If the label is right, your dream of 400+ got killed and buried right as it was proclaimed in the comments.

I was not dropped so that is a plus.

Edit: being zoomed out a fair bit while reading on a TV, I had completely missed the S3 before it said END.

But they are taking a super long break before starting up Season 4 - so... I hope it is still good in a couple of years when it hopefully make it to 400+

I know what you mean with how many stories try to make that kind of "misunderstanding" a plot point? it really just makes the characters appear/feel stupid.

In this one though... it does not really do that. He knows the monsters are not really an issue and that he can slap them around, so to speak? He is just trying to keep up a fake image with his(?) Emblem as the reason. He obviously does not think of himself as weak, he was the main force that took down the Demon king. But it was in doing that and it ended in betrayal that he is trying to lead a new life and get over his social issues and gaining any sort of heroic like fame would make that much harder.

Maybe it is better to phrase it as 'emotionally tapped out' and not wanting to rather than not able to?

Are we all to be assuming the Bird-Lady...

Near all stories are a story about a MC - there are several things where the MC can die, stay dead, and no longer be an active force in the story - this is obviously not one of them.

If there was no such thing as plot armour then most stories would just end in 1 to 2 or a dozen chapters.
You know he is not going to die, it is about HOW they get from point A to B and if that is interesting.

This comment is all kinds of wrong that pulls deep on the anger and disappointment inside of me. I am just going to stop here, do better.

New comment system cut off soo much.
+1 for the cup!

Depends on the Lore, but in a fair number if not most instances that does not hold true. Best to keep them entirely separate when used in a general topic. My reasoning basically comes from that group of people that do not know that an Orca (Killer Whale) is actually a Dolphin and not a actual Whale. Messy business and loads of disappointment that topic has caused.

Na, I feel this... If it does not have 4 legs it is not ( a standard/Western) dragon. Even the Asian (Eastern) tend to be depicted with at least 4 feet/claws/legs.

For me this is a more broad annoyance - my own parents would drive me insane with things like calling all vehicles a car [They had always had three when I was growing up and did not own an actual car from ~1995 to 2022 {I was born in 1989}]. To me it is like calling a Bison or Buffalo a Cow, or maybe a better extreme would be calling a goat a cow because it also makes milk. Yeah, that level of 'how does this person even breath' intellect.

Where is that * after alchemist; Terms and Conditions do apply.

Though it was mentioned that the other ones that make things that are equal to running a cut under warm-hot water overcharge to the extreme. So maybe (super*) would have been a better thing for me to write.

I do not know whether or not I am upset that, he did not say: "I am the weapon."

Well ...that happened.

Damn, I was not expecting this kind of comment! Ended up laughing for like half a minute. Simply amazing.

I completely missed the fixed arms on the chair because of those chair legs... but I did have good bit of a laugh at the MCs face on that first sword swing.

This is actually an incredible first chapter... The pacing was near if not perfect. It was a bit long in comparison to some others but it felt like it wrapped up a ton of major points by giving enough detail without bogging down everything as it went. It leaves you with the basics of what you need and left open many other hopeful points of where it is going.

If anything was a downside it might have put my feels on high-alert!

Not a hard win when the old one ends so early. I would even say a person should ready the old one cause they skipped a whole lot of stuff, like it was expected you read the other version already to fill the gaps.

I was giving some thought to a response, but my mind just somehow went broken record mode and started looping "just like Disney".

It really is hard to find something that is GOOD, and just stays GOOD through and through all the way to the end. Especially so if your "tastes" fluctuate on the finer points like mine do.

Nostalgia truly is an amazing brain drug though. Loved Dragon Ball back in the day, just do not ask me to re-watch it (well maybe DB but not DBZ). That is actually kind of relevant with how slows some of theses things release! are we hyping them up too much in the end? Honestly I could say this gives AI a tiny hopeful outlook, cause if you could have it make those adjustments... IP falling into the hands of the unwanted or those that do not do things justice could be redone, especially in a still image graphical format. Fine lines though.

I was going to disagree but I sadly do agree... far more than I would like to admit... The god of the Christian religion is just too nebulous in too many ways.

they mentioned it, but yeah... the disappointment. I hope the start going deeper when they pass the other version completely.

That is true but the first one stopped getting updated? (I think). There is a real possibility that they are going hyper speed to pass over what the old one covered in detail. Later chapters will have to give the judgment on that.

I do certainly agree it is fast especially in comparison but I personally do not get 20,50,100+ chapters in and continue to care about how good the first few are. It would have to have been an Epic or Masterpiece to warrant that kind of caring. just go ten or something chapters down the line and either 'drop it' or take a hit of nostalgia and never look back! ha-ha-ha!

Either you like this rendition or you do not. Read it because you like it or hate read or do not read at all. If you do not like it and can not forgive those points start the hunt for the next thing. Just do not do yourself the disservice of reading something you do not enjoy for the purpose of enjoyment.

Over defense was supposed to be 'Overly defensive'. I was a touch tired while writing and failed to write the proper forms. I used 'Overly Defensive' in a way generally referring to when we end up defending something beyond the point of its merits with a tendency to ignore unfavourable factors.

There was no Pre or Post Hoc in my statements. You appear to have combined the two separate issue into one instance - once again that is the problem with your position. You have not done well enough to clarify what factors your have considered; at first I assumed your position applied up to the point that where after eliminating the first four ghouls and defeating the crowd of puppet/ghouls that was protecting her after she made clear her intentions to kill him. The before and after of her being struck down in the process of clearing that second group is the defining point in this situation.

Your points on this are not clear enough to have proper understanding of your position. Does your position of capture/unnecessary killing start when she was disarmed/knocked down and does it stop when she got back up and started attacking again?

(I will temporarily ignore all other points for this vital clarification)

If you hold this idea on morality personally, than you may be over defense of your point. I used 70% as a minimum for the reason that it is/should be a reasonable percentage for a person estimating their own abilities to restrain an individual (It leaves room for error but for most purposes should be possible). In this story or IRL the illusion of being able to restrain a person/animal/entity has the potential to be just as or even more dangerous than not being able to restrain them in anyway. I can see you are getting hung up on specific that were never a specific, which is specifically why I wrote: "I would argue" denoting that it was not a hard fact and a general measure in my own opinion.
the reason you argument is moot is as stated: that even though it is correct for the moment that the event occurred, the follow up on what happens when you do that for that particular individual in the particular instance has already been shown. The weakness (of your argument) is that you did not put enough emphasis that what you were stating only applies up to that point and not beyond. If your point of morality did included the actions that happened beyond that point, then you need to seriously reconsider it but I assume you were not including the actions after the fact.

The fact that you do not agree that killing a person with a disease that could wipe out the planet as a morally good thing shows how weak your moral stance is. Being moral is about doing what is right, it is not about doing what makes you personally feel good at your convenience. Not killing a person that you know for certain will wipeout the plant; I would love to see some reasoning for that.