Concealed-undead Clerics of Hel

[ZhonLord]

As I was re-skimming the comic looking for items for the trivia thread, I was rereading the part where Hel complained about how her undead clerics always get killed off before they can gain enough strength to attend the Godsmoot. And it reminded me of another undead cleric of a death god, who managed to keep his identity secret from the majority of the world.

Malack has been "alive" for centuries, right? And the gods are at least aware of the activities of other clerics, in some cases paying direct attention to others. So why didn't Hel have one of her priests follow Malack's example and hide their undead + evil nature behind a facade of neutrality and "I never said I was alive"?

For someone as manipulative as Hel who has layers of backup plans going, it seems like she should have been able to have had a cleric replicate Malack's success multiple times over by now.

[hroþila]

I think it's quite likely that at least some of her clerics tried. The thing is, that scheme is a lot easier to pull off when you're already a high-level character ruling an entire country from the shadows (it's a lot easier to deal with the consequences of being found out by someone, too)

[ZhonLord]

I think it's quite likely that at least some of her clerics tried. The thing is, that scheme is a lot easier to pull off when you're already a high-level character ruling an entire country from the shadows (it's a lot easier to deal with the consequences of being found out by someone, too)
Malack was already a vampire cleric when he and Tarquin adventured together back in the day. How did Malack conceal himself long enough for the empire plan to get implemented in the first place?

[brian 333]

Malack began as a barbarian. Not necessarily the class, but the background. He was always an outsider with strange ways. It was easier for him to conceal his vampire template because every civilized person he met expected him to be somewhat odd.

It is far different from a cleric in an organized religion suddenly acting strangely or a wight or ghast with spellcasting ability showing up and earning exp from villagers. Those things get noticed.

[InvisibleBison]

Do we know that Malack was high enough level to cast summon proxy before he was killed?

[brian 333]

Do we know that Malack was high enough level to cast summon proxy before he was killed?

We don't. We know he was a barbarian shaman, but his exact class and level combination is speculative at best.

[Peelee]

Do we know that Malack was high enough level to cast summon proxy before he was killed?

What level is that?

[Fyraltari]

Malack also had the advantage of the pre-existing Nergalian Church* as something of a network support he could lean on rather than having to build the entire church himself from the ground up. It's easier for an undead to hide when they're part of a large group of death worshippers who include many normal mortals than for an undead to hide while leading a death-worshipping church whose every priest is undead.

*And probably the Ereshkigalian one too, to a lesser degree.

[Ionathus]

Probably several factors at play here.

Hel seems to be hated far worse than the gods of death/undeath in other pantheons. Part of this seems to be that she has no living worshippers b/c no living clerics, but also because she's in charge of the only Evil afterlife that Good and Neutral mortals can get sent to against their will. That has likely damaged her reputation severely, at least among dwarves. It's a special, unjust degree of evil, and so her undead clerics are more likely to be rooted out and destroyed out of spite.

That's all purely speculation and headcanon, of course, extrapolated from the facts that we actually know.

Another point to consider: it's entirely possible that she does have a couple of wight clerics lurking in the dark corners of the Northern Continent, slowly building their power. The problem there would be that they're slowly building their power, and the more powerful they become, the more likely they are to be crushed as the end-bosses of a dungeon like Greg said. So it's entirely believable that there are clerics of Hel out there in hiding (there's at least one vampire dwarf cleric still kicking, after all), but they just ain't powerful enough to cast summon proxy.

[Bacon Elemental]

Malack also had the advantage of a long history working in an extremely competent Evil adventuring party and then retiring into a succession of positions of immense societal power in terms of "surviving being an undead cleric". We don't know what level they were to start, but they seem like a very long-term deal to me.

[DirePorcupine]

What level is that?

Pretty sure that's a homebrewed spell Giant thought up just for the comic. Dunno the level.

[Peelee]

Pretty sure that's a homebrewed spell Giant thought up just for the comic. Dunno the level.

That was kind of my point. Although it doesn't even seem like it needs to be cast, per se - the representatives from the West and South seem to have been blindsided by it and not casting it themselves. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html)

[Grey_Wolf_c]

That was kind of my point. Although it doesn't even seem like it needs to be cast, per se - the representatives from the West and South seem to have been blindsided by it and not casting it themselves. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html)

I feel like that is not Summon Proxy but a "Communicate Pantheon Results" cast from the other end on the designated representatives.

GW

[Peelee]

I feel like that is not Summon Proxy but a "Communicate Pantheon Results" cast from the other end on the designated representatives.

GW

I dunno, though. The clerics didn't vote, and the godly essence is being transmuted between all the high priests and the reps at the Northern temple. Seems like the gods could just easily zot into the reps and let their wishes be known rather than creating a whole new spell just for that one specific purpose when they already have a spell just for that one specific purpose.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I dunno, though. The clerics didn't vote, and the godly essence is being transmuted between all the high priests and the reps at the Northern temple. Seems like the gods could just easily zot into the reps and let their wishes be known rather than creating a whole new spell just for that one specific purpose when they already have a spell just for that one specific purpose.

But it is not the same purpose. Summon Proxy exists so that gods of a Pantheon can have a talk amongst themselves in a neutral setting. The other one is intended so a Pantheon can communicate their conclusion to the other Pantheons without any of the gods having to be anywhere near the other Pantheon, thus preventing even the chance of a Snarl (and possibly without having a god speak for all the others).

GW

[Jasdoif]

But it is not the same purpose. Summon Proxy exists so that gods of a Pantheon can have a talk amongst themselves in a neutral setting. The other one is intended so a Pantheon can communicate their conclusion to the other Pantheons without any of the gods having to be anywhere near the other Pantheon, thus preventing even the chance of a Snarl (and possibly without having a god speak for all the others).Yeah; I figure summon proxy is like a video addon to the Godsmoot telecommuting thing, letting deities emote more effectively at each other (and authenticate their clerics as theirs) without actually leaving their demense.

[Peelee]

But it is not the same purpose. Summon Proxy exists so that gods of a Pantheon can have a talk amongst themselves in a neutral setting. The other one is intended so a Pantheon can communicate their conclusion to the other Pantheons without any of the gods having to be anywhere near the other Pantheon, thus preventing even the chance of a Snarl (and possibly without having a god speak for all the others).

GW

Both (assuming two discrete spells) allow the gods to speak to the other gods remotely, so long as the divine casters are in close proximity. The representatives from the other pantheons go to close proximity to the northern pantheon high priests, and bam, exact same effect/purpose. That the southern and western pantheons don't say anything except the results of their vote is neither here nor there.

Summon Proxy alone could accomplish this.

[Fyraltari]

I suppose the simplest explanation would be that Summon Proxy allows for either channeling your deity's voice and/or image yourself or making a Cleric of the same god as yourself who you are familiar with do it no matter the distance (similar to Sending rules) and that the High Priests of Veldrina's goddess and of whichever of the Twelve the other guy follows cast it twice, once for their Pantheon's vote and once to communicate it to the Northerners.

Edit: if this is true, then Veldrina and the other guy don't have to cast anything (hence their surprise) and their levels don't matter.

[Turin_19]

I suppose the simplest explanation would be that Summon Proxy allows for either channeling your deity's voice and/or image yourself or making a Cleric of the same god as yourself who you are familiar with do it no matter the distance (similar to Sending rules) and that the High Priests of Veldrina's goddess and of whichever of the Twelve the other guy follows cast it twice, once for their Pantheon's vote and once to communicate it to the Northerners.

Edit: if this is true, then Veldrina and the other guy don't have to cast anything (hence their surprise) and their levels don't matter.

Considering that the Gods cannot influence this world directly also, it looks like they made a specific whole in their non-involvement clauses that are only specific to the Godsmoot. Summon Proxy probably only works on the holy grounds when the event is happening.

[Mike Havran]

Hel seems to be hated far worse than the gods of death/undeath in other pantheons. Part of this seems to be that she has no living worshippers b/c no living clerics, but also because she's in charge of the only Evil afterlife that Good and Neutral mortals can get sent to against their will. That has likely damaged her reputation severely, at least among dwarves. It's a special, unjust degree of evil, and so her undead clerics are more likely to be rooted out and destroyed out of spite.

Also, I would not put it past Loki that he actively tries to encourage his evil clergy to pursuit such clerics (hence the "icky things") just so he will get a bigger portion of Evil juice.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Both (assuming two discrete spells) allow the gods to speak to the other gods remotely, so long as the divine casters are in close proximity. The representatives from the other pantheons go to close proximity to the northern pantheon high priests, and bam, exact same effect/purpose. That the southern and western pantheons don't say anything except the results of their vote is neither here nor there.

Summon Proxy alone could accomplish this.

On the contrary. The purpose is to NOT have the gods in close proximity to the other pantheons. The collective conclusion of their respective moots is communicated through the representatives, but the individual gods of those representatives did not make an appearance. Case in point, we did not hear the result of the vote as interpreted by Veldrina's really minor goddess - if her pantheon is any like the Northern one, she might not even have got a vote. We heard from the pantheon as whole. No proxies were summoned.

GW

[Peelee]

On the contrary. The purpose is to NOT have the gods in close proximity to the other pantheons.
And they aren't. Not even in the same pantheon are they in close proximity. Their divine casters are in close proximity, in both events. Which is not a problem at all.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

And they aren't. Not even in the same pantheon are they in close proximity. Their divine casters are in close proximity, in both events.

"Directly talking to one another" is close proximity, when your disagreement could escalate into feuds that can cause Snarls. The whole system is clearly designed to minimize all contact, including verbal.

GW

[Peelee]

"Directly talking to one another" is close proximity, when your disagreement could escalate into feuds that can cause Snarls. The whole system is clearly designed to minimize all contact, including verbal.

GW

And it does! The pantheons use the spell to discuss amongst themselves, and then again to relay the consensus and only the consensus to the others.

Again, there's no issue at all with having the same spell work for both instances. It has the exact same functionality, allowed the gods to remotely talk to each other without being in close proximity, by way of their divine casters being in close physical proximity and acting as conduits..

[Jasdoif]

Again, there's no issue at all with having the same spell work for both instances. It has the exact same functionality, allowed the gods to remotely talk to each other without being in close proximity, by way of their divine casters being in close physical proximity and acting as conduits..So...are you positing that summon proxy is one of those spells with multiple functions; and HPoH is casting it with himself as the target for one function, and someone outside the Godsmoot is casting it with Veldrina as the target for another?

[Peelee]

So...are you positing that summon proxy is one of those spells with multiple functions; and HPoH is casting it with himself as the target for one function, and someone outside the Godsmoot is casting it with Veldrina as the target for another?

Not even multiple functions, no. The same function - allows gods to talk to each other without needing to be in close proximity. It turns them into a speakerphone, to analogize. Speakerphone doesn't work differently if you pop it into a different office, it's still performing the exact same function, the only difference is that now the yellow speakerphone can hear what the blue and red speakerphones are saying since you put the blue and red models in the office with the yellow model.

[Jasdoif]

Not even multiple functions, no. The same function - allows gods to talk to each other without needing to be in close proximity. It turns them into a speakerphone, to analogize. Speakerphone doesn't work differently if you pop it into a different office, it's still performing the exact same function, the only difference is that now the yellow speakerphone can hear what the blue and red speakerphones are saying since you put the blue and red models in the office with the yellow model.So are you saying Veldrina did cast summon proxy, that HPoH didn't cast summon proxy, or that casting summon proxy was never strictly necessary in the first place?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Not even multiple functions, no. The same function - allows gods to talk to each other without needing to be in close proximity. It turns them into a speakerphone, to analogize. Speakerphone doesn't work differently if you pop it into a different office, it's still performing the exact same function, the only difference is that now the yellow speakerphone can hear what the blue and red speakerphones are saying since you put the blue and red models in the office with the yellow model.

And yet your hypothesis requires the spell to be cast by people surprised by it being casted, and for no proxies to be summoned in some cases but yes in others. My alternative, that there are two spells with two different effects, casters and purposes, honestly seems far more parsimonious.

GW

[Peelee]

So are you saying Veldrina did cast summon proxy, that HPoH didn't cast summon proxy, or that casting summon proxy was never strictly necessary in the first place?
Casting is not strictly necessary but since it can be cast on people (either by the high priests or the gods, take your pick), but it's probably a nicety or something akin to that.

And yet your hypothesis requires the spell to be cast by people surprised by it being casted, and for no proxies to be summoned in some cases but yes in others. My alternative, that there are two spells with two different effects, casters and purposes, honestly seems far more parsimonious.

GW
Two spells with the same effects, casters, and purposes. The effect of "the gods can talk to each other remotely" and "the gods can talk to each other remotely" probably don't need separate spells, is what I'm saying.

[Jasdoif]

Casting is not strictly necessary but since it can be cast on people (either by the high priests or the gods, take your pick), but it's probably a nicety or something akin to that.

Two spells with the same effects, casters, and purposes. The effect of "the gods can talk to each other remotely" and "the gods can talk to each other remotely" probably don't need separate spells, is what I'm saying.Ah, so you are saying HPoH didn't cast summon proxy.

Or, maybe, that summon proxy does indeed have multiple functions; among them the option of giving the target the choice to accept, which the target does through actions that "happen" to look like casting summon proxy themselves...and another option being the visual manifestation, which is dependent on a cost to the caster to prevent it from being employed every time.

[Peelee]

Ah, so you are saying HPoH didn't cast summon proxy.

Not saying that at all. He clearly did.

Also, "able to cast oneself or able to have the god cast on one" is not something I really classify as "multiple functions, anymore than Plane Shift being able to shift yourself or shift another person being multiple functions.

[Jasdoif]

Not saying that at all. He clearly did.

Also, "able to cast oneself or able to have the god cast on one" is not something I really classify as "multiple functions, anymore than Plane Shift being able to shift yourself or shift another person being multiple functions.I think I see...you're conflating the caster and target because neither is the primary impetus for the effect, the deity is; and the 3.x spell description format isn't well suited for describing this kind of ancillary targeting. The location of the speakerphone is irrelevant to you, only who's on the call.

Either that or your autocorrect is mocking both of us; because "able to cast oneself or able to have the god cast on one" would apply like "able to cast fireball oneself or able to have the god cast fireball on one".

[Peelee]

The location of the speakerphone is irrelevant to you, only who's on the call.

This exactly. For this spell, and only this spell, one can initiate the call or the phone can ring, to stretch the metaphor. The caster can cast it (as the Hel's priest did) or the gods can cast it on one (as with Veldrina).

[Jasdoif]

This exactly. For this spell, and only this spell, one can initiate the call or the phone can ring, to stretch the metaphor. The caster can cast it (as the Hel's priest did) or the gods can cast it on one (as with Veldrina).So noted. Resorting to a one-time alteration of spellcasting fundamentals, instead of just letting it be two spells (or one spell and one magical effect), seems excessive to me; even without considering that "cast on self" has the 1:1 correlation with the presumably-bundlable "visual representation of the deity" effect.

I suppose that's more about the spellcasting model's focus on cause over effect, though; and while it'd be an interesting discussion I think the first panel of 604 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0604.html) sums it up more succinctly than a ton of rambling on my part would.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Two spells with the same effects, casters, and purposes. The effect of "the gods can talk to each other remotely" and "the gods can talk to each other remotely" probably don't need separate spells, is what I'm saying.

Again, you are declaring that the target is the gods, and then wondering about people being surprised by it being cast. The two spells are clearly not targeting the same things. Summon Proxy is cast by a high level priest and summons a proxy version of a god to the place where the priest is. The other spell is not targeting a god at all, it is targeting a cleric far away and transmits the results of a vote. The spells are nothing alike, except in a superficial way that both sort of allow communication - but in fact it is completely different communication - one brings a god to the realm so it can talk to other gods in the same room without any of them being present. The other transmits a "yes" or "no" from the priests to a different priest in a way that presumably cannot be faked and carries official characteristics. They really are nothing alike.

Grey Wolf

[brian 333]

When cast upon a target area it allows the deity to communicate through an image of itself, as the caster understands that deity's image to appear.

When cast upon a person it allows a pre-recorded message from the caster's deity to be played when the target person meets pre-established criteria, such as being asked to speak the will of their deity.

Same spell, different targets, and different-seeming effects.

To go back to the phone analogy: the Northern gods had a conference call, at which the casette tapes from the red and blue answering machines were played.

Too young for phones and cassettes? Okay, the Southern and Western pantheons each sent a thumb drive with their decisions recorded on it to the host server's physical location, and while they were doing face time the thumb drives were plugged into a port on the server.

[Peelee]

Again, you are declaring that the target is the gods

Gonna stop you right there. I'm not. The target is the caster. The effect is the gods can talk through the caster. The gods are not the target. They are part of the effect.

[TaiLiu]

I'm confused. Isn't it explicitly the case that it's one spell? OOTS 1027 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1027.html):

"And second: the entire reason Hel needed a ready-made priest of a certain level was that voting requires casting a high-end clerical spell that both contacts the deity and transmits the vote to the other gods. That was a level of magic that I didn’t believe Banjo was capable of doing, any more than could Hel’s previous low-level clerics."

There's some ambiguity, but it seems reasonable to say that it's one spell and that it's a high level spell.

[Ruck]

I'm confused. Isn't it explicitly the case that it's one spell? OOTS 1027 (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1027.html):

"And second: the entire reason Hel needed a ready-made priest of a certain level was that voting requires casting a high-end clerical spell that both contacts the deity and transmits the vote to the other gods. That was a level of magic that I didn’t believe Banjo was capable of doing, any more than could Hel’s previous low-level clerics."

There's some ambiguity, but it seems reasonable to say that it's one spell and that it's a high level spell.

I don't think that says anything about whether the spell the Western and Southern pantheons used to communicate their votes through their representatives is the same as Summon Proxy.

[TaiLiu]

I don't think that says anything about whether the spell the Western and Southern pantheons used to communicate their votes through their representatives is the same as Summon Proxy.
Well, we know that summon proxy "transmits the vote to the other gods," right? Isn't that what happened? It targeted the representatives and then they transmitted the votes.

[Ruck]

Well, we know that summon proxy "transmits the vote to the other gods," right? Isn't that what happened? It targeted the representatives and then they transmitted the votes.

Does it? I'm still not really sure. When we see a high priest cast Summon Proxy, we see a big vision of the god in question and can hear them talk (as can the other proxies). When the votes are transmitted, the clerics and representatives seem to be struck by a spell they didn't cast and the god speaks directly through them. See #999 in case I'm not clear.

And interestingly, upon reviewing that strip, Loki's vote is spoken through his high priest, but the proxy for Loki from the Summon Proxy spell is still there and commenting on the vote separately. This suggests to me that they're different spells; otherwise, Loki-as-proxy could simply vote himself instead of going through his high priest.

[brian 333]

Does it? I'm still not really sure. When we see a high priest cast Summon Proxy, we see a big vision of the god in question and can hear them talk (as can the other proxies). When the votes are transmitted, the clerics and representatives seem to be struck by a spell they didn't cast and the god speaks directly through them. See #999 in case I'm not clear.

And interestingly, upon reviewing that strip, Loki's vote is spoken through his high priest, but the proxy for Loki from the Summon Proxy spell is still there and commenting on the vote separately. This suggests to me that they're different spells; otherwise, Loki-as-proxy could simply vote himself instead of going through his high priest.

We certainly have no way to disprove this. However, consider that West and South were transmitting the vote of a pantheon as a whole. Which deity should have appeared?

Also consider that the Northern high priests at the godsmoot were casting the spell, and the representitives from the West and South were simply triggering magic that had been cast upon them. Many spells in the PHB have a different result when cast on different targets.

Now consider the economics of spell research. What is wanted is a spell capable of allowing the will of the gods of a specific pantheon to communicate their will to their high priests in a setting that allows some debate between them, (sort of like a 'Mass Commune' spell,) which also has the ability to transmit the conclusion of those deliberations to the representative councils of the other pantheons. Is it easier and less costly to research two spells?

[Peelee]

Does it? I'm still not really sure. When we see a high priest cast Summon Proxy, we see a big vision of the god in question and can hear them talk (as can the other proxies). When the votes are transmitted, the clerics and representatives seem to be struck by a spell they didn't cast and the god speaks directly through them. See #999 in case I'm not clear.

In 999, the Northern gods hear the Southern and Western votes (and parnell would hear the results of the Northern vote), delivered in the same deity-colored speech balloons as Summon Proxy, and the Northern gods speak directly through their clerics. The only difference seems to be that the representatives didn't cast it themselves, which I see as an inconsequential difference that could easily be covered by the spell.

[Jasdoif]

Does it? I'm still not really sure. When we see a high priest cast Summon Proxy, we see a big vision of the god in question and can hear them talk (as can the other proxies). When the votes are transmitted, the clerics and representatives seem to be struck by a spell they didn't cast and the god speaks directly through them. See #999 in case I'm not clear.

And interestingly, upon reviewing that strip, Loki's vote is spoken through his high priest, but the proxy for Loki from the Summon Proxy spell is still there and commenting on the vote separately. This suggests to me that they're different spells; otherwise, Loki-as-proxy could simply vote himself instead of going through his high priest.I agree; summon proxy originates on the scene and...summons a proxy, and the other effect does neither. (Also note that casting summon proxy is considered valid authentication (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1000.html), something that wouldn't work if the source is unobservable). I don't think that second effect is even a spell, honestly; seems more likely it's an ability gods have that doesn't draw on spell slots at all, what with how limited it appears to be.

Of course all this evaluation is all based on reverse-engineering what we've seen on-panel; if "uses exactly one spell" is the goal (as it appears to be Peelee's), it's not strictly impossible for overengineering to accomplish.

[Ruck]

In 999, the Northern gods hear the Southern and Western votes (and parnell would hear the results of the Northern vote), delivered in the same deity-colored speech balloons as Summon Proxy, and the Northern gods speak directly through their clerics.

Except when they don't, as I pointed out:


Loki's vote is spoken through his high priest, but the proxy for Loki from the Summon Proxy spell is still there and commenting on the vote separately.

[Peelee]

Except when they don't, as I pointed out:

The do the entire time. Each God votes throigh the cleric, and then if they chose to manifest visually, they comment by the manifestation. But they still all speak through the spell caster when relaying their vote. Which, I have to note is exactly what the representatives do.

Think of it this way: I can, in a single post write as a moderator in red text, which will be more formal and have specific reason, and then write as a standard user in black text where I can be more goofy when discussing. The gods speak throigh the casters and also through their apparitions, if they chose to manifest them (I figure most dont for art logistics reasons). But it's still the gods the entire time. The casters aren't just saying what they think their deity probably wants when they speak in the yellow speech bubbles. The gods are clearly speaking through the casters.

Again, I see no reason to complicate things with two highly specific spells that perform the same function with at best trivial cosmetic differences when you can just have them be one spell.

[Ruck]

The do the entire time. Each God votes throigh the cleric, and then if they chose to manifest visually, they comment by the manifestation. But they still all speak through the spell caster when relaying their vote. Which, I have to note is exactly what the representatives do.

Right, no disagreement that they communicate the vote through their representatives. But the only time we see anyone cast "Summon Proxy," it creates that visual manifestation so the gods can talk to each other.


Think of it this way: I can, in a single post write as a moderator in red text, which will be more formal and have specific reason, and then write as a standard user in black text where I can be more goofy when discussing. The gods speak throigh the casters and also through their apparitions, if they chose to manifest them (I figure most dont for art logistics reasons). But it's still the gods the entire time. The casters aren't just saying what they think their deity probably wants when they speak in the yellow speech bubbles. The gods are clearly speaking through the casters.

I don't disagree with the second part, but I think it's more like if you had separate accounts for posting (summon proxy) and moderation (channeling your vote through the high priest).


Again, I see no reason to complicate things with two highly specific spells that perform the same function with at best trivial cosmetic differences when you can just have them be one spell.

I just think if two spells have clearly different effects-- one cast by a priest that summons a proxy for the god, one that is cast on the priest so the god can vote directly-- the simplest explanation is that they are two different spells. (And that's assuming the latter is even a spell and not some special God Voting Power.)

[Peelee]

I just think if two spells have clearly different effects-- one cast by a priest that summons a proxy for the god, one that is cast on the priest so the god can vote directly-- the simplest explanation is that they are two different spells. (And that's assuming the latter is even a spell and not some special God Voting Power.)

But they're not two different effects, they're the exact same effect with the sole differentiating feature being visual/thematic (an image of the god the voice comes from instead of the same voice from the same being coming from the spellcaster). To use your example of two different accounts, both accounts would be named Peelee and would have the same avatar and location tag and bio and one would have the moderator badge and speak only in red text. Sure, it could be done that way, but it's needlessly convoluted for exactly zero benefit.

Sure, you could have two different spells to serve the exact same purpose (for the gods to talk amongst themselves) in the exact same circumstances (when official business needs to be discussed) at the exact same time (during the Godsmoot), but why would you want to?

[Ruck]

But they're not two different effects, they're the exact same effect with the sole differentiating feature being visual/thematic (an image of the god the voice comes from instead of the same voice from the same being coming from the spellcaster).

But that is a difference-- not only visually, but in the way the gods talk among themselves through their proxies but use the priests only to record their vote (aside from Odin's high priest, who is used to conduct the voting as well).

And there's still the part where the priests and representatives don't seem to be casting the spell that the gods use to vote through them, but seem to be on the receiving end of whatever spell or effect allows the gods to do that. That's a really significant mechanical difference.

[brian 333]

But that is a difference-- not only visually, but in the way the gods talk among themselves through their proxies but use the priests only to record their vote (aside from Odin's high priest, who is used to conduct the voting as well).

And there's still the part where the priests and representatives don't seem to be casting the spell that the gods use to vote through them, but seem to be on the receiving end of whatever spell or effect allows the gods to do that. That's a really significant mechanical difference.

The messengers were not high priests, and therefore could not cast the spell themselves. However, if the spells had been cast upon them before they left their respective goodsmoots, and triggered at the godsmoot of the Northern gods, then what we saw in comic is easily explained.

Whether one or two spells were involved isn't ultimately important. But from a spell economy PoV, it makes more sense for the one spell theory. You need a spell that communicates the will of the gods within a pantheon, and you need a spell that communicates the will of the gods between pantheons. Authenticated divine communication is the goal.

When cast by a high priest upon himself, the spell allows a diety to speak via an image to a group of mortals who represent other deities. A mass commune spell, if you will. When the same spell is cast upon a messenger, it allows the messenger to carry an authenticated message to another godsmoot.

Having a high level spell with such a singular purpose is understandable, even if it only gets used two or three times in each world's incarnation. Having two spells with such a singular purpose that do very similar things, which will be used only two or three times in each world's incarnation makes less sense. Why not use the same spell and tack on two ways it can be used? There are many spells that have more than one way to use them.

[Laurentio III]

Having a high level spell with such a singular purpose is understandable, even if it only gets used two or three times in each world's incarnation.
Well, I can see Thor being channelled during college parties.

[brian 333]

Well, I can see Thor being channelled during college parties.



I now have a new headcanon for the spell. Its creation was specifically for this purpose, and its use at the godsmoot was purely opportunistic reapplication.

[pearl jam]

The messengers were not high priests, and therefore could not cast the spell themselves. However, if the spells had been cast upon them before they left their respective goodsmoots, and triggered at the godsmoot of the Northern gods, then what we saw in comic is easily explained.

Whether one or two spells were involved isn't ultimately important. But from a spell economy PoV, it makes more sense for the one spell theory. You need a spell that communicates the will of the gods within a pantheon, and you need a spell that communicates the will of the gods between pantheons. Authenticated divine communication is the goal.

When cast by a high priest upon himself, the spell allows a diety to speak via an image to a group of mortals who represent other deities. A mass commune spell, if you will. When the same spell is cast upon a messenger, it allows the messenger to carry an authenticated message to another godsmoot.

Having a high level spell with such a singular purpose is understandable, even if it only gets used two or three times in each world's incarnation. Having two spells with such a singular purpose that do very similar things, which will be used only two or three times in each world's incarnation makes less sense. Why not use the same spell and tack on two ways it can be used? There are many spells that have more than one way to use them.

I'm whole-heartedly in the "it's not important" category, but is there any reason to believe spell economy is of any concern to the gods or, indeed, of any importance whatsoever?

[Peelee]

But that is a difference-- not only visually, but in the way the gods talk among themselves through their proxies but use the priests only to record their vote (aside from Odin's high priest, who is used to conduct the voting as well).

And there's still the part where the priests and representatives don't seem to be casting the spell that the gods use to vote through them, but seem to be on the receiving end of whatever spell or effect allows the gods to do that. That's a really significant mechanical difference.

Not really. They still talk to each other and hear each other. It's more of an on-the-record vs off-the-record type deal, which IRL is often incredibly informal, even in otherwise formal settings such as courtrooms.

I don't see that as the substantive difference that you do, basically.

[Ruck]

The messengers were not high priests, and therefore could not cast the spell themselves.

But we see the same effect on the high priests (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html) (first panel of page 2). Some of them, like Thor's high priest, seem more prepared than others for it, but it still seems to be the same.

Also, no "ZOT!" when a high priest casts Summon Proxy.


Not really. They still talk to each other and hear each other. It's more of an on-the-record vs off-the-record type deal, which IRL is often incredibly informal, even in otherwise formal settings such as courtrooms.

I don't see that as the substantive difference that you do, basically.

Honestly there are so many visible differences in the effects here that it feels roughly analogous to trying to say an illusion spell and a charm spell are the same.


I'm whole-heartedly in the "it's not important" category, but is there any reason to believe spell economy is of any concern to the gods or, indeed, of any importance whatsoever?

I definitely don't think this is of any importance. However, I just don't see how two magical effects that seem so clearly different to me are apparently obviously the same spell to other people.

[pearl jam]

Certainly there's no harm in people who find the topic interesting discussing their viewpoints on the matter. As someone without any vested interest in either answer, I can say I have found the both the cases for it being one spell and the cases for it being more than one spell to be very plausible.

[Jasdoif]

Honestly there are so many visible differences in the effects here that it feels roughly analogous to trying to say an illusion spell and a charm spell are the same.Indeed. You could certainly have such a thing, don't get me wrong; but when we start talking about contorting fundamentals like range as part of a spell's effect, it seems more like the result of apathy than the result of a good idea. Which, again, is certainly reasonable in a case like this; unless PCs ascending to divinity (or physically battling deities) is something the DM's willing to consider, it's not really necessary to flesh out all the implementation details of an effect that's only available to deities...but at that point, where's the advantage of even tying it to a spell in the first place?

[Ruck]

Certainly there's no harm in people who find the topic interesting discussing their viewpoints on the matter.

Definitely not. I mean, I find it interesting or I wouldn't have commented at all. I just think it ultimately won't matter or have any effect on the story.

I'm not even sure if The Giant made any real decision as to whether it was the same spell or not, or even if a spell was used for the voting, or anything like that. "If I made it up for the strip, it works how it needs to work" seems to be his approach a lot of the time, and I'm fine with that.


Indeed. You could certainly have such a thing, don't get me wrong; but when we start talking about contorting fundamentals like range as part of a spell's effect, it seems more like the result of apathy than the result of a good idea. Which, again, is certainly reasonable in a case like this; unless PCs ascending to divinity (or physically battling deities) is something the DM's willing to consider, it's not really necessary to flesh out all the implementation details of an effect that's only available to deities...but at that point, where's the advantage of even tying it to a spell in the first place?

Yeah, re: the bolded, I'm not even sure the voting effect is a spell, per my above comments.

[TaiLiu]

Does it? I'm still not really sure. When we see a high priest cast Summon Proxy, we see a big vision of the god in question and can hear them talk (as can the other proxies). When the votes are transmitted, the clerics and representatives seem to be struck by a spell they didn't cast and the god speaks directly through them. See #999 in case I'm not clear.

And interestingly, upon reviewing that strip, Loki's vote is spoken through his high priest, but the proxy for Loki from the Summon Proxy spell is still there and commenting on the vote separately. This suggests to me that they're different spells; otherwise, Loki-as-proxy could simply vote himself instead of going through his high priest.
You might be right. But then what explains Roy talking about a spell and not multiple spells?

[Peelee]

Honestly there are so many visible differences in the effects here that it feels roughly analogous to trying to say an illusion spell and a charm spell are the same.

So many visible differences that make no or negligible difference. There's already a spell that has visible differences, Prestidigitation. There's also already a spell twith two functions hat work very similarly but notably differently, Gate. This is hardly out of hand, we have precedent in RAW.

And, frankly, given that there is zero utility for these outside of a godsmoot and there is no mechanical balance to consider whatsoever (arguably outside of spell slots), there is no reason at all for it to be two different spells when it could be one with two functions that work very similarly but still notably differently. There is zero mechanical reason for it to be two spells. There is zero balance reason for it to be two spells. There is zero narrative reason for it to be two spells. There is zero reason whatsoever for it to be two spells.

I do not expect this to convince you, but these are the reasons why your arguments are utterly failing to convince me.

[Ruck]

So many visible differences that make no or negligible difference.

But whether or not they make a difference is a matter of opinion, not fact.


There's already a spell that has visible differences, Prestidigitation. There's also already a spell with two functions that work very similarly but notably differently, Gate. This is hardly out of hand, we have precedent in RAW.

Gate still opens a Gate in both senses; it's just whether you're going through it or summoning someone from the other side to come through it.

Again, the difference here seems analogous to me to casting an illusion of someone that can speak, vs. charming someone to say what you want them to say. Those are clearly different effects, even if the end result may be relatively similar. The Gate analogy, applied here, seems more to me like if the summoned creature from the other side cast it on the caster, which obviously isn't how it works.


And, frankly, given that there is zero utility for these outside of a godsmoot and there is no mechanical balance to consider whatsoever (arguably outside of spell slots), there is no reason at all for it to be two different spells when it could be one with two functions that work very similarly but still notably differently. There is zero mechanical reason for it to be two spells. There is zero balance reason for it to be two spells. There is zero narrative reason for it to be two spells. There is zero reason whatsoever for it to be two spells.

There's no reason for the voting effect to be a spell at all. I have no idea what it is.


I do not expect this to convince you, but these are the reasons why your arguments are utterly failing to convince me.

I just think when there are multiple significant differences in the two effects-- in particular, that none of the high priests is seen casting Summon Proxy for the vote, but rather appear to have the effect thrust upon them, which seems like a huge mechanical difference to me-- there's no reason to assume they are the same spell or effect.

[Peelee]

Only going to address the strongest argument:

Gate still opens a Gate in both senses; it's just whether you're going through it or summoning someone from the other side to come through it.

And, assuming the spell in question is one spell, it gives vocal control of the caster to the deities. It's just whether it's cast by the caster or cast on the caster.

Again, I see these differences as vastly less significant than you do. Repeating "but they are significant" does nothing, because I can reply "but they are not significant". Spells can have different visual effects. Spells can have similar mechanical effects with slight differences. Everything is simpler in both wataonian and doylistic approaches for it to be one spell. Two spells gives zero benefit at all. One spell gives the benefit of simplicity.

[Ruck]

And, assuming the spell in question is one spell, it gives vocal control of the caster to the deities. It's just whether it's cast by the caster or cast on the caster.

As far as I can tell, though, the Summon Proxy that creates a separate proxy for the god doesn't give vocal control of the caster to the deities. It creates a separate entity that speaks on its own.

edit: Note that when Roy and Durkula are fighting (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1001.html), Durkula is speaking for himself even though his summoned proxy for Hel is there watching and speaking to the other gods' proxies.


Again, I see these differences as vastly less significant than you do. Repeating "but they are significant" does nothing, because I can reply "but they are not significant". Spells can have different visual effects. Spells can have similar mechanical effects with slight differences. Everything is simpler in both wataonian and doylistic approaches for it to be one spell. Two spells gives zero benefit at all. One spell gives the benefit of simplicity.

In Doylistic terms, like I said, I think the voting effect is more likely to be "I haven't figured out the exact mechanics because it works how I need it to work for the story."

And as far as we know, gods can't actually cast spells on the material plane, so if the voting effect is Summon Proxy cast on the caster, then who exactly is casting it?

edit: You could argue that the Southern and Western pantheons' high priests are casting the spell on their designated representatives, but that doesn't explain the Northern pantheon.

[Peelee]

As far as I can tell, though, the Summon Proxy that creates a separate proxy for the god doesn't give vocal control of the caster to the deities. It creates a separate entity that speaks on its own.
Doesn't appear to be a separate entity to me. Appears to be exactly like all the other clerics who voted without having an apparition of their god, which appears to be a purely stylistic choice on the gods' part.

Look dude, we can go round and round all day long, no argument you have made has been convincing in the slightest. I'm not even trying to convince you, I'm just explaining why I don't buy what you're saying. It's not going to change if you just use different words to say the same things.

[Ruck]

Doesn't appear to be a separate entity to me. Appears to be exactly like all the other clerics who voted without having an apparition of their god, which appears to be a purely stylistic choice on the gods' part.

Dunno if you missed my edit, but I think it serves as evidence to my point here:


edit: Note that when Roy and Durkula are fighting (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1001.html), Durkula is speaking for himself even though his summoned proxy for Hel is there watching and speaking to the other gods' proxies.


Look dude, we can go round and round all day long, no argument you have made has been convincing in the slightest. I'm not even trying to convince you, I'm just explaining why I don't buy what you're saying. It's not going to change if you just use different words to say the same things.

We can. We certainly don't have to. I think it ultimately will make absolutely zero difference in the strip which way it's treated and whether one of us is right or not. I'm just telling you why they seem like different effects to me.

[Jasdoif]

As far as I can tell, though, the Summon Proxy that creates a separate proxy for the god doesn't give vocal control of the caster to the deities. It creates a separate entity that speaks on its own.

edit: Note that when Roy and Durkula are fighting (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1001.html), Durkula is speaking for himself even though his summoned proxy for Hel is there watching and speaking to the other gods' proxies.Indeed.

It seems to me that a key feature of summon proxy is to authenticate a high priest (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1000.html): as the high priest is casting the spell on premises themselves, the normal spellcraft check to identify a spell being cast works to be sure some illusion spell isn't being cast; which is likely useful in a pantheon with a trickster deity.

(It's far more uncertain whether there's a magical connection between the high priest of the head of the pantheon recognizing the other priests/representatives and the less dramatic deity-voice-channeling; it could simply be formal protocol timing that she spoke each (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html) time (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1012.html) others were bezotted)

[Peelee]

Dunno if you missed my edit, but I think it serves as evidence to my point here:

No, I saw it, I just don't think it's the strong evidence that you seem to think it is. I don't see it as avidence of anything other than that the spell also allows the cleric to talk while the gods aren't talking through them. I saw it as irrelevant so I didn't bother to address it at all.


Again, what you think is important is not a thought I share with you.

[brian 333]

The intensity of the debate exceeds the importance of the issue. However, I have to echo Peelee's conclusions here.

Whether it is an effect imposed by the gods on their chosen high priest or a spell cast by their high priests on themselves to allow them to channel their deities' words, it only needs one 'mechanical method' to accomplish what we've seen.

In my opinion, it is a spell cast by the high priests upon themselves, or cast by the high priest of the leader deity of a pantheon upon a representative being sent to another pantheon. The purpose is to allow the high priests to recognize that the words are the authentic words of the deity.

Authenticated Voice Transmission with potential visual accompaniment is a single spell. It looks different on panel because The Author didn't want to draw the whole pantheon for each of three continents.