What is really in the Rift?

[Insertmeme]

In OoTs #998, when Loki is making his speech, notice that he says "You know who", implying that the thing in the rift is not a what, but a Who. Again in #999, Tyr, God of War says he will not allow anyONE to get an advantage over us.
Which leads to my theory.
The planet in the Rift that Blackwing saw is the first world that was supposedly consumed by the snarl. The "Who" in the rift the gods are afraid of, is one or more of the Gods of the East, that were supposedly destroyed by the Snarl.
Only some of the Gods were given this knowledge, which is why Hel , The Dark One, and the Paladins think it's the Snarl. Of course, any discussion of what the Dark One knows hinges on the assumption that he isn't lying to Redcloak.

(This is, obviously, pure speculation. It is entirely possible that Rich just made a mistake while writing, and I'm making a mountain out of a molehill. The East Pantheon Theory really doesn't have much evidence backing it up.)
Any thoughts?

[martianmister]

I always believed that Snarl is a "who", and "he" is a conscious, evil being.

[Kish]

The Snarl is a creature; Tsukiko identified Redcloak's ritual as not actually doing what he'd said it did based partly on that fact, remember? So I'm not clear on what clue you're seeing here. "You-Know-Who" is far more likely to be the character dominating the big panel (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html) than three pantheons of gods being terrified of part of one pantheon.

[Mad Humanist]

I can see good points all round here. It would however be a Giant-worthy plot-twist (and yet adequately foreshadowed) if the OP is correct. Just to carry the speculation a little further the crayon stories could have been metaphorical with the original Snarl being a "red mist" that mind-controlled gods rather than killing them outright. Thus the Eastern pantheon became the god-like equivalent of zombies - at least from the perspective of the other gods. The world we see inside the rift is what the Zombified Eastern pantheon created once they had nothing that they could attack.

On the other hand I always previously thought the "who" the OP is referring to is the Dark One. This implies that if the other Gods had just invited the Dark-skinned god round to tea and shared their toys with him like well- brought up gods, a whole lot of plot could have been avoided.

[Jasdoif]

Only some of the Gods were given this knowledge, which is why Hel , The Dark One, and the Paladins think it's the Snarl.
Any thoughts?How do you think this knowledge was withheld from Hel? Unlike the Dark One and the Sapphire Guard, she would've been around for the events in question (it'd be hard to make the wager with Thor if she wasn't there when the current world was created).

[theAui]

It is the world from 3rd edition DnD and the Snarl is an equivalent to PunPun. The gods remade the world after the the rules they created became a god killing abdomination, just like WotC created a bunch of rules that made it harder for players to become the same. There was no way to fix 3rd editions rules, that's why they made a "new world" 3.5 edition.
Nowadays it is pretty easy to make a character that also gets pretty insanely powerful by level ~10, assuming one plays a focused specialist conjurer with ethereal jaunt and some Incantrix levels.

It's kind of like the whole story evolves around it and there have been masses of hints :)

[Domino Quartz]

It is the world from 3rd edition DnD and the Snarl is an equivalent to PunPun. The gods remade the world after the the rules they created became a god killing abdomination, just like WotC created a bunch of rules that made it harder for players to become the same. There was no way to fix 3rd editions rules, that's why they made a "new world" 3.5 edition.
Nowadays it is pretty easy to make a character that also gets pretty insanely powerful by level ~10, assuming one plays a focused specialist conjurer with ethereal jaunt and some Incantrix levels.

It's kind of like the whole story evolves around it and there have been masses of hints :)

The problem with your theory is that in the very first comic, the characters notice that they have been updated to version 3.5 from version 3.0.

[KorvinStarmast]

The problem with your theory is that in the very first comic, the characters notice that they have been updated to version 3.5 from version 3.0.
Perhaps, but I think that Rich had experienced *that which became the Snarl* at a table or two long before comic 0001 ever saw the light of day. (Subconscious influences are a weird thing in writing ...)

[Insertmeme]

I always believed that Snarl is a "who", and "he" is a conscious, evil being.

in #275, Shojo says "The Snarl was a thing born of chaos." Hardly seems like a "who" or "he", much less something that would notice a strategic advantage. Of course, Tyr could just be crazy and paranoid.

[theasl]

in #275, Shojo says "The Snarl was a thing born of chaos." Hardly seems like a "who" or "he", much less something that would notice a strategic advantage. Of course, Tyr could just be crazy and paranoid.

Things don't have to be alive or gendered for people to assign them such attributes (look at ships, for example, which are commonly called "she" or "her"). Conversely, people often refuse to assign such attributes to alive, gendered things that they really dislike (exes, Hitler, etc.), referring to them as "thing". As far as we know, the Snarl is alive, sentient, and very much disliked.

And if we're assigning the Snarl and the remaking to version changes, I nominate the old world as 2e/AD&D and the Snarl clearly represents THAC0 :smallbiggrin:

[Goblin_Priest]

In OoTs #998, when Loki is making his speech, notice that he says "You know who", implying that the thing in the rift is not a what, but a Who. Again in #999, Tyr, God of War says he will not allow anyONE to get an advantage over us.
Which leads to my theory.
The planet in the Rift that Blackwing saw is the first world that was supposedly consumed by the snarl. The "Who" in the rift the gods are afraid of, is one or more of the Gods of the East, that were supposedly destroyed by the Snarl.
Only some of the Gods were given this knowledge, which is why Hel , The Dark One, and the Paladins think it's the Snarl. Of course, any discussion of what the Dark One knows hinges on the assumption that he isn't lying to Redcloak.

(This is, obviously, pure speculation. It is entirely possible that Rich just made a mistake while writing, and I'm making a mountain out of a molehill. The East Pantheon Theory really doesn't have much evidence backing it up.)
Any thoughts?


An interesting theory. I could very well imagine any living creature being referred to as a "you-know-who", though, and not just sentient ones. "If you mention the S word, you-know-who is going to come running and jumping", to refer to mentioning steak within hearing range of the family pet dog, feels more proper to me than saying "you-know-what" to refer to that same dog, even if he isn't sentient. The scribble lore seems to indicate that the snarl is, at the very least, as intelligent as an animal.

The other comment, though, does more strongly suggest talking about someone sentient, though. Now maybe the Snarl is sentient. Maybe there's someone sentient controlling the Snarl. Maybe there's just a sentient someone and no Snarl. Hard to say. But you have to remember that there are eye accounts of the Snarl snatching people through the rifts.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

But you have to remember that there are eye accounts of the Snarl snatching people through the rifts.

We don't need to rely on accounts anymore. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html)

Also, as described, the Snarl does not sound sentient - just aggressive, and only capable of lashing out.

GW

[Goblin_Priest]

We don't need to rely on accounts anymore. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html)

Also, as described, the Snarl does not sound sentient - just aggressive, and only capable of lashing out.

GW

Technically, this could be an effect created by another creature, such as by a spell. If we accept the possibility that the lore might be a lie, there's no way to truly evaluate any of the things we have seen ourselves.

The gods might have lied about the Snarl not being really sentient (he might be the big bad they fear). They might have lied about it existing (he might just be a manifestation of another's power). They might have lied about it being the source of their fears (he might exist, but obey another's agenda).

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Technically, this could be an effect created by another creature, such as by a spell. If we accept the possibility that the lore might be a lie, there's no way to truly evaluate any of the things we have seen ourselves.

Irrelevant. We have seen something that looks like the Snarl, coming from the rift. Until such time as we get further evidence, Ockham's Razor is to call those things coming out "the Snarl", since it matches previous accounts, and judge based on what it did - which was to lash out because someone was scrying its world.

Yes, "technically (https://xkcd.com/1475/)" it could be something else. But that is true of absolutely every statement you care to make about the comic. "Maybe it was a spell made to look like the Snarl", like "Maybe all this is a dream of a 6-year-old child from our world", is "a possibility". Just a barren one, since it requires additional assumptions for which we have no evidence.


The gods might have lied about the Snarl not being really sentient (he might be the big bad they fear). They might have lied about it existing (he might just be a manifestation of another's power). They might have lied about it being the source of their fears (he might exist, but obey another's agenda).

Again: we do not need to rely on accounts. We have seen the Snarl in action. And so far, its actions have not been sentient, but reflexively aggressive. In the future, that may change, but until it does, there is no need to add complexity - what evidence we have matches well enough with the accounts we have been given - there is no particular reason to believe the stories are a lie.

Grey Wolf

[littlebum2002]

Remember though: the Snarl has eyes. At least it did in the Crayon comics. Whether those are to be trusted is another matter entirely, but as it stands right now, we can say the Snarl is a creature, not an object, and therefore has at least animalistic intelligence.

[A_S]

We don't need to rely on accounts anymore. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html)
I note that Laurin still appears to be standing outside the Rift in the final panel of that comic, even after her eyes get all weird. I'm not really clear on what happened in this strip, but Laurin doesn't appear to have been physically snatched.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I note that Laurin still appears to be standing outside the Rift in the final panel of that comic, even after her eyes get all weird. I'm not really clear on what happened in this strip, but Laurin doesn't appear to have been physically snatched.

So? There is a guard next to her that was pierced by a tentacle. Why doesn't he count?

GW

[A_S]

So? There is a guard next to her that was pierced by a tentacle. Why doesn't he count?

GW
The guy in, like, the bottom-center of the last panel? He does sorta look like the tentacle is doing something to him, but I thought it looked more like he was being impaled than snatched.

Like I said, I'm not super clear on what's happening in that panel. Is it indicated more clearly somewhere else that I've missed that somebody is being snatched into the rift there (rather than it just kind of exploding)?

*edit* I see you weren't really specifically saying that it snatches people, just that it definitely lashes out.

[Mandor]

I always believed that Snarl is a "who", and "he" is a conscious, evil being.

I'm going to side with The Doctor on this one. “Hardly anything is evil, but most things are hungry. Hunger looks very like evil from the wrong end of the cutlery. Or do you think your bacon sandwich loves you back?”

That said, given that this is a Fantasy setting, in this world there ARE many things that are in fact truly evil. Hel and Greg not least. Perhaps the Snarl is also one such, but I think it's more of just the "hungry" variety. And/or really pissed off at having been in solitary confinement for a rather long time.

[Snails]

Yes, "technically (https://xkcd.com/1475/)" it could be something else. But that is true of absolutely every statement you care to make about the comic. "Maybe it was a spell made to look like the Snarl", like "Maybe all this is a dream of a 6-year-old child from our world", is "a possibility". Just a barren one, since it requires additional assumptions for which we have no evidence.

Kudos, for usage here of "barren". I think such is a good way to describe suggestions that certainly are not absolutely impossible under known facts, yet require additional supporting speculation for so little in the way of useful predictions.




Again: we do not need to rely on accounts. We have seen the Snarl in action. And so far, its actions have not been sentient, but reflexively aggressive. In the future, that may change, but until it does, there is no need to add complexity - what evidence we have matches well enough with the accounts we have been given - there is no particular reason to believe the stories are a lie.

Grey Wolf

I generally agree. It would be uncharacteristically sloppy writing on the part of the Giant to declare things we thought were probably facts are actually outright wrong, especially when there were so many opportunities to drop hints about a significant errors in the story. Mind you, I believe it is quite likely the story we were told will turn out to be incomplete, where the details we know suggest a conclusion that turns out to not be quite correct.

I happen to be a proponent of the hypothesis that Kraagor could possibly be alive (not is definitely alive, but could be). I do recognize that such hypothetical depend on reasonings along the line of: the Snarl will turn out to actually be sentient, and possible to reason with under the right conditions. Of course, such is unfalsiable for the moment. It is likely we will learn enough about the Snarl eventually to determine whether this line of speculation is completely crazy....

[hamishspence]

We don't need to rely on accounts anymore. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html)

Also, as described, the Snarl does not sound sentient - just aggressive, and only capable of lashing out.

GW
Terms like "Intelligent" "hateful" and "malevolent" do get used for it in Shojo's account:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0273.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0274.html

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Terms like "Intelligent" "hateful" and "malevolent" do get used for it in Shojo's account:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0273.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0274.html

And he may well be intelligent (although the fact it couldn't tell it was being trapped is a bit of an issue), but his actions so far don't require him to be intelligent.

Going a bit meta, I think the story is setting up the Snarl to be more akin to a natural disaster than a scheaming big bad overlord, but that just IMnpHO.

GW