158 5820

Kerfuffle

Every game of Kerfuffle begins with the local constable bursting onto the scene in questions shouting "WHAT'S ALL THIS THEN!?!"

158 thoughts on “Kerfuffle

  1. Wow… Tarra is just… dang. “Crack!” says it all for me. Yikes.

    Also, I’m glad you’ve added the name theme (and Ellie’s birth name) to the actually story canon. For those people who don’t read the comments section, it will all make more sense. ;)

  2. ok, thats one scary sister she has.
    I mean, snapping a guys neck just with her hair!? thats fullblown murder!!
    And knowing Rusche, she will probably get away with it as well…

    also, is that hair possesed?

      1. What, with him looking at his butt? Besides, it’s self preservation and self defense. He was robbing the place, with a mask, and a shotgun, presumably loaded with deadly ammo-munition type pellets propelled by chemical reagents commonly known as gun powder.

        He’s Dead Jim.

        1. This is one of those surreal comic moments that is pretty funny in the comics but wouldn’t be funny in the real world. In the real world, duct-taping a cat into the engine compartment of a car wouldn’t be funny, and killing this guy wouldn’t be funny either.

          Non-funny discussion follows.

          There is a legal standard that is pretty much universal in the USA: a person may only use potentially lethal force when there is an immediate, otherwise unavoidable danger of death or grave bodily harm to the innocent. (And making someone’s head face 180 degrees the wrong way with a loud “crack” noise certainly must be classed as “potentially lethal”!) So, if the DA decided to prosecute her, Tarra would have to argue that she thought the danger was unavoidable, and she would have to explain why just giving the guy her wallet would not have avoided the danger. Also, very likely the guy (if he lived) or his surviving family would bring civil suit against her, so the very best she could hope for is to win both those trials while paying expensive lawyers the whole time.

        2. Not necessarily.

          1. If you commit a crime (ie robbery) and someone is hurt or killed in the process, the criminal is the one held liable for it by default. More than once, a clerk has simply pulled out a gun and shot a would-be robber, and the robbers partner in crime is the one charged with murder. Further…

          B. The lethal force equation has a level of belief factor. That is, if you are threatened with deadly force (ie a gun), you may believe that you must act with deadly force to protect yourself and others. Further, it is hard to measure what force will be lethal at times, so something that may seem reasonable at the use may not be in the end.

          III. Tarragon the paragon did not even look at the robber, or even seem to notice his existence. The fact that he happened to walk into her whip-like braid of hair as she exuberantly flipped it as she spoke to her sister of the phone is his own fault. Then, he goes and falls, causing his neck to snap is clearly one of those acts of failure that will end up on You-Tube, and will be deemed death-by-misadventure.

        3. Agreed, but there’s at least one legal argument and an unfortunate reality that really do make it more likely than not that she’d have no issues.

          While I’m fairly sure Florida doesn’t allow lethal force for protecting property (Ohio definitely doesn’t), there is also a category of “severe bodily harm” which allows lethal force as a defense in most states. In Ohio, rape has specifically been ruled to count. An order to become prostrate with no “I’m only after the money behind the counter” type statements could be interpreted as a need to defend herself. At this point her available options are to: A) comply and be in a worse position to defend herself if the need arises; B) turn and challenge the man with the gun, letting him know she’s going to resist; or C) take him down before he realizes she’s even paying attention to her (dumb blonde stereotypes can be helpful, and she’s even chatting away on her cell phone in a public place). Her safest option, if she’s confident about being able to pull it off, is definitely C.

          Policemen have also, unfortunately, fallen into the trap many other professions have of: “How do we judge their job performance when it’s so subjective? Hey, let’s just use numbers that are objective!” As a result, they’ll be rewarded for getting a case closed (or gathering enough evidence for the DA to prosecute) as quickly as possible with as little problems as possible. “Successful, attractive woman kills man who walked up behind her with a shotgun” is just fine as-is, and if the guy had a record, well why even bother the DA. Even if someone disagrees, she’s been stated to be successful enough that she’d have to tick off someone pretty high up before they’d be willing to tangle with her lawyers (and possible connections to their higher ups).

          While I agree with Tarragon’s actions (and agree that it’s certainly sad to be put in a position to need to take a life), I also thing some of the less-than-ideal realities of the legal system will help her here.

        4. I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, and everything I say is a lie (including this statement).

          I have read that there are some jurisdictions that allow the use of potentially lethal force to stop any felony, which would include theft of valuables with no threat to human life… but I would definitely not recommend relying on that. Only use potentially lethal force to stop immediate, otherwise unavoidable danger of grave bodily harm to the innocent.

          I think pretty much all jurisdictions consider rape to be “grave bodily harm”. Even if not, it’s possible a jury would refuse to convict.

          A few self-defense rules that I have been taught: never let them herd you into a back room, never let them tie you up, and never let them put you into a van or car. If the attackers are trying to do any of those things, the situation has escalated badly enough that you are likely better off to fight or run (and possibly die either way) rather than cooperate. (It’s really too bad that the nurses let Richard Speck tie them up. :-( It didn’t end well at all, but there were nine nurses vs. one guy with a knife… it would have ended better had they fought him rather than letting him tie them up.)

          Lying on the floor is kind of a half-way case… I don’t think it rises to the level of “oh **** he’s about to kill everyone”. I think in real life there is a good chance she would need to spend large sums of money on lawyers.

          But as jeffepp pointed out, this was just an innocent accident… the perp walked into Tarra’s hair, and who can blame her for that?

        5. I’m certainly not a lawyer either. Everything I’ve heard is that a lot of self-defense law is state-by-state, and that the attitudes of your county or city prosecutor that you deal with first makes a big difference too. Regardless, from what I’ve heard guns tend to be explicitly classified, in a legal sense, as deadly weapons, so a threat with a gun shouldn’t take a lot to be sufficient for the reasonable man test to constitute threat to life and limb. It’s similar to the way that a warning shot is actually a very, very bad idea from a legal sense (which surprised me when I first heard that), as instead of conveying an attempt to avoid lethal force it legally conveys a willingness to use lethal force.

        6. So: I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, and you should assume that I’m an evil spirit who is trying to entrap you into doing illegal things by giving you cunningly deceiving advice. (On the Internet, nobody knows you’re an evil spirit.)

          The law does not give you, me, or even the cops the power to kill. The law does, however, give us the power to use *potentially* lethal force under some circumstances. This is why you never shoot to kill… you shoot to *stop*. This means if the bad guy is no longer a threat, you must stop shooting him.

          Some people think the phrase “shoot to stop” is just a euphemism that really means “shoot to kill”. It’s not. It means “shoot to make the guy stop doing something” and when the guy stops doing it, the shooting stops as well.

          If what the bad guy is doing right now does not meet the legal standard (all together now: an immediate, otherwise unavoidable danger of death or grave bodily harm to the innocent), then you are not allowed to use potentially lethal force. This includes a firearm, a knife, blunt instruments applied to the head or spine, or making the guy’s head do a 180 (“CRACK!”).

          An example from a class I took: if you see that a guy has just splashed gasoline all over a dormitory full of people, and you see that he just pulled out a box of matches, you could shoot him if that is the only way to keep him from putting the match to the gasoline. However, if you are just a little bit too late and he already lit the gasoline and is running away, you would most likely be in grave legal difficulties if you shoot him in the back as he flees. If you somehow knew what he was running to do next, with great certainty, and what he was running to do was to kill someone, you could then shoot him to prevent that next murder. But if it’s too late to stop him from burning the building, then the burning building is not a legal excuse for you to shoot him.

          The exact specifics of the law may vary, but that broad standard described above is, as I understand it, pretty safe in any part of the USA.

          Sometimes when a citizen shoots a bad guy in the back as he is fleeing, the DA decides not to prosecute the citizen. I wouldn’t count on it if I were you.

          Warning shots are a bad idea every way you look at them. If the bad guy isn’t doing anything that makes you need to shoot him, you shouldn’t be shooting anywhere near him. You shouldn’t ever send bullets anywhere unless you *know* where they are going… you would purely hate for a stray bullet to hurt an innocent bystander. Even shooting into soft dirt near your feet is really not recommended (usually a bullet will stop in soft dirt, but who knows, maybe you will be really unlucky and hit a buried rock and have a ricochet!). And sure, maybe the lawyers will try to use it to prove that you had murderous intent.

        7. Note: I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, I’m currently tripping on mushrooms so assume everything I say is oh wow the colors.

          1. This is “felony murder”. Still, there are some legal jurisdictions that will go after the person who shot the felon (especially if the felon happened to be black and the shooter happened to be white, or the shooter said anything unfortunate suggesting intent to murder rather than intent to defend). I have even read of a couple of instances where a person in fear for his/her life used a weapon against the attackers, and the person was charge with a felony while the attackers were released without being charged with anything. (Those were both in the U.K., not the USA, but I have heard plenty of stories from the USA where the defender was charged with a felony and the attackers were also charged with crimes.)

          B. This is the “reasonable man” standard. If a hypothetical reasonable person, knowing exactly what the defendant knew, would believe there was danger of death or grave bodily harm to the innocent, then the use of force can be argued to be reasonable. Real-life example: one dark night, a homeowner shot a teen who had a camera in his hand; the homeowner believed the teen had a handgun. Note that this is still an “affirmative defense”, which puts the burden of proof on the defendant. (Normally the burden of proof is on the prosecution, and the defendant could just say “It’s all on you to prove I committed a crime.” However, when a defendant says “Yes I killed that person, but it was self-defense”, now the burden goes onto the defendant to prove the need for self-defense.)

          III. This is awesome and you win the Internet.
          http://you-win-the-internet.com/?n=jeffepp

        8. There is one overlooked thing here.

          It’s a man attacking a woman and unknown others. The woman is allowed to defend herself in any way because she’s supposed to be the weaker sex of the two.

        9. #1, I like that. The crook is creating a situation where the balance of power is indeed tipped in his favor.

          #2, anyone brandishing a weapon in the commission of a crime, is holding that weapon as a credible threat of death, otherwise, why would anyone be taking him seriously? I mean, bank employees were bullet and stab proof, why would they hand over money?

          It’s not the action of having a weapon on a person, but the action of threatening another person with that weapon that makes it a crime punishable by death, because that weapon is able to kill. Peter Parker didn’t throw Stacey Gwen off of the bridge, but his actions to save her killed her. Who is to blame? Spiderman or Doc Ock?

          #3 She didn’t see him, but she heard him. The threat was enough to assume a robbery. The sentient pony tail passed judgement on it’s own.

        10. Oh come on. There is NO reason for a person to have to surrender their personal property, money or whatsoever at the threat of immediate bodily harm from a shotgun, thief or their ski mask. He presented a clear and credible threat to life and limb, and therefore by his actions in doing so, he gave up his rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Unless he wanted to be killed by a blonde pony tail.

        11. And the civil trial? NO WAY. The judge would throw that out in an instant. Look, I know that this is supposed to be in Florida, and George Zimmerman may be fresh on people’s minds and opinions, but in no way does a person brandishing a projectile weapon capable of killing indiscriminately give a person the right to take away another person’s life, property or money.

          This is supposed to be a country of the Free and Home of the Brave. Not cowards who brandish shotguns in order to get a few hundred bucks.

        12. Judges are unlikely to throw it out in an instant. If somebody died, a judge wouldn’t want it said the case was dismissed with no consideration.

          Even with perfectly justifiable actions, a relative with time on their hands that can look for ambulance chasers to keep you in court. I have an uncle who’s a surgeon who had a patient die and some member of the patients’ family literally went through every lawyer who would take the case and then filed without a lawyer after that. At that point the judge told the family member any additional attempt to file suit would be considered harassment, contempt, or something similar. Through all that, my uncle still had to show up in court and deal with every law suit. Granted, I think the hospital footed the bill with the lawyer, and the scheduling time to get to court would’ve been handled easier than most people too, but it’s still a massive pain. I’ve heard from former police officers that when a person shoots someone who broke into their house and police and prosecutor are 100% convinced that it was legal self-defense, there are still frequently civil suits from the housebreakers (if they survive) or their family, and some of them win.

          Additionally, civil suits are weird in ways aside from a lower standard of proof. For example, my aunt works for a small rural township. A kid I vaguely remember worked there one summer while he was in college. Same calendar year, his parents were in a car wreck (the dad died, the mom had some very severe injuries but was able to walk a few months later). The ambulance chaser that they were working with filed a civil suit against the township because there was a law that allowed it due to the connection of the township employing the child. The mom kibashed that one before it went to court, so no clue if it was winnable, but the lawyer the township checked with said it was a 100% kosher lawsuit.

          People who are so inclined can absolutely put you through hell in court even if you have never done anything wrong and manage to avoid putting your foot in your mouth going on record in a way they can use against you (which can be hard). Additionally, civil suits can be odd and even more counter-intuitive than criminal suits, and the plaintiff gets a lot less in the way of rights and protections.

        13. People can sue anyone for anything under the sun, including the moon.

          It will be up to the Judge to determine if the lawsuit holds merit, and then from there, it’s anyone’s guess.

        14. Self-defense legal expert Massad Ayoob has said that you have to win three times: in the street, in the court, and in the civil court. You have to not suffer death or grave bodily harm if you encounter bad guy(s), you have to not be convicted of murder in court, and you have to not lose all your money and possessions in civil court. (Remember that O. J. Simpson escaped criminal conviction for murder, but lost the civil trial; Wikipedia says he was ordered to pay about 46 million dollars. That’s probably an unusually high amount, but I am not exaggerating when I say that losing such a civil case could cost you everything you have: your money, your house, probably your present and future wages.)

          The legal system in the USA isn’t perfect, but I do think it is generally a good idea that people be allowed to use force in self-defense but with some pretty bright-line boundaries that must not be crossed. I personally would not shoot a robber who took money and did not hurt anyone, even if the law allowed me to do so.

        15. this explains ebverything that is wrong with our country. in our efforts to “protect” people, we actually prevent them from protecting themselves. hence why here in Hannibal, MO, a burglar who was trying to break into a school, falls through the skylight and gets cut to shreds when he lands on the glass, successfully sued the school for his medical expenses AND has to pay him disability for the rest of his life, because he wouldn’t have been hurt so badly if they would have had safety-glass installed in the skylight…..

        16. Hey yeah, I’ve heard that anecdote too, only in the version I heard it was a student not a burglar (though he may have been trespassing) who was adjusting a light so he and his friends could play basketball, the skylight was painted black for some reason (no longer used I guess) which is why he stepped on it in the first place (this is what made it not-safe, as the skylight was invisible), and the student was a quadriplegic afterward.

          Also, they reached a settlement – while that means the kid successfully sued the school, it’s far from the same thing as the courts siding with the criminal and forcing the victim to pay.

        17. There are a lot of things wrong with this country, but part of the problem here is a bit harder. Any set of rules you want to come up with will have an edge case that’s wrong/unfair/promotes the opposite of what you’re trying. So some set of rules is put in place, and when an edge case comes up, there’s debate on leaving as-is or modifying. Any modification will still have edge cases. Patches and band-aid modifications are generally considered easier and more palatable than wholesale rewrites. Over time, a structure with too many patches and band-aids gains more problems from complexity.

          Enter our founding fathers, whom I believe were quite aware of this. The legislative branch is designed to be slow and deliberate in creating laws to attempt to get a good set. The executive has discretion for enforcement and prosecution and the ability to pardon (if you go up high enough) to attempt to allow a way to balance a bad edge case without changing the law. The judicial interprets from the laws passed by the legislature, past precedent, and ultimately allows the people a voice in deciding the verdict (and jury nullification if the correct legal verdict is morally wrong).

          Now, some of that isn’t working as well as we might like and I absolutely don’t defend the way some of that is breaking down; but the root of the problem is systemic to definable rule sets, cannot be completely removed, and can easily be made worse by bad attempts to remove the unfairness. I consider it a sort of Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem for morality/legal systems.

        18. That is BS, he got a liberal judge. OMG, he had to be up there on the school’s roof, tresspassing, and then he slipped and fell through the glass that he was trying to cut, and he fell onto the glass that he broke from the skylight, and he was injured.

          boo hoo.

        19. Another aspect of this is her possible use of her hair as a lethal weapon. Martial artists at a certain level or above are required to register themselves as lethal weapons (ex. Mike Tyson’s fists are considered lethal weapons). This doesn’t mean that they can’t board airplanes, but there are restrictions on what they can and can’t do.

          Verdict: being Little Miss Perfect, she would not have used her hair to kill anybody, no matter the justification. If she had, she would be mired in messy paperwork for hours afterwards and probably made to register her hair. And she wouldn’t do anything to truly jeopardize her hair.

        20. Only if there were witnesses to the punk’s crime between when he said ‘hit the floor’ and when he hit the floor.

  3. Everyone else is all like, “ohh…did she kill a guy?”…I’m just over here like, *snicker*…”she called her number 5”, lol.

    Seriously…the number 5 thing has me cracking up. And of course the perfect one can foil a robbery with just her hair while talking on the phone about the board game she just sold…who can’t?

    1. I liked the number 5 part too. Aside from Short Circuit references, it’s also very natural for analytical/logical thinkers. An odd series of events led me to spend a fair amount of time with MIT students and alumni when I lived in Boston, and I don’t think most of the buildings even have names other than their numbers.

      Is her not being aware of a six month old change a sign of them not talking much, or her rarely calling her sisters by anything but their enumeration?

  4. I did not realize just how similar those Ellie and Tarra look. I can’t help but feel that with how successful Tarra is; Ellie couldn’t help but feel as if she could not outshine her older sister. It is an interesting “motivation” to be lazy for sure. I would not be surprised that their mother puts Ellie to a higher standard. Among the sisters it seems like Ellie has to most unused potential. She was clever enough to adapt to the multiple aspects of a fast food joint and is quickly growing beyond it. In fact it feels like Blind guy has been grooming her for something more fulfilling because even he sees…

    heh.

    Mayhaps i’m speculating a little too much. It is 3am and I’m a little rambly jambly. But it is interesting to ponder at least

  5. ……….
    Sorry needed time to process that. Ok ok, 1. Kerfuffle would be a great game. Or at least a great title.
    2. Is..is Tarra perfect, like really? Come on! Did she watch Indiana Jones and desire to make her hair a whip?
    3. Wait, so Ellie’s name was once Lavender!? Backstory!
    4. Finally, we get to actually meet the Buckingham sisters, not just hear about them!

        1. Due to previous experience, I do not ever wish to play as the thimble….I know where it’s been. *cringe*

    1. she is supposed to be the perfect sister…. so the author just decided to really exaggerate that aspect of her. Look at the other characters in this comic and you will find that certain aspects of their character is overly exaggerated for effect.

      1. 1. My icon is looking down on you.
        2. My icon and your icon (great, what was that 80s song, just popped into my head.) are in existential arrangement(s) (at least for the current icon set)
        3. I know about the artistic license. And I agree with it. However, a 180 spin on the head really doesn’t do much for life span.

  6. *snickers* Kerfuffle, honestly up until I started watching Gravity Falls last year, I had never actually heard that word used. Still snicker every time I hear it now, which is rare, but does happen oddly enough.

    1. Clever foreshadowing.

      You see, her mother had a few sisters herself (3, to be exact), so, if you include them, that makes her the 9th in two generations.

      And while I’m making stuff up, one of them is totally Tire Guy’s nurse, and her snapping at him gets him to stop trying to evict Ellie (but Quinn is still fair game).

      1. Interesting. The comment seems to have turned “Tired Guy” into a MegaMan villain. I know I typed that d in there….

        1. Tired Guy – after you defeat him you get the tired missile, which puts enemies to sleep with stories about how things were when you were younger. (cue the Grandpa Simpson story about taking the ferry over to Shelbyville to get a new heel for his shoe…)

          Very different from Tire Guy, who is just the guy down the road who has tall stacks of tires in his yard for some reason.

  7. I just realized something, just HOW LONG is her hair? I hadnt noticed it before but looking closer, she has it lattice braided doesnt she? Going over and around, then back up to the top then over around and down over and over. Her hair could very well be a record setter if thats true. I’ve only seen one girl do that before, and her hair had some serious weight to it, a few pounds if memory serves.

  8. …..Wow. Mind blown XD. Not only is Tarra gorgeous (in my opinion anyway), but she can incapacitate/kill armed robbers with her HAIR. Without even trying. Though comically playing up “The Perfect One” is really amusing. I’m wondering if Ellie’s calling all her sisters because I want to see her talk to Ginger.

    1. I, too, am curious if she’s calling all the sisters. That is, I can’t see why she wouldn’t call Ginger. My guess is if there’s one sister she wouldn’t call, it’d be Juniper.

      Unless she really wants to brag that badly.

      1. It actually makes sense because, since this is her first phone since being kicked out, I imagine her being deprived of family contact for a while now. Like catching up since she’s been away for so long.

    2. Yes and No. I’ll have her calling each sister in the book verison I’m sure, since I wrote strips for all of them. I’m only doing these three for pacing, since I need to move on. Her talking to her sisters right now is fun, but there are three non-sister-people she needs to talk to about it to advance the story.

      The iNimbus is the setup plot for the larger chunk of Chapter 3, so you can see how those 3 plus 6 sisters would really bog down the timing.

        1. The iNimbus came with a 12-year contract… unless she gets out of that contract within the first 24 hours or something, yeah she will have that thing for “a long time”.

          Phones sometimes get slower after awhile (I can actually explain why if anyone really cares). I’m picturing the iNimbus becoming slow at floating along after Ellie, and ten years from now she has to shuffle along slowly so her phone can keep up. A silly but amusing mental image.

        2. Huh, didn’t expect anyone to take me up on that. :-)

          0) Over time, people install more software, and some of that software installs “services” that run all the time and make the phone’s CPU more busy more of the time.

          1) Over time, newer software comes out that was only tested on newer phones with more powerful CPUs and/or more powerful graphics hardware. When people try to run this software, it feels slow on their phones.

          2) Phones use “flash memory” to store data. For technical reasons, writing to fresh flash memory is faster than rewriting used flash memory. A new phone has a lot of fresh memory but once it’s filled up, writes get slower. (This is changing now… Android 4.3 adds a feature called “trim” that finds memory that was used but is now idle, and marks it as fresh. So, as long as you don’t completely fill the memory on a phone with Android 4.3, it should never experience the slowdown.)

          3) Over time, some applications store a lot of data and slow themselves down. The main offender is the web browser, but unfortunately that’s an app you use a lot! Recently my phone became unacceptably slow at web browsing, and I deleted all the “history” and it got fast again. (“History” is a balancing act… you don’t want the phone to have no history at all, but you also don’t want the phone searching through vast amounts of history every time you try to do something.)

          Hmm, I think those are the high points.

          I just did a quick Google search and found one article that’s pretty good. Sorry iNimbus users, I didn’t find anything for you; this is for Android. http://blog.laptopmag.com/speed-up-android-phone

        3. I like how you started from zero not one. Computer counting I assume to avoid those off by one errors?

      1. I’m assuming you put these three conversations here because they were the sisters at the top of the popularity poll? Also I have taken note of the fact there will be a book. =)

  9. Ahh… perfection.

    So excuse my ignorance, but exactly how does Gameshow Network even work with board games? Do they just televise people playing the game? That sounds really pretty terrible. They better make sure in their negotiations that they not only purchase rights to the game, but also hire Tarra as a consultant when planning the show to make it actually entertaining. In which case it would be.

    Number 5’s idea sounds more like it could eventually be an action-comedy show/movie, rather than a game show. “Stop that hurts!” starring Seth Rogen, Charlie Day, and who cares who else because that’s already comedy gold you’ve got right there.

      1. Clue is sort of a cult classic.

        But point taken – the show could be a single play-through of the game with added narrative. With so many channels going away from actual shows and moving toward reality shows and game shows, it only makes sense that Gameshow Network would do the opposite.

  10. whoa, Tarragon is turning out to be more attractive that I thought she’d be. I thought you were going to make her into a snobby sister or something o_o

      1. Nah, Tarra has more life in her eyes. Granted, her O’s are more irritating/distracting than Ellie’s N’s, but that’s not enough to outweigh the eyes.

  11. So, am I the only one who doesn’t like Tarra? It’s very odd for me to completely hate a character after only just meeting them….

    1. It’s completely normal. The perfect ones that always have everything fall into place for them are there for us to hate. It’s their purpose in the universe. Heck, she would be hated both Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader!!

    2. It’s not odd, just shows your reaction to a character currently based on a very strong stereotype with little additional personality added yet. You apparently have a strong negative reaction, and it’s likely others do too. While I like Tarra, I can easily see how someone could strongly dislike her immediately.

    3. I don’t hate her… but as someone who has *ahem* an overdose of pride and constantly strives for perfection while failing… she’s a bit annoying. I like her… and at the same time she bothers me. Because she’s too perfect.

      She sorta makes me think of how I felt about my older brother until I realized he wasn’t amazing at everything under the sun. Before that, it was hard to motivate myself to do anything he’d done because I felt like I could never do it as good as him… so why even try? Then one day we drew together because I had an art class… and I realized I liked mine better. From there I began to realize he wasn’t so perfect. But in all seriousness, I’d hate to have Tara as my sister if she’s truly perfect. While she’d be amazing to admire, she’d constantly break my pride and leave me feeling worthless. But as soon as we see a fault, I’ll honestly like her more, if she has one.

      1. come to think of it… maybe her fault is being perfect. Sorta like my brother he couldn’t understand why some one else could pick up painting and not be instantly good at it. “I made a board game Ellie, why don’t you make yours? I’m sure it’d sell well.”
        “I’m not you Tara.”
        “You don’t have to be me, everyone can do it.”
        or something like that… assuming everyone else has the same innate blessed ability they do, which accidently makes people around them feel like trash.

  12. tbh I think Lavender is the more normal of any of the names the sisters have.
    Also, Tarra is now known to me as “Tarra the Terrifying” although I have trouble taking her “perfect sister with glamorous successes” seriously when she walks around in a ‘wife beater’.

    just me though. hahaha

    1. Actually, for all the sisters’ names Ginger is the only one I’ve ever met people who had that name. Tarragon, Anise, and Juniper can also easily go by Tarra, Anne, & June which aren’t uncommon names.

      Tarra’s out running errands (bank or shopping), so that’s not necessarily what she wears to work. Though, I thought there was something about her founding her own company, so if she’s the boss, she could be the type of boss I’ve had a time or two that has a suit in a spare closet at work and wears comfortable clothes whenever they can get away with it. Works well in tech shops, and she does have 75 patents and some degree of science cred, so her business could be tech-based.

  13. Rusche – Could you put a link to the Odds Are comic, copy/paste the sister bios in that comment to the cast page, or put a “BUCKINGHAM SISTER BIOS HERE” by the Odds Are comic in the Archive list?

      1. Yeah, I just had a weird “forgetting that bios were after all sisters were introduced (the Ginger comic)” and went through several others trying to find the bio to check something from Tarra’s bio.

  14. Call me moody, but I so do NOT like Tarra. Sure she looks great and everything goes her way, but her breathtaking lack of empathy negates all other qualities. I mean, I think I’d prefer Ginger the lush/ho/opportunist to Tarra. Maybe not quite though. She’s just as self centered.

    1. Bunny, out of curiosity, do you dislike the taste of the spice ginger? I ask because I absolutely hate the taste of anise, and I often type Anise when I mean Juniper.

      Juniper seems the most common sister to get name swapped in comments in general, for some reason (though perhaps it’s just easier to notice “this person must mean Juniper”).

      Anyone else have a tendency to swap Juniper’s name with their least favorite spice in the name set, or is it just me?

      1. I think it’s possible she meant Juniper. Calling yourself “self-centered” after having four kids is a hard thing to justify.

        1. I disagree. The state of having four kids means nothing about your parenting quality or skills.

        2. I took “Ginger the lush/ho/opportunist” to be enough to believe it was a typo for Juniper. All we’ve seen of Ginger is her cast picture and her catching some Z’s while Mama Buckingham & Pumpkin occupied her brood, so “lush/ho/opportunist” really doesn’t fit from that quick glimpse, and Bunny has commented in the past in sufficiently thoughtful ways that I would be very surprised if she actually meant Ginger.

          I have friends who hate the spice ginger, and I know that the name I frequently mix up for Juniper is Anise, which is my least favorite spice. Seeing the Ginger substitution made me aware of that tendency of my own and I was curious if anyone else has similar.

      2. You’re right, That One Guy, I had a brain fart this morning(not to sound TOO thoughtful). I meant Juniper. Juniper is the lush, Ginger is the mega mom on the rise. I actually like the taste of Ginger. Anise I can take or leave(though I love the concept of the sister) and due to an unfortunate incident with bees in a juniper thicket, I cannot bear the smell of juniper. It actually makes me feel a little panicky. So I didn’t expect to make such a mistake… Thanks for the vote of confidence and for pointing it out.

        1. Oh well, there goes that theory. Most others that I’ve noticed have swapped Juniper with Anise, and black licorice definitely has a good share of detractors, so I thought it possible. The post of yours is the only one I remember swapping a different name, so now I’m back to introduction adjacency and being the two who are the farthest away from socially accepted norms. But I thought a taste swap possibility would’ve been a very amusing unconscious cause. Welcome back by the way.

  15. Funny thing: you can’t actually patent a board game. And you can’t copyright the rules either. Protections for board games are based on copyrights of images and trademarks of the names. *hoping to go on kickstarter next month*

  16. Maybe it’s just me, but… her hair looks like a scorpion tail in that last panel. I’d be surprised if it doesn’t have a stinger in it or something.

    1. Coming Soon from Dan Halen Industries, the Ponytail Barb! Now when you whip your hair back and forth, make a lethal statement to anyone who gets in your way! Comes in venomous, non-venomous, razor-sharp, and grappling hook!

      …patent pending.

    2. I think that it’s covering the third arm growing out of the back of her head, and it’s all flexing in testeronic manliness at defeating the villain.

  17. Personally, I’d like to know more about Terra at this point. More specifically, why Ellie is willing to work in fast food retail hell–which is a layer of hell located just behind Satan in Dante’s terms, sufficiently so that, while chewing on Judas, Satan occasionally gets a weird urge to ask for fries–as opposed to seeing if Terra knows anyone in the massively high-powered array of connections she doubtless has.

    1. I suspect embraced title of “The Lazy One” is part of it. Tarra would probably be more likely to hand her a college application and offer to help her get accepted and call that a pre-req. Sometimes family holds you to a higher standard than strangers do, and I’m sure Tarra realizes Ellie is capable of more than she is inclined to work towards.

      Additionally, as a younger sister who looks very similar, I can see Ellie not wanting to put herself in the same sphere as Tarra and invite those comparisons. There’s a comment above by Zariu with speculation into some of the dynamic that might make that uncomfortable for Ellie, and I’ve certainly heard younger siblings say things which back that view up.

  18. The thing is… considering how perfect she is, and how easily she took that guy down, something tells me she could have EASILY placed the culprit into submission without endangering herself or anyone, but seems she was just too busy on her phone to bother and didn’t otherwise give a crap.

    Hmmm… a flaw, perhaps?

    1. Possibly, or you could take the perfection in the direction of Sherlock Holmes’ pre-fight planning in the recent movies and that was just the only one that came out as viable/certain of being successful. Seriously, a failed attempt to physically disarm/disable someone with a gun has a very high chance of going pretty badly for the failed hero.

      Though I freely admit her facial expression as her hair wraps around the guy’s head favors your explanation over mine. I just like playing devil’s advocate.

        1. True/agreed, I had my browser scrolled half-way up when I wrote that. So it’s an irrelevant item, as a lack of change in facial expression could equally mean not caring or maximum attempt at element of surprise.

        1. The pleasure’s all mine Frankenstein,
          We’re about to perpetrate some evil on these Champion City people,
          Rapping, snapping, cappin.

          Yeah.

      1. Oh yes, that comic. So you’ve worked at the real “GetMart” too huh? Yeah that’s a once a year mandatory time-waster. – minus actually using a shotgun.

  19. Ah, the USA, land of the corrupt where even criminals can sue u when they are robbing u and u resist…
    Its sickening really..

  20. Well now we know Why she didn’t have her hair cut. Out of the seven of them Hers is the sentient locks and the key to her success, much like Sampson in that regard.

  21. Yes, that is seriously MURDER!!!
    But no where as bad ass as defeating an armed bank robber with killer pepper-bees and then throwing him with via his TONGUE!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

*

*

*