Imitating the archaic speech style is not equal to simply using arbitrary archaic words with no system nor logic. Let us take "What art those eyes for?" as an example: "art" is not an archaic form of "are" at all, it is the second person singular present tense conjugated form of "be", i. e...
Mimi's interlocutrix' phrase containeth an orthographical mistake: the verb should be "are" because the logical subject is "consequences" (third person plural).
"He is starting..." – ye missed the verb in this Present Continuous construction. "...his "fitting in" is..." – it's obviously a place for possessive with gerund. I consider you my friend in the battle for English grammar and insist that ye make no such glaring mistakes that undermine our efforts.
Yes, and I want to add that Kanaria's phrase on the fifth page clearly lacketh the preposition "from" and should read as "...Miku-san, I understand how empty ye mote feel from not being able to meet Sou-sama...".
P. S. "ye" is the archaic nominative case form of "you", thus is technically...
I noticed some typos: 1) on page 14: "As excepted of the great Yuuki Rio.." (obviously, it should be "expected" while the two dots at the end should be three dots to make a proper ellipsis). 2) on page 45: "sheriously" instead of "seriously".
Except that there's a comma in a lower bubble on page 9 which isn't present on page 10.
A similar situation is also with pages 14 and 15. And with pages 17 and 18.
I concur with Geako in this instance, and "toward" is just "the American way" of saying "towards". Otherwise I would have to find fault with your writing "color" because the true and only way of spelling it is "colour" (/s).
I noticed a typo on page 17: "To destoy them as the very woman they looked down on?". And another one on page 18: "I seduced and praise the Lord..." – it seems from the context that the form should've been "praised".