I've figured out the gates! (Fan Theory 1,645,724)

[brian 333]

I know what the gates are! It took me a day to realize I had already got it...


The DM need not be a sole individual. I once played a game where the DM split the party and then two DMs sat back to back running the dungeon for two groups simultaneously.

In the above post it seemed implied that the DM was the gods, but my bet is The Snarl is the DM. Who else can erase gods from the campaign world?

The empty ocean world in the desert with no life. The whole world in the sky above Azure City. They are other worlds the DM is working on, with different rulesets, possibly. The DM would have the power to remove a pantheon of gods from his world when early worldbuilding was revised, and he would be capable of ending the world.

But the creator never wants to quit creating, and the 3.5 ruleset is angiquated.

Oh, the gates. You see, this campaign world is the DM's early efforts at worldbuilding. It's been revised at least three times, considering Haley's assertion that her daddy was a 1st edition thief. Lots of work was put into the setting, but along the way the DM created five other campaign worlds, at least one of which is in its infancy. The DM may have gotten as far as creating the empty ocean. The gates weren't to keep the Snarl out, but to keep the PCs in.

Who knows? That world in space may have been a d20 Modern world or a far future space opera planet. Or it may have been a different campaign world for 4.0 edition. Or anything the DM wanted. In any case, any PC who attempts to cross between worlds risks erasure by the DM. As we saw when plans were being made for exactly that purpose.

The OotS is working to save the campaign world. The DM is planning to scrap it and start over. It's up to the PCs to determine if the setting is worthy of yet another revision.

[Elanasaurus]

Sorry I'm a bit confused. I always saw the OOTSverse as a comic strip universe with a D&D setting.
Are you saying that the Snarl created the gates? If the Snarl is the GM, who exactly are the players? Why would the GM create the Gates/Portals to other worlds if he didn't want the players to use them?

[Kish]

Sorry I'm a bit confused. I always saw the OOTSverse as a comic strip universe with a D&D setting.
Are you saying that the Snarl created the gates? If the Snarl is the GM, who exactly are the players? Why would the GM create the Gates/Portals to other worlds if he didn't want the players to use them?
It's worth noting that Rich has explicitly stated that there is no DM, and no players, just characters in a D&D setting.

[Elanasaurus]

It's worth noting that Rich has explicitly stated that there is no DM, and no players, just characters in a D&D setting.
Oh. I didn't know that. Thank you.

In fact I haven't read most of Rich's statements.

[Razade]

I know what the gates are! It took me a day to realize I had already got it...



The empty ocean world in the desert with no life. The whole world in the sky above Azure City. They are other worlds the DM is working on, with different rulesets, possibly. The DM would have the power to remove a pantheon of gods from his world when early worldbuilding was revised, and he would be capable of ending the world.

But the creator never wants to quit creating, and the 3.5 ruleset is angiquated.

Oh, the gates. You see, this campaign world is the DM's early efforts at worldbuilding. It's been revised at least three times, considering Haley's assertion that her daddy was a 1st edition thief. Lots of work was put into the setting, but along the way the DM created five other campaign worlds, at least one of which is in its infancy. The DM may have gotten as far as creating the empty ocean. The gates weren't to keep the Snarl out, but to keep the PCs in.

Who knows? That world in space may have been a d20 Modern world or a far future space opera planet. Or it may have been a different campaign world for 4.0 edition. Or anything the DM wanted. In any case, any PC who attempts to cross between worlds risks erasure by the DM. As we saw when plans were being made for exactly that purpose.

The OotS is working to save the campaign world. The DM is planning to scrap it and start over. It's up to the PCs to determine if the setting is worthy of yet another revision.

Yeah...no. Nice fanfiction though.

OotS is just a regular world where the laws of physics and the like are D&D rules. It's not an actual campaign, there's no DM. Simple as that.

[martianmister]

Gods are the DM equivalents. Snarl is literally a continuity snarl (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ContinuitySnarl) came to life.

[brian 333]

I didn't say the PCs had players. I didn't say the DM had a player.

And if the gods were the DM, they could declare one continuity thread correct and move on, but they cannot touch the Snarl.

Who, in any campaign world can create or erase continuity snarls? The DM. Nobody else, unless the DM should pass his creation on to another DM. The Snarl cannot exist without a DM behind it, unless it is itself the DM.

Similarly, the OotSverse cannot have been created except by a DM because the laws of physics of fantassy role playing games requires a creator from outside that setting.

The Snarl is creating other worlds, and doesn't like it when inhabitants of his first creation try to creep into their new ones.

I can relate to this. I ran a 1st ed game simultaneously with a Traveller game, swapping between the two for a change of pace. One of my players played Everin Strongarm and E. Vrin Strong in the two campaigns. Then my brother started a 2nd ed. campaign and the player tried to port the same character to that one too.

I can also relate to frustration at revision, because my 1st ed. world was revised for two and a half editions. I had a few continuity errors as the maps evolved, and a few obsolete monsters hanging about unrevised. When 4 and 5 came out virtually simultaneously I abandoned the idea of upgrading yet again, and my world sits in various editions awaiting a rewrite to bring it up to date. When my brother stops by we sometimes crack the 1st ed. books for a trip back in time.

I'm pretty sure the inhabitants of my world would have done exactly what the OotS guys are doing if they thought it would help.

In the mean time, I've created Shadowrun, Battletech, Runequest, Gurps, and half a dozen short or one shot campaigns. But they all go back to a day when I came home from my tour overseas to see my brother and his friends with my dice and my D&D books. The map I drew that evening has grown.

And I've stolen ideas generated for that world to use in others. My brother stole a scene and put it smack in the center of his world. There are rifts all over, both continuity and incomplete revision. My world which began with a river and three cities now fills a globe, but only if we squint when the edges of one campaign bump into another.

So, almost exactly what happened to my first game world is happening to OotS. It's one last campaign before the revision. And how well the players do will determine if they get a 5.0 revision or a storage bin in the garage.

[Lacuna Caster]

So, almost exactly what happened to my first game world is happening to OotS. It's one last campaign before the revision. And how well the players do will determine if they get a 5.0 revision or a storage bin in the garage.
I think it's unarguable that OOTS has gone through significant shifts in both tone and effective mechanical content over time. I actually quite like this idea.

[Elanasaurus]

I didn't say the PCs had players. I didn't say the DM had a player.
*snip*
So, almost exactly what happened to my first game world is happening to OotS. It's one last campaign before the revision. And how well the players do will determine if they get a 5.0 revision or a storage bin in the garage.
So in your theory do the PCs have players or not?
I still don't get the gates. In your world, there were only rifts, not gates. Why would a DM place gates over rifts he had purposely created? Why not just close the rifts?
Or is the Snarl actually two entities in a constant state of war? :elan:

[brian 333]

So in your theory do the PCs have players or not?
I still don't get the gates. In your world, there were only rifts, not gates. Why would a DM place gates over rifts he had purposely created? Why not just close the rifts?
Or is the Snarl actually two entities in a constant state of war? :elan:

No, there are no players in evidence, but it is not relevant to this theory. It really doesn't matter if there were or were not players, but I rather like the idea of a campaign world coming to life on its own.

In OotS they are only rifts which some Second Edition PCs tried to fix by creating gates over them. The gates themselves were created by The Order Of The Scribble, possibly during the revision to 3.0.

The DM created the rifts through plot holes resolved via retcon, revisions to update to new game systems, (remember the mosters which never got converted to 3rd ed.?), and campaigns which ended with TPKs. Add to this the erasure of a whole pantheon and the creation of new racial deities.

Now, assume the original D&D game created a village, road, and dungeon. It still exists, even if PCs never go there any more. But the ideas for an upgrade to 1st ed. from that humble beginning creates a huge world with four pantheons from the Deities and Demigods tome. It still has a link, a rift, where stuff from one world came into the next. Now that world sees massive development growing from vague ideas into a real campaign setting, but when 2.0 comes along it's time to trim some of the ideas which didn't pan out.

In this case, the Olympians were excised because the revision discarded the Eastern continent and its gods. This was when the DM realized he had created a series of conflicting plot elements which manifest as rifts in the setting. But the 3.5 revision is followed almost immediately by the 4.0 ed. This calls for another complete revision which opens yet another rift, and then before the 3.5 campaign ends 5.0 comes out opening the potential for the DM to revise straight from 3.5 to 5.0, skipping the 4.0 version entirely.

We've seen version 4.0 when Blackwing got a glimpse through the Azure City gate and Laurin saw the empty ocean of the DMs 5.0 revision to come. So each rift was caused by revisions which ripped pieces of the OotS universe for use in its derivative campaign settings, and the gates were createdby players who want to preserve the world they know.

The Snarl is the manifestation of cumulative story errors which threatens to destroy the world.Whether it is a single entith or many is not relevant. What is important is that it exercuses the powers reserved for the DM: the ability to alter the campaign world. We bave only seen destructive behaviors from this being, but we've never seen it from the other side of the rifts. What it destroys in one world it might recreate in another, but even better. Imagine Laurin as the god of Psionics!

So, as the only being capable of eliminating not only huge segments of the game map but even the gods, the Snarl demonstrates it has the power of a DM. Even all the gods of all the pantheons could not save the Olympians when The Snarl decreed, and none of the gods fighting The Snarl was injured accidentally in the battle of their lives, demonstrating a degree of precision and control on the part of The Snarl which a random force of destruction could never exercise.

Notes:
If Rich ever publishes an OotS campaign setting his world will explode with rifts as DMs paint their favorite spot and many others paint the same spot differently.

I hope we get a glimpse into the rift behind Kraggor's Gate. I'm betting it is a village, possibly Hommlet, with a road to a nearby ruin, surrounded by nothing but possibilities. You remember the place; we all started our adventure there.

[Razade]

I know what the gates are! It took me a day to realize I had already got it...



The empty ocean world in the desert with no life. The whole world in the sky above Azure City. They are other worlds the DM is working on, with different rulesets, possibly. The DM would have the power to remove a pantheon of gods from his world when early worldbuilding was revised, and he would be capable of ending the world.

But the creator never wants to quit creating, and the 3.5 ruleset is angiquated.

Oh, the gates. You see, this campaign world is the DM's early efforts at worldbuilding. It's been revised at least three times, considering Haley's assertion that her daddy was a 1st edition thief. Lots of work was put into the setting, but along the way the DM created five other campaign worlds, at least one of which is in its infancy. The DM may have gotten as far as creating the empty ocean. The gates weren't to keep the Snarl out, but to keep the PCs in.

Who knows? That world in space may have been a d20 Modern world or a far future space opera planet. Or it may have been a different campaign world for 4.0 edition. Or anything the DM wanted. In any case, any PC who attempts to cross between worlds risks erasure by the DM. As we saw when plans were being made for exactly that purpose.

The OotS is working to save the campaign world. The DM is planning to scrap it and start over. It's up to the PCs to determine if the setting is worthy of yet another revision.


No, there are no players in evidence, but it is not relevant to this theory. It really doesn't matter if there were or were not players, but I rather like the idea of a campaign world coming to life on its own..

Except there are in your original write up of your theory.

Also, as said before. There's no DM. Not even a Metaphysical DM.

[KorvinStarmast]

Not even a Metaphysical DM.Then why are they rolling dice? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0090.html) :smallcool:

[Lacuna Caster]

Also, as said before. There's no DM. Not even a Metaphysical DM.
'Narrative causality' appears to be a functionally equivalent concept. (Plus there's technically role-playing XP.)

[brian 333]

Except there are in your original write up of your theory.

Also, as said before. There's no DM. Not even a Metaphysical DM.

Pedantry? Really?

There are Player Characters. That's all I've asserted. Whether or not there are players behind them is irrelevant to my theory. I haven't seen any, and I take The Giant at his word when he says there are no players.

And my assertion that The Snarl is the DM is based on in comic evidence. Whether The Snarl is controlled by a player DM or not is also irrelevant. There is nothing in comic to show there are players outside the game world involved in anything inside the campaign setting, and this includes a DM. However, The Snarl demonstrates DM powers, which the gods do not. The Snarl is stronger than four pantheons of gods, and has the power to erase both gods and a huge segment of the game map with such precision that nothing aside from its totally obliterated targets was even singed while the gods fought the battle of their lives. Which only a DM can do.

[Elanasaurus]

So what you're saying is that the Snarl is this God above Gods who wants to destroy the universe and create a new and improved one. But most of the inhabitants of that universe don't want the world to end.
Because most people don't enjoy dying.
:elan:

[Razade]

Then why are they rolling dice? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0090.html) :smallcool:

Because that was when it was still a strip dedicated to D&D jokes and before a story was set up. :smalltongue:


Pedantry? Really?

Welcome to Giants in the Playground.


There are Player Characters. That's all I've asserted. Whether or not there are players behind them is irrelevant to my theory. I haven't seen any, and I take The Giant at his word when he says there are no players.

I don't recall Rich call them PC's either. I mean, if you're a PC and you have no Player...you're a Non-Player Character. Or an NPC. One sort of requires the other, doesn't it?


And my assertion that The Snarl is the DM is based on in comic evidence.

Well...what you're claiming is evidence. Your argument to back that up is...well it's certainly something.


Whether The Snarl is controlled by a player DM or not is also irrelevant.

Then it's not a Dungeon Master, is it? A DM sets the story, the Snarl isn't doing that. It's not rolling encounter tables and it's not rewarding XP for killing monsters. It's not dolling out weapons and gear in treasure chests. It's literally not doing anything that a DM would do...outside working on campaign worlds. Which incidently isn't something a DM alone does. At my tables I let the players help flesh out the world. That's a digression however.

The Snarl isn't a DM, it's not acting like a DM. It's acting like...well it's not acting like anything because we haven't really seen it. The Snarl may well not even be a thing. Plenty of theories have argued that and many of them far better argued than using a word and then saying it's acting like the word because it's a word.


There is nothing in comic to show there are players outside the game world involved in anything inside the campaign setting, and this includes a DM.

Right. So there are neither a DM nor players. Glad you can point out the flaws in your own argument. 10/10.


However, The Snarl demonstrates DM powers, which the gods do not.

Excuse me, what? The Gods made the "Campaign World" under your argument. They populated it and they made the history and everything in it. The Gods have done exactly the same thing as you're claiming the Snarl is doing. Except there's actual in comic evidence for it. As opposed to the Snarl making worlds because...that hasn't been demonstrated at all.

In fact it's the Gods who are planning on destroying the Campaign Setting as you define it and starting over. It's the Gods voting to restart the Campaign World. Not the Snarl.


So. Counter Argument. The Gods are the DMs. There's far more evidence for that than there is for yours.


The Snarl is stronger than four pantheons of gods, and has the power to erase both gods and a huge segment of the game map with such precision that nothing aside from its totally obliterated targets was even singed while the gods fought the battle of their lives.

Is it? Last I recall the Snarl lost to the Gods. Because they sealed it away. The only reason they didn't kill it was because it's immune to the Divine Powers the Gods have. They still won though. Also it didn't destroy anything with precision, it annihilated a world in a rampage. That's the opposite of precision. It also only killed the Eastern Pantheon because...they didn't think it could kill them in the first place.


Which only a DM can do.

Or players. Or a well placed taco dropped on a page the DM has at his table. Or a host of other things. A DM isn't God.

[Liquor Box]

I don't recall Rich call them PC's either. I mean, if you're a PC and you have no Player...you're a Non-Player Character. Or an NPC. One sort of requires the other, doesn't it?




He calls them PCs. See panel 6:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0485.html

[Razade]

He calls them PCs. See panel 6:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0485.html

Suppose so. Still doesn't really take away that The Snarl doesn't fit the description of a DM. The Gods do. Because the Snarl hasn't made any worlds that we know about. Only the Gods have.

[KorvinStarmast]

A DM isn't God. Yeah, no DM would accept the power reduction to a god. :smallyuk:

DM's are by default and by definition greater than any god in his or her campaign.
If you are however using God as a proper noun, then we agree. (But that's getting us into areas we ought not to drag into GiTP discussions ...)

[brian 333]

Then it's not a Dungeon Master, is it? A DM sets the story, the Snarl isn't doing that. It's not rolling encounter tables and it's not rewarding XP for killing monsters. It's not dolling out weapons and gear in treasure chests. It's literally not doing anything that a DM would do...outside working on campaign worlds. Which incidently isn't something a DM alone does. At my tables I let the players help flesh out the world. That's a digression however.

The Snarl isn't a DM, it's not acting like a DM. It's acting like...well it's not acting like anything because we haven't really seen it. The Snarl may well not even be a thing. Plenty of theories have argued that and many of them far better argued than using a word and then saying it's acting like the word because it's a word.

The old saw about detecting ducks comes to mind here. If it quacks and waddles it's very likely to be a duck. In fact, it is more reasonable that The Snarl is DM than assuming it is not because the only times we see it is when it is exercising powers D&D reserves for the DM.

But let's ask who gives RP Exp? Who watches the dice and sets the DC of a challenge? You can bet Thor would fudge a few rolls if he could, and he's one of the good guys. If the gods, (small g), could, then Hell would have clerics by awarding massive RP Exp to anyone who showed up for the job interview.

Conclusion? The gods do not have such power because they are not the DM



Right. So there are neither a DM nor players. Glad you can point out the flaws in your own argument. 10/10..

Once again, this is something I have not asserted, so I feel no particular desire to refute it. My argument stands whether players exist or not. There is simply no evidence of players who exist outside of the comic, but aside from Rich's assertion there are none, there is no in-comic evidence to prove it. I take the author at his word.

But there is a DM, even if it's not played by a real world human. Dice rolls have to be adjudicated. In fact, Durkon exposes the presence of a DM very early in the comic when he forgets to add his bonuses and then retroactively kills a goblin he should have killed in the previous round. Only a DM would need the player to do this because without a DM, bonuses are automatically applied whether the PC declares it or not. Otherwise some player will declare bonuses he is not entitled to declare and just keep listing until everything in the room is dead. What's to stop him?

Something enforces the rules. That something in D&D is a DM.




Excuse me, what? The Gods made the "Campaign World" under your argument. They populated it and they made the history and everything in it. The Gods have done exactly the same thing as you're claiming the Snarl is doing. Except there's actual in comic evidence for it. As opposed to the Snarl making worlds because...that hasn't been demonstrated at all.

In fact it's the Gods who are planning on destroying the Campaign Setting as you define it and starting over. It's the Gods voting to restart the Campaign World. Not the Snarl.


So. Counter Argument. The Gods are the DMs. There's far more evidence for that than there is for yours..

And you have their word that this is so...
Who created the gods? A DM worldbuilder. This creator built his gods with the memory of creating the world, just as it created Shojo with those neat crayon memories of Soon.

As for evidence: what worldbuilding have you seen from the gods? What adjudication of game rules have they issued? What retcons have they imposed? And most damning, if the gods are the de facto DM of the setting, why have they not simply excised the rifts and declared them never to have existed?

That they cannot do any of these things indicates they do not have DM powers.



Is it? Last I recall the Snarl lost to the Gods. Because they sealed it away. The only reason they didn't kill it was because it's immune to the Divine Powers the Gods have. They still won though. Also it didn't destroy anything with precision, it annihilated a world in a rampage. That's the opposite of precision. It also only killed the Eastern Pantheon because...they didn't think it could kill them in the first place.



Or players. Or a well placed taco dropped on a page the DM has at his table. Or a host of other things. A DM isn't God.

The Snarl lost? A pantheon and a continent were erased. Of course the gods declare they won, but they utterly failed to achieve even a small part of their intent. Even poor old Zeus was scrubbed, along with every other Olympian influence in the setting.

This reminds me of the kid who comes into the room with a shiner saying how he kicked butt.

To be sure, I have added two and two here, but I'm not saying the answer is anything but four. Only Rich knows if two and two are the right numbers to add. I certainly can be wrong, but the pieces fit my thesis very well.

You are free to choose other explanations or choose to not explain at your leisure.

[Razade]

The old saw about detecting ducks comes to mind here. If it quacks and waddles it's very likely to be a duck. In fact, it is more reasonable that The Snarl is DM than assuming it is not because the only times we see it is when it is exercising powers D&D reserves for the DM.

This isn't a Duck Test though. Because the Snarl doesn't show powers that a DM has. You're claiming that but the evidence doesn't meet that claim. The full quote of the Duck Test reveals why it doesn't apply. It's

"When I see a bird that walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck".

But when you see a Snarl (a thing we don't have in our world...that we know of) act like a DM (which...it hasn't) then you're NOT in the right of calling it a DM. You fail abductive reasoning.


But let's ask who gives RP Exp? Who watches the dice and sets the DC of a challenge? You can bet Thor would fudge a few rolls if he could, and he's one of the good guys. If the gods, (small g), could, then Hell would have clerics by awarding massive RP Exp to anyone who showed up for the job interview.

Hel (one l) doesn't have clerics. Or didn't. Has'em now. Kinda a huge plot point there ya know?

But to answer the question of who awards RP XP...The DM? Not the Snarl though. Or are you going to try and claim that the Snarl doled out the RP XP we see Belkar get? Because you better have a very rigorous argument to show that it does. I mean, all it does to life is destroy it. So how is it awarding XP?

Not that you are arguing that. But...


Conclusion? The gods do not have such power because they are not the DM

You kind of ARE by this statement. If the Gods aren't the DM, and you're saying that the Snarl IS, then you need to show that the Snarl is the one handing out XP. The Snarl doesn't have that power either that we know of. It certainly doesn't seem to have that power. It also doesn't seem to have the power to make WORLDS which the Gods do. So the Snarl has...less powers than the Gods. So it's not a DM. If it's got less powers than the Gods (demonstrably) who you argue aren't DMs then...it can't be one either. A DM can't be weaker than its creations, after all.


You, once again, demonstrate the faulty logic you're using and defeat your own argument. Which I love, it's like...my favorite thing about this thread.


Once again, this is something I have not asserted, so I feel no particular desire to refute it. My argument stands whether players exist or not. There is simply no evidence of players who exist outside of the comic, but aside from Rich's assertion there are none, there is no in-comic evidence to prove it. I take the author at his word.

There's no evidence of a DM either.

Also, the evidence that there is no players behind the character is what Rich says. Because he's the one making the story. Which ya know...would make him the DM if anyone or anything is. :smalltongue:


But there is a DM, even if it's not played by a real world human.

No there isn't.


Dice rolls have to be adjudicated.

We've never seen dice rolls. Other than for humor sake. So there aren't dice rolls to adjudicate.

Which ya know...even if there was. Are you saying the Snarl is adjudicating them? Because you're claiming it's the DM.


In fact, Durkon exposes the presence of a DM very early in the comic when he forgets to add his bonuses and then retroactively kills a goblin he should have killed in the previous round.

Back when the comic had no actual story or plot. Rich has stated that there's a point where the jokes are just jokes. Like that comic, for instance. Do you want to use the Dragon Magazine comics to prove there's a DM too?

None of this gets you to the Snarl being the DM either. So when are you going to get around to saying "and this all shows the Snarl is the DM".


Only a DM would need the player to do this because without a DM, bonuses are automatically applied whether the PC declares it or not. Otherwise some player will declare bonuses he is not entitled to declare and just keep listing until everything in the room is dead. What's to stop him?

There is no player though. So there's nothing for a Player to do. You know. If it wasn't just a joke. Which it was.


Something enforces the rules. That something in D&D is a DM.

I mean...that's fine but that still doesn't make the Snarl that thing. The Snarl isn't the one enforcing the rules.

Also, The Rules are just like our Laws of Physics. There's nothing enforcing those. They're simply the state of the Universe. In the OotSverse gravity is just the speed of a creature falling. Etc etc etc for whatever rule you want to bring up.



And you have their word that this is so...

Well, we also have evidence in the comic.


Who created the gods? A DM worldbuilder. This creator built his gods with the memory of creating the world, just as it created Shojo with those neat crayon memories of Soon.

Yeah...but The Snarl isn't the answer to your question. The Snarl didn't create the Gods. The Gods created The Snarl. See "the Snarl can't be the DM because it's weaker than the Gods" argument.


As for evidence: what worldbuilding have you seen from the gods?

Literally the world the story takes place in. They've actually worldbuilt (literally as in built it with their hands) two worlds. What worlds have you seen the Snarl build? None. None is the answer. You haven't seen the Snarl really do much of anything but kill.


What adjudication of game rules have they issued?

Well, Thor certainly fudged the rules on Control Weather for Durkon. The Gods made Miko fall from her paladinhood. So that's....two. What adjudication of game rules has The Snarl done?


What retcons have they imposed? And most damning, if the gods are the de facto DM of the setting, why have they not simply excised the rifts and declared them never to have existed?

Well, I call denying an entire pantheon of Gods having never existed a pretty good retcon. Also claiming that a whole world they made never existed another. So...two. Do those count as retcons? They sorta do I guess?

The second...they're doing that right now aren't they? What's this whole damn arc about if not them trying to declare the rifts never existed by destroying the planet and remaking the prison the Snarl is in.

So...do I win yet? Because I feel like you've lost any damn ground you could stand on. Because, if I even wanted to cede the idea that The Snarl is the DM, these questions are equally (and more so) damning for you.

What has The Snarl rectonned? Nothing. Why did the DM, if it is the Snarl like you think, let the Gates exist if the Players are just going to try and stop it from destroying the game world.

Even better. Why doesn't The Snarl (the DM as you claim) just stop the players by destroying them? It should be able to do that if it were the DM. Rocks fall, everyone dies. Right?


That they cannot do any of these things indicates they do not have DM powers.

Well. Just showed not only do they have those powers but that the Snarl doesn't have them whatsoever. Unless you can ya know....answer my return questions with examples? I'll be waiting.


The Snarl lost?

Yeah. I'd call being sealed away and unable to destroy any more Gods a loss.


A pantheon and a continent were erased.

A pantheon wasn't "ereased". They were all brutally murdered. The people who erased their memory as pointed out were the Gods.

Also the Snarl didn't erase a continent. It destroyed the first world the Gods made. Or maybe it didn't. We don't know if that part is true.


Of course the gods declare they won, but they utterly failed to achieve even a small part of their intent.

Which was....what? What was their intent? They made a world with worshipers. Twice. I'd say they didn't fail jack.


Even poor old Zeus was scrubbed, along with every other Olympian influence in the setting.

By the Gods.


This reminds me of the kid who comes into the room with a shiner saying how he kicked butt.

Might well have. Winning a fight doesn't mean not taking any hits. Winning a fight just means the people throwing punches at you stop.


To be sure, I have added two and two here, but I'm not saying the answer is anything but four. Only Rich knows if two and two are the right numbers to add. I certainly can be wrong, but the pieces fit my thesis very well.

That's...not what you're doing though it's cute you think it is. You're not only able to be wrong. You are wrong.


You are free to choose other explanations or choose to not explain at your leisure.

I'm not making a positive claim. You are. I've provided...ample...more than ample...evidence to the contrary of your point. You have, at every turn, rather eagerly avoided actually providing evidence outside what I can only fairly call baseless assertions.

[Liquor Box]

I hope one of you two necros this thread and acknowledges it, when the other is ultimately proven correct.

[Sm3gl]

I actually kind of like the theory. Kind of like the dad in the Lego movie.

What would MitD be in this theory of yours considering he has some sort of special relationship with the gates or the snarl? The DMs annoying kid brother who the mum insists has to be allowed to play?

What about the swirly eyes that Laurin gets? Is that her being convinced of the benefit of scrapping this world and starting a new D&D Next campaign?

[brian 333]

Razade, what can I say?

Your position is that I am wrong. You say that, but you don't prove it.

Instead of a wall of text, let's start with one issue: I claimed that The Snarl used powers reserved to the DM.

1) In D&D a world is always created from outside that world. The physics of Fantasy RPG worlds requires this as it requires dice rolls. Therefore Stickverse must have a DM. (The DM need not be a real world human.)

Question 1: What entity reaches into the setting from outside?

2) In D&D there is exactly one "player" (for lack of a better word,) with the ability to alter the campaign map and the available pantheons. We call this player the DM.

Question 2: What entity has altered the game map and available pantheons?
Question 2a: Would a random entity of destruction be capable of exercising such fine control that the entire Olympian influence was eradicated without even singing Rabbit's whiskers?

3) I have read assertions that the gods defeated The Snarl. But we have only their word on that. Is it not equally likely that it accomplished what it wanted to do and left? The gods didn't create the rifts, and they cannot destroy them. The gates were built by 2nd ed. PCs, not by the gods. So the gods, other than having taken credit for driving it away, accomplished none of their goals, (saving the Olympians.) And we have their word on that.

Question 3: Is it reasonable to assume the gods were victorious against a being they could not harm, or is it more reasonable to assume The Snarl accomplished its mission and went home?

The question has been raised about the gods sealing out The Snarl, but at the end of Edition 2 we have The Order Of The Scribble building gates to keep it out. The gods were less than successful. The Snarl is not only active, but apparently came to the attention of The Order Of The Scribble because things (and people) were disappearing. The Why of this remains unexplained.

Question 4: Other than the assertion of the gods, what evidence exists that demonstrates any effective restraint of The Snarl?



The available evidence demonstrates that The Snarl is de facto DM. Assertions are not evidence, or I'd have won those golden gloves back when I was 17. Cause I beat the snot out of that dude, and the judges gave him the bout on points.


Now, as for coming back and admitting I'm wrong: well, back in my second post I admitted I could be. I'm waiting to see what The Giant has to say on it, possibly at Kraggor's gate. Until then it's fun to speculate.

[Bohandas]

Oh. I didn't know that. Thank you.

In fact I haven't read most of Rich's statements.

Actually I think it's explicitly said in-comic during the sequence where Belkar is tripping out

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Actually I think it's explicitly said in-comic during the sequence where Belkar is tripping out

Indeed (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0606.html), but of course the problem is indeed that it's Belkar while he is tripping out. I think it is authoritative, but it'd be hard to convince someone of it that isn't already on board.

GW

[Kish]

The available evidence demonstrates that The Snarl is de facto DM.
Actually, in (nearly*) every case I can think of "the gods" are described as creating the campaign world.

You're drawing a distinction between the Snarl actually doing it (and incidentally, even that the Snarl created the world in the rift, which would mean it created one world and the gods created two, is an assumption, not something established) and the gods being stated in the setting documents to have done it...but that makes no sense. If you look at the in-comic level the Snarl is at most equal to the gods in terms of having created a world. If you look at the meta level, the level on which the DM creates a campaign world, the creator of the worlds inside and outside the rift is Rich Burlew. In neither case is the Snarl any sort of parallel to the DM. I get that you're very impressed with your own scenario-spinning, but that doesn't make it logic.

*In Ravenloft it's "the Dark Powers." Dark Sun may be the only system in which it's left truly unstated, I'm not sure.

[brian 333]

Actually, in (nearly*) every case I can think of "the gods" are described as creating the campaign world.

You're drawing a distinction between the Snarl actually doing it (and incidentally, even that the Snarl created the world in the rift, which would mean it created one world and the gods created two, is an assumption, not something established) and the gods being stated in the setting documents to have done it...but that makes no sense. If you look at the in-comic level the Snarl is at most equal to the gods in terms of having created a world. If you look at the meta level, the level on which the DM creates a campaign world, the creator of the worlds inside and outside the rift is Rich Burlew. In neither case is the Snarl any sort of parallel to the DM. I get that you're very impressed with your own scenario-spinning, but that doesn't make it logic.

*In Ravenloft it's "the Dark Powers." Dark Sun may be the only system in which it's left truly unstated, I'm not sure.

You too are basing your conclusions on assumptions.

For example, you state that The Snarl is at best the equal of the gods. Okay, then explain how it eradicated an entire pantheon and all its cultural influences from the campaign, eradicated an entire continent, and failed to even accidentally kill off even one minor deity from the other pantheons. This is a level of power which exceeds all the combined power of all the gods.

Let's see, one fourth of the world destroyed versus... what did the combined power of three surving pantheons actually accomplish? This is not a victory for The Gods because as we see The Snarl is just as active as before, and the gods, rather than take it on and drive it out, send some PCs to build gates.

There is no equality, or even equivalence, of power. The Snarl is so powerful the gods know they can't even annoy it, much less harm it. What entity in D&D has more power than four pantheons of gods?

Now you say the gods created two worlds. What evidence is there for this? They assert it, but offer no proof. While not every setting has a creation myth, many do. These myths have the gods doing all sorts of things, but in the end it's just a matter of the DM decreeing this or that. Being created with the memory of being a creator is normal for D&D gods.

But we all know a DM created them or imported them into his campaign world. They are, after all, passive in their 'creativity'.

I assert that The Snarl is DM and Creator of the OotSverse, including the world we see in comic, and five other worlds beyond the five rifts. Just coincidentally, there are 6 versions of D&D:

D&D
AD&D
AD&D 2nd ed.
D&D 3.0 + 3.5
D&D 4.0
D&D 5.0

We saw the revision to 3.5 happen in comic.

[Razade]

I hope one of you two necros this thread and acknowledges it, when the other is ultimately proven correct.

I mean, I think the counter to his point is already clear but sure. I'll absolutely do it when and if the time comes.


Razade, what can I say?

Your position is that I am wrong. You say that, but you don't prove it.

What...do you call the wall of text? You have literally nothing to say to any of that? You just want to move on and dismiss it as "not proving you wrong"? I think that's shockingly dishonest of you.


Instead of a wall of text, let's start with one issue: I claimed that The Snarl used powers reserved to the DM.

Oh, it's because I used too many words to show how you're wrong. But let's just go with your assertion all over again.


1) In D&D a world is always created from outside that world. The physics of Fantasy RPG worlds requires this as it requires dice rolls. Therefore Stickverse must have a DM. (The DM need not be a real world human.)

Question 1: What entity reaches into the setting from outside?

The answer is "not the Snarl". Because the Snarl is, literally, inside the setting. Like. Physically and metaphysically. Inside the setting. It's encased in the Campaign World. By the Gods. So that's answer One.


2) In D&D there is exactly one "player" (for lack of a better word,) with the ability to alter the campaign map and the available pantheons. We call this player the DM.

Wrong? Wrong. A D&D game can have more than one DM. One is the minimum number. Not the maximum number. So...your premise is wrong from the get go. Let's see where you go from there.


Question 2: What entity has altered the game map and available pantheons?

The...Gods. The Gods did it. The Snarl killed the Olympians and destroyed the planet but the Gods are the ones that altered the world by remaking it and are in the process of debating remaking it again. Destroying the world. Again. And remaking it. A third time. So...the answer is once again "Not the Snarl".


Question 2a: Would a random entity of destruction be capable of exercising such fine control that the entire Olympian influence was eradicated without even singing Rabbit's whiskers?

The answer to this is no, a being of destruction wouldn't. Which makes sense, because the Snarl only killed the Olympians while the other Gods fled. The Gods themeslves wiped out any evidence of the Olympians.


3) I have read assertions that the gods defeated The Snarl. But we have only their word on that. Is it not equally likely that it accomplished what it wanted to do and left? The gods didn't create the rifts, and they cannot destroy them. The gates were built by 2nd ed. PCs, not by the gods. So the gods, other than having taken credit for driving it away, accomplished none of their goals, (saving the Olympians.) And we have their word on that.

Well....we don't just have their word for it. The Snarl is provably sealed away. That's a win.

How else, in your estimation, did the Snarl get sealed away? Or are you the only one allowed to ask the questions around here? Since you seem to want to dodge any and all others asked of you up to this point. Can you even answer one?


Question 3: Is it reasonable to assume the gods were victorious against a being they could not harm, or is it more reasonable to assume The Snarl accomplished its mission and went home?

The former because you would, for the latter, have to apply a motive to a being that you have no evidence has the ability to have a motive.


The question has been raised about the gods sealing out The Snarl, but at the end of Edition 2 we have The Order Of The Scribble building gates to keep it out. The gods were less than successful. The Snarl is not only active, but apparently came to the attention of The Order Of The Scribble because things (and people) were disappearing. The Why of this remains unexplained.

The Snarl doesn't seem to be active unless something provokes it from the other side. We haven't seen the Snarl going on a mission of destruction. Just smacking things that get to close. This is the inherent mystery of just what's going on and how much the Gods have lied. But they didn't lie about sealing the Snarl away. Because that's been proven.


Question 4: Other than the assertion of the gods, what evidence exists that demonstrates any effective restraint of The Snarl?

The rifts in the first place. Unless you want to suggest that the DM (The Snarl) is just making rifts for the hell of it and risk upsetting whatever motive it has to destroy the campaign world. A thing, as pointed out to you and you again have refused to acknowledge, the Gods are currently trying to do.

Oh. That's another bit of proof. The Gods want to destroy the World because the prison of the Snarl is growing weak. They want to remake the prison. Oh also the Dark One wanting to use the Snarl as a weapon or...if it can't do that, break the prison and force the Gods to remake the world with him at the Big Boy's seat. So that's..quite a lot of evidence. I expect you to ignore it all though since this whole response can't fit on the side of a post-it-note.

So, putting aside the reason the Snarl was imprisoned, we still know it was imprisoned.


The available evidence demonstrates that The Snarl is de facto DM.

What evidence? You haven't provided evidence, you've moved the goal posts and tried to shunt the burden of proof onto everyone else. Please provide some concrete evidence. Other than appeals to what you think a DM does. Like, in comic evidence. Please. Thank you.


Assertions are not evidence, or I'd have won those golden gloves back when I was 17. Cause I beat the snot out of that dude, and the judges gave him the bout on points.

Well you best start providing some evidence then! Because all you've said is that the Snarl is the De Facto DM and haven't backed it up with...literally any evidence.

Ball's in your court pal.


You too are basing your conclusions on assumptions.

Kish is actually using the comic to back up their claims. Something at least two of us are doing and spoiler alert, you aren't the second one.


For example, you state that The Snarl is at best the equal of the gods. Okay, then explain how it eradicated an entire pantheon and all its cultural influences from the campaign, eradicated an entire continent, and failed to even accidentally kill off even one minor deity from the other pantheons. This is a level of power which exceeds all the combined power of all the gods.

1. We're told how the Snarl killed the Gods. The Olympians (not called that in the comic btw) were killed in seconds because they didn't know the Snarl could do it. The other Gods FLED to the Divine Realm where...well we don't know if the Snarl couldn't reach them. It didn't reach them is all we know.

2. The Snarl didn't wipe out the Olympian culture from the map. We're not even sure they had a culture. But we do know they didn't get to put their stamp on the new world because they were dead. The Gods made the second world. The Gods hid the existance of another Pantheon. Not the Snarl.

3. The Snarl didn't destroy the Eastern Pantheon's continent. It destroyed the whole world. You're not even getting the actual story right at this point. Come on man. At least do that.


Let's see, one fourth of the world destroyed versus... what did the combined power of three surving pantheons actually accomplish? This is not a victory for The Gods because as we see The Snarl is just as active as before, and the gods, rather than take it on and drive it out, send some PCs to build gates.

Not one fourth of the world. The whole world, or so we're told. But what did the other pantheons accomplish? They made a whole new brand spanking second world fresh out of the box with all new creatures and peoples and whatever else you want to include. The Gods made...literally everything. Twice. The Snarl destroyed one world (just the Mortal World) once.

The Gods are also, if you'll recall, planning on destroying the world. Ya know. Like. That's the whole current story arc. So the Gods are going to remake the world. A third time. While the Snarl is still left with...one, maybe, world kill.


There is no equality, or even equivalence, of power. The Snarl is so powerful the gods know they can't even annoy it, much less harm it. What entity in D&D has more power than four pantheons of gods?

Well you're right about one thing. There's no equivalence. The Gods are stronger.

As to your second question...some Epic Monsters are stronger than pantheons of Gods. The Elemental Lords of Evil were at least more powerful than A God or two. The list is long.


Now you say the gods created two worlds. What evidence is there for this? They assert it, but offer no proof. While not every setting has a creation myth, many do. These myths have the gods doing all sorts of things, but in the end it's just a matter of the DM decreeing this or that. Being created with the memory of being a creator is normal for D&D gods.

Well, that there is a world the story is taking place and another beyond the rift is...a dubious start. The fact that the Dark One's whole plan hinges on it. Oh and the fact that the Gods have outright said in the comic itself that they're going to have to remake the world. Again. The AGAIN part is pretty key to the whole "there was at least one other world before the one we're in right now" argument.

I mean...if you REALLY want to go "Well the whole story is a lie" angle then what if the Snarl isn't real? Maybe it's something else beyond the Gate. Maybe the Snarl is just an excuse that the Gods have to keep uppity mortals from ascending. Who knows. If you want to call the entire story into question, it does more harm for you than it does help.


But we all know a DM created them or imported them into his campaign world. They are, after all, passive in their 'creativity'.

So there's evidence that the Snarl did this? That the Snarl brought the Gods into the game world? What is it then? Where can we find that?


I assert that The Snarl is DM and Creator of the OotSverse, including the world we see in comic, and five other worlds beyond the five rifts. Just coincidentally, there are 6 versions of D&D:

D&D
AD&D
AD&D 2nd ed.
D&D 3.0 + 3.5
D&D 4.0
D&D 5.0

So not only are you saying that you're asserting (not demonstrating) all of this but that there are actually more worlds that we haven't seen and that the Snarl has made all of them.

What's your proof. Where's the evidence of even one iota of this?


We saw the revision to 3.5 happen in comic.

And Rich has said he won't be updating to another version in comic because the story has moved beyond joke a day panel stories.

[Sm3gl]

So how many times has the world been destroyed by the Snarl?

Could the destroyed world's be original campaign settings under previous editions?

How do the OotS encounters with the gates coincide in real time with the release and existence of additional editions of D&D?
I'm thinking Durokans Gate was maybe a suggestion to convert to Pathfinder.
Azure City was 4th Edition. Desert gate 5th?

If theoretically Xykon had gained control of the gate would it have given him the opportunity to convert the current game world into a later edition with him having some influence in the conversion? (Allowing him to rule the world?)

It does seem pretty clear that the question of this campaign world is what sort of world the next campaign setting should be with different factions trying to influence the outcome. The Snarl wants a fresh start, Hel wants a more Ravenloft-esque setting, the Gods and PCs want to stick to the current setting/rules.

The really great thing is that it might not ever be explicitly stated which theory is correct, which is kind of the point of literary devices, it's just the interpretation of the consumer that gives an additional layer of meaning.

[Sm3gl]

And the ritual is teleportation right? So the ritual is going to teleport the current campaign world into a new rule set.

And what about the MiTD... He Understands the ritual and can't see the gates... Got to be some sort of 1st or 2nd edition left over from a previous campaign world surely? Or a little brother learning how to be a DM (was the MitD making less appearances during "Don't split the Party" suggesting that his power was being used to "DM" one half of the party?).

Maybe can't see the gates because he hasn't read the new edition or doesn't want to change to a new edition...?

[martianmister]

I still don't get it. Snarl is created by gods and in turn destroyed gods. He can't be a DM. That makes no, zero sense. :smallconfused:

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Could the destroyed world's be original campaign settings under previous editions?
No. Haley's dad was at some point a 1st ed thief.

GW

[Sm3gl]

I still don't get it. Snarl is created by gods and in turn destroyed gods. He can't be a DM. That makes no, zero sense. :smallconfused:

Watch the Lego Movie to get a better understanding of how different "players" (DMs and PCs) can influence a game world with the narrative wrapping itself around whatever meta decisions are made.

The Tarquin arc can even be seen as supporting this theory as it can be seen that narrative is a very real power in the OotS universe which in terms of D&D is the story adjusting itself to conform to the desires of the players involved (PCs and DMs) such as if one person wants to leave the game the narrative wraps itself around that choice. Or if the players want to convert the game to a later edition.

Perhaps the later editions have in fact been trialled before the destruction of the relative gates?

[Sm3gl]

No. Haley's dad was at some point a 1st ed thief.

GW

Just because he was a 1st edition thief it doesn't mean it was in this world. It's very common practise to have old characters from previous games make cameo appearances as recurring characters. He certainly fits as a 1st edition PC Thief - more one dimensional compared to the modern "rouge".

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Just because he was a 1st edition thief it doesn't mean it was in this world. It's very common practise to have old characters from previous games make cameo appearances as recurring characters. He certainly fits as a 1st edition PC Thief - more one dimensional compared to the modern "rouge".

The previous world was destroyed together with everyone in it. Not to mention all that happening a thousand years prior to the current year. Haley's dad was not in the previous world.

GW

[brian 333]

I mean, I think the counter to his point is already clear but sure. I'll absolutely do it when and if the time comes.



What...do you call the wall of text? You have literally nothing to say to any of that? You just want to move on and dismiss it as "not proving you wrong"? I think that's shockingly dishonest of you.

Wall o'text is just going to turn other readers away, so I tried to trim the argument to one point and four questions. This is called being concise. Dishonesty is representing a falsehood as true, which I have not done. I have asserted opinions and defended them with references to both the core rules and the comic.

Fear not, I'm perfectly willing to debate any point, but mass walls of text tend to drive readers away.

Dishonesty accusation refuted. Fair warning: accusing your opponent of deciet with no evidence to support that accusation is itself deciet. Everyone here knows this, so shoot yourself in the foot less often in your future responses.

And keep in mind that I enjoy debate. You can't hurt my feelings, but I can use personal attacks as proof my opponent has failed to make his point.




Oh, it's because I used too many words to show how you're wrong. But let's just go with your assertion all over again.


Now insults directed at my intelligence? Please step up your game, mon ami.



The answer is "not the Snarl". Because the Snarl is, literally, inside the setting. Like. Physically and metaphysically. Inside the setting. It's encased in the Campaign World. By the Gods. So that's answer One.

With what do you support this claim? I support its counter with in comic evidence of a being from outside the campaign world reaching through rifts which we know in two cases to lead to other worlds. This is clear evidence The Snarl exists outside the campaign world.



Wrong? Wrong. A D&D game can have more than one DM. One is the minimum number. Not the maximum number. So...your premise is wrong from the get go. Let's see where you go from there.

In my original post on this thread I quoted myself from another thread discussing an experience I enjoyed in which our DM split the party and gave one half of the players to a second DM. Thereafter two parties with two DMs ran the same dungeon. Why would I take a position which counters my original post?

The segment you clipped is not describing a singular entity, but a singular title for a person who exercises the power to remove pantheons and continents from a campaign. More than one entity can hold that title simultaneously. I mean, just count the kings which had a seat at Arthur's Round Table.



The...Gods. The Gods did it. The Snarl killed the Olympians and destroyed the planet but the Gods are the ones that altered the world by remaking it and are in the process of debating remaking it again. Destroying the world. Again. And remaking it. A third time. So...the answer is once again "Not the Snarl".

And this assertion, of course, comes from gods who have no agenda. Perhaps all the gods have to do to accomplish the remake is to stop arguing with the DM, who is allowing his players one last chance to play in their playground before he rebuilds it.



The answer to this is no, a being of destruction wouldn't. Which makes sense, because the Snarl only killed the Olympians while the other Gods fled. The Gods themeslves wiped out any evidence of the Olympians.

Please support this assertion with evidence. And keep in mind that assertions made by a god only prove that god said it. They are not obliged to either honesty or full disclosure, and they have a huge interest in maintaining their appearance of authority in front of their clerics.



Well....we don't just have their word for it. The Snarl is provably sealed away. That's a win.

How else, in your estimation, did the Snarl get sealed away? Or are you the only one allowed to ask the questions around here? Since you seem to want to dodge any and all others asked of you up to this point. Can you even answer one?

Feel free to ask any questions. I've been wrong before and expect to be wrong in the future. I have an amazing capacity to recover from being wrong through learning. But I do require more than assertions to prove a thing. Except Santa. He's real no matter what evidence you may offer.



The former because you would, for the latter, have to apply a motive to a being that you have no evidence has the ability to have a motive.

How do you know this being has no motive? Please provide evidence.



The Snarl doesn't seem to be active unless something provokes it from the other side. We haven't seen the Snarl going on a mission of destruction. Just smacking things that get to close. This is the inherent mystery of just what's going on and how much the Gods have lied. But they didn't lie about sealing the Snarl away. Because that's been proven.

And what brought the rifts to the attention of those 2nd ed. characters of The Order of the Scribble? It was the actions of an entity you asserted was sealed away by the all powerful gods. Liiran found the first rift because forest creatures were vanishing. Did they provoke The Snarl who was safely sealed away?

The Snarl was not sealed away because if it had been there would have been no need for The Order Of The Scribble to create gates.



The rifts in the first place. Unless you want to suggest that the DM (The Snarl) is just making rifts for the hell of it and risk upsetting whatever motive it has to destroy the campaign world. A thing, as pointed out to you and you again have refused to acknowledge, the Gods are currently trying to do.

I've already explained what I think the rifts are: holes to other worlds created when parts of this current incarnation of the OotSverse were stolen from previous versions or when parts of this world were stolen for subsequent versions of the campaign world. The DM is not just poking holes willy nilly. In fact, he seems to have a detailed plan.

And as I have said before, the destruction of the campaign world is how it would be seen from within. From the DM's POV it's simply a matter of boxing up the campaign world and storing it in the garage while the DM and players move on to aother.


Oh. That's another bit of proof. The Gods want to destroy the World because the prison of the Snarl is growing weak. They want to remake the prison. Oh also the Dark One wanting to use the Snarl as a weapon or...if it can't do that, break the prison and force the Gods to remake the world with him at the Big Boy's seat. So that's..quite a lot of evidence. I expect you to ignore it all though since this whole response can't fit on the side of a post-it-note.

Notice the gods are allowing a PC group to make their decision for them? But whatever motivates the gods and NPCs doesn't seem to motivate them enough to do anything but wait on a handfull of PCs. Evidence is more than asserting a thing to be so. The Dark One, whose existence post-dates the erasure of the Olympians, has no clue about The Snarl. He wants to control the gates! With control of the gates he can blackmail the other gods. Once the last gate is gone, his ritual is worthless.



So, putting aside the reason the Snarl was imprisoned, we still know it was imprisoned.

It was a lousy prison, then, because it appears to have had zero impact on The Snarl's efforts. It did not prevent its causing mischief at Liiran's gate and Laurin is discovering it is very active in "her" gate.

And once again I must point out that the gates were not created by the gods, butby a handfull of 2nd ed. PCs.



What evidence? You haven't provided evidence, you've moved the goal posts and tried to shunt the burden of proof onto everyone else. Please provide some concrete evidence. Other than appeals to what you think a DM does. Like, in comic evidence. Please. Thank you.


I have indeed presented evidence from both the comic and the source books. You have dismissed, but not refuted it.



Well you best start providing some evidence then! Because all you've said is that the Snarl is the De Facto DM and haven't backed it up with...literally any evidence.

Ball's in your court pal.

In D&D, what entity has the power to excise a continent and a pantheon? Only a DM. The Snarl did both of these things. No PC or deity has been shown doing this. If you can present a counter to this my thesis falls apart, but you cannot. The claim of the power of the gods fails before utterance because against the combined might of four pantheons of gods The Snarl removed one pantheon entirely and eradicated every influence that pantheon had on the world. And did this without harming the least member of another pantheon.

That's called Up For Three. Your ball.



Kish is actually using the comic to back up their claims. Something at least two of us are doing and spoiler alert, you aren't the second one.

I like kish. S/he makes me think. As for proof, well, I'm not the guy refuting arguments with "Wrong."



1. We're told how the Snarl killed the Gods. The Olympians (not called that in the comic btw) were killed in seconds because they didn't know the Snarl could do it. The other Gods FLED to the Divine Realm where...well we don't know if the Snarl couldn't reach them. It didn't reach them is all we know.

In other words, The Snarl beat four pantheons and eradicated one, and was left to do as it liked? How does this lead to your repeated assertions that the gods are more powerful than The Snarl? How does this support your repeated assertions that the gods sealed The Snarl out? In fact, it refutes both those assertions.


2. The Snarl didn't wipe out the Olympian culture from the map. We're not even sure they had a culture. But we do know they didn't get to put their stamp on the new world because they were dead. The Gods made the second world. The Gods hid the existance of another Pantheon. Not the Snarl.

Again, this is an assertion from the same source that showed, (in living crayon,) The Snarl destroying the Olympians. But according to your previous assertion, the gods fled, leaving The Snarl to do as it wished. Which, if the gods remade the world, they could have made with no rifts for The Snarl to reach through.

This is self contradictory. You cannot be more powerful than an entity which defeats you, and you can't flee the field of battle and defeat your foe.

However, many historical examples exist of people claiming victory while obviously defeated. Especially politicians, which any successful god must be.



3. The Snarl didn't destroy the Eastern Pantheon's continent. It destroyed the whole world. You're not even getting the actual story right at this point. Come on man. At least do that.

Umm, before The Snarl there was an Eastern Continent and a fourth pantheon. After The Snarl there was not.

It's fairly conclusive evidence. And as for destroying the whole world, I thought the gods defeated and sealed The Snarl out? Why, then, if the gods remade the world, did they not revive the dead pantheon or recreate the lost continent? If you recall, The Snarl was blamed for removing them. At the least, assuming they didn't want another pantheon competing for souls, why didn't they recreate the missing continent?

Most damning of all, why did they rebuild the world with rifts which gave their enemy entry to the world?

Consistency is evidence that a person is arguing for a position. Hopping around to obfuscate the issue while espousing contradictory opinions is evidence that a person is arguing with no base to support his position.


Not one fourth of the world. The whole world, or so we're told. But what did the other pantheons accomplish? They made a whole new brand spanking second world fresh out of the box with all new creatures and peoples and whatever else you want to include. The Gods made...literally everything. Twice. The Snarl destroyed one world (just the Mortal World) once.

A whole new world. That sounds more like my theory than yours. But again, we have only the word of Shojo, who is a known liar. And he got the story second hand from Soon, who never spoke to any god about this. This testimony is interesting, but not conclusive.

Plus, if true, it supports my theory that the rifts are holes to previous and future incarnations of the OotSverse, and the purpose of the gates is to prdvent PCs getting out and annoying the DM.


The Gods are also, if you'll recall, planning on destroying the world. Ya know. Like. That's the whole current story arc. So the Gods are going to remake the world. A third time. While the Snarl is still left with...one, maybe, world kill.

They don't say how. What if all they have to do is nothing? It seems to me their entire action in this story has been to play dominance games to enhance any future position in a future incarnation of the OotSverse.

My theory accounts for this by removing the agency of the gods who have talked a good game but accomplished nothing and placed it in the tentacles of the only active worldbuilder we've seen in comic. While this is certainly speculation on my part, it is grounded in what I've observed.


Well you're right about one thing. There's no equivalence. The Gods are stronger.

Evidence in comic refutes this. The Snarl appears to be doing as it likes while the gods plan what to do after their inevitable defeat.


As to your second question...some Epic Monsters are stronger than pantheons of Gods. The Elemental Lords of Evil were at least more powerful than A God or two. The list is long.

Temple of Elemental Evil. Good times. I played it in 1st ed. days, with a Monk/Magic User. It was a grind getting back to level 8 so I could use Monk powers again. Look at the Exp required. Back then Level 8 was an awesome accomplishment, but twice on the same character was unheard of. But I digress.

And none of those monsters fits the profile of The Snarl. Even Tharizdun could be beaten which he was by Ernie Gygax... umm, Gord of Greyhawk. With the help of deities of creation, of course. And they never stepped outside their campaign setting.

Do any of these monsters you mention lurk around rifts causing locals to vanish? Can any of them remove every member of a pantheon withoug harm to others? Can any of them alter a campaign map?

Of course, this doesn't mean such a creature cannot exist. However, I know a creature who can do all these things and more. We call it DM.



Well, that there is a world the story is taking place and another beyond the rift is...a dubious start. The fact that the Dark One's whole plan hinges on it. Oh and the fact that the Gods have outright said in the comic itself that they're going to have to remake the world. Again. The AGAIN part is pretty key to the whole "there was at least one other world before the one we're in right now" argument.

The Dark One's plan hinges on gates. Rifts without gates are useless because the ritual is supposed to take control of the gate, not the rift. And you do realise everything you attribute to the gods was actually said by Shojo?

Not only are the gods poor witnesses, (they each have an agenda,) Shojo is a known liar. So, did they make the world? We have only the word of a known liar as told to him second hand from a person who never spoke to the gods but relied on a third intermediary.

And, if the gods are actually NPCs, what they know was given to them by the DM. The same entity which created their world also created their memories. If the gods are PCs, why bother with what five or six obscure mortals are doing? Why not simply decree and do, like PCs do?



I mean...if you REALLY want to go "Well the whole story is a lie" angle then what if the Snarl isn't real? Maybe it's something else beyond the Gate. Maybe the Snarl is just an excuse that the Gods have to keep uppity mortals from ascending. Who knows. If you want to call the entire story into question, it does more harm for you than it does help.

I didn't say the whole story is a lie. I said that the gods have good reason to lie, and Shojo was known to lie. From whence comes our knowledge of the gods? It is unreasonable to not suspect the veracity of a story told by a known liar. It is certain a liar can tell the truth, but we would be fools to not double-check.

So far we know that the gods did not harm or even affect The Snarl. This does not lead to a conclusion that the gods, even collectively, are as powerful as The Snarl. In fact, it refutes any such assertion.



So there's evidence that the Snarl did this? That the Snarl brought the Gods into the game world? What is it then? Where can we find that?

That is an extrapolation on my part, as is fairly obvious. It follows from my theory that the true creator of the OotSverse is The Snarl. This is based on the observation that the gods are not even trying to fight The Snarl, but are instead arguing over their place in a revised OotSverse. And it is based on the fact that The Snarl exists outside the OotSverse. And it is based on the fact that the only entity which has been shown with DM powers, (even if only in a flashback to a memory of a story told second hand by a third party who... asked the gods,) is the Snarl.


So not only are you saying that you're asserting (not demonstrating) all of this but that there are actually more worlds that we haven't seen and that the Snarl has made all of them.

What's your proof. Where's the evidence of even one iota of this?

These are extrapolations, as is obvious from context. You can't 'prove' projections because the fun part of guessing what will happen in the future is not knowing for sure. But my projections, as wrong as they may be, are based in what has been seen in comic.

And I have set forth the evidence which supports my projections.



And Rich has said he won't be updating to another version in comic because the story has moved beyond joke a day panel stories.

But he also never downdated to a previous edition. We're not talking about OotS 2, The New Edition, (which, let's agree, would be awesome.)

Stories are finite, but the worlds they create exist with a history and a future. Even if Rich does not write a sequel the 'future' of the OotSverse will exist within the campaign setting.

The question is not if Rich plans to update OotS. The question is if the PCs get a revision or if the campaign gets boxed up and stowed away.


And that is an example of a wall of text. That's why I wanted to reduce the scope of the argument to a single point at a time. It makes the whole discussion easier to follow.

[Elanasaurus]

Actually I think it's explicitly said in-comic during the sequence where Belkar is tripping out

Indeed (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0606.html), but of course the problem is indeed that it's Belkar while he is tripping out. I think it is authoritative, but it'd be hard to convince someone of it that isn't already on board.

GW
Thank you both! I think I have this problem of believing anything a character says in a work of fiction (unless they're the BBEG or something), without remembering where/if that was actually covered in the writing. I had this 'headcanon' that OOTS was not a D&D world but had a D&D setting. I didn't realize Belkar also has this opinion.

brian333, I'm sorry that I keep poking in, but could you please confirm/clarify/deny my interpretation of your theory? I'm still a bit confused. Are you taking the "the whole story is a lie" angle? Are you saying that the Snarl is an all-powerful God, which in this context would be very similar to a DM, except that the Snarl is itself in the OOtSverse (or multiverse idk)but not in the world/planet/plane. This theory assumes that:
1. The gods are lying/have false memories. The Snarl isn't really a Snarl, and the gods didn't create the world.
2. The 'Snarl' is creative, not entirely destructive. It just 'edits' things it doesn't like.
3. It is not trapped in the world. It created the rifts from somewhere else.
4. It also plans to coincide its release of the new world with the gods' destruction of the current one.
Is that right? I'll be grateful if you let me know what your assumptions are.

And Razade. Please don't try too hard to prove that brian333's 'theory' is wrong. He is obviously enjoying the argument, and he has admitted that he could be wrong. In other words, this is "JUST A THEORY! AN OOTS THEORY!"
:elan:

P.S. Please don't get annoyed that I am bugging almost everyone at the same time. All I want is to talk to people and hear from them(and be noticed), and I figured the most efficient way to do that is to talk to as many people at once as possible. Basically, I'm seeking attention. Notice me.
:elan:

[brian 333]

Thank you both! I think I have this problem of believing anything a character says in a work of fiction (unless they're the BBEG or something), without remembering where/if that was actually covered in the writing. I had this 'headcanon' that OOTS was not a D&D world but had a D&D setting. I didn't realize Belkar also has this opinion.

brian333, I'm sorry that I keep poking in, but could you please confirm/clarify/deny my interpretation of your theory? I'm still a bit confused. Are you taking the "the whole story is a lie" angle? Are you saying that the Snarl is an all-powerful God, which in this context would be very similar to a DM, except that the Snarl is itself in the OOtSverse (or multiverse idk)but not in the world/planet/plane. This theory assumes that:
1. The gods are lying/have false memories. The Snarl isn't really a Snarl, and the gods didn't create the world.
2. The 'Snarl' is creative, not entirely destructive. It just 'edits' things it doesn't like.
3. It is not trapped in the world. It created the rifts from somewhere else.
4. It also plans to coincide its release of the new world with the gods' destruction of the current one.
Is that right? I'll be grateful if you let me know what your assumptions are.

And Razade. Please don't try too hard to prove that brian333's 'theory' is wrong. He is obviously enjoying the argument, and he has admitted that he could be wrong. In other words, this is "JUST A THEORY! AN OOTS THEORY!"
:elan:

P.S. Please don't get annoyed that I am bugging almost everyone at the same time. All I want is to talk to people and hear from them(and be noticed), and I figured the most efficient way to do that is to talk to as many people at once as possible. Basically, I'm seeking attention. Notice me.
:elan:

You have the essence of the idea. But I'm not saying the whole story is a lie, I'm saying that Shojo is a known liar, and the only place we learn the history of the gods is from his crayon memories.

Also the gods, themselves creations of the worldbuilder, are suspect as fair witnesses because the worldbuilder gave them those memories.

Finally, the gods have every reason to talk up their power and overlook their own weaknesses because their clerics might waver in their devotion if they learn the limits on their god's power.

None of this means they must lie, but it does mean that what they say should be proveable by means other than their sayso.

As for your four points: right on every count.

As for being annoying, you aren't. Neither is any other poster here. This is the internet. If you bring your feelings into the fight, expect them to take a few punches. I check my feelings at the door, and I advise everyone to do the same.

Because interweb trolls love tasty, tasty feelings almost as much as e-tears and rage quitters. Poor Mikey...

[Sm3gl]

It really is such a neat theory when all the evidence is put together.

Durokans Gate Destroyed #120 - 2004 3.5 edition released 2003
Soons Gate Destroyed #462 - 2007 4th edition released 2007
Girards Gate Destroyed #898 - 2013 5th edition released 2012

The dates match up for each adventure having a narrative option for the players to decide to upgrade to the new edition. All they'd have to do is jump through the rift. Or allow the campaign world to be destroyed and replaced with a new world with a new edition. Or allow one of the other forces to gain control and make choices about the new campaign world (Xykon, Hel, IFCC etc would all create very different campaign options for a future campaign).

Ian could have definitely come from a previously destroyed world. Who hasn't pulled out a character sheet of a character that they liked to use as an NPC without any need to explain how that character got from one campaign world to another (being the DM has its perks that way).

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Ian could have definitely come from a previously destroyed world.

No he couldn't. He is not thousands of years old.

GW

[brian 333]

No he couldn't. He is not thousands of years old.

GW

The OotSverse is not thousands of years old. At best it began 42 years ago, like my own Duchy of Tinald. (Hey, I was a teenager, gimme a break.)

And Ian certainly could have come from previous editions. Remember, my theory is that the rifts occur when something from one campaign world is used in another, creating a link between the two. It's easy to pluck an old character sheet from the storage bin and convert it to an NPC because you already have an established character to roleplay, and all you need is a stat block.

At each revision the campaign backstory grew, pushing history back, then farther back as the DM needed more narrative space. So while the Cliffport of Ian's day ran on a different ruleset, it was much the same as we saw it. The only difference is that the backstory grew between then and now.

[Razade]

Wall o'text is just going to turn other readers away, so I tried to trim the argument to one point and four questions. This is called being concise. Dishonesty is representing a falsehood as true, which I have not done. I have asserted opinions and defended them with references to both the core rules and the comic.

Fear not, I'm perfectly willing to debate any point, but mass walls of text tend to drive readers away.

Spoiler tags were created for a reason.


Dishonesty accusation refuted. Fair warning: accusing your opponent of deciet with no evidence to support that accusation is itself deciet. Everyone here knows this, so shoot yourself in the foot less often in your future responses.

We'll see about that. Let's see how you actually answer the questions yes?


And keep in mind that I enjoy debate. You can't hurt my feelings, but I can use personal attacks as proof my opponent has failed to make his point.

Go right ahead, if I've failed to show you that you're wrong to other people then I'll rectify it. Considering others are voicing the same issues with your "theory" (Not actually a theory. Barely a hypothesis) so...I don't think I have.



Now insults directed at my intelligence? Please step up your game, mon ami.

When the shoe fits, pal


With what do you support this claim? I support its counter with in comic evidence of a being from outside the campaign world reaching through rifts which we know in two cases to lead to other worlds. This is clear evidence The Snarl exists outside the campaign world.

So you support it with more assertions. Bad start, bud. There's nothing indicating that the Gates lead outside the Campaign World anymore than Celestia was outside the Campaign world. Also, asking a question in response to a question. You're just not very good at this debate thing are you?


In my original post on this thread I quoted myself from another thread discussing an experience I enjoyed in which our DM split the party and gave one half of the players to a second DM. Thereafter two parties with two DMs ran the same dungeon. Why would I take a position which counters my original post?

The segment you clipped is not describing a singular entity, but a singular title for a person who exercises the power to remove pantheons and continents from a campaign. More than one entity can hold that title simultaneously. I mean, just count the kings which had a seat at Arthur's Round Table.

Yep. So...All the Gods could, in "theory" be DMs. Yes?


And this assertion, of course, comes from gods who have no agenda. Perhaps all the gods have to do to accomplish the remake is to stop arguing with the DM, who is allowing his players one last chance to play in their playground before he rebuilds it.

Ascribing motive where there is no stated motive and then building off that is not evidence. You're 0/10 so far.


Please support this assertion with evidence. And keep in mind that assertions made by a god only prove that god said it. They are not obliged to either honesty or full disclosure, and they have a huge interest in maintaining their appearance of authority in front of their clerics.

It's the presented evidence in the comic. If you're calling it into question, you have the burden of proof. I shouldn't have to explain this to you.


Feel free to ask any questions. I've been wrong before and expect to be wrong in the future. I have an amazing capacity to recover from being wrong through learning. But I do require more than assertions to prove a thing. Except Santa. He's real no matter what evidence you may offer.

I've asked plenty. You haven't answered any yet. Not really. You've answered with questions. Which isn't an answer.


How do you know this being has no motive? Please provide evidence.

I don't know it doesn't have a motive. I'm saying you don't have evidence it does. Because YOU are ascribing it motives. Like making campaign worlds and things like that. I am saying "how do you know it has that motive". Not "It has no motives". Do you...see the difference in that? I can explain it easily.

A jar of pebbles either is even or odd. You are saying "the number of pebbles is even" and I'm saying "how do you know that" and you've responded "WELL HOW DO YOU KNOW THEY'RE ODD!" and...I haven't made a claim of that nature. Not one bit.


And what brought the rifts to the attention of those 2nd ed. characters of The Order of the Scribble? It was the actions of an entity you asserted was sealed away by the all powerful gods. Liiran found the first rift because forest creatures were vanishing. Did they provoke The Snarl who was safely sealed away?

You keep using the word "asserted". I don't think you know what it means.

"provoked" seem to be just getting close to the rifts. That seems enough to provoke the Snarl into Mortal Slaying action.


The Snarl was not sealed away because if it had been there would have been no need for The Order Of The Scribble to create gates.

I think you need to go back and read the comic. Because unless you're saying the tale the Gods told about how they literally wove a new world around the Snarl and sealed it away and how the seal was breaking and the rifts needed to be re-sealed thus leading to the Gates....

You're so far outside any kind of logic at this point I can't even right now.


I've already explained what I think the rifts are: holes to other worlds created when parts of this current incarnation of the OotSverse were stolen from previous versions or when parts of this world were stolen for subsequent versions of the campaign world. The DM is not just poking holes willy nilly. In fact, he seems to have a detailed plan.

I know. I know you've explained it. You haven't DEMONSTRATED that that explanation is VALID. PLEASE. PLEASE explain how that demonstration is valid.


And as I have said before, the destruction of the campaign world is how it would be seen from within. From the DM's POV it's simply a matter of boxing up the campaign world and storing it in the garage while the DM and players move on to aother.

Now this is an assertion. One I feel no need to refute really.




Notice the gods are allowing a PC group to make their decision for them? But whatever motivates the gods and NPCs doesn't seem to motivate them enough to do anything but wait on a handfull of PCs.

The Godsmoot was held by only NPCs. The verdict would have been rendered unless the PCs intervened. People are obviously not just sitting on their hands.


Evidence is more than asserting a thing to be so.

Yes it is. When you learn the difference I'll still be here waiting to hear your evidence.


The Dark One, whose existence post-dates the erasure of the Olympians, has no clue about The Snarl.

The Dark One knows about The Snarl. Like. He just does. It's said flat out in the comic that he knows about the Snarl.


He wants to control the gates! With control of the gates he can blackmail the other gods. Once the last gate is gone, his ritual is worthless.

The ritual allows him to move the Gates. The Gates that have The Snarl behind it. He knows about the Snarl. You're just flat out wrong here. It's even on his wiki page (http://oots.wikia.com/wiki/Dark_One).



It was a lousy prison, then, because it appears to have had zero impact on The Snarl's efforts. It did not prevent its causing mischief at Liiran's gate and Laurin is discovering it is very active in "her" gate.

The rifts opening shows that the prison wasn't a permanent solution. The prison kept it from destroying all the Gods and the Celestial Realms and everything else. I'd say it was a decent prison.


And once again I must point out that the gates were not created by the gods, butby a handfull of 2nd ed. PCs.

And?


I have indeed presented evidence from both the comic and the source books. You have dismissed, but not refuted it.

You've demonstrated you don't even know what those words mean. So claiming it to be so isn't so.



In D&D, what entity has the power to excise a continent and a pantheon? Only a DM. The Snarl did both of these things. No PC or deity has been shown doing this. If you can present a counter to this my thesis falls apart, but you cannot. The claim of the power of the gods fails before utterance because against the combined might of four pantheons of gods The Snarl removed one pantheon entirely and eradicated every influence that pantheon had on the world. And did this without harming the least member of another pantheon.

Oh can't I? How many times have I said "The Snarl didn't do either of those things you claim it did". The Snarl did not "excise entirely every influence" of either a continent (because...he destroyed a WORLD not the Eastern Continent...which we don't even know if that existed) and didn't excise every influence of the Eastern Gods because...well....

1. Lord Shojo knew about them.

2. The Gods. The Gods took out the evidence of the Eastern Pantheon. The Snarl killed them. To a man. To be sure. But the Snarl didn't then go around and scrub the world clean of their influence. The Gods remade the world and chose not to include whatever the Eastern Gods put in the first one.


That's called Up For Three. Your ball.

Intercepted at the end zone and other sports analogies!!! RIGHT AT THE BUZZER!! Or something. I sorta lost track of what we were doing here. Oh right, proving you wrong.



I like kish. S/he makes me think. As for proof, well, I'm not the guy refuting arguments with "Wrong."

Me neither, hence your complaint about walls of text.



In other words, The Snarl beat four pantheons and eradicated one, and was left to do as it liked? How does this lead to your repeated assertions that the gods are more powerful than The Snarl? How does this support your repeated assertions that the gods sealed The Snarl out? In fact, it refutes both those assertions.

The Snarl didn't beat four pantheons. It killed a pantheon and the rest set to trapping it with guile over brute strength. It's like you haven't even read the comic.

A God that can trap a God Killer is more powerful than the God Killer. Three Pantheons trapped the Snarl. Hell. The Gods MADE the Snarl. A point you haven't even tried to explain.

So, since you claim to answer questions...you haven't yet...how is it that the Snarl is the DM when the Snarl was made by the Gods? All four Pantheons by the by. How is that? I'm going to put this question outside of the spoiler box because this is really the only question you REALLY need to answer.


Again, this is an assertion from the same source that showed, (in living crayon,) The Snarl destroying the Olympians. But according to your previous assertion, the gods fled, leaving The Snarl to do as it wished. Which, if the gods remade the world, they could have made with no rifts for The Snarl to reach through.

Not my assertion. The comic says word for word in indelable crayon. The Gods fled.

The Gods didn't make the Rifts. The Rifts formed on their own.


This is self contradictory. You cannot be more powerful than an entity which defeats you, and you can't flee the field of battle and defeat your foe.

You're just wrong. There. I've finally done "you're wrong" for you. Mostly because I don't want to spend the time to educate you on things like Game Theory or neutral power or any actual indepth explanation on how losing once doesn't make you instantly lose because time is a progression not a singular event a...look at me here. Saying I won't do something and I start doing it. You're a sly one brain.


However, many historical examples exist of people claiming victory while obviously defeated. Especially politicians, which any successful god must be.

Real World politics to go along with your Big G, little g God comment earlier? This thread doesn't have much longer.



Umm, before The Snarl there was an Eastern Continent and a fourth pantheon. After The Snarl there was not.

Comic number please, where they said there was an Eastern Continent. First I've ever heard of it.


It's fairly conclusive evidence. And as for destroying the whole world, I thought the gods defeated and sealed The Snarl out? Why, then, if the gods remade the world, did they not revive the dead pantheon or recreate the lost continent? If you recall, The Snarl was blamed for removing them. At the least, assuming they didn't want another pantheon competing for souls, why didn't they recreate the missing continent?

The Gods did defeat the Snarl. By sealing it away. That's just...what we know of from the comic. Because again, Defeat doesn't mean just beating through physical means.

As to why the Gods didn't revive the Eastern Pantheon...would you, if you had a chance to make a world but had to share it, bring the dudes back you had to share it with if they somehow died? Because I wouldn't. That'd be the last thing I'd do.

Also, no Eastern Continent that we know of from the comic. Never mentioned as far as I can recall. So...can't recreate something that never existed.


Most damning of all, why did they rebuild the world with rifts which gave their enemy entry to the world?

They didn't build the world with the Rifts. The rifts formed on their own.


Consistency is evidence that a person is arguing for a position. Hopping around to obfuscate the issue while espousing contradictory opinions is evidence that a person is arguing with no base to support his position.

I have been consistent. You can verify this by going back and reading every post. You'll see my answers are the same.


A whole new world. That sounds more like my theory than yours.

I don't have a theory. Or a hypothesis. I don't actually think the Gods are DMs. I'm just pointing out how flawed your argument is. My "theory" allows for more than one world. Because I support what the comic has shown. Not baseless ideas.


But again, we have only the word of Shojo, who is a known liar. And he got the story second hand from Soon, who never spoke to any god about this. This testimony is interesting, but not conclusive.

Yep. You're right. But we have no. None. Nada. Stories about how the Snarl creates worlds. So. Ya know. An unreliable story is better than no story at all when you're trying to prove a point. Because at the very least, we know that some of what Soon said was true. We have no reason to believe a word you say no matter how many time you say it.


Plus, if true, it supports my theory that the rifts are holes to previous and future incarnations of the OotSverse, and the purpose of the gates is to prdvent PCs getting out and annoying the DM.

No it doesn't.


They don't say how. What if all they have to do is nothing? It seems to me their entire action in this story has been to play dominance games to enhance any future position in a future incarnation of the OotSverse.

My theory accounts for this by removing the agency of the gods who have talked a good game but accomplished nothing and placed it in the tentacles of the only active worldbuilder we've seen in comic. While this is certainly speculation on my part, it is grounded in what I've observed.

Observation is not enough evidence for a thing to be true. Your accounting requires us to believe the whole story we've been told is not only wrong but there's a whole other story


Evidence in comic refutes this. The Snarl appears to be doing as it likes while the gods plan what to do after their inevitable defeat.

The comic doesn't show the Snarl really doing anything. So. Yeah.



And none of those monsters fits the profile of The Snarl. Even Tharizdun could be beaten which he was by Ernie Gygax... umm, Gord of Greyhawk. With the help of deities of creation, of course. And they never stepped outside their campaign setting.

Who cares?


Do any of these monsters you mention lurk around rifts causing locals to vanish?

Yeah...actually. Hell, some of the monsters mentioned are so powerful they make copies of things (even Gods if I recall the stat block right for the one Time beasty from the Epic Level Handbook) from future events. And past events. And just events. Forget their name...


Can any of them remove every member of a pantheon withoug harm to others?

Yeah, absolutely. So long as the other pantheons don't get involved. Like how the other three didn't get involved with The Snarl killed the Eastern Pantheon.


Can any of them alter a campaign map?

Hells to the yes. A level 20 wizard in 3.5 (the chosen edition of the setting) can alter a campaign map. So not a high bar on the power scale really.


Of course, this doesn't mean such a creature cannot exist. However, I know a creature who can do all these things and more. We call it DM.

A DM isn't a creature. It's a title. As you have already pointed out. The "creature" the DM is would be Human. Or I guess if you taught a dog to talk it could DM. I'd play that game. They'd probably only want to play Pugmire.



The Dark One's plan hinges on gates. Rifts without gates are useless because the ritual is supposed to take control of the gate, not the rift. And you do realise everything you attribute to the gods was actually said by Shojo?

And Redcloak to some extent but yes. I do realize that. And the Gates are over the rifts. So ya know. His plan hinges on...both. If we're being honest.


Not only are the gods poor witnesses, (they each have an agenda,) Shojo is a known liar. So, did they make the world? We have only the word of a known liar as told to him second hand from a person who never spoke to the gods but relied on a third intermediary.

Once again. Untrustworthy testimony is still testimony. Clock is right twice a day and all that. We clearly don't know the full extent and progression of events. But we know that events happened and some of the ones we were told actually happened. The question is which ones. Not if they happend at all.

It is also still better than "The Snarl is the DM. Yeah no one knew that and everything you've heard is a lie". Which is your position.


And, if the gods are actually NPCs, what they know was given to them by the DM. The same entity which created their world also created their memories. If the gods are PCs, why bother with what five or six obscure mortals are doing? Why not simply decree and do, like PCs do?

The same entity that the Gods created. Gotcha.



I didn't say the whole story is a lie. I said that the gods have good reason to lie, and Shojo was known to lie. From whence comes our knowledge of the gods? It is unreasonable to not suspect the veracity of a story told by a known liar. It is certain a liar can tell the truth, but we would be fools to not double-check.

The whole story has to be a lie for your "theory" to be correct. The Snarl cannot be the DM if even one point of data from the story is correct.


So far we know that the gods did not harm or even affect The Snarl. This does not lead to a conclusion that the gods, even collectively, are as powerful as The Snarl. In fact, it refutes any such assertion.

No it doesn't, because "more powerful" doesn't mean "can kill it".



That is an extrapolation on my part, as is fairly obvious. It follows from my theory that the true creator of the OotSverse is The Snarl. This is based on the observation that the gods are not even trying to fight The Snarl, but are instead arguing over their place in a revised OotSverse. And it is based on the fact that The Snarl exists outside the OotSverse. And it is based on the fact that the only entity which has been shown with DM powers, (even if only in a flashback to a memory of a story told second hand by a third party who... asked the gods,) is the Snarl.



These are extrapolations, as is obvious from context. You can't 'prove' projections because the fun part of guessing what will happen in the future is not knowing for sure. But my projections, as wrong as they may be, are based in what has been seen in comic.

And I have set forth the evidence which supports my projections.

Whole thing is an extrapolation off...who even knows what.



But he also never downdated to a previous edition. We're not talking about OotS 2, The New Edition, (which, let's agree, would be awesome.)

Stories are finite, but the worlds they create exist with a history and a future. Even if Rich does not write a sequel the 'future' of the OotSverse will exist within the campaign setting.

The question is not if Rich plans to update OotS. The question is if the PCs get a revision or if the campaign gets boxed up and stowed away.

The story ends when Rich stops writing. There is no campaign setting. There is no OotS outside of Rich's writing. Books don't contain their own worlds. You can write whatever you want after Rich has finished writing. But it's not Rich's story after that and the characters aren't the characters from Order of the Stick, the Webcomic.

Stories are finite and while you can go back and read about the world, it no longer has a future history. Because there's no one writing that history. YEESH.


And that is an example of a wall of text. That's why I wanted to reduce the scope of the argument to a single point at a time. It makes the whole discussion easier to follow.

And that's an example of how you parse a wall of text down.

So now I get to do this. And I'm super excited. Don't read the spoiler. It's pointless. There's nothing in there that really matters. All you need to do is answer this one question. Not with another question. Not with a "well you didn't x,y,z". A concrete "this is how" explanation.

How is The Snarl the DM when the Gods created it?

[Kish]

The Order of the Scribble were not second edition, or Girard wouldn't have existed (no sorcerers), Lirian and Kraagor would not have been able to get anywhere close to high level, and none of them would have been epic-level by the end of the campaign, because epic-level wasn't a thing.

[Kantaki]

:smallconfused:I'm kinda confused there.
The theory is that the gods didn't create the world, no that they can't create worlds?:smallconfused:
And the Snarl- literally chaos incarnate born from the strife and conflict between the gods -did?:smallconfused:

If the gods can't create (or destroy for that matter) worlds what was the point of the Godsmoot (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0997.html)?

I mean Loki and Heimdall certainly seem to think they can. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0998.html)
As do some others if we go by their votes (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html).
Sure, they could be pretending to placate their followers, but Hel (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1000.html) wouldn't have any reason to do the same.

[brian 333]

The Order of the Scribble were not second edition, or Girard wouldn't have existed (no sorcerers), Lirian and Kraagor would not have been able to get anywhere close to high level, and none of them would have been epic-level by the end of the campaign, because epic-level wasn't a thing.


You are technically correct, which is the best kind of correct.

However, even as far back as 1st ed. there were players who resented having to memorize spells ahead of time and there were many homebrewed spontaneous casting wizards, along with articles in Dragon magazine introducing mana systems along with a host of other options for wizards. 2nd ed. was the era of kits too, which allowed players to tweak base classes to conform to their vision of their character.

And Level 10+ was epic back then, with characters in the teens being considered godlike. I have a folder filled with dead characters, and very few of those are above 6th level. Oh, permadeath was the norm back then.

It is entirely possible that a spontaneous casting wizard was retconned into being a sorcerer when the 3.0 revision was completed.

If, on the other hand, your thesis stands on all points, then in the worst case this only throws off the timing of the 3.0 revision. I placed it as occurring after the gates were built, but they could have as easily been the first campaign under 3.0 rules.

But again, you are correct.


Razade, far from trimming down the discussion to one point at a time to keep it manageable, you have expanded it to include at least twenty issues to which your only refutation seems to be, "You are stupid and also wrong."

While I question your judgement of my mental faculties, you are entitled to hold both opinions. However, repeatedly asserting a thing is not the same as demonstrating it. You have utterly failed to discredit my arguments with your walls of text, while kish did it in one paragraph. We may not agree on the conclusion but kish backs up hir arguments, and has to date not delivered gratuitous insults as debating points. Please learn from the example.

Flooding the marketplace is a debating technique often used by those who have no basis to support their argument. The essence of the technique is to keep expanding the argument until the other guy gives up. That's not a win. It's the mental equivalent of remaining on the field after the other team has gone home and counting all the goals you score. In fact, this technique is very transparent once one knows to look for it.

It goes like this:

You said A, but B.

Well, B may not be true, but C and D are.

Well, D may not apply, but you can't refute F.

Well, you never proved C was untrue, which brings up G, H, and I.

And the intent is to make the reader believe A was refuted when it was never addressed. This is a technique I see all too often. Drag the conversation all over the place so you never have to actually argue the original point because you've distracted your opponent into an argument having nothing to do with the original conversation.

You see, I do know the art of rhetoric. So step up your game. I've been playing fair. Try it; you might like it.

As to your bolded question, which I have already answered several times, let me try again.

The only place we learn anything about The Snarl is in the crayon strips. These were Shojo's memories of a conversation he overheard as a child. Shojo is a known liar. He is a manipulative narcissist who tells ordinary people that they are special so he can use them. Why would he suddenly revert to open honesty with Roy? It would be out of character.

So, if Shojo didn't alter the info to set Roy on a path of his choosing he may have forgotten or added details over the at least fifty years.

And he heard the story from Soon, who was shown to be the type to jump to conclusions first then 'prove' them to be true.

And, Soon's information was second hand at best, haven never spoken to the gods himself about any of this.

And the diviner who did speak to a god got the story from someone who had an active interest in playing up his power and playing down the fact that there was an entity capable of beating the snot out of any god.

And we know Roy learned that what he was told about the gates was fundamentally wrong because he talks about it in comic.

It is unreasonable to assume the crayon drawings were the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. There are far too many filters between the event and its telling.

Therefore, I do not accept them as irrefutable proof of anything, any more than I trust a wikipedia article, and for the exact same reason.

So, the statement that the gods created The Snarl is not supported by any evidence outside of questionable testimony. Let's see what we can support, then.

The Snarl exists. We see it in comic outside the crayon strips.
The gods cannot defeat it or otherwise impair it, but PCs apparently can.
The Snarl is always depicted as tentacles reaching into the campaign world from outside.

Now apply logic, the core rulebooks, and a history of gaming beginning in the late 1970's.

What entity routinely and casually reaches into campaign worlds with the ability to alter any aspect of the world?
What entity is capable of defeating entire pantheons of gods but is influenced by players?
What entity can be described as having tentacles which reach every part of the game world?

According to the DMG, any edition, the DM can do anything we've seen The Snarl do, and some of the things attributed to it can only be done by a DM.

The gods in any campaign setting are creations of the DM, and come into being fully formed with memories. Aside from some odd game systems or campaigns, gods are never depicted as new characters working on building the world. Far more often the gods are created long after the campaign setting is begun, but many DMs give their gods memories of having created the world. We as players know Zeus had nothing to do with imprisoning the Titans, bur an Agean campaign would have him remember doing it because that is his backstory.

Now you can say and believe I have not proven my thesis, and you may be right. I am weighing evidence and examining possibilities. The observant will note my thread title says Theory, not Fact, and the insightful will note I've given this theory a very high number, indicating over a million other possibilities exist which all may be derived from the same comic.

[KorvinStarmast]

Durokans Gate Destroyed #120 - 2004 3.5 edition released 2003
Soons Gate Destroyed #462 - 2007 4th edition released 2007
Girards Gate Destroyed #898 - 2013 5th edition released 2012
I think 2014 not 2012 for 5e

Ian could have definitely come from a previously destroyed world. Who hasn't pulled out a character sheet of a character that they liked to use as an NPC without any need to explain how that character got from one campaign world to another (being the DM has its perks that way). What about the mud farmers in book 2? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0218.html) That old guy seems to have been a mix of AD&D 1 and 2. Ian raised Haley in Greysky city in OoTSverse. His origins as 1e thief are considered fact. It's an interesting idea, but the arguments against are pretty sound. I thus conclude that 1e was within OoTSverse at a point not so very long ago in the past of the time line in OoTSverse.

The Order of the Scribble were not second edition, or Girard wouldn't have existed (no sorcerers), Lirian and Kraagor would not have been able to get anywhere close to high level, and none of them would have been epic-level by the end of the campaign, because epic-level wasn't a thing. That also.

Beyond that, if Snips Snails and Dragon Tails 4e encounter happens after having gone through a rift to the 4e world, then the party knows about the rifts and the consequences of going through them. It is very clear that the party does not. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0672.html)

[brian 333]

I think 2014 not 2012 for 5e
What about the mud farmers in book 2? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0218.html) That old guy seems to have been a mix of AD&D 1 and 2. Ian raised Haley in Greysky city in OoTSverse. His origins as 1e thief are considered fact. It's an interesting idea, but the arguments against are pretty sound. I thus conclude that 1e was within OoTSverse at a point not so very long ago in the past of the time line in OoTSverse.
That also.

Beyond that, if Snips Snails and Dragon Tails 4e encounter happens after having gone through a rift to the 4e world, then the party knows about the rifts and the consequences of going through them. It is very clear that the party does not. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0672.html)

All excellent points.

But, we as players are aware that characters can exist simultaneously in several campaign. Wecall them parallel universes and such, and the continuity of one does not impact the other. For example, Battlestar Galactica has two Starbucks. (Sorry, Face, the second Starbuck is better.) It also has very different cylons. Why doesn't Adama or Apollo remember what happened last time around?

[Jasdoif]

For example, Battlestar Galactica has two Starbucks.No; there are two different Battlestar Galacticas, each with a different character named Starbuck.

[brian 333]

No; there are two different Battlestar Galacticas, each with a different character named Starbuck.

Isn't that what I said?

[Jasdoif]

Isn't that what I said?You said Battlestar Galactica had two Starbucks, not that there are two Battlestar Galacticas with their own Starbuck. They're not parallel universes/characters just because they have superficial similarities in names when most everything behind those names is different.

[brian 333]

The part where I said
"Wecall them parallel universes and such, and the continuity of one does not impact the other. For example, Battlestar Galactica has two Starbucks." includes the statement that "the continuity of one does not impact the other."

Please forgive me for thinking I had said exactly what you said. Perhaps I should have used reboot instead of parallel universes and such..

[Razade]

Razade, far from trimming down the discussion to one point at a time to keep it manageable, you have expanded it to include at least twenty issues to which your only refutation seems to be, "You are stupid and also wrong."

Nope. I asked you one single question. I just wrote the rest out for funsies. I said very plainly that you only have to answer one question. I made it very big and very noticeable. So. Answer it.


While I question your judgement of my mental faculties, you are entitled to hold both opinions.

I neither require nor request your permission.


However, repeatedly asserting a thing is not the same as demonstrating it. You have utterly failed to discredit my arguments with your walls of text, while kish did it in one paragraph. We may not agree on the conclusion but kish backs up hir arguments, and has to date not delivered gratuitous insults as debating points. Please learn from the example.

I've used the same proofs that Kish has.


Flooding the marketplace is a debating technique often used by those who have no basis to support their argument. The essence of the technique is to keep expanding the argument until the other guy gives up. That's not a win. It's the mental equivalent of remaining on the field after the other team has gone home and counting all the goals you score. In fact, this technique is very transparent once one knows to look for it.

Again with the "too many words" thing. But none of that matters.

Answer. The. One. Question.



How can the Snarl be the DM if the Gods made the Snarl.

[brian 333]

Nope. I asked you one single question. I just wrote the rest out for funsies. I said very plainly that you only have to answer one question. I made it very big and very noticeable. So. Answer it.



I neither require nor request your permission.



I've used the same proofs that Kish has.



Again with the "too many words" thing. But none of that matters.

Answer. The. One. Question.



How can the Snarl be the DM if the Gods made the Snarl.

Already answered that gem at least six times now, including in the post following its first appearance.


They didn't make The Snarl

The explanation of my answer is already posted.

This is another disingenuous debating technique, to dismiss the opponent's answer by repeating the question no matter what answer was given. Anyone can simply look at my previous posts to see the question was answered prior to your having asked it.

Look, aside from I'm wrong and you are right, do you have anything to add to the conversation? Because if that's all you got, you've already lost the debate. And attempting to goad me into forum violations isn't going to result in a win.

You don't have to like my answer for it to be a valid answer. Feel free to disagree, but please disagree with something more than, "Nuh-uh!"

[Fyraltari]

How can the Snarl be the DM if the Gods made the Snarl.

Brian333 is positing that the gods did not make the Snarl and that the Crayons of Time were just a bunch of lies and misinformation.

Granted we were never told how this information came by them (or even if the scribblers knew it at all insteadof it having been unearthed by the LG on its own) so there is a good claim to that.

The claim that this world needs a DM to function also makes sense but the theory that this role is the Snarl's seems to ignore the obvious candidate : Rich Burlew.

Edit: ninja'd.

[Jasdoif]

The part where I said
Wecall them parallel universes and such, and the continuity of one does not impact the other.

includes the statement that "the continuity of one does not impact the other."It does indeed include the false implication that the two distinct settings have enough in common to be continuities in the same scope.

[brian 333]

Then I apologise for my lack of clarity. I meant to imply exactly what your refutation said.



Brian333 is positing that the gods did not make the Snarl and that the Crayons of Time were just a bunch of lies and misinformation.

Granted we were never told how this information came by them (or even if the scribblers knew it at all insteadof it having been unearthed by the LG on its own) so there is a good claim to that.

The claim that this world needs a DM to function also makes sense but the theory that this role is the Snarl's seems to ignore the obvious candidate : Rich Burlew.

Edit: ninja'd.

Well, I am taking the position that The Giant hasn't lied to us when he says there are no players or DMs outside the comic.

Inside the comic we do see Player Characters, implying the existence of a DM.

And, as always, I could be wrong.

[Jasdoif]

Then I apologise for my lack of clarity. I meant to imply exactly what your refutation said.Thing is, and I just went through my books to check....

The Snarl is described as "kind of an analogy" for Gamer Drama, where petty squabbles can causes rifts between players and ultimately make the gaming group break up; and threatens to do so again with a new group unless steps are taken to listen and understand one another (thus "sealing the rifts").
If we're positing a scenario where the Snarl exists on a meta-contextual level, like would be required for the Snarl to even possibly be a (meta-contextual) DM....Then I say we'd have to take the out-of-universe clue from the commentary: The Snarl was created when the DM exposed the setting, a product of their imagination, to a (meta-contextual) gaming group (prior to which there was only one individual involved, so no chance for interpersonal conflict); and if the Snarl destroys the world, it'll signify the gaming group breaking up and the DM no longer running sessions in the world....

But since the strip is framed as following the campaign of a particular group of adventurers, there's never a point during the comic where the Snarl doesn't exist; the very premise of the strip requires the circumstances that necessitate the Snarl's existence. The DM creating a world for a game resulting in the Snarl would superficially resemble a Snarl-as-DM creating a world. And the DM (and group) abandoning the world, resulting in the destruction of the in-universe perspective of the world, would superficially resemble a Snarl-as-DM destroying the world.


If you're proposing that the Snarl is the DM, you'd need to account for the contradicting commentary. And if you're instead proposing that the Snarl has abilities that would mean it's effectively a DM, you'd do well to explain why the Snarl has to be an agent rather than a tool (like, why the Snarl has to be "the wizard" instead of "the magic").

[brian 333]

Not having the book, I have not read its commentary. This is, for me, new information, thank you.

And your revised explanation fits well. Thanks again.

After a good night's sleep I'm still not sure of the details, but the big picture still fits.

Keep in mind that everything I've proposed is projection based on what has been seen in comic, and as a projection it is but one possibility. For example, the DM does not have to be The Snarl, but so far the only entity in comic which has demonstrated DM powers is the snarl. Is it the DM? Or is it a manifestation of the DM's actions in the game? I don't see that it really matters: the cart needs a horse and vice versa. However, I have no definitive answer to this chicken/egg problem because there is a lack of evidence.

I was obviously mistaken about the origins of the rifts themselves. Wait, I need to do this in a way that can be seen by the obtuse:

I was, obviously, mistaken about the origin of the rifts!

Do I need to put that in red?

However, they still appear to open into other worlds, and the gates were built by PCs in order to keep PCs inside the Stickverse. Are these other worlds in the OotS continuity? Are they later editions and revisions as I have previously speculated? Are they other games to which players fled when they left the OotS campaign?

I'll certainly speculate on this, but I think someone will go through the rift behind Kraggor's gate, and I'll think we'll find a very simple starter campaign with a village, a dungeon, and Jimmy with all the polearms Roy couldn't buy. But this may be wishful thinking on my part.

What we know is that there is the OotS continuity and five rifts, two of which have worlds behind them. Everything I've discussed about what is beyond the rifts is pure speculation, obviously, and it may be entirely coincidental that there are 6.5 editions of D&D. However, conspiracy theories often begin with less evidence, and I rather like the idea. However, as in my original post, those worlds could be virtually anything, limited only by the imagination and effort of the DM.

The commentary does solidify my argument, which was posted in the title: I know what thd gares are.

They are creations of the player characters intended to keep player characters in the game world.

To extend the argument presented in the commdntary, if the rifts symbolize player drama that leads to the gaming group splitting up, then the gates represent the players attempting to repair those rifts. Perhaps those bandages are coming loose revealing the wounds beneath, and the PCs have to actually heal the wounds this time around?

To date the only actions of the gods have been either to retain their power base in this world or manipulate the situation to improve their power base in the next. The gods appear to be certain there will be a revision, no matter what happens, and they want to use it to their advantage.

As another poster said, the Dark One's ritual involves teleportation. Does this mean his plan is to take his chosen people to a world they can dominate? It fits the new data much better than my own speculation that his plan was to use the last gate for blackmail.

So, my revised thesis is that the gates were built by PCs to keep PCs in the OotSverse. Wait, that was my original premise.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'll certainly speculate on this, but I think someone will go through the rift behind Kraggor's gate, and I'll think we'll find a very simple starter campaign with a village, a dungeon, and Jimmy with all the polearms Roy couldn't buy. But this may be wishful thinking on my part.
That would be a great ending.