mrrr, daydreams are good C:<

Kazuki is rather the real wolf here, as well as how she is a coward herself. Author actually hinted it in the last panels.

A little too cliche for me. "She can never know about all the things I want to do to her..." is something I've heard way too many times, I can't handle it anymore.

Who's the coward now.... >:3

Short but good read ' '

This neeeeeds a sequel, I can't be satisfied with things ending like that >.<

Shamalanmanom

what

Shamalanmanom

what

An important contribution.

So, what is preventing Kazuki to tell HER feelings to Mio? Isn't she being just as much of a coward?

Yes, pretty much unless she has a change of heart and gobbles her up. Or is that "wolfs her down"?

Also, your Muteki Kanban Musume profile pic is great!

Ahhh. Thank you, Phil. Finally somebody who notices!

woah

Same.

+1
Instant Fav for me. :D

I want to savage her.
Isn't it ravage?

What TsundereChan said.

Also on page four, second panel, maybe "what is it that I really love." should be "what it is that I really love."

Edit: It's a Wildrose story without an actual sex scene, but only an imagined sex scene. Have we seen that before?

last edited at Sep 6, 2015 11:30PM

Isn't it ravage?

No, if you look carefully the letter curls right around both ways. It's an S.

what is it that I really love

This is an actual mistake and we can hopefully correct that.

That took the breath out of me. goooOood shit mmhm.

Isn't it ravage?

No, if you look carefully the letter curls right around both ways. It's an S.

That doesn't really make much sense though. "I want to savage her" or at least it's the first time I've seen it used instead of ravage.

In any case, I can see Kazuki be impatient and jump her senpai when she backs off the next time, or at least she'd say 'coward' to her face.

last edited at Sep 7, 2015 1:15PM

"Savaging someone" is actually a real phrase though, meaning viciously attack them. So it kinda works here, although so uncommon compared to "ravage" as to make it look weird.

"Savaging someone" is actually a real phrase though, meaning viciously attack them. So it kinda works here, although so uncommon compared to "ravage" as to make it look weird.

So I gathered, I doubt she'd mean that she'd attack her as to wound/kill though, and ravage is more used in the sexual sense as portrayed in her imagination of what she would do to her.

Love the internet.

Just do it.

Don't let your dreams be dreams.

Yesterday you said tomorrow.

Nothing is impossible.

Don't dream it; be it.

Seriously, love it.

I doubt she'd mean that she'd attack her as to wound/kill though

Like the way a wolf might attack and eat its prey, you're saying

I doubt she'd mean that she'd attack her as to wound/kill though

Like the way a wolf might attack and eat its prey, you're saying

Yeah, it's pretty obvious it's in the sexual sense so I don't see why the translators went with 'savage' instead of 'ravage'

Ya know, I love this style...most especially because it's such a foreign and unusual form of storytelling you will almost never see this side of the Pacific. There is no real opening, there is no real closing. You get just pure cake, not the mouse or filling.

"Savaging someone" is actually a real phrase though, meaning viciously attack them. So it kinda works here, although so uncommon compared to "ravage" as to make it look weird.

Minor note here too...whether or not a word exists doesn't particularly matter. The issue is whether or not your choice of verbiage is the best possible way to convey your meaning. If the former was a real problem, no one would have gone to any of Shakespeare's plays. It's the main reason the language is so difficult, beyond the 'everything is an exception' rule...a very small proportion of even the most intelligent, schooled, and native speakers can legitimately claim mastery of it...and even they always have something they should be working on.

My guess is that savage seemed like a better choice since it evokes a more 'beastly' and 'wild' connotation, similar to a wolf. People usually ravage, beasts usually savage. Although a fair and informed argument could be made about either word.

I don't see why the translators went with 'savage' instead of 'ravage'

You know, I suspected you didn't know who I was.

I will say, I deliberately chose "savage" over the more clichéd "ravage" so I suppose it's cool that a debate has sprung up specifically about that.

last edited at Sep 7, 2015 10:45PM