The Dark one has already cut a deal with the snarl (spoilers SoD)

[Tyrrell]

Redcloak was ready to kill Durkon even after hearing the ramifications of continuing his plan that Durkon presented to him. The reasonable explanation is that Redcloak didn't believe Durkon.

While there are plenty of reasonable explanations why not, one of them that I like is that the Dark one and the snarl already have an arrangement. The snarl is no longer (or perhaps never was) the mindless ball of rage we saw in the crayon sketches. It's a creature that has entrapped by the gods for the duration of all of the different universes. The Dark One also sees himself as wronged by the gods. They're going to do something about it together. Ergo when the Dark one created the red cloak, he included specific instructions with it (remember that it did come with instructions) about how to react when the agents of the gods came to talk him out of the plan.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'll take your speculation one step further:

The Snarl, during its various prison stays (inside of various worlds created as its latest prison) does something to keep itself occupied.

It creates something, or tries to. It has four quiddities to do this with, given its origins as described in Shojo's crayon stories: green, blue, yellow, red.

While Thor identifies the existence of an additional quiddity - purple - Thor does not necessarily know its origin, and neither he, nor Odin, nor perhaps any of the gods in three pantheons know that there is something created within the Snarl, or, something existing alongside the Snarl (as seen through Girard's rift and Soon's rift).

I parse your speculation thusly:
TDO's ascension and acquisition of the purple quiddity may be a result of the Snarl doing {something} that has an effect on the "safe" side of the various rifts. (TDO's ascension began within OoTS world.

Hmm: could be the case.

This would mean that Thor is wrong, and that the Snarl has five quiddities twisted together -- adding in purple -- or that the purple quiddity is the result of an unexpected synergy or interaction between blue and red quiddity strands that make up the Snarl and is indeed something new, but not the salvation Thor thinks that it is.

We'll see. As V observed at the end of book 4 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0672.html):
Perhaps we do not know everything we ought to regarding the task which we are undertaking

This could apply to Thor as well regarding the task that he has assigned to Durkon.

[Tvtyrant]

I'm not sure I buy this one, but I like it! It would be in character for the Snarl to be a terribly abused entity with billions of years of imprisonment rather than just evil incarnate.

[Peelee]

Redcloak was ready to kill Durkon even after hearing the ramifications of continuing his plan that Durkon presented to him. The reasonable explanation is that Redcloak didn't believe Durkon.

While there are plenty of reasonable explanations why not, one of them that I like is that the Dark one and the snarl already have an arrangement. The snarl is no longer (or perhaps never was) the mindless ball of rage we saw in the crayon sketches. It's a creature that has entrapped by the gods for the duration of all of the different universes. The Dark One also sees himself as wronged by the gods. They're going to do something about it together. Ergo when the Dark one created the red cloak, he included specific instructions with it (remember that it did come with instructions) about how to react when the agents of the gods came to talk him out of the plan.

Given how the author talks about the Snarl, I doubt he considers it a character.

The MacGuffin is not the antagonist. The MacGuffin is the object sought by the antagonist. Narratively speaking, it does not matter what it does—only that the antagonist is willing to kill the protagonist to get it. That is the source of the conflict. It does not matter what is in the rift, it matters who is willing to kill whom to get it, even if they are mistaken about its usefulness. What is in the rift is only important insofar as it may, at some point, change who is willing to kill whom and why. And that IS important, because those details will change the shape of what happens, but not as the source of conflict. The Snarl is not the threat; Xykon is the threat. The Snarl's powers have as much relevance to the quest to get the Snarl as the exact properties of the glowing briefcase have on the plot of Pulp Fiction, or the exact dollar value of the statue in The Maltese Falcon.
The Snarl is like a nuclear bomb. You can get a lot of leverage out of owning a nuclear bomb, because no one wants it dropped on them. But if everyone knows you only own one and then you use it on someone...then everyone left knows you don't have it anymore. Sucks for your one target, but it won't end well for you, either.

That's why the Dark One's actual plan is to use the threat of moving the Gate to extract concessions from the other gods and deter preemptive strikes against his followers. Those concessions will be significantly less than, "All of you be my slaves forever," because at that point, the calculus would change and some of the gods might risk the bomb getting dropped on one of them to end the Dark One's threat to their friends and family.Also, I doubt that he has explicitly said "The Dark One's actual plan is X" only for us to find out The Dark One's actual plan is different.

ETA:
I'll take your speculation one step further:

The Snarl, during its various prison stays (inside of various worlds created as its latest prison) does something to keep itself occupied.

It creates something, or tries to. It has four quiddities to do this with, given its origins as described in Shojo's crayon stories: green, blue, yellow, red.
The Snarl does not have four quiddities any more than Durkon has three quiddities.

[KorvinStarmast]

Given how the author talks about the Snarl, I doubt he considers it a character.
Also, I doubt that he has explicitly said "The Dark One's actual plan is X" only for us to find out The Dark One's actual plan is different.

ETA:
The Snarl does not have four quiddities any more than Durkon has three quiddities.
The Snarl is immortal, not mortal. It is made of / from four quiddities. Some from each pantheon to include green. Thor is immortal, made from one quiddity.

I disagree with you on comparing Snarl to Durkon. You can argue that it is, like a world or a mortal, an accidental creation, sure. But it cannot be uncreated, it can only be contained, and it is immortal. It is on par with the deities that it likes to eat, not puny mortals.

Not only that, but if that world seen through the rift is/was created by the Snarl, then it is even more on par with the deities. They make worlds; the Snarl has learned how to make worlds. It's had time, and it has the material: the strands of at least four quiddities.

[Peelee]

The Snarl is immortal, not mortal. It is made of / from four quiddities. Some from each pantheon to include green. Thor is immortal, made from one quiddity.

I disagree with you on comparing Snarl to Durkon. You can argue that it is, like a world or a mortal, an accidental creation, sure. But it cannot be uncreated, it can only be contained, and it is immortal. It is on par with the deities that it likes to eat, not puny mortals.

Immortal does not mean divine. Devas are immortal. The IFCC are immortal. They do not have quiddities.

[KorvinStarmast]

Immortal does not mean divine. Devas are immortal. The IFCC are immortal. They do not have quiddities. This is a speculation thread, and I'll point your towards V's observation a few posts up.

What Thor tells us about the Snarl may not be the whole story.

Who besides deities create worlds?

It appears that the Snarl can .... but that's still an unknown since that world in the rift is at this point of unknown origin.

[Peelee]

This is a speculation thread, and I'll point your towards V's observation a few posts up.

What Thor tells us about the Snarl may not be the whole story.

Who besides deities create worlds?

It appears that the Snarl can .... but that's still an unknown since that world in the rift is at this point of unknown origin.

It is indeed a speculation thread, and V is definitely correct. However, you are making bad assumptions in your speculation, like that Thor is "made of" a quiddity instead of a quiddity being something Thor gives off (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1141.html).

I at no point have suggested that what Thor tells us about the Snarl is the whole story. I have suggested the author is not openly lying to us.

[The Pilgrim]

The world within the world was created by the Snarl. That's for sure, as Odin relayed though his High Priestess (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html):

"I see worlds within worlds, and yarn winding yarn".

So, yes, the Snarl can create things. Though probably not life, as the world within the world appears to be empty, according to aunt Laurin (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html).

[Keltest]

I'd like to point out that the whole reason the Snarl is as effective against the gods as it is, is because it is made from literal deific frustration and malice. Personally i'd say it has as much claim to godhood as Thor does, or at least it would if it had any worshipers.

[Peelee]

The world within the world was created by the Snarl. That's for sure
We have different definitions of "sure", apparently.

Thats likely. That's not for sure.

I'd like to point out that the whole reason the Snarl is as effective against the gods as it is, is because it is made from literal deific frustration and malice. Personally i'd say it has as much claim to godhood as Thor does, or at least it would if it had any worshipers.
So despite the fact that it works entirely different from gods, it has the same claim to godhood the gods have.

Youll forgive me if I do not share your belief here.

[Fyraltari]

If that were true Redcloak would have attacked Durkon just as he said he was sent by Thor. Also Redcloak would have said so to Right-Eye, no?


I'm not sure I buy this one, but I like it! It would be in character for the Snarl to be a terribly abused entity with billions of years of imprisonment rather than just evil incarnate.
Chaos incarnate.

Given how the author talks about the Snarl, I doubt he considers it a character.
Also, I doubt that he has explicitly said "The Dark One's actual plan is X" only for us to find out The Dark One's actual plan is different.
Devil’s advocate says that The Giant could be preserving the twist that the Snarl actually as agency by talking about it from the point of view of the characters/its narrative role thus far.


The Snarl does not have four quiddities any more than Durkon has three quiddities.

Thor describes the Snarl as being made of four colors/quiddities in panel 11 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1141.html). We know that Thor is made of his quiddity because that’s the meaning of the word, it’s Latin for nature/essence/thingness. What he gives off is an aura of a particular color determined by his essence, not the essence itself.

[Keltest]

So despite the fact that it works entirely different from gods, it has the same claim to godhood the gods have.

Youll forgive me if I do not share your belief here.

I mean, yes? Not even all the gods work the same way as as the other gods. What defines a god that the Snarl lacks?

[Peelee]

Thor describes the Snarl as being made of four colors/quiddities in panel 11 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1141.html). We know that Thor is made of his quiddity because that’s the meaning of the word, it’s Latin for nature/essence/thingness. What he gives off is an aura of a particular color determined by his essence, not the essence itself.

And Durkon is made of three quiddities. That does not mean that Durkon/Snarl can harness the powers of three/four quiddities, which was being asserted and I was rebutting.

I mean, yes? Not even all the gods work the same way as as the other gods. What defines a god that the Snarl lacks?

[citation needed]

[Keltest]

And Durkon is made of three quiddities. That does not mean that Durkon/Snarl can harness the powers of three/four quiddities, which was being asserted and I was rebutting. Is that not fundamentally how the new gates would work with Redcloak's assistance?



[citation needed]

Well, lets see. The Dark One exists entirely of his own power, the Elven Gods exist in part from external assistance of the Western Gods, Hel has an abnormal distribution of souls compared to the other gods, and that just what we know of off hand.

So i think i should ask again, what do the gods have that the snarl does not that defines them as deities?

[KorvinStarmast]

Youll forgive me if I do not share your belief here. When one is dealing with incomplete information, one tries to arrange the known in a variety of different ways to arrive at a conclusion that makes sense. If there were a certainty there would be no need to go through that exercise.

And no, not operating on flawed assumptions but rather using the information already provided in the comic. What the Snarl is made of is described similarly in two different places (Shojo's crayons and Thor's narrative); we then take a look at Thor's brief treatment of how many quiddities a god, a Durkon, and a Snarl are made of. I used 'has' rather than 'made of' so if you want to split hairs on that go ahead. It adds no value to this thread.

What makes me less than comfortable with the detailed accuracy of Thor's exposition is the reveal near the end of the Thor scenes where he expresses surprise and "what world?" when Durkon tosses that tidbit out before he goes back. The Snarl having had a few million year to sit in various prisons and do {something} strikes me as the Snarl not being a static entity: it grows and changes over time. (Or, maybe it does). The world in the snarl bait has been hung out for us to speculate upon. (PS: prisoners can get down right creative when they are stuck in a prison with time on their hands ... there are RL examples a-plenty).

As we've all discussed in some detail, the gods of OoTSverse do not have omniscience as a characteristic. (Though to be fair, they've been around for millions of years and so have a lot of experience and an intuitive grasp of how the OoTSverse works). So while his general authority is easy to support, there are/will be details that escape him. (And all of the other gods)

I am also not drawing any line in the sand and declaring "I am right, I must be right, because [citations A-Z]." Not sure why you are (or appear to be) demanding support at that level.

[Metastachydium]

So i think i should ask again, what do the gods have that the snarl does not that defines them as deities?

The Snarl is made of the threads of reality (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0273.html) as are mortals and the world and unlike gods.
The gods need Belief, Worship and Dedication to survive and Souls to power themselves. In turn, they are shaped by belief. Neither seems to be true for the Snarl.

Also, on an unrelated note, Peelee is right. If the author says that the Dark One has a specific agenda, as outlined in the quote provided, we better believe him. He's the author, after all.

[Keltest]

The Snarl is made of the threads of reality (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0273.html) as are mortals and the world and unlike gods.
The gods need Belief, Worship and Dedication to survive and Souls to power themselves. In turn, they are shaped by belief. Neither seems to be true for the Snarl.

Also, on an unrelated note, Peelee is right. If the author says that the Dark One has a specific agenda, as outlined in the quote provided, we better believe him. He's the author, after all.

Theoretically, so is the Dark One, and the Elven Gods. Yet theyre pretty clearly divine.

As for the snarl, could he not be subsisting off of deific fear? Absent that, could he not have worshipers on the world within the rifts?

[Peelee]

Is that not fundamentally how the new gates would work with Redcloak's assistance?
Don't know yet. My money is on "no."

Well, lets see. The Dark One exists entirely of his own power, the Elven Gods exist in part from external assistance of the Western Gods, Hel has an abnormal distribution of souls compared to the other gods, and that just what we know of off hand.
Today I learned that the goblinoid's praise, worship, devotion, yadda yadda is entirely The Dark One's own power. Same for the elves/elven gods. It's cool that they don't need any living creatures to acknowledge their existence in order to keep existing. Imean, if we ignore that Hel is wasting away and that Loki himself isn't sure of her survival. Sure does make Thor's comments about TDO possibly not surviving a world remake weird, though, since TDO can survive entirely of his own power and all.

Or, crazy theory here, none of what you said is correct and you're wrong.

So i think i should ask again, what do the gods have that the snarl does not that defines them as deities?
Acknowledgement of existence among mortals for billions of years, for one. I think that's a pretty major one, but that's only from what I read in the comic, so ya know, take that as you will.

[Keltest]

Acknowledgement of existence among mortals for billions of years, for one. I think that's a pretty major one, but that's only from what I read in the comic, so ya know, take that as you will.

Thats obviously not a requisite, as most of the gods existed before mortals of any flavor, let alone these mortals.

Also, again, TDO and the Elven Gods also disprove that. They havent even existed that long.

[Peelee]

Thats obviously not a requisite, as most of the gods existed before mortals of any flavor, let alone these mortals.


Except we know the answer to the chicken and the egg. The egg predated avian life by millions of years, and beyond that, the chicken as we know it is a domesticated form of the red junglefowl of Southeast Asia. At some point, an almost-chicken junglefowl laid an egg with what we would consider a chicken in it.

In a similar way, the fact that the gods are the way they are now does not preclude them having existed in some other form in the past—one that we might not have thought of as "gods." It's just that the mechanism for change isn't reproduction and evolution. Or rather, it's memetic evolution, not genetic.

EDIT: I also think you're forgetting that the gods originated "from beyond the chaos (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0273.html)." Their initial creation and/or ascension would involve how things work in that other place, wherever that might be, and has little bearing on the story.

From that, we can conclude that if the gods existed in a form we might not have thought of as "gods", the same can (and should) be true of the Snarl. The Snarl does not share any of the traits that we know all gods share - a quiddity in the form of an essence surrounding their being, belief, worship, and dedication required to continue existing, etc. The Snarl, as such, can be said to be not a god, and not similar to the gods. It is its own distinct thing.

Also, I want to apologize to you and any others for how I've been responding lately, especially in that last reply. I've been going through a rough time lately, and that's no excuse to be so rude to other people. I'm going to try to keep a better handle on myself, and if I start going back to mean-spirited or sarcastic retorts, please let me know so I can try to fix that.

[KorvinStarmast]

Also, I want to apologize to you and any others for how I've been responding lately, especially in that last reply. I've been going through a rough time lately, and that's no excuse to be so rude to other people. I'm going to try to keep a better handle on myself, and if I start going back to mean-spirited or sarcastic retorts, please let me know so I can try to fix that. Hang in there, we need our dragon with us! :smallsmile:
We've got your back.

[Keltest]

From that, we can conclude that if the gods existed in a form we might not have thought of as "gods", the same can (and should) be true of the Snarl. The Snarl does not share any of the traits that we know all gods share - a quiddity in the form of an essence surrounding their being, belief, worship, and dedication required to continue existing, etc. The Snarl, as such, can be said to be not a god, and not similar to the gods. It is its own distinct thing.

Also, I want to apologize to you and any others for how I've been responding lately, especially in that last reply. I've been going through a rough time lately, and that's no excuse to be so rude to other people. I'm going to try to keep a better handle on myself, and if I start going back to mean-spirited or sarcastic retorts, please let me know so I can try to fix that.

Apology accepted. Times are not great here as well. I am perhaps not high on the patience needed to make myself properly understood on the first pass these days myself.

At any rate, that response doesnt really answer my question. They may not have been gods at one point, but they are now. So what does that mean? What is intrinsic to their "godness"? Worship, ok, but does that make Banjo a god then? Im not being snarky here (not deliberately anyway), im genuinely curious. Where is the line drawn?

[Peelee]

Hang in there, we need our dragon with us! :smallsmile:
We've got your back.

Apology accepted. Times are not great here as well. I am perhaps not high on the patience needed to make myself properly understood on the first pass these days myself.
I appreciate it.

At any rate, that response doesnt really answer my question. They may not have been gods at one point, but they are now. So what does that mean? What is intrinsic to their "godness"? Worship, ok, but does that make Banjo a god then? Im not being snarky here (not deliberately anyway), im genuinely curious. Where is the line drawn?
I disagree; we know from that quote there is a difference between a god and a different, not-a-god state, whatever that may be. I would classify the Snarl in a not-a-god state, as the Snarl does not show any attribute that is shared by the other gods (aside from possibly being able to weave the threads of reality, but even that is not exactly known yet so I am hesitant to ascribe such an ability to the Snarl).

To put it in a very bad but somewhat-workable analogy, the gods are like Jedi and the Snarl is like the Death Star. The Snarl is a threat to everything, can destroy things just like the Jedi can, but cannot wield the Force. Even if the Death Star can replicate some feats of the Jedi, such as control over an energy beam or the ability to remotely manipulate objects, it is not a Jedi.

[Keltest]

I disagree; we know from that quote there is a difference between a god and a different, not-a-god state, whatever that may be. I would classify the Snarl in a not-a-god state, as the Snarl does not show any attribute that is shared by the other gods (aside from possibly being able to weave the threads of reality, but even that is not exactly known yet so I am hesitant to ascribe such an ability to the Snarl).

To put it in a very bad but somewhat-workable analogy, the gods are like Jedi and the Snarl is like the Death Star. The Snarl is a threat to everything, can destroy things just like the Jedi can, but cannot wield the Force. Even if the Death Star can replicate some feats of the Jedi, such as control over an energy beam or the ability to remotely manipulate objects, it is not a Jedi.

Ok, but then what do the gods have that the snarl doesnt?

In your somewhat-workable analogy, the jedi are defined by being force users belonging to a specific monastic tradition, presumably. Hence the Death Star not being one due to its lacking of those qualities. So whats the equivalent for godhood?

[Peelee]

Ok, but then what do the gods have that the snark doesnt?

In your somewhat-workable analogy, the jedi are defined by being force users belonging to a specific monastic tradition, presumably. Hence the Death Star not being one due to its lacking of those qualities. So whats the equivalent for godhood?

Quiddity, for one. Thor explains that each god has a quiddity (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1141.html), and that things created by single quiddities are ephemeral. The Snarl very clearly does not have one. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html) Further, even if the Snarl was a god and did have a quiddity it was somehow hiding, it would only have one, and anything it created with that quiddity would be similarly ephemeral. If the Snarl created the world in the rift (which I will readily acknowledge is a possibility), I would wager that it would not have done so by using said quiddity, but by some different, more permanent means.

There is also "ability to change as per how mortals see you, or waste away and die without any acknowledgement at all from mortals", as we have seen with Thor, Loki, Odin, and Hel, and the Giant's comments regarding such.

[Keltest]

Quiddity, for one. Thor explains that each god has a quiddity (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1141.html), and that things created by single quiddities are ephemeral. The Snarl very clearly does not have one. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html) Further, even if the Snarl was a god and did have a quiddity it was somehow hiding, it would only have one, and anything it created with that quiddity would be similarly ephemeral. If the Snarl created the world in the rift (which I will readily acknowledge is a possibility), I would wager that it would not have done so by using said quiddity, but by some different, more permanent means.

There is also "ability to change as per how mortals see you, or waste away and die without any acknowledgement at all from mortals", as we have seen with Thor, Loki, Odin, and Hel, and the Giant's comments regarding such.

The aura is actually not a function of the quiddity, but rather their personal energy. The quiddity just "bends" it like light through the atmosphere. The visual manifestation, or lack there of, of the energy is not necessarily indicative of having a quiddity. Likewise, the Snarl was created with 4 quiddities, and i have no real reason to believe that they would somehow "blend" into a single one. The whole problem with the Snarl is that it has 4 after all.

[Fyraltari]

The Snarl is a one-of-a-kind creature poorly understood by its progenitors and even mess understood by us readers. We do know that it is made of four divine essences (panel 11 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1141.html)) unlike mortals who are made out of 3

The process of granting a divine essence to another creture is one well understood by the gods and not all by us readers.

The process of generating a whole new kind of divine essence is not at all understood by either the gods or us readers.

Does the Snarl have the power to grant a divine essence to a mortal? Is that more likely than said mortal generating a new essence? We simply cannot tell because the only one who actually knows what the Snarl is capable of is The Giant.

The Snarl is unlikely to be playing by the same rules as everyone else though since it's not even drawn in the same artstyle.


The Snarl very clearly does not have one. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html)

I don't see what you mean, neither of the characters present said anything about quiddities. (I mean how could they? None of them knows what they even are at this point.)

[Peelee]

The aura is actually not a function of the quiddity, but rather their personal energy. The quiddity just "bends" it like light through the atmosphere. The visual manifestation, or lack there of, of the energy is not necessarily indicative of having a quiddity. Likewise, the Snarl was created with 4 quiddities, and i have no real reason to believe that they would somehow "blend" into a single one. The whole problem with the Snarl is that it has 4 after all.
Thor describes the essence as determined by the quiddity, so I would argue that it is a function of the quiddity.

Further, the Snarl is made of 4 quiddities, just as Dukon is made of three quiddities. I see no reason to assume that the the Snarl can use the quiddities it is composed of more than Durkon can use the quiddities he is composed of - which is not at all. The problem, as Thor states, is that the Snarl is the most real thing in creation (which further distances it from the gods, I realized as I wrote that), which makes it a threat to all of creation.

To continue the color analogy, the gods are made of light and can combine their light to make full-color images. The images they create are made of those colors, but cannot shed light themselves.

I don't see what you mean, neither of the characters present said anything about quiddities. (I mean how could they? None of them knows what they even are at this point.)
I was referring to the fact that we can see the actual Snarl in that strip, and we can see that it has no quiddity.

[Jasdoif]

To continue the color analogy, the gods are made of light and can combine their light to make full-color images. The images they create are made of those colors, but cannot shed light themselves.I think it's kind of like LEDs; in that properties of their semiconductor determine the color of their light, but the light is not composed of that semiconductor.

[Thales]

In Stickverse, gods seem to be their own class of being. Yeah, it's possible for mortals like The Dark One to ascend, and it's possible the main pantheons were something else before they came to the Stickverse, but deities still have specific powers and limits beyond just being "the strongest beings". The Snarl probably can't grant spells, it doesn't rely on mortals for its continued existence, it's not a one-color being.

[Fyraltari]

I was referring to the fact that we can see the actual Snarl in that strip, and we can see that it has no quiddity.
No we can't. It has no aura but that doesn't mean it doesn't have a godly essence. In fact Thor told us plainly that it has 4. Mortals have 3 and don't have aura while Thor's little illusions only have 1 and have an aura (unless it's Thor's dweomer, it's hard to tell) so maybe once you have more than one the aura cancels itself out.

Or, more likely, since Thor describes aura as being particles escaping divine singularities (with the perceived color being a function of the essence of said singularity) then it means that the Snarl, unlike the gods, isn't a singularity. Which makes sense since Thor describes the Outer Planes (and himself) as being made of ideas
(https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1138.html).

So basically when a lot of people belive in stuff, this stuff coalesces together until it becomes so massive as to form a singularity (i.e. a god) each with a certain type (or whatness (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/quiddity)). Just like Hawking radiations, there are particles escaping these singularities but the wavelength at which they do so is determined by the essence of the sigularity, hence they form auras of a specific color.

When gods create thing they imbue them with their own essence but since these creations aren't things that are believed by a whole lot of people they're not singularities and so don't have any aura. So all things we see in comic are made of divine essences (most likely all 'xcept the Snarl and gods are made of three) but out of all of them, only the gods are subject to so much belief/worship/etc that they have auras.

[ShaneWegner]

Hmm, I'm rolling with the explanation that the Snarl really is just chaotic malevolence, at least as a starting point until disproven, although I'm curious about other possibilities.

The Snarl was created by the gods angrily disagreeing with each other. So the same feeling as yelling at someone we don't like on the forums- that core, uncivil, "how can you be so wrong?!" energy. The Snarl didn't get created when they were politely agreeing with or empathizing with each other, or even grudgingly tolerating each other- we could say it doesn't have any of that positive energy. It's just the worst, angry parts.

What can we tell from its actions?
All we've ever seen it do is lash out of the breaches and devour souls, utterly destroying them beyond having anything left to go to the afterlife. That's what apparently took Soon's wife down in the park. We saw Kraagor battling a tendril. Tendrils exploded out of the tomb rift Laurin Shattersmith was scanning and apparently killed some of her elite guard. (And maybe would have her if Mirron hadn't mad a reflex save, although they're both pretty high level).

Soon acted like the Snarl was an all-destroying force that needed to be stopped at any cost, including binding his souls and calling the souls of all paladins in the throne room as entirely reasonable, proportionate actions.

It darkened the sky over Azure City.

The gods destroyed seemingly millions or even billions of worlds to stop the Snarl, and Thor claimed that some they nuked, but others they didn't even time to do that and the Snarl just shredded them first.

We've never on-screen seen any hints of the Snarl showing anything more than blind rage- although that doesn't prove beyond all doubt that it's not possible somehow. The Dark One got his power from somewhere, something unprecedented. Maybe "The Good Guys" have a mindset that the Snarl can't be reasoned with that is so strong they've never questioned it.

Then there's the question of what happens to souls shredded by the Snarl. Subatomically shredded into oblivion, presumably? But maybe it absorbs them? Teleports them to another world? It's unknown, although the highest entropy answer is probably the most reasonable starting point, of just shredding them to nothing.

Maybe the Snarl slowly absorbs some of the qualities of the souls it devours. Who knows, maybe it even slowly gains knowledge, insight, and the hopes and fears of those it consumes, slowly becoming more... complex? There's very little evidence to even hint at this, other than "Well, the Dark One got his power from somewhere, so MAYBE??" If consuming sentient beings made it more reasonable, I would thinking consuming the entire Green Pantheon would probably have made it at least a little calmer.

Maybe if it consumed ALL the gods, their civilized energies would merge back with their uncivilized and it would stabilize? I'm also curious what an assload of healing magic would do to it.

But until I get more info, I'm going to assume it's like trying to reason with entropy or a black hole.

[Tvtyrant]

Also, I want to apologize to you and any others for how I've been responding lately, especially in that last reply. I've been going through a rough time lately, and that's no excuse to be so rude to other people. I'm going to try to keep a better handle on myself, and if I start going back to mean-spirited or sarcastic retorts, please let me know so I can try to fix that.

Sorry you are having a rough time of it lately. Hope things turn up for you.

[Wizard_Lizard]

Yeah I ain’t even sure the snarl HAS sentience. I’ve always thought of it as not an entity but an effect, like entropy.