Bad webcomics

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
DoHwHMhVsAAc_2r.jpg
 
I know they were probably trying to come off cute and quirky here while making a jab at normies with no imagination but Christ, a grown-ass adult thinking a magazine you can purchase at the drug store is going to contain the secret to obtaining flight is some next-level exceptionalism.
The no unlimited serotonin could have been a decent punchline on it's own...but it would have been a reach as well, because exercise is supposed to help your sadbrain.
 

This would have been funny if we were supposed to be laughing at, instead of with, the broken sadbrains furry.

Or I guess more to the point:
This is a decent punchline for a Calvin & Hobbes strip. Where the an "ideal body" magazine's lack of telling him how to grow horns or wings or gills is disappointing to a six year old, a child. Because that's the joke, these are the things literal children want. Its not amusing coming from a 20-something NEET.
 
Last edited:
I'm kind of surprised no one has posted Tamberlane yet. The art is really good, in my opinion, but after reading through for a while and checking out some of the cast and their reference sheets...uh...
(Sidenote: The reference sheets used to be the character's main profile image instead of how it's now under a link. I put this post off a good while.)

They also have a cameo from another favorite of this site.
 
I'm kind of surprised no one has posted Tamberlane yet. The art is really good, in my opinion, but after reading through for a while and checking out some of the cast and their reference sheets...uh...
(Sidenote: The reference sheets used to be the character's main profile image instead of how it's now under a link. I put this post off a good while.)

They also have a cameo from another favorite of this site.

I've never understood the need for full nudity in (presumably finalized) reference sheets for characters that probably won't ever be nude in the first place. It's something I've really seen from people who get a shitton of porn commissions lately.
 
I've never understood the need for full nudity in (presumably finalized) reference sheets for characters that probably won't ever be nude in the first place. It's something I've really seen from people who get a shitton of porn commissions lately.

I’d understand it if this was an nsfw comic, but it isn’t and the artist made their underage character’s (including a few toddler’s) reference sheets to be completely naked. What the hell.

The artist also boasts that the comic is completely work safe.
 
I’d understand it if this was an nsfw comic, but it isn’t and the artist made their underage character’s (including a few toddler’s) reference sheets to be completely naked. What the hell.

The artist also boasts that the comic is completely work safe.

I actually went to the Patreon to see if there was some secret adult tier, but it's pretty pristine.
I'm not one to equate ALL nudity with explicit adult content, but it seems oddly excessive. This is a reach but I feel like it may be one of the few instances where the nudity in a ref sheet was depicted with genuine artistry in mind instead of titillation, but it just feels irrelevant.
 
This guy has a surprisingly large internet footprint (most of it is ridiculously NSFW, so be careful) and one small press critic described his work as 'smug, smirking Asperger's nerd porn' and 'the most insulting crap I ever read'. Judge for yourselves, preferably in a cave where no-one can see or hear you...

https://dexter-cockburn.livejournal.com/

He occasionally publishes other people's stuff apparently, whilst remaining oblivious to how crappy his own stuff is. He also has a long-running (over 170 pages, for fuck's sake) web comic called 'the Mloff'. I'll leave you to seek that outand draw your own conclusions.
 
I actually went to the Patreon to see if there was some secret adult tier, but it's pretty pristine.
I'm not one to equate ALL nudity with explicit adult content, but it seems oddly excessive. This is a reach but I feel like it may be one of the few instances where the nudity in a ref sheet was depicted with genuine artistry in mind instead of titillation, but it just feels irrelevant.
Devil's advocate here, what if the artist behind the comic is just working under furry social norms and assumes that there's nothing wrong with drawing young nude characters? Places like FA will have tons of ref sheets for youngish characters that depict them perfectly nude.

Alternatively, the artist is part of the LGBTQ! community and she's utterly batshit insane.
She is also an LGBTQ+ creator and enjoys creating fiction with queer characters doing things that have nothing to do with being queer. She also feels ever-so-slightly weird writing this bio in the third person, but she will nonetheless persevere!

Caytlin also lives with chronic pain and occasionally has to take short breaks from the comic so she can heal, much to her deep regret. Thanks for your patience!
 
Back