they're particularly novel criticism at this point.
But while I won't say you're alone in thinking there's nothing redeeming in the Celestials, you seem to be in the minority from my experience, especially in thinking that none of the 3 are likeable. I like all 3, and most people I've seen like at least 1. And again, people who don't like them at all tend to be those who (I believe often influenced by their having god-like capabilities) see their actions as inherently manipulative or morally wrong.
As far as the wall of text stuff, yeah, Rick has well admitted there were better ways to have done that. But I still have never managed to understand what confused people about the Heavenly stuff. Long-winded, yes; convoluted, not to me.
But what are you actually trying to ask here? Cause we're down in the weeds with all this, but I can't really understand your overall goal/intention in having this discussion
![Neutral :|](./images/smilies/icon_neutral.gif)
![Image](http://i.imgur.com/wc2wJb6.jpg)
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
My overall goal here is trying to understand how other readers seem to succeed where I'm failing in seeing the demigods as likeable and interesting characters.Obbl wrote: ↑Sun Nov 29, 2020 6:32 amHe has run things past betas in the past. Don't know much about that. Housepets! is an ongoing experiment that Rick puts out 3 times a week and tends to write on an arc by arc basis. He readily admits that there are tons of things he would have done differently if he knew at the start what he knows now. So feel free to criticize, but it's not like they're particularly novel criticism at this point.
But while I won't say you're alone in thinking there's nothing redeeming in the Celestials, you seem to be in the minority from my experience, especially in thinking that none of the 3 are likeable. I like all 3, and most people I've seen like at least 1. And again, people who don't like them at all tend to be those who (I believe often influenced by their having god-like capabilities) see their actions as inherently manipulative or morally wrong.
As far as the wall of text stuff, yeah, Rick has well admitted there were better ways to have done that. But I still have never managed to understand what confused people about the Heavenly stuff. Long-winded, yes; convoluted, not to me.
But what are you actually trying to ask here? Cause we're down in the weeds with all this, but I can't really understand your overall goal/intention in having this discussion![]()
Maybe I have different standards when it comes to character writing, or maybe you're right that the more dystopian elements I found in the comic kept me from sympathizing with anyone other than the animal characters (who I know technically are the main focus of the comic anyway).
But really, it's NOT the moral alignment (or the arguable lack there of) of the demigods that's my big problem. It's that you and quite a few readers are able to see them as interesting and likeable, and yet I couldn't find anything to give me the same impression.
I repeat, I. couldn't. find. anything.
Say what you will about the characters of the Berserk manga series, in that series you at least always understood who they were, what they're about, and more often than not it's always clear how sympathetic or unsympathetic you're supposed to view them. And that's a world that's obviously more grimdark than the darkest stuff you'd see in the Housepets universe.
As of this post, I got as far as to have just started on Peanut's Dork Tower arc, and I couldn't even find anything to laugh at about the antics of the demigods. The only legit reason to care about the whole celestial business I was able to find was how the main animal characters keep getting dragged into their affairs and how it affects them.
Another way to look at this is that my problem with the demigods as characters is the opposite problem to one I dealt with in reading a webcomic called Rayfox, where I am able to get how the author, named Scott, wanted me to interpret most of the characters, but wrote many of them in ways that failed to convince me (and even, I think, a good amount of his fans) that the characters are properly following how he wants me to look at them.
Unlike with certain characters in Rayfox, The Demigods are characters that I couldn't find any traits I'm able to find interesting and likeable about them after what they put the main characters through, let alone feel sorry for them when the comic tells me I'm supposed to.
And yet, you (and apparently alot of people who read this comic) don't have this problem. The bottom line is that I'm trying to figure out how and why you're able to succeed where I'm failing.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
You've literally got like 4 or 5 people here telling you what they do and don't like about the Celestials.
So it seem to me that what's left in this conversation is for you to delve into what specifically you dislike about the characters... or not as you please. It's just no longer seeming like it'll be particularly fruitful to ask for more reasons why people like these characters until you address the replies you've got
Hagus really likes Pete, thinks Kitsune is relatively cool but not an amazing character, and hates Dragon, partly because he has misread some things (Dragon did not cheat, she just made good use of the game rules to trap Pete, and as far as we know she only ever had Sabrina and Tarot hook up with people cause Pete was stuck in the middle of the desert for 5000 years which was his whole problem) and partly because the manipulation is more or less unforgivable to him.Hagus wrote: ↑Fri Nov 27, 2020 8:51 am Kitsune- Overrated by a lot of people. He's funny, a trickster, and a cool character I suppose. But he doesn't have traits I would deem to make him a top tier or high tier character. Unfortunately many people don't look at who he is trait wise, just other...things about him...and no I don't agree with them.
Pete- The best one of the group. The whole cosmic game, he was behind, and was able to out maneuver Dragon's attempts to stop him. He doesn't like to lose, and fails to understand mortals just like all the other gods, but seems to be the most in-touch. He knows what they value, what they like to do, etc. It makes sense he's the most upset about losing the game, having been trapped in a temple for 5,000 years, and tried his gosh dang hardest to win, just to be screwed over by Kitsune in the end. Because let's be honest, no way Bailey was gonna lose to Tarot and Sabrina, we've seen what she can do![]()
Dragon- The evil one. Everyone looks at Pete as the villain. But the whole mess with King and rules and Pete stealing Bailey wouldn't have happened if she would've just played fairly. She traps Pete immediately. She manipulated Sabrina and Tarot to date specific pets, just so Pete couldn't get an avatar. And if this game has been going for THAT long, that means Dragon has been forcing people to hook up with other people for over 5,000 years. She also tries to steal Peanut from Tarot, after she forced Tarot to date him, and doesn't understand why a mortal would choose someone they've been with for a year over a random god. She doesn't seem to understand mortals at all.
Sean on the other hand pretty strongly dislikes Pete and Kitsune, and he is understanding with Dragon as a character, recognizing her flaws and the better nature that Rick tried to show.SeanWolf wrote: ↑Fri Nov 27, 2020 9:55 am It's Pete and Kitsune I have problems with (The Heaven's Not Enough arcs I've made it clear almost killed my love of Housepets) as, whenever they or, as of lately Kitsune, appeared, I always felt they hijacked the stories they were in and always changed the overall tone of HP (this current arc included). Pete, even in his early days, I never liked as he came off as unlikeable from the start and, even when he broke down at the diner (which I felt was him just acting like a spoiled brat not getting his way, which in turn meant his words were empty sounding) and this goes equal for his mortal form. Personally, I always dread when either him (as Celestial or Mortal) and/or Kitsune appear in an arc as there's that part of me that still fears for the rest of the cast as to what those two will or end up doing.
With Kitsune, I just hate characters who are written to be a smart-alleck and be some sort of fourth-wall breaker of shorts (I'm pretty sure he broke said wall in the spa arc at one point, I don't recall). His talk with Tarot at the end of Temple Crashers 2, while nice, I felt that it was nothing more then his 'I SO SMARTER THEN Y'ALL' side coming out once more. I'll also have to agree with Hagus as he is overrated.
Dragon, however, I'm in a weird area with. Yes, she was as bad as Pete during the early years but, I dunno, she always came off as the more 'sane one of the trio, to me at least, and I always felt she, deep down, actually wanted to do good things for the mortals but Kitsune and Pete kept pushing her to do the things she ended up doing. Again, I'm just indifferent with Dragon and that's all I got with her.
And I like characters who are sincere even if they are flawed. I'm relatively easy to please because I don't need a lot of characterization to know what you're going for with a character, and I tend to fill in the gaps pretty well. Rick in particular is extremely easy to read because almost all of his characters are meant to be read as very normal people: people who want to do what's best and don't always know what is best. To that end flaws are easier to forgive because I know they are trying, and Rick does like to acknowledge that the characters do better themselves. Their goals are not always aligned, and it's really great to see that characters don't agree and yet each person's decisions are understandable based on what they have to go off of.Obbl wrote: ↑Fri Nov 27, 2020 5:30 am As to their actual character separate from their god-like abilities, I don't really know what to tell you other than that, yes, they are flawed characters, but flawed characters can be compelling. Pete's egotistical and hates losing, but his own ego is often his downfall. Some people enjoy that kind of story. Dragon feels entitled and whines to get her way, but she's also clearly trying to find herself. Some people can really symapthize or empathize with her. Kitsune is eternally laid back and likes to think he's the smartest guy in the room (not entirely without warrant when he's with Pete and Dragon), but he's always working toward a good outcome and trickster characters are just particularly compelling to me personally
So it seem to me that what's left in this conversation is for you to delve into what specifically you dislike about the characters... or not as you please. It's just no longer seeming like it'll be particularly fruitful to ask for more reasons why people like these characters until you address the replies you've got
![Image](http://i.imgur.com/wc2wJb6.jpg)
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
I never said she outright cheated. She made use of a rule that made Pete resort to desperate tactics to succeed. It’s more of the fact that she did kind of the same thing as if you were playing a board game, and due to an obscure rule that nobody knew about except you, you managed stopped your opponents from taking their turn for the first 10 rounds. Everyone who was affected would be pretty upset about it. Yes it’s legal, but you aren’t really playing “fair” in the sense that you aren’t letting people actually participate. She was the catalyst that pushed Pete to basically break rules and be hyper aggressive in order to catch back up to Dragon and her 5000 years of avatars.Obbl wrote: ↑Wed Dec 02, 2020 9:29 am Hagus really likes Pete, thinks Kitsune is relatively cool but not an amazing character, and hates Dragon, partly because he has misread some things (Dragon did not cheat, she just made good use of the game rules to trap Pete, and as far as we know she only ever had Sabrina and Tarot hook up with people cause Pete was stuck in the middle of the desert for 5000 years which was his whole problem) and partly because the manipulation is more or less unforgivable to him.
As for her manipulation, think about this; the reason she manipulated Sabrina and Tarot to hook up with specific pets was so that Pete didn’t use them as avatars (since Pete’s avatar couldn’t be in love when he recruited them). The only way Pete was able to recruit people was through dreams. He contacted Grape and Peanut for sure (the grove), as well as Mr. Milton, who moved his temple to Babylon to get someone to free him. We don’t know if he tried with Fido, although we do see him on the game board that the demigods are playing on. There’s no doubt he was contacting other pets via dreams for the thousands of years he was trapped, and Dragon moving people to stop him by making them fall in love. We know that pets existed where Pete’s temple was, since his was in the desert and Housepets 5000 BC took place in the desert. So it wouldn’t be out of the question for Pete to try and snag a pet from one of the local cat or dog villages.
The main thing is Pete had a reason to be aggressive. He was behind by 5000 years. He had basically nothing to start with. He was one misstep away from losing his god-like powers. Dragon has no reason to trap Pete except for “haha it’s fun to see him mad, let’s make sure he’s stuck there forever”. It was a “big brain” play by her, but it was very unnecessary, and made the game boring for everyone involved since she had no opposition.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Pete literally says in the next strip that he "screwed [him]self there". The text goes out of its way to remind everyone that Pete's "that is so cheap" is just the response of someone who has been dealt a bad blow rather than a low blow. This is a duel with stakes after all. And besides, Dragon isn't the one responsible for Pete's decisions anyway. Pete was desperate because he was behind, but I feel you're putting too much blame on Dragon for Pete's actions.
As for the manipulation, I've taken to just not really discussing this one. If you see it as manipulation, there's nothing I can do to change your view on that.
But I definitely don't think she was having people fall in love the whole time. The point of Pete's dilemma was that he was in an area where there was no one for him to influence via dreams. So he had to rely on people coming to the mysertious temple in the desert in order to actually be able to influence anyone, and Henry Milton happened to do that. Certainly for there to have been any rumors at all of this temple some people had to have gone past it from time to time. But in order for Dragon to need to get involved in stopping said people with a love interest they would have had to have been the right species to be an avatar (dogs and cats only), and actually acted upon Pete's influence, and the falling in love thing only negates the powers of the Dream Sunderer class that Pete was looking for. So, I doubt this ever really happened before. Not that I would personally have a problem with it regardless.
As for the manipulation, I've taken to just not really discussing this one. If you see it as manipulation, there's nothing I can do to change your view on that.
But I definitely don't think she was having people fall in love the whole time. The point of Pete's dilemma was that he was in an area where there was no one for him to influence via dreams. So he had to rely on people coming to the mysertious temple in the desert in order to actually be able to influence anyone, and Henry Milton happened to do that. Certainly for there to have been any rumors at all of this temple some people had to have gone past it from time to time. But in order for Dragon to need to get involved in stopping said people with a love interest they would have had to have been the right species to be an avatar (dogs and cats only), and actually acted upon Pete's influence, and the falling in love thing only negates the powers of the Dream Sunderer class that Pete was looking for. So, I doubt this ever really happened before. Not that I would personally have a problem with it regardless.
![Image](http://i.imgur.com/wc2wJb6.jpg)
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
I will say this: don't agree with everything on bahamut, as he probably is dealing with multiple things at once, and may be more or less like cerb in being out of the "loop", kind of like him understanding a language, but someone talking about a piece of media he doesn't know well, or someone speaking a cant confront of him. I feel bahamut is supposed to be "serious, oblivious, means well but may make things worse or humiliate their kid, parent figure" often seen in many media slice of life things.
The only thing I dislike is that he has that dragon form (I like it when he is awhale only), and a few nitpicks thus far.
My criticism of the celestials is their "names". With bahamut and Cerberus being the only exception as they're the only one of their species (celestial or otherwise) so far, and the creatures they are based on have those names as personal names, but I can't excuse our seemingly Japanese trio for being nothing more than a animal species + modifier (another noun, verb, or adjective) as their name. That's like me saying I was a demi god, and my name was "Vengeance Human" or saying "you can just call me "human".
That's one of my BIGGEST gripes with the celestials, the NAMES. Atleast pete has a actual name, even if it's for a gag. And of the trio, atleast he his diverse. It would be better, imo, of spirit was a eastern "dragon" with colorful feathered wings, because then you could atleast say she is also central & north American dragon + asian. It just makes pete seem like he is bad to me for also not being a Japanese kami like the others. I hope that sense dragon's name is draig, ie the welsh word for dragon, if pete and dragon will come back as their Celtic version of these creatures: Celtic dragon & griffon, but more so spirit. Like to see spirit back as a more buff, sort of female form of bahamut's dragon form with a more effeminate shape, and rainbow colored wings like some wesh "dragons"/"serpents" had, glossy gem-like (not literally gems) scales, mane/frill and all. Keep her chest symbol, green colors, and horns and bead shape and all, but the rest the new worked out body that's on all fours like pete, so maybe she can bond more like him, and I dunno, make their relationship as siblings a little more believable IMO, because while pete and the great fox may both be the only ones to sit like that, it would be nice for me to see her sit like that. I can imagine all demi gods except her doing that, and I would like her to make that pose. Even if it is a one time thing were she takes the form of a Celtic or winged dragon and can sit on her rear like pete does in non anthro form, that would be good enough. We barely got any real solo one one development with her, except for max, which it's alright, but it was after a relationship thing. Would like to see how she solo talks to people who she tries to get to be a avatar without using others, or going through others, if that makes sense? Kind of the relationship thing pete had with king, or how the great fox does now while pretending to be a normal fox at times, or HIS development with king when the game was still going on.
I dunno, just me?
But I kind of miss grape and peanut being the MAs. Sure, we can move on from grape, but it never felt like peanut had proper closure, you know?
But that's my opinion on it.
Don't really like any of the main 3 trio. And certain aspects of Cerb I do and don't like. Don't like that she started as a gag, and sort of had no real character except for that one seen where she helps a drowned pup and explains why she wanted a job change. Other than that she is sort of like the straight man, who as one of you puts it, "exists". Yeah, bahamut has flaws, but I think partially for a good reason he is oblivious. From what I can tell, if he really fully understood how the game worked, and realised alot of his mistakes, the game would have happend.... At ALL in any sense of the word? Or ANY supernatural (even 4th wall (imo) gags if he was omniscient? In my honest opinion, I think not, and we would never have king, bailey would probably never been developed outside of a one time x-mas gag deal, and if you DO consider this a high note, we would probably be forever stuck with peanut and grape at rest. Then again maybe they would get more character growth up until a certain point.
Stuff like this happens alot in old media trying to stay relevant or trying to keep alive, or the artist becoming dis-interested in their work. Not saying it is the same thing, but look at all the characters they added to the show "fairy oddparents", just to stay relevant: poof, sparky, and the worst of them all (imo) - chloe.
They do stuff like this to spice it up and bring either new life, new readers, or a new take on something old (minus remakes/reboots, in most cases I don't like those)
Also saw chimera, wonder if she is a demi god we will every at all, get to see her. And since she is greek like pete & cerberus, (well, now that I think about it, pete is more Egyptian & middle eastern than greek) and DID return, would she be cerb's sister if you know your greek mythology
.
I dunno, if done right it would be great to see more demi gods, if done right. Would to see some native south African, Panama, and basque related demi gods...
The only thing I dislike is that he has that dragon form (I like it when he is awhale only), and a few nitpicks thus far.
My criticism of the celestials is their "names". With bahamut and Cerberus being the only exception as they're the only one of their species (celestial or otherwise) so far, and the creatures they are based on have those names as personal names, but I can't excuse our seemingly Japanese trio for being nothing more than a animal species + modifier (another noun, verb, or adjective) as their name. That's like me saying I was a demi god, and my name was "Vengeance Human" or saying "you can just call me "human".
That's one of my BIGGEST gripes with the celestials, the NAMES. Atleast pete has a actual name, even if it's for a gag. And of the trio, atleast he his diverse. It would be better, imo, of spirit was a eastern "dragon" with colorful feathered wings, because then you could atleast say she is also central & north American dragon + asian. It just makes pete seem like he is bad to me for also not being a Japanese kami like the others. I hope that sense dragon's name is draig, ie the welsh word for dragon, if pete and dragon will come back as their Celtic version of these creatures: Celtic dragon & griffon, but more so spirit. Like to see spirit back as a more buff, sort of female form of bahamut's dragon form with a more effeminate shape, and rainbow colored wings like some wesh "dragons"/"serpents" had, glossy gem-like (not literally gems) scales, mane/frill and all. Keep her chest symbol, green colors, and horns and bead shape and all, but the rest the new worked out body that's on all fours like pete, so maybe she can bond more like him, and I dunno, make their relationship as siblings a little more believable IMO, because while pete and the great fox may both be the only ones to sit like that, it would be nice for me to see her sit like that. I can imagine all demi gods except her doing that, and I would like her to make that pose. Even if it is a one time thing were she takes the form of a Celtic or winged dragon and can sit on her rear like pete does in non anthro form, that would be good enough. We barely got any real solo one one development with her, except for max, which it's alright, but it was after a relationship thing. Would like to see how she solo talks to people who she tries to get to be a avatar without using others, or going through others, if that makes sense? Kind of the relationship thing pete had with king, or how the great fox does now while pretending to be a normal fox at times, or HIS development with king when the game was still going on.
I dunno, just me?
But I kind of miss grape and peanut being the MAs. Sure, we can move on from grape, but it never felt like peanut had proper closure, you know?
But that's my opinion on it.
Don't really like any of the main 3 trio. And certain aspects of Cerb I do and don't like. Don't like that she started as a gag, and sort of had no real character except for that one seen where she helps a drowned pup and explains why she wanted a job change. Other than that she is sort of like the straight man, who as one of you puts it, "exists". Yeah, bahamut has flaws, but I think partially for a good reason he is oblivious. From what I can tell, if he really fully understood how the game worked, and realised alot of his mistakes, the game would have happend.... At ALL in any sense of the word? Or ANY supernatural (even 4th wall (imo) gags if he was omniscient? In my honest opinion, I think not, and we would never have king, bailey would probably never been developed outside of a one time x-mas gag deal, and if you DO consider this a high note, we would probably be forever stuck with peanut and grape at rest. Then again maybe they would get more character growth up until a certain point.
Stuff like this happens alot in old media trying to stay relevant or trying to keep alive, or the artist becoming dis-interested in their work. Not saying it is the same thing, but look at all the characters they added to the show "fairy oddparents", just to stay relevant: poof, sparky, and the worst of them all (imo) - chloe.
They do stuff like this to spice it up and bring either new life, new readers, or a new take on something old (minus remakes/reboots, in most cases I don't like those)
Also saw chimera, wonder if she is a demi god we will every at all, get to see her. And since she is greek like pete & cerberus, (well, now that I think about it, pete is more Egyptian & middle eastern than greek) and DID return, would she be cerb's sister if you know your greek mythology
![Cool 8-)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)
I dunno, if done right it would be great to see more demi gods, if done right. Would to see some native south African, Panama, and basque related demi gods...
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Oh, man
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
I'm definitely with you on missing Peanut and Grape as the mains. Rick's been saying that he wants to involve the whole cast (or presumably as much as is feasible) in this overarching plot line, so hopefully we'll get more of them
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
![Image](http://i.imgur.com/wc2wJb6.jpg)
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Been awhile since we've had a mass curtain call - Rick does kinda like to do an "all cast on stage" around Christmas time, though.Obbl wrote: ↑Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:38 amOh, manMight just be me, but I would love that
![]()
I'm definitely with you on missing Peanut and Grape as the mains. Rick's been saying that he wants to involve the whole cast (or presumably as much as is feasible) in this overarching plot line, so hopefully we'll get more of them![]()
- Amazee Dayzee
- Posts: 26190
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 6:24 pm
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Maybe we will be able to see more of Peanut and Grape in this arc!
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Definitely yay, the supernatural aspects of the comic are my favourite part.
What I think is a total waste of time is stuff like the Jurassic Park re-enactment.
What I think is a total waste of time is stuff like the Jurassic Park re-enactment.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Aww, Imaginate scenarios are the very genesis of Housepets.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
The Imaginates in my opinion are the very reason I started reading Housepets. I thought the first one was adorable and I was hooked immediately by it. Granted, the Jurassic Park one wasn’t great, but like Pageanate was fantastic and a bigger more ambitious crossover than Avengers Endgame!
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
I feel like Pete serves as great antagonists, and that the cosmic nerd's presence allowed for many creative and enjoyable arcs (The Temple Crasher arcs in particular, My Life as Squirrel was a bit long but I still liked and it set up future arcs, and Housepet 5000BC is ok) and while I certainly have a lot of thoughts (generally positive, the temple hats are really cool and I might find time to talk about them later) towards the supernatural elements of the strip and could go on many tangents, let me focus on King because I think I have the most coherent thoughts about him:
I love King's character arc, and Pete was his primary antagonist and it would simply not have happened without Pete's divine intervention. Pete was a jerk with a point who was cruel to King, but he wasn't so innocent himself and it did incidentally made him a better person. He also lost the game by taking one last potshot at King by turning him human, leading to all of the rest of Heaven's Not Enough. Had he just left well enough alone, then it is very possible that they don't make it to Australia because they don't have shapeshifting to show Keene and even if they did, then Bailey still has a reason to fight for King's sake.
Beyond this, Pete serves as a good character foil. King and Pete were both jerks who liked to play the victim, but King outgrew that and ultimately won over him when he became a better person, grew a backbone, flew half-way across the world and stared down a demigod for the sake of his wife and friends. Keene and Pete were both people who had incredulously luxurious lives and willingly to play dirty to achieve their goals, and by taking one step to far ended up losing their luxuries and suffering for it, but where Keene repented and started to grow as a character, Pete doubled down and ended up figuratively and literally regressing.
I like analysis works, and I might go overboard at times, but the more I look into Pete, the more it just works and I find more to enjoy. One scene that sticks out in my memory is from temple crashers 2, when Peanut logic-bombs the knights and knave puzzle. Firstly, I think the puzzle itself is very telling of Pete. He doesn't care about fun, he cares about winning and he will bend and twist the rules until just before they break and occasionally a bit more after. Peanut isn't completely unconcerned with winning, but decided to wait to choose his role to support everyone else and probably wisely decided against trying to wish for more wishes.
And short thoughts on the other two: They both were good in the overall cosmic game arc, I think Dragon also was a decent antagonist just not as well developed as Pete in that role, and Kitsune is still active and is in the right of the middle of doing a thing, a demon invasion thing, so I am waiting to see where that goes.
I love King's character arc, and Pete was his primary antagonist and it would simply not have happened without Pete's divine intervention. Pete was a jerk with a point who was cruel to King, but he wasn't so innocent himself and it did incidentally made him a better person. He also lost the game by taking one last potshot at King by turning him human, leading to all of the rest of Heaven's Not Enough. Had he just left well enough alone, then it is very possible that they don't make it to Australia because they don't have shapeshifting to show Keene and even if they did, then Bailey still has a reason to fight for King's sake.
Beyond this, Pete serves as a good character foil. King and Pete were both jerks who liked to play the victim, but King outgrew that and ultimately won over him when he became a better person, grew a backbone, flew half-way across the world and stared down a demigod for the sake of his wife and friends. Keene and Pete were both people who had incredulously luxurious lives and willingly to play dirty to achieve their goals, and by taking one step to far ended up losing their luxuries and suffering for it, but where Keene repented and started to grow as a character, Pete doubled down and ended up figuratively and literally regressing.
I like analysis works, and I might go overboard at times, but the more I look into Pete, the more it just works and I find more to enjoy. One scene that sticks out in my memory is from temple crashers 2, when Peanut logic-bombs the knights and knave puzzle. Firstly, I think the puzzle itself is very telling of Pete. He doesn't care about fun, he cares about winning and he will bend and twist the rules until just before they break and occasionally a bit more after. Peanut isn't completely unconcerned with winning, but decided to wait to choose his role to support everyone else and probably wisely decided against trying to wish for more wishes.
And short thoughts on the other two: They both were good in the overall cosmic game arc, I think Dragon also was a decent antagonist just not as well developed as Pete in that role, and Kitsune is still active and is in the right of the middle of doing a thing, a demon invasion thing, so I am waiting to see where that goes.
- Amazee Dayzee
- Posts: 26190
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 6:24 pm
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Depending on how Kitsune is able to handle this and fix everything in the long run, he might actually have his ranking pull ahead among the other two because let's face it. Pete/Craig is going to continue to be a jerk and Dragon/Draig right now is a non-entity.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
I read Pageanate every Christmas, it's more fun than Christmas Carol, sets fire to a whole bunch of cliches, and would make a great musical someday. Jurassic Park was fun and I particularly enjoyed seeing the puppies step to center stage (along with Pueblo!). I liked having Draig and Craig in the mix because they're also interesting personalities. Interactions between the ferals and the pets are often just a little tense and intriguing, too, so adding them to the cast suggested future directions for that aspect. The Imaginates do ask you to have some acquaintance with the films and characters being satirized - I love the take-off on Agatha Christie's Ten Little Indians because I saw the movie several times on 1950s black-and-white televison and read the book because of it. But if you didn't know the movie, you might have missed some things or had trouble with the plotting.Hagus wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 8:03 pm The Imaginates in my opinion are the very reason I started reading Housepets. I thought the first one was adorable and I was hooked immediately by it. Granted, the Jurassic Park one wasn’t great, but like Pageanate was fantastic and a bigger more ambitious crossover than Avengers Endgame!
Agreed, Hagus, Rick Imaginate's just delight me.
- Sleet
- Bringing Foxy Back
- Posts: 17291
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 1:32 am
- Location: Nephelokokkygia
- Contact:
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
It's ultimately subjective. The supernatural things created a genre shift. Some people loved that and other people felt it was a departure from what they loved about Housepets! Housepets! is different things for different people, and with all the different characters, genres, and styles involved, most fans aren't going to like everything about it. It's just a matter of reading for what you like and tolerating what you don't in the mean time, recognizing that the things you slog through might be the things that make other readers happy!
Personally I dislike the change, but not to the extent that I would stop reading! My favorite strips and arcs are the more down-to-earth, humor-focused ones.
Personally I dislike the change, but not to the extent that I would stop reading! My favorite strips and arcs are the more down-to-earth, humor-focused ones.
![Image](http://pile.randimg.net/0/16/4035/Signature.png)
Questions? Comments? Concerns? Friendly banter? Feel free to click the "PM" button below!
- Amazee Dayzee
- Posts: 26190
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 6:24 pm
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
I didn't even know the change was happening at that there would be a lot of supernatural elements that went in and when I figured it out I just figured I would give it a chance and continue reading. I really had no opinion though I really did want to see King get his revenge of Pete.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Well, looks like we got a fat load of new information about the celestials in the newest page, 3 ranks of the Christian divine hierarchy were mentioned: Seraphim, Virtues, and Principalities, in descending order of rank.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_angelology
They represent the first, second, and third spheres of the angelic choirs respectively.
Seraphim directly serve god.
Virtues shape the physical world.
Principalities govern over humanity (or in this case, sapient beings).
It's also implied that all the known celestials are outranked by all of them, unless Bahamut is a Principality (he certainly fits the role).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_angelology
They represent the first, second, and third spheres of the angelic choirs respectively.
Seraphim directly serve god.
Virtues shape the physical world.
Principalities govern over humanity (or in this case, sapient beings).
It's also implied that all the known celestials are outranked by all of them, unless Bahamut is a Principality (he certainly fits the role).
- Amazee Dayzee
- Posts: 26190
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 6:24 pm
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
I have the opinion that Bahamut might have been God himself in the HP! universe and that he just uses a different name than what Christians call him but I am probably wrong about that.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
Might be impossible to determine all the manifestations the Heavenly hosts have gone through to operate in the cosmic speck that is Babylon Gardens.
- Amazee Dayzee
- Posts: 26190
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 6:24 pm
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
It probably is and to do so would be in vain because you aren't going to get everybody no matter how hard you try.
- Ash Greytree
- Posts: 455
- Joined: Tue May 21, 2019 4:05 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
I'm okay with the Divine/Demonic characters having had their hands in certain elements and main arcs of the series. With Heckraiser, I was hoping for an arc or series of arcs revolving around Marion, Lois, Keene, the ECP, and Steward & Trinket, and Todd the Red Panda, with Dino Demon serving as making things only slightly more chaotic. Instead, the factors and characters at play here are a portal to Heck, Eudoant, Bahamut, Kitsune, and possibly Craig & Draig getting their memories back as Pete and Dragon. And all the Babylon Gardens folks are displaced up in Heaven.
And before this, after the Be Mine arc and the Spot comic last year, I was hoping for something like an arc with Marion & Lois moving into the ECP Boarding House and acclimating. Some fun scenes and stuff of them making friends with other animals and humans-turned-animals. Seeing Sasha join the ECP after getting emancipated and her taking lessons about how prey animals like Marion aren’t food. Stuff like that.
My thing was that I was thinking that the fallout from the end of the Temple Crashers 2 arc was going to be smaller-scale magic(k) stuff with Kitsune giving nudges here and there when he can/needs to. And that’d be it alongside the regular slice-of-life fare. But now (if Bahamut talking about “rescinding the timeline” is as serious as it sounds), it’s suddenly high-stakes with what seems like the entire universe that HousePets takes place in being at risk.
Obbl said that Rick plans to have as much of the cast as possible involved in this current overarching plot line. If this is true, my concern is that there are some characters who in my opinion would be better suited to getting character development that takes place outside of the current situation where they're displaced in Heaven. Fox definitely needed the kind of Heavenly intervention that he received in Heavendropper, because Spring and Summer had been a thing in his character development for a good while. But others? I'm not so sure.
I'm getting ideas in my head about how other characters are going to wind up having a bit too much Paradise and then they get brought out of it to the waiting room like Fox and learn a life lesson from somebody. I know Rick will be more creative than that, and there's tons of different ways for things to go. But that's just part of my worry for some characters who'd be better suited to arcs & development outside of a scenario where they're stuck in literal paradise. My worry that they're gonna wind up getting critical things they'd be better off learning themselves, essentially given to them by divine intervention in arcs that are less impactful than they could've been.
Rick's Patreon says that he's looking to expand to a proper creative team for the wide range of projects he has. I'd asked if that would apply to HousePets, and he said he'd be happy to distribute some of the work they do into HousePets if he can. One thing that I'd love to see borne from that, if at all possible, is a side-comic series featuring Marion & Lois and what they were up to in the six-month gap mentioned on this page, and what they were up to between that Christmas timeskip on there and this page. I think there'd definitely be a readership for more slice-of-life-y side stories, especially as more major arcs involving the Celestials occur in the main comic.
And before this, after the Be Mine arc and the Spot comic last year, I was hoping for something like an arc with Marion & Lois moving into the ECP Boarding House and acclimating. Some fun scenes and stuff of them making friends with other animals and humans-turned-animals. Seeing Sasha join the ECP after getting emancipated and her taking lessons about how prey animals like Marion aren’t food. Stuff like that.
My thing was that I was thinking that the fallout from the end of the Temple Crashers 2 arc was going to be smaller-scale magic(k) stuff with Kitsune giving nudges here and there when he can/needs to. And that’d be it alongside the regular slice-of-life fare. But now (if Bahamut talking about “rescinding the timeline” is as serious as it sounds), it’s suddenly high-stakes with what seems like the entire universe that HousePets takes place in being at risk.
Obbl said that Rick plans to have as much of the cast as possible involved in this current overarching plot line. If this is true, my concern is that there are some characters who in my opinion would be better suited to getting character development that takes place outside of the current situation where they're displaced in Heaven. Fox definitely needed the kind of Heavenly intervention that he received in Heavendropper, because Spring and Summer had been a thing in his character development for a good while. But others? I'm not so sure.
I'm getting ideas in my head about how other characters are going to wind up having a bit too much Paradise and then they get brought out of it to the waiting room like Fox and learn a life lesson from somebody. I know Rick will be more creative than that, and there's tons of different ways for things to go. But that's just part of my worry for some characters who'd be better suited to arcs & development outside of a scenario where they're stuck in literal paradise. My worry that they're gonna wind up getting critical things they'd be better off learning themselves, essentially given to them by divine intervention in arcs that are less impactful than they could've been.
Rick's Patreon says that he's looking to expand to a proper creative team for the wide range of projects he has. I'd asked if that would apply to HousePets, and he said he'd be happy to distribute some of the work they do into HousePets if he can. One thing that I'd love to see borne from that, if at all possible, is a side-comic series featuring Marion & Lois and what they were up to in the six-month gap mentioned on this page, and what they were up to between that Christmas timeskip on there and this page. I think there'd definitely be a readership for more slice-of-life-y side stories, especially as more major arcs involving the Celestials occur in the main comic.
With the right community, getting into a webcomic at the beginning of a brand new arc can feel just as enjoyable and rewarding as being there from the beginning.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
I recently cleared the arc where Keene Milton temporarily went to Heaven. And other than the plothole near the end where I don't think it was properly explained how and why Keene was able to return to the land of the living, I liked that arc's portrayal of demigods here much better than the previous arcs.
I think that arc did a better job establishing Cerberus as character than anything I've seen from other demigods prior. While I think there were some moments where I felt she fell into being condescending (like the aforementioned unwillingness to explain why Keene was able to return to Earth, and some of the moments where she warned against certain things like she thought Keene was made of glass, that could be my cynicism talking though) she otherwise did a better job explaining herself and answering questions respectfully even toward mortals. Even her coddling towards Keene seemed more like it was intented to be genuine and part of her job description given she works in Heaven.
And I should probably correct myself on one of my overarching questions in this thread.
It's not WHY some of you seem to like the demigod trio that I'm struggling to figure out. It's HOW you were able to see them as three-dimensional characters and HOW I'm still mostly failing to do the same.
HOW were you able to see Pete and Dragon as anything than immature jerks who only saw mortals as pawns to use for their conveniences?
HOW were you able to look at their emotional breakdowns feel sympathy for them rather than justified catharsis like you would when a villain breaks down after seeing their plans fall apart?
The only one here who answered that question was Obbl, and they admitted it was because they consider themself easy to please.
I've gotten to where I'm a little more forgiving towards Kitsune, since at least his intentions could be viewed as acting for the sake of pragmatism and it seems intentionally incidental that his actions work in the favor of the main cast. He may not have done anything to invoke sympathy from me, but he hasn't had any scenes where I'm supposed to view him as anything more than a pragmatic trickster seeking to get a point across.
I think that arc did a better job establishing Cerberus as character than anything I've seen from other demigods prior. While I think there were some moments where I felt she fell into being condescending (like the aforementioned unwillingness to explain why Keene was able to return to Earth, and some of the moments where she warned against certain things like she thought Keene was made of glass, that could be my cynicism talking though) she otherwise did a better job explaining herself and answering questions respectfully even toward mortals. Even her coddling towards Keene seemed more like it was intented to be genuine and part of her job description given she works in Heaven.
And I should probably correct myself on one of my overarching questions in this thread.
It's not WHY some of you seem to like the demigod trio that I'm struggling to figure out. It's HOW you were able to see them as three-dimensional characters and HOW I'm still mostly failing to do the same.
HOW were you able to see Pete and Dragon as anything than immature jerks who only saw mortals as pawns to use for their conveniences?
HOW were you able to look at their emotional breakdowns feel sympathy for them rather than justified catharsis like you would when a villain breaks down after seeing their plans fall apart?
The only one here who answered that question was Obbl, and they admitted it was because they consider themself easy to please.
I've gotten to where I'm a little more forgiving towards Kitsune, since at least his intentions could be viewed as acting for the sake of pragmatism and it seems intentionally incidental that his actions work in the favor of the main cast. He may not have done anything to invoke sympathy from me, but he hasn't had any scenes where I'm supposed to view him as anything more than a pragmatic trickster seeking to get a point across.
- Amazee Dayzee
- Posts: 26190
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 6:24 pm
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
I can easily find myself on Kitsune's point because of how he has to get his point across. If he were the type to just tell someone what they needed to do outright that would either be too easy or they wouldn't listen. Kitsune needs to actually trick them into coming into an ultimate realization. He tries to teach but in his own way. Admittedly he can be very immature about it, but you know he has a good heart.
Re: The Demigods, yay or nay?
I'm not sure he's as good-hearted as you give him credit for. What I've seen points to him acting for the sake of his own desired ends that just incidentally benefit main cast. I haven't really seen anything that implies he's been intentionally acting solely for anyone's benefit other than his own. Though it's possible I overlooked something that was supposed to give me that more benign impression.Amazee Dayzee wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 4:49 pm I can easily find myself on Kitsune's point because of how he has to get his point across. If he were the type to just tell someone what they needed to do outright that would either be too easy or they wouldn't listen. Kitsune needs to actually trick them into coming into an ultimate realization. He tries to teach but in his own way. Admittedly he can be very immature about it, but you know he has a good heart.
But still, I at least have an easier time viewing Kitsune as a character than I do Pete or Dragon.