Zombie Cliche Lookout: Passing the Test
In most cases, trust is something built up slowly over a long period of time, but the zombie apocalypse has a way of accelerating these things. After all, it’s hard to have someone slowly show you that they are trustworthy over the course of many months when there’s a veritable army of zombies right outside the door. You can either decide to trust each other or not, but either way you’re going to have to deal with the zombie problem outside sooner rather than later.
Of course, this works both ways. Just as surely as some could gain trust in a very short amount of time, they can also destroy a solid foundation of trust with a few bad decisions. Especially if those decisions lead to people getting eaten by zombies.
About this Episode:
Sometimes the writer’s own lack of attention to detail can spin the story in different directions, as is the case here. I don’t know how, but I wrote the last few episodes to have everyone leave Joy and Michael alone in the cabin with their guns. Sometimes, I’m just dumb.
Check out the prize packs – that’s right, three prize packs – for our soon to be announced contest:
Discussion Question: Yet Another Contest Question
I’ve almost got our contest figured out, but I want to run one more thing past you guys. As you can see from the above teaser, I’m going to have three prize packs. What I want to know is whether you guys would prefer three winners in one contest category, or one winner in three categories. So we’d either have a single theme and set of rules, or three.
I’m leaning toward the latter, having three different build challenges, with one winner in each, but if the consensus is otherwise, I’ll defer to you guys.
Typo alert: About This Episode, first sentence: and–>can 😀
Same sentence, after the comma: “as in the case” in–is 😉
This one might be right, it’s just seeming a lot like Dave’s typical typos! 😉
Discussion Question, first sentence, after the comma: things–>thing 😀
Fixed all; thank you sir.
Regarding the comic itself, I think there’s more to it than they think there is: For starters, they still haven’t explained what they want help with, and then there’s the action they took of firing a warning shot at Stewart.
IF they really mean to come clean or at least be on the level with them they’ll explain that they fired a warning shot at Stewart, and they’ll also explain why they felt it justified to do so. There are better and less scary methods of getting someone’s attention, so I’m really interested in these two, to find out what exactly drives them to be the way they are, so to speak! 😀
You make a really good point with the warning shot, and I think this is one of those areas where it’s important to draw a distinction between actions we’d expect in real life, and things we’d accept in fiction.
In real life, firing a warning shot is horribly dangerous, and will get you arrested. I the movies, people do it all the time and no one seems to think it’s a big deal.
There have been some questions here about warning shots. Just to clarify, I have taken the IL Concealed Carry Class. Warning shots are a no-no, and are treated legally as though you intended to shoot the person but missed. (And really, considering the possibilities of where a shot might go and what it might hit in many circumstances, can you blame the law?)
I meant to put that comment in as a stand-alone… Oh well.
Hey Bob, so far as I know, the same is true here in Michigan. It’s been a while since my CCW class, but I know that it’s not cool, legally.
BrickVoid raises an interesting point about the warning shot. How do you safely approach someone in this type of situation? The lease threatening way would be unarmed with your hands up…..but then you run the risk of presenting yourself as easy prey if the person your approaching turns out to be hostile. On the other hand, firing a warning shot indicates that you could have easily killed that person but chose not to, but at the same time communicates that you are dangerous and not to be preyed upon. Unfortunately, it will most likely be perceived as a threat because, “Hey, you shot at me!”
I’d have to say, if I was on the receiving end of the warning shot, I’d be pretty pissed. That’s an extremely aggressive action in my book.
Hi Dave, nice prize packs!
Regarding your question… having multiple categories will bring more variety but you just need to clarify upfront if people can enter each one and if so what would happen if someone scores in multiple categories.
On today’s episode, I think your oversight of the fact that the new guys were left alone with the guns does not sound too unrealistic. There is a lot going on at the same time – the new guys showing up, Murphy getting shot, the little argument between Cheryl and Russell.. I can see people being focused on their own little struggles and missing the elephant in the room (just like you did yourself it seems!). As we sit back and dissect every decision and mistake we tend to forget that the characters are going through this in a rush.
Excellent point on multiple winners, Greg. I’ll include that in the rules.
Really good thoughts about the oversight too. That makes a lot of sense, and I know I’ve done similar things in the past. Tunnel vision is a dangerous thing.
They should be wondering if these new folks are worth teaming up with if they were so dumb to have left guns indoors with strangers and went outside. One locked door and they’d been goners never mind having guns pointed at them. Would they be more of a liability? They already got themselves caught and were quick to reveal their cabin in the first place. But yes I’d probably have been just as dumb!
I vote 3 contests and enter 1,2 or 3 as you like
That’s two for multiple contests!
Wow, these prize packs look cool. I like the sound of one contest with three winners, because prize pack #3 looks like some kind of ‘grand prize’ with hard-to-find spiked bats, the BrickArms Zombie Defence Pack and not two but three custom minifigures.
I have to build something fantastic to win this time!
Actually, all three packs include a spiked bat, and a spiked club. Super cool items, both.
Russell sure has some trust issues, which is the perfect cover for a traitor, DUN DUN DUN!!!
Okay, so I cannot tell really what those “paper” items are, other than the fact that the one for G.I. brick is a coupon ,however, what is the World War brick thing?
I’ll get into that in more detail with the contest announcement 🙂
thanks!, they look really cool ( and expensive :P)
Hah, I love this episode. Leaving strangers inside your stronghold with the weapons while you wander outside and have a chat is a dumb move given the circumstances, and could have turned out waaaay worse than it has.
I am curious to know why Joy is keen for someone with mechanical skills, as usual Dave you keep throwing stuff out there which means I keep coming back for more.
In terms of the competition, maybe you have two categories that people enter and win a prize for each and Dave (and any judges) keep the third pack to give out for a random prize category that they can make up based on the entries they see. Just my thoughts 🙂
Hah, I do what I can.
Dave, is there supposed to be an episode for today? It’s a bit late if there is one supposed to be published today! 😀
That is supposed to be, unfortunately, my ISP has been having major issues lately and I didn’t have internet access, and now I’m not home to post it. It’s quite frustrating.
Well, relax and take it easy, just get it up whenever you’re able to! 😉
Hah, thanks. We’ll be back on schedule for Monday.
I think what you should do is post the one that should’ve gone up Friday on Monday, and then post the extra one due on Tuesday or Thursday. That depends, of course, on whether your ISP issues clear up over the weekend or not! 😀 If issues are ongoing, maybe it’s time for you to attempt to find a new ISP! 😉
in regards to the to the warning shot, you might be able to pick a large target near them and hit it dead center to show them it was not aimed at them but they may or may no be capable of rational thought or may not be convinced and none of that includes the posability of missing.