What was Soon Holding? (Possibly Spoilerish)

[Holy_Knight]

When Soon transfers leadership of the Sapphire Guard to Shojo's father here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0277.html), he seems to be giving him something round and blue. Also, the space on the throne which in Shojo's time contained the sapphire sealing the rift, is grey in the flashback, not blue. Is he actually handing Shojo's father the sapphire itself, and with it the tear in reality? If so, does this mean that the rifts could theoretically be moved around without the use of the Dark One's ritual?

[Gift Jeraff]

I think it's the sapphire which would eventually become Soon's Gate. The rift is floating the sky, and then (minor War and XPs spoiler)Lord Ronjo built a new tower to reach the rift.And then Lirian and Dorukan perform the ritual in the new throne room and never see Soon again (unless Soon is already dead by that point).

I think.

[TheMac04]

I doubt it. I think Soon made the gate before he ever got that old. That's kind of implied.

[Manga Shoggoth]

Or he could be giving him a real sapphire, just not the one that is being used to seal the gate.

[Dr.Epic]

I doubt it. I think Soon made the gate before he ever got that old. That's kind of implied.

Yeah, the group disbanded when he appeared to be a lot younger. Why would he call Dorukan and Lirian to build the Gate now, so many years after they found it and made the agreement never to see each other again?

[FujinAkari]

It can't be THE Sapphire, since the fact that the Sapphire cannot be moved is a pretty major plot point.

[King of Nowhere]

Good spot check. It can't be the sapphire, because we know it can't be moved. It's also not possible that lirian and dorukan built the gate after soon died, because soon never saw them again after they split.
On the other hand, we see in that comic the spot on the throne where the sapphire should be is grey, like there was no sapphire there. And the stuff soon is giving ronjo (i think that's shojio's father's name) looks very much like the sapphire that seals the rift.
Soon called his paladins sapphire guard because they protected the sapphire, so i doubt that the sapphire is a later addition.

In the end, it may be a minor plot hole or misdrawing from Rich. Or it may be a simbolic drawing, where the passing of the sapphire is drawn to simbolize for the transfer of responsability.
Or maybe it is actually another sapphire (part of a ceremony maybe), and there is a sapphire on the throne, and it just looks grey in crayon.

[Sarco_Phage]

Aren't the crayon drawings not necessarily depictions of the actual events?

[ThePhantasm]

Aren't the crayon drawings not necessarily depictions of the actual events?

That's one theory. My stance is to view them as actual in-universe history until proven otherwise, though. I'm not sure if we have an indications that they aren't reliable.

[HZ514]

Possible fridge brilliance: no one outside the loop as to the gates could know the true nature, or at least the extent of the importance, of that particular gem on top of the throne. Perhaps the sapphire Soon passes Ronjo is a symbolic gesture meant to satisfy the curiosity of anyone who saw/heard about the Sapphire Guard leadership transfer ceremony. Also, it helps to have some sort of object to pass on to the next leader (crown, scepter, etc.) just to represent that transfer of power, and for obvious reasons, an immobile seal to a deicidal being wasn't the most readily available object to use.

[JSSheridan]

I consider crayon drawings to be of questionable authenticity.

[Phishfood]

That's one theory. My stance is to view them as actual in-universe history until proven otherwise, though. I'm not sure if we have an indications that they aren't reliable.

Too...many....double negatives.

Anyhoo, I would count on the crayons of time being accurate, at least in the major plot points. They have driven large parts of the plot so far it would be pretty weird to turn round and say its all bs.

[Gift Jeraff]

Yeah, the group disbanded when he appeared to be a lot younger. Why would he call Dorukan and Lirian to build the Gate now, so many years after they found it and made the agreement never to see each other again?They disbanded after the Gates were made and disagreed on how to defend them. He didn't call them over or anything, the party was just still together at the time. Or are people suggesting Soon and Serini made their Gates by themselves?

[ThePhantasm]

Too...many....double negatives.

Anyhoo, I would count on the crayons of time being accurate, at least in the major plot points. They have driven large parts of the plot so far it would be pretty weird to turn round and say its all bs.

I don't think there were any double negatives in my post. :smallconfused:

But yeah, I think there would be "hints" of unreliability or some sort of foreshadowing if the crayon-tales were falsehoods - anything else would feel like a retcon.

[Gift Jeraff]

I don't think there were any double negatives in my post. :smallconfused:

But yeah, I think there would be "hints" of unreliability or some sort of foreshadowing if the crayon-tales were falsehoods - anything else would feel like a retcon.Some people said the lack of phylactery in Jirix's crayon story is a hint of unreliability. (Compare: second (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0656.html) and third (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0704.html) panels.) I think that just means the crayon stories just don't show details the person telling the story chose to omit, but are otherwise almost exactly what happened.

[Holy_Knight]

It can't be THE Sapphire, since the fact that the Sapphire cannot be moved is a pretty major plot point.
It has been presented as one, although that raises some more questions. When Hinjo says that the sapphire can't be moved, he says that the throne, the platform, and the entire castle were built around the sapphire (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0411.html). But that would seem to imply either that the castle was built before Lirian and Durokan sealed the rift (which doesn't seem likely, given the urgency of sealing them), or that they somehow suspended the sapphire in mid air until the castle could be built (which doesn't seem likely, due to drawing unwanted attention to something supposed to be top secret). Alternatively, if the sapphire and rift could be moved, then those problems would go away, and we could understand the fortifications being "built around" the sapphire in terms of it being the reason for and focal point of its construction, rather than that it was literally constructed around it. This would also explain why the throne in the flashback does not seem to have a sapphire in it. I'm not saying I think for sure this is what happened, but if it is, and Hinjo is simply incorrect in thinking the sapphire can't be moved, it could answer a number of potential questions, as well as suggest some intriguing possibilites.

[mrmcfatty]

that they somehow suspended the sapphire in mid air until the castle could be built

i hope i quoted that correctly.

How do we know that when the rift was sealed with the sapphire the seal held the gem in place. Also from the size of it, the gem looks really small. depending what was there before the castle, i would assume it hard to believe a tiny, diminutive even, sapphire would be seen randomly while looking upwards towards the sky.

[Dr.Epic]

They disbanded after the Gates were made and disagreed on how to defend them. He didn't call them over or anything, the party was just still together at the time. Or are people suggesting Soon and Serini made their Gates by themselves?

Thank you for rephrasing what I posted?:smallconfused:

[Kish]

That's one theory. My stance is to view them as actual in-universe history until proven otherwise, though. I'm not sure if we have an indications that they aren't reliable.
Check the SoD Spoilers and Miko's Fall link in the sig of...someone or other, I can't remember who offhand.

:smallwink:

[hamishspence]

Here:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8081896&postcount=21

[Gift Jeraff]

Thank you for rephrasing what I posted?:smallconfused:Sorry, I was not sure what you were trying to say...

[ThePhantasm]

Check the SoD Spoilers and Miko's Fall link in the sig of...someone or other, I can't remember who offhand.

:smallwink:

Doesn't that only show that the stories are told from a particular perspective (certain things get mentioned to further certain views, or because info is limited) but not necessarily that the stories themselves are unreliable? I know there are theories that the Dark One has lied to Redcloak but I'm not convinced as the stories all seem to line up.

Maybe I'm missing something though. My copy of SoD is in another country (international student) and I haven't read it in awhile.

[Kish]

Rich said the crayon story is "a narrative told by Redcloak."

Presumably, but not to my knowledge explicitly said by Rich, the other crayon story is also only as reliable as Shojo.

[ThePhantasm]

Rich said the crayon story is "a narrative told by Redcloak."

Presumably, but not to my knowledge explicitly said by Rich, the other crayon story is also only as reliable as Shojo.

I agree on that point. I'm not sure the fact that they are narratives necessarily calls their reliability into question?

Your comment on Shojo's reliability got me thinking through and I went back through the strips where he reveals that he has been lying to the paladins and whatnot. I did find this interesting quote that I had forgotten about, which may cast the reliability of Shojo's crayon narrative into doubt:

"Whatever you learn at Girard's Gate, you cannot tell any of the paladins. Not even my nephew." (* (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0405.html))

So maybe I'm wrong, and there are hints. Hmm.

[Mutant Sheep]

I agree on that point. I'm not sure the fact that they are narratives necessarily calls their reliability into question?

Your comment on Shojo's reliability got me thinking through and I went back through the strips where he reveals that he has been lying to the paladins and whatnot. I did find this interesting quote that I had forgotten about, which may cast the reliability of Shojo's crayon narrative into doubt:

"Whatever you learn at Girard's Gate, you cannot tell any of the paladins. Not even my nephew." (* (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0405.html))

So maybe I'm wrong, and there are hints. Hmm.

Shojo was talking about the secret of Mr. Scruffy. Obviously related to the rift somehow, and in no way is a ordinary house cat. :smallwink:

[Holy_Knight]

"Whatever you learn at Girard's Gate, you cannot tell any of the paladins. Not even my nephew." (* (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0405.html))

So maybe I'm wrong, and there are hints. Hmm.
I figured that that comment was because of the paladins' oaths of non-interference, not because Shojo thought it might contradict his own story. So while I do think there's the possibility that some of the crayon narratives are misleading (intentionally or otherwise) or incomplete, I'm not sure that Shojo's statement there is an indication of it either way.


i hope i quoted that correctly.

How do we know that when the rift was sealed with the sapphire the seal held the gem in place. Also from the size of it, the gem looks really small. depending what was there before the castle, i would assume it hard to believe a tiny, diminutive even, sapphire would be seen randomly while looking upwards towards the sky.

It might not be, but "might not be noticed" isn't a great way to go when you're talking about a secret which literally threatens the entirety of existence. Even if the seal did hold the gem in place, that's not really an acceptable risk.

[Ron Miel]

That's one theory. My stance is to view them as actual in-universe history until proven otherwise, though. I'm not sure if we have an indications that they aren't reliable.

Soon accurately reported what he believed to be true. Surely he wouldn't lie about it. But as for reliability, there is every indication that Soon did not fully understand the situation. There's at least two things he got wrong.
1) He thought that no two of the scribblers ever saw each other again. We know that Dorukan and Lirian remained lovers, and Serini and Girard at minimum sent each other messages.
2) Plus the fact that the rift above Azure City does not have a monster reaching out from it.

The crayon strips are therefore the inaccurate memories of someone who does not fully understand the situation.

[Balain]

To me it looks like the sapphire isn't in the throne yet in that panel. It looks like the setting is in place but grey where the sapphire would be

[The Extinguisher]

We've seen flashbacks and history told in both the crayon style and the normal style of the comic. Obviously we're not assuming the normal style is inaccurate. It makes more sense to assume that the normal flashbacks are objective while the crayon ones are subjective.

[Conuly]

He thought that no two of the scribblers ever saw each other again. We know that Dorukan and Lirian remained lovers, and Serini and Girard at minimum sent each other messages.

Indeed, I read the comic with the assumption that they probably ALL stayed in touch EXCEPT him.


The crayon strips are therefore the inaccurate memories of someone who does not fully understand the situation.

And to date, only V and the bird seem to have any idea that there's more to understand. Has V let the rest of the gang in on the whole "planet in the rift" concept? (And did they believe V(im) when V did?)

[JoseB]

Some people said the lack of phylactery in Jirix's crayon story is a hint of unreliability. (Compare: second (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0656.html) and third (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0704.html) panels.) I think that just means the crayon stories just don't show details the person telling the story chose to omit, but are otherwise almost exactly what happened.

First of all, it is not surprising that the panel doesn't show Jirix with the phylactery, because Jirix, at that point, was not carrying Xykon's phylactery ;) He carried his holy symbol.

But, in any case, in the second strip linked to (#704), the crayon drawing that shows Jirix being killed by O-chul *shows* Jirix wearing his holy symbol. It is hard to see, because the symbol itself is hidden by the iron bar that O-chul is wielding. If you look carefully you can see the string or chain that holds the symbol hanging from Jirix's neck --it is just that, in that panel, its colour is very similar to the background of Jirix's vest.

So, that particular argument, using these two strips, is not relevant.

[Kish]

Soon accurately reported what he believed to be true.
[...]
The crayon strips are therefore the inaccurate memories of someone who does not fully understand the situation.
Soon didn't narrate one of the crayon strips.

Shojo, who lied habitually and casually, did.

[Tebryn]

No one else noticed that the throne doesn't have the sapphire in it in the crayon picture? It's the Sapphire. I think that's pretty clear.

[Cizak]

First of all, it is not surprising that the panel doesn't show Jirix with the phylactery, because Jirix, at that point, was not carrying Xykon's phylactery ;) He carried his holy symbol.

But, in any case, in the second strip linked to (#704), the crayon drawing that shows Jirix being killed by O-chul *shows* Jirix wearing his holy symbol. It is hard to see, because the symbol itself is hidden by the iron bar that O-chul is wielding. If you look carefully you can see the string or chain that holds the symbol hanging from Jirix's neck --it is just that, in that panel, its colour is very similar to the background of Jirix's vest.

So, that particular argument, using these two strips, is not relevant.

What are you talking about? We're talking about the fact that the phylactery O-chul dropped cannot be seen in the second comic linked.

[Sarco_Phage]

No one else noticed that the throne doesn't have the sapphire in it in the crayon picture? It's the Sapphire. I think that's pretty clear.

Yes. What we're arguing about is whether or not it's THE Sapphire, and if it is, how this contradicts parts of the story, since it's been stated that the seal can't exactly be moved.

[zimmerwald1915]

Has the possibility been explored that the Gate was not the Sapphire itself, but rather that it originally looked like Lirian's and Dorukan's Gates (a, in this case tiny, pink wall buttressed by stone edges? Lirian's Gate looked like that and was floating in midair) and that the Sapphire was just placed in front? Hinjo says that the Gate is the Sapphire itself, but he's a Paladin told about the Galte's construction many years after the fact, not an epic spellcaster who should be expected to know about Gate construction.

[Tebryn]

Yes. What we're arguing about is whether or not it's THE Sapphire, and if it is, how this contradicts parts of the story, since it's been stated that the seal can't exactly be moved.

Why wouldn't it be -the- Sapphire? I'm more confused why we're even discussing it when it's so plain to see. Why would they rotate Sapphires out of the throne of the Lord of Azure City?

[Sarco_Phage]

Why wouldn't it be -the- Sapphire? I'm more confused why we're even discussing it when it's so plain to see. Why would they rotate Sapphires out of the throne of the Lord of Azure City?

Because if the seal is the Sapphire, then there's some incongruity with when the seal was created.

[Cizak]

Why wouldn't it be -the- Sapphire? I'm more confused why we're even discussing it when it's so plain to see. Why would they rotate Sapphires out of the throne of the Lord of Azure City?

Because it has been established that the gate cannot be moved, and the sapphire is the gate. That's the whole reason this is all pretty confusing.

[Tebryn]

I doubt there is. The rift in Azure City is in the sky, we know that. Perhaps the gate was sealed with a rune like the others we've seen and the rune was replaced by the Sapphire via some other spell. We don't know. But Occam's Razor is applicable here. The solution with the least assumptions is probably the right one. There's no reason for it -not- to be -THE- Sapphire. It's the bloody Sapphire.

Edit: I am also fairly certain that in SoD Redcloak mentions being able to actually move the gates.

[Quild]

A "big" rift has been sealed in a "tiny" sapphire, which is held "quite far" from the original emplacement of the rift.

Maybe the sapphire can't be moved more than a few dozens feet away.

It's like my house's phone. I can't use it outside my house, but I can move inside the house while answering a call.

[Tebryn]

It's also called the Sapphire Guard. Not the Guardians of the Rift or the Topaz Templar or the Cat's Eye Crusaders. They're protecting the object that seals the rift. The Sapphire. The Sapphire which was in the throne, but isn't in the picture. To claim it's not the same sapphire would require a good deal of evidence. Claiming it is the sapphire does not, the evidence is in the drawing. It was intentionally not drawn into the picture. Sure a cigar is a cigar but I think Rich is pretty clear that the Sapphire in the drawing is the same one on the throne. Meaning that it's the seal for the rift. How that works...I dunno.

[Cizak]

I doubt there is. The rift in Azure City is in the sky, we know that. Perhaps the gate was sealed with a rune like the others we've seen and the rune was replaced by the Sapphire via some other spell. We don't know. But Occam's Razor is applicable here. The solution with the least assumptions is probably the right one. There's no reason for it -not- to be -THE- Sapphire. It's the bloody Sapphire.

Edit: I am also fairly certain that in SoD Redcloak mentions being able to actually move the gates.

What other rifts were sealed with a rune?

The reason for it not to be -the- sapphire is the fact that the gate cannot be moved.

The part with RC you mention is with the ritual. I dount Soon knew about the ritual.

[Tebryn]

What other rifts were sealed with a rune?

None of them were sealed by runes, but I do believe at the very least the Elven Lands Gate and the Red Mountains Gate had runes on the gates themselves. Again, I could be remembering incorrectly and only the RM one did. We've actually yet to see two of the others.


The reason for it not to be -the- sapphire is the fact that the gate cannot be moved.

False.


The part with RC you mention is with the ritual. I dount Soon knew about the ritual.

By your own post. The Gates -can- be moved.

Once again, Occam's Razor. The answer with the least assumptions is more than likely the correct one. The Sapphire he's being handed is the sapphire that held the gate. Once again, how is it possible? No idea, barring the Giant coming in and explaining himself which I doubt quite highly will happen there is little reason to assume otherwise.



I think it's the sapphire which would eventually become Soon's Gate. The rift is floating the sky, and then (minor War and XPs spoiler)Lord Ronjo built a new tower to reach the rift.And then Lirian and Dorukan perform the ritual in the new throne room and never see Soon again (unless Soon is already dead by that point).

I think.

There's also that bit of information or to really add to it. If it -isn't- the Sapphire then it's just some random sapphire with no baring on the story and there's really no need to discuss it is there?

[Sarco_Phage]

False.

... but it's stated that they can't.

[Tebryn]

... but it's stated that they can't.

But it's shown that there is a way around it. So...what exactly is your point? Just because someone said they couldn't means they can't even though on of the main villains has a ritual that will let it be moved around? I actually forget who said they couldn't be moved, if you could refresh my memory. Red Cloak says he can move them via a spell the Dark One gave him. So either the person who said it can't be moved is incorrect or Red Cloak is.

[Quild]

I thought that Redcloak's spell was supposed to allow him to control the Snarl. Not to move the gate (but to move the gate is a part of the plan).

[Tebryn]

I thought that Redcloak's spell was supposed to allow him to control the Snarl. Not to move the gate (but to move the gate is a part of the plan).

Red Cloak actually states that the Snarl is uncontrollable and that the spell only lets them move the portal where ever they wish.

[Quild]

Can't check my "Start of Darkness" right now, but I trust you on this.
Still, that doesn't mean gates can't be moved AT ALL.

Sounds fair to me that the seals have to stay close from the rift they seals. Redcloak's spell may allow to move a rift.
I remember that Lirian's Gate was broken easily when the trees moved, but it was a much larger rift, and the "structure" of the seal broke off. So this could be compared by the sapphire being broken by Miko.

If the seals couldn't move at all, this rift should have been sealed in the sky, right?

[Tebryn]

Can't check my "Start of Darkness" right now, but I trust you on this.

I'm fairly certain that's what he said. I don't have the book at hand at the moment either.


Still, that doesn't mean gates can't be moved AT ALL.

That's what I'm stating in the first place. Well, more to the point I'm saying that there's no real reason other than baseless assumption that it isn't what it looks like.

[legomaster00156]

Aren't the crayon drawings not necessarily depictions of the actual events?

Shojo saw that event himself, so I think it's pretty reliable.

[Joerg]

Let's summarize a bit:


The rift is in the sky now. It was in the throne room earlier, which was in an upper level of the palace, which exploded when the Gate was destroyed.
Hinjo says here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0411.html) that the throne and the palace have been constructed around the Gate, which was the Sapphire. The rift has never moved, and the Sapphire was always where the rift was.
You need a ritual to be able to move the rift (if that is possible at all)
There's no indication that a Gate could be away from the rift it seals

So what does that leave us with?


Hinjo lied or was misinformed about the Sapphire; and either the Gate can also be away from the rift, or the rift can be moved without the ritual.
Shojo misremembered or told the story inaccurately.
The drawing is not actually what Shojo narrates, but what the listeners imagine from the narration.
The sapphire in the drawing is not the one that seals the rift.
The author made a mistake in the drawing.

Use your own judgement about what you think more likely or where you think more assumptions have to be made.

[Tebryn]

The rift is in the sky now. It was in the throne room earlier, which was in an upper level of the palace, which exploded when the Gate was destroyed.

The rift was always in the sky.

Also note that Hinjo didn't say the gate -COULDN'T- be moved. Just that it was to risky. Big difference.

[Holy_Knight]

The rift was always in the sky.

Also note that Hinjo didn't say the gate -COULDN'T- be moved. Just that it was to risky. Big difference.

Not really. If it's too risky to move the gate, then it makes it all the more unlikely that Soon would have done so--but that is what would have to have happened if he kept the sapphire somewhere else and only later attached it to the throne. On the other hand, if Hinjo is misinformed about that point, it raises the possibility that the gates theoretically could be moved without using the ritual (and that other things we think we know about the gates may not be right).

On that note...


But it's shown that there is a way around it. So...what exactly is your point? Just because someone said they couldn't means they can't even though on of the main villains has a ritual that will let it be moved around? I actually forget who said they couldn't be moved, if you could refresh my memory. Red Cloak says he can move them via a spell the Dark One gave him. So either the person who said it can't be moved is incorrect or Red Cloak is.

...I really don't know why you're equating these two things when they're clearly not the same. Saying "we can't physically move the sapphire because it might break the seal on the rift" is not contradicted by "a magical ritual can allow us to move the rift around", whether or not the first statement is actually true.

[Whiffet]

The drawing is not actually what Shojo narrates, but what the listeners imagine from the narration.
The sapphire in the drawing is not the one that seals the rift.
The author made a mistake in the drawing.


I think these are the best explanations for this issue. Who knows, maybe at that point it hadn't been decided that the rift was right there yet.

[137beth]

I think the most likely scenario is that it is a sapphire, but not the same one in the throne. It is a symbol of leadership of the SAPPHIRE guard. Most other theories tossed around here just seem overly complicated (except for "the author hadn't decided the gate couldn't move", which I find unlikely).

[Ron Miel]

Soon didn't narrate one of the crayon strips.

Shojo, who lied habitually and casually, did.

Shojo repeated the Lore of the Sapphire Guard, which came from Soon. He was surrounded at the time by members of the guard, who would have noticed if he misrepresented the Lore. Plujshe wanted to get Roy on his side, so he told him the facts, as he understood them. I consider it unlikely that Shojo was deliberately lying, but highly probable that he was mistaken about a number of things.

[Cizak]

But it's shown that there is a way around it. So...what exactly is your point? Just because someone said they couldn't means they can't even though on of the main villains has a ritual that will let it be moved around? I actually forget who said they couldn't be moved, if you could refresh my memory. Red Cloak says he can move them via a spell the Dark One gave him. So either the person who said it can't be moved is incorrect or Red Cloak is.

But only the high priest of the Dark One (and Xykon) knows this very complex ritual that allows them to move it. Nobody else (as far as we know) can move the gate, which makes hit impossible for the thing Soon holds to be -the- sapphire, since -the- sapphire IS the gate.

[WickedWizard17]

I think it WAS the sapphire and the rift. But I don't think it was moved around - I think Soon stuck around in Azure City holding onto it. Might have even lived in the castle, because he had such a high ranking.

[Cizak]

I think it WAS the sapphire and the rift. But I don't think it was moved around - I think Soon stuck around in Azure City holding onto it. Might have even lived in the castle, because he had such a high ranking.

What? He's clearly handing it over to Shojo's father.

[Tebryn]

...I really don't know why you're equating these two things when they're clearly not the same. Saying "we can't physically move the sapphire because it might break the seal on the rift" is not contradicted by "a magical ritual can allow us to move the rift around", whether or not the first statement is actually true.

Because...the statement "The Gate cannot be moved" is wrong? It can be moved. Either by the ritual or of course just moving it and taking the risk. Just because something is improbable and dangerous does not make it impossible or undoable.

[Cizak]

Because...the statement "The Gate cannot be moved" is wrong? It can be moved. Either by the ritual or of course just moving it and taking the risk. Just because something is improbable and dangerous does not make it impossible or undoable.

How and why is it wrong? Besides the ritual, which Soon obviously does not know about, and wouldn't be able to do if he did know.

[Tebryn]

Because no one actually states that the Gates -cannot- be moved. Just that they shouldn't be moved because of the risk involved. Sure, big risk and a good enough reason not to move the gates. But still, the Gates -can- be moved, either by the Ritual or just moving them manually and accepting you might let loose a god killing abomination.

[Cizak]

So you think Soon risked the undoing of the entire universe when he had to tell the new guy he was going to be in charge from now?

[Tebryn]

I did not state that what so ever. I stated that the assumption it cannot be -the- Sapphire based on the fact the Sapphire couldn't be moved is false since it isn't the case and shouldn't be used as an argument for how it cannot be the Sapphire because it is false.

[Cizak]

BS. The gate cannot be moved without high risk of leting the Snarl loose. Therefore, it is very unlikely that the thing Soon is holding is -the- sapphire.

[Tebryn]

You still haven't answered why the Sapphire...you know, the thing the gate is bound to, isn't in the chair we know it's supposed to be in. You can call B.S all you want but it not being the Sapphire is much more unlikely. Where's the Sapphire go then if it's not on the chair? You know, the chair, the throne room, the whole dang castle is built around? You'd think that'd be an important piece to be missing.

[Gift Jeraff]

Why can't it be the sapphire, but before it turned into the Gate? I still think the scene takes place before the Order of the Scribble disbanded, and Soon was telling Lord Ronjo what was going to happen. (Two foreigners are going to seal the rift indefinitely using that sapphire.)

[Holy_Knight]

Because...the statement "The Gate cannot be moved" is wrong? It can be moved. Either by the ritual or of course just moving it and taking the risk. Just because something is improbable and dangerous does not make it impossible or undoable.
You're mssing the point. The statement is not "the gate can't be moved", it's "the gate can't be moved physically without risking its opening". It is irrelevant to what Hinjo said whether there exists a magical ritual that could move the rift.

Further to that point:


I stated that the assumption it cannot be -the- Sapphire based on the fact the Sapphire couldn't be moved is false since it isn't the case and shouldn't be used as an argument for how it cannot be the Sapphire because it is false.
Again, simply "could it have been moved?" was never the issue. The argument is: "If it was too dangerous to risk moving the sapphire, then it doesn't make sense to assume that Soon did exactly that". When people have said the sapphire "couldn't be moved", they meant without risking the opening of the gate, not that it literally couldn't be moved. We already know that it could, because Hinjo's reason why moving it won't work is that it's too risky (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0411.html), not that it's literally impossible.


You still haven't answered why the Sapphire...you know, the thing the gate is bound to, isn't in the chair we know it's supposed to be in. You can call B.S all you want but it not being the Sapphire is much more unlikely. Where's the Sapphire go then if it's not on the chair? You know, the chair, the throne room, the whole dang castle is built around? You'd think that'd be an important piece to be missing.
Right--that observation was my whole reason for starting the thread in the first place. Given that it seems as if the sapphire is not there, and that Soon may be giving it to Ronjo, it casts doubt on the idea that it was too risky to move the sapphire.


Why can't it be the sapphire, but before it turned into the Gate? I still think the scene takes place before the Order of the Scribble disbanded, and Soon was telling Lord Ronjo what was going to happen. (Two foreigners are going to seal the rift indefinitely using that sapphire.)
That scenario doesn't make sense. For one thing, the scene in question is when Soon is very old and near death, and they sealed the rifts when he was still much younger looking. More importantly, they sealed all the rifts before they decided how to defend them, which was what the argument was about. We know that Soon had no contact with any of the others after that argument, so by the time that Soon founded the sapphire guard to defend his gate, the seal would have already been in place.

[Cizak]

You still haven't answered why the Sapphire...you know, the thing the gate is bound to, isn't in the chair we know it's supposed to be in. You can call B.S all you want but it not being the Sapphire is much more unlikely. Where's the Sapphire go then if it's not on the chair? You know, the chair, the throne room, the whole dang castle is built around? You'd think that'd be an important piece to be missing.

Yes. That's the whole thing that makes it all so confusing.

We know for a fact that the gates were already done when the Scribble disbanded and when Soon died. We can also be 99% sure that Soon would not risk the undoing of the universe when giving leadership to Ronjo (he just strikes me as a guy who wouldn't take that risk...) Therefore, it's very unlikely that the thing Soon is holding is the sapphire. So what is it? Why is the spot in the chair where the sapphire should be empty? This is what is so hard to tell.

[thereaper]

Maybe that's not actually the throne room they're in, but a special duplicate they used while the real one was being cleaned?

Hey, if nothing else works, it'll do as a fallback explanation. :smallwink:

[mrmcfatty]

why is it so hard to grasp that the Sapphire is really small and in the scribble it wasnt worth it to make sure it was slightly more blueish, maybe the giant just didnt feel like it, we know he has left out minor things before and he didnt expect it to explode into something this big.

And who knows what he was handing over, i assume it was just an ordinary gem that is used as the "crown" for rulers. or maybe its just a ceremony for show.

[CrimsonAngel]

If it can't be moved it would just float mid-air. I think that, as long as it's inside of something that you can move, the gate can move with it. Do I make sense?

[Tebryn]

You're mssing the point. The statement is not "the gate can't be moved", it's "the gate can't be moved physically without risking its opening". It is irrelevant to what Hinjo said whether there exists a magical ritual that could move the rift.

No I'm not. Until now everyone has been saying the gate cannot be moved, I will quote the various times it's been said until now. The two statements are not the same, regardless of the danger involved. You're also confusing the issue since my statement wasn't Hinjo was wrong because of the ritual..or any other such thing. I'll put it fully though.

The statement "The Gates cannot be moved" is false because.

1. No one has ever claimed that. The only time it's ever brought up was it was struck down because it was to dangerous. Not because it was impossible.

2. There is a ritual that only Red Cloak and Team Evil knows about. Thus rendering the statement "The Gates cannot be moved" false even if that was ever said.

Further to that point:



Again, simply "could it have been moved?" was never the issue. The argument is: "If it was too dangerous to risk moving the sapphire, then it doesn't make sense to assume that Soon did exactly that". When people have said the sapphire "couldn't be moved", they meant without risking the opening of the gate, not that it literally couldn't be moved. We already know that it could, because Hinjo's reason why moving it won't work is that it's too risky (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0411.html), not that it's literally impossible.

Hey! Once again I never claimed that he did. Please don't put words in my mouth. My only statement is that it's the Sapphire because it's the easiest answer to the question because it makes the least assumptions. You know, Occam's Razor?




Yes. That's the whole thing that makes it all so confusing.

We know for a fact that the gates were already done when the Scribble disbanded and when Soon died. We can also be 99% sure that Soon would not risk the undoing of the universe when giving leadership to Ronjo (he just strikes me as a guy who wouldn't take that risk...) Therefore, it's very unlikely that the thing Soon is holding is the sapphire. So what is it? Why is the spot in the chair where the sapphire should be empty? This is what is so hard to tell.

We do know that yes. No one is claiming that Soon moved the gate just for the giggles and pomp of it though. The fact remains, and the only point I've actually made for what the Sapphire is, is that the evidence points to it being -the- Sapphire. I'll even


1. It's a sapphire, or at least what we recognize as one from the drawings.

2. There is no sapphire in the throne. We know that there -was- before it was destroyed and we know that the entire place was built -around- it. For it to be missing is the real question mark here as many have pointed out.

3. Soon named the order after the sapphire they guarded.

4. Soon transferred control over to Hojo's father over the entire guard.

That's what we know. Once again, using logic here...it's the Sapphire

[Cizak]

Once again, using logic here...it's the Sapphire

How about you trying to do that? I feel like we're stuck in a loop here. You cannt move the gate (the gate = the sapphire) without risking setting the Snarl free. Soon would obviously not do that when transfering command. Therefore it's very unlikely that the thing he is holding is the sapphire.

[zimmerwald1915]

And who knows what he was handing over, i assume it was just an ordinary gem that is used as the "crown" for rulers. or maybe its just a ceremony for show.
It can't be the "'crown' for rulers". We saw Hinjo's coronation ceremony as Lord of Azure City, and it involved an actual metal crown, with points and everything. It could be the symbol for leadership over the Sapphire Guard, which until Soon handed it over to Lord Ronjo wasn't attached to the office of Lord of Azure City, and at that time became redundant as a symbol.

[Holy_Knight]

No I'm not. Until now everyone has been saying the gate cannot be moved, I will quote the various times it's been said until now. The two statements are not the same, regardless of the danger involved. You're also confusing the issue since my statement wasn't Hinjo was wrong because of the ritual..or any other such thing. I'll put it fully though.
Yes, you are. As I said, you're taking people's statements that "The sapphire can't be moved" literally, when it was really shorthand for "...without an unacceptable risk".



The statement "The Gates cannot be moved" is false because.

1. No one has ever claimed that. The only time it's ever brought up was it was struck down because it was to dangerous. Not because it was impossible.

2. There is a ritual that only Red Cloak and Team Evil knows about. Thus rendering the statement "The Gates cannot be moved" false even if that was ever said.
Right, and neither 1 nor 2 have anything to do with the argument that Soon wouldn't have taken that risk unnecessarily, again, unless you take people saying the gate "can't be moved" literally.



Hey! Once again I never claimed that he did. Please don't put words in my mouth.
I know you didn't--I'm saying you're putting words in other people's mouths, by thinking they're arguing that it's actually impossible to move the sapphire, not just too dangerous.



My only statement is that it's the Sapphire because it's the easiest answer to the question because it makes the least assumptions. You know, Occam's Razor?
Actually, Occam's Razor is more like "Don't complicate explanations beyond necessity", not "the explanation with the least assumptions is best" (and certainly not the "the easiest answer is best"). In any case, it's not clear that thinking it is THE sapphire has the fewest unnecessary assumptions anyway. The real question is: "What presumed peces of information must we discard if it is THE sapphire, vs. not?" Thus part of the reason for the thread.





1. It's a sapphire, or at least what we recognize as one from the drawings.

2. There is no sapphire in the throne. We know that there -was- before it was destroyed and we know that the entire place was built -around- it. For it to be missing is the real question mark here as many have pointed out.

3. Soon named the order after the sapphire they guarded.

4. Soon transferred control over to Hojo's father over the entire guard.

That's what we know. Once again, using logic here...it's the Sapphire
3. and 4. are true, but don't affect the argument.

1. is possible, but not confirmed.

2. is really the crux of the issue, and the question remains of how to reconcile the conflicting information we seem to be getting about the scene. It may be the sapphire, but if it is, we need to explain the problems that raises. If it isn't, then we need an explanation for what's actually going on there.

[thereaper]

Question: Do we know that the gate is the sapphire?

What if the sapphire is hollow, and it goes over the gate (with that gray thing being the real gate)?

[VanBuren]

I've just assumed it was a symbolic "passing of the torch" illustration.

[Lord Raziere]

Wait....a promise....Soon....we do not know enough about Gates.....

connecting the dots....could've Soon known what was behind the Gates and promised not to tell anyone whats inside?

[Cizak]

Wait....a promise....Soon....we do not know enough about Gates.....

connecting the dots....could've Soon known what was behind the Gates and promised not to tell anyone whats inside?

Say whut? The entire Order of the Scribble knew about the Snarl, obiously.

[Sarco_Phage]

Wait....a promise....Soon....we do not know enough about Gates.....

connecting the dots....could've Soon known what was behind the Gates and promised not to tell anyone whats inside?

Wait, what?

Shojo knows, which means that the information certainly disseminated somehow - clearly only to the leaders of the Sapphire Guard and the followers of the others though.

[The Giant]

The gem reinforces the Gate; the gem is NOT the Gate, and the Gate is not the seal, and the seal is not the rift. The gem is the deadbolt, not the lock, or the door, or the doorway. The "door" is a complex spell that is not actually visible but is what Dorukan and Lirian are casting in the first panel of the second page of #276. The "lock" is the Gate, a tiny magical object that later had a throne crafted around it; it's about the size of a raisin in the case of Azure City. The "doorway" is the rift itself, and it is not really inside the gemstone, it's just that the gem (and Gate) are translucent and we can see through it (because it's a visual medium and it made it easier to understand). The gemstone is an enchanted object that further seals and reinforces the Gate; thus, the "deadbolt."

When Soon hands over the Sapphire to Shojo's father, he is essentially giving the last piece of the Gate's security system over so that it might be put into place. Think of the Sapphire as an additional seal that Soon and his followers came up with. The Sapphire does not NEED to be in the same place as the Gate in order to seal it, because it's magic, but moving it around is risky. There's a chance that it will just fail and the Gate will swing open. Before the panel shown, Soon likely kept it somewhere else safe, but chose as he was dying to consolidate the protections (because that's where he was going to be hanging out as a ghost-martyr). I guess the magic might have been stronger being in the same spot as the Gate, too.

So, no, the Gate or the rift could not have been physically moved. The Sapphire could be moved, and Xykon would have been obligated to track it down and undo its magic before he could perform his ritual, but there would be a risk in doing so, and it wouldn't really have stopped Xykon from sieging the city at that point (because he still would have needed the immovable Gate).

The use of Redcloak's magic ritual to shift the Gate into another plane is entirely unrelated, and in fact can only shift a Gate to another plane—not to another place in THIS plane. Think of it like moving a Bag of Holding from the Prime to an Outer Plane: you've moved the entranceway to an extradimensional space, but opening it still leads to the same interior.

Hopefully, that clears the issue up.

[Gift Jeraff]

Thanks for clearing that up. :smallsmile:That also adds a whole other level to Redcloak's deception. Not only is he lying to Xykon about being able to to control the Snarl, but he's also letting Xykon deceive himself into thinking the Gates could be moved around the prime material plane. Intriguing.

[VanBuren]

It does clear that up, but now I'm a little confused about how Miko blew up the gate. If the gem was only the deadbolt, then how did destroying it unleash the Rift? Or did Miko cut through more than just the gem when she did that?

[ThePhantasm]

It does clear that up, but now I'm a little confused about how Miko blew up the gate. If the gem was only the deadbolt, then how did destroying it unleash the Rift? Or did Miko cut through more than just the gem when she did that?

Miko doesn't destroy the gem, she destroys the throne. Since the throne is built around the gate, presumably she cut through the gate as well, opening the rift.

EDIT: Nevermind, I was thinking of when she killed Shojo. She does indeed destroy the gem, so there goes my theory in response to your question.

[zimmerwald1915]

EDIT: Nevermind, I was thinking of when she killed Shojo. She does indeed destroy the gem, so there goes my theory in response to your question.
The Gem was placed in front of the Gate, which reinforced the Seal, which sealed the Rift. They were all in the same spot. :smallsigh:

[ThePhantasm]

The Gem was placed in front of the Gate, which reinforced the Seal, which sealed the Rift. They were all in the same spot. :smallsigh:

Ok, it was the transparent gate bit that confused me. I interpreted "throne built around the gate" in a different way than "built around the gem / seal."

[Tebryn]

It does clear that up, but now I'm a little confused about how Miko blew up the gate. If the gem was only the deadbolt, then how did destroying it unleash the Rift? Or did Miko cut through more than just the gem when she did that?

I'd say yes. You can see the Gate in the Gem so shattering the Gem would also mean that the sword cut through the gate which somehow caused it to explode.

[Holy_Knight]

The gem reinforces the Gate; the gem is NOT the Gate, and the Gate is not the seal, and the seal is not the rift. The gem is the deadbolt, not the lock, or the door, or the doorway. The "door" is a complex spell that is not actually visible but is what Dorukan and Lirian are casting in the first panel of the second page of #276. The "lock" is the Gate, a tiny magical object that later had a throne crafted around it; it's about the size of a raisin in the case of Azure City. The "doorway" is the rift itself, and it is not really inside the gemstone, it's just that the gem (and Gate) are translucent and we can see through it (because it's a visual medium and it made it easier to understand). The gemstone is an enchanted object that further seals and reinforces the Gate; thus, the "deadbolt."

When Soon hands over the Sapphire to Shojo's father, he is essentially giving the last piece of the Gate's security system over so that it might be put into place. Think of the Sapphire as an additional seal that Soon and his followers came up with. The Sapphire does not NEED to be in the same place as the Gate in order to seal it, because it's magic, but moving it around is risky. There's a chance that it will just fail and the Gate will swing open. Before the panel shown, Soon likely kept it somewhere else safe, but chose as he was dying to consolidate the protections (because that's where he was going to be hanging out as a ghost-martyr). I guess the magic might have been stronger being in the same spot as the Gate, too.

So, no, the Gate or the rift could not have been physically moved. The Sapphire could be moved, and Xykon would have been obligated to track it down and undo its magic before he could perform his ritual, but there would be a risk in doing so, and it wouldn't really have stopped Xykon from sieging the city at that point (because he still would have needed the immovable Gate).

The use of Redcloak's magic ritual to shift the Gate into another plane is entirely unrelated, and in fact can only shift a Gate to another plane—not to another place in THIS plane. Think of it like moving a Bag of Holding from the Prime to an Outer Plane: you've moved the entranceway to an extradimensional space, but opening it still leads to the same interior.

Hopefully, that clears the issue up.
Thanks, Giant, that really does clear things up. So the sapphire was the final deadbolt, and the delay in placing it was due to the time needed to construct the castle and throne.