Gate takes a piece of your soul? Huh?!

[hroþila]

"You have to sacrifice part of your soul to cast this spell" sounds bad and micro-Faustian but the implication seems to be that gaining XP literally makes your soul grow so it's not as bad as it sounds

[The MunchKING]

Yes and no. The scriber pays the XP cost, not the end user.

Ah, so I need to off load all my XP loss onto OTHER high-level casters. Thus, weakening them while raising my power. PERFECT. *steeples fingers*

And also, one day after the drain, character must make tests, to see if the drain is permanent.

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/energyDrain.htm

There is no saving throw to avoid gaining the negative levels, but 24 hours after gaining them, the subject must make a Fortitude saving throw (DC = energy drain spell’s save DC) for each negative level. If the save succeeds, that negative level is removed. If it fails, the negative level also goes away, but one of the subject’s character levels is permanently drained.

Ah OK, I knew there was a save to see if it was permanent. I just thought the negative level status became permanent. Now I know better.

[Resileaf]

Guys, the Giant just has been trying to refrain from using game terms to describe events in recent books. XP requires knowledge of how D&D works. Saying 'piece of soul' makes it less gamey and easier to understand for people who do not play D&D.

It's not that complicated.

[hroþila]

Guys, the Giant just has been trying to refrain from using game terms to describe events in recent books. XP requires knowledge of how D&D works. Saying 'piece of soul' makes it less gamey and easier to understand for people who do not play D&D.

It's really just that simple.

It's strip #1264. I doubt any readers aren't familiar with XP at this point

[Resileaf]

It's strip #1264. I doubt any readers aren't familiar with XP at this point

Any strip can be an introduction to new readers.

[BaronOfHell]

Another take based on strip 1130

If
1) a person is their soul (when Roy went to the afterlife he was clearly his soul, not his body that was rotting away), the same for Durkon and Minrah

2) a person is the sum of all their experiences - see strip 1130

3) XP literally means experience

it stands to reason, that in the world of the OotS, we're formed by our experiences, an XP cost is a loss of the experiences which defines us, hence it is a loss of a part of the whole 'us'.

How a loss, or a gain, of experience manifests physically, apart from leveling at certain intervals, making it quantized, I don't know. On one hand I want to prescribe it to D&D being a poor representation of personal development, such as developing a skill... On the other hand, most of us know that when we study a subject, our increase in knowledge or skill is not a continuous effect, but something that happens in steps.
So I suppose it translates to RC will require more XP to level, since he just lost some XP.

Ah OK, I knew there was a save to see if it was permanent. I just thought the negative level status became permanent. Now I know better.

I recall Belkar losing a level back in former Azure City when the party was separated. I suppose he lost the level permanent, but if he has gained it since, is there still any negative effects of this level loss, apart from setting him back compared to his team?

[Fyraltari]

Guys, the Giant just has been trying to refrain from using game terms to describe events in recent books. XP requires knowledge of how D&D works. Saying 'piece of soul' makes it less gamey and easier to understand for people who do not play D&D.

It's not that complicated.

XP is hardly a D&D-exclusive concept. I doubt that anyone reading a fantasy webcomic would be unaware of the concept.

[brian 333]

XP is hardly a D&D-exclusive concept. I doubt that anyone reading a fantasy webcomic would be unaware of the concept.

And everyone who is reading a webcomic can type 'What is XP' into a browser.

[Fyraltari]

And everyone who is reading a webcomic can type 'What is XP' into a browser.

That's true for literally every thing though. The comic still has to explain stuff from time to time.

[Resileaf]

XP is hardly a D&D-exclusive concept. I doubt that anyone reading a fantasy webcomic would be unaware of the concept.

And everyone who is reading a webcomic can type 'What is XP' into a browser.

It's still a game term, something that the Giant has been trying to use as little as possible to make the comic approachable by a wider audience.

This would be a good explanation if not for the fact many of the recent comics has been using DnD/RPG/tabletop terms.

My friend has no DnD knowledge, didn't understand what "loose brains end campaing" meant, and didn't know what "spot checks" and "disarm" means and those things were just a few pages ago.

The entire talk between Durkon and Redcloack seems to rely on people having at least some bit of insight into DnD mechanics.

I actually like it when the comic dosen't use too much tabletop lingo, but I think you need to pick one or another. You can't go from be "no big deal, just some XP" and then "No big deal, just a bit of my soul - the thing which has been established to be very important, way more than XP, in this setting".

That some game terms are occasionally used (especially for a punchline) does not mean that the Giant won't try to avoid them when there are other ways to convene the sacrifice of literal life experience to cast a powerful spell.

[KillianHawkeye]

My friend has no DnD knowledge, didn't understand what "loose brains end campaing" meant, and didn't know what "spot checks" and "disarm" means and those things were just a few pages ago.

Disarming is not a game term, it's a real word and a thing people did IRL.

[Roland Itiative]

I saw that as a very clear "XP is part of the soul" analogue. And also possibly as foreshadowing that this concept will become important soon, so it needed a reminder/extra affirmation.

Sure, it's a retcon from previous times when exp-draining spells were cast, but it can be brushed away as the other casters just being better at handling the pain, and as mentioned by other people, there were times when experience/levels were tied into the strength of a soul.

[Peelee]

Sure, it's a retcon from previous times when exp-draining spells were cast, but it can be brushed away as the other casters just being better at handling the pain, and as mentioned by other people, there were times when experience/levels were tied into the strength of a soul.

Not really. We can see level draining hurts here, for example. It's just not highlighted or specifically called out other times, but also, not all sword hits or inflictions of pain have such reactions either despite that they will obviously hurt, so it doesn't seem to be a retcon at all.

[Jasdoif]

Yeah this is likely the main ingredient of my fake memory. Kinda embarrassing

I figure if the Giant doesn't use the term "calling" to avoid confusion, then you can't be faulted for confusing one calling effect (that shares a panel with a Gate) for another calling effect (that happens to be named "gate").

[Psyren]

Guys, the Giant just has been trying to refrain from using game terms to describe events in recent books. XP requires knowledge of how D&D works. Saying 'piece of soul' makes it less gamey and easier to understand for people who do not play D&D.

It's not that complicated.

Agreed - and the whole point of showing it to be painful/costly is to explain why he didn't do this as soon as he arrived + why he doesn't gate reinforcements into every fight.

[Darth Paul]

It's also conceivable (to me anyway) that summoning beings of pure Law, who aren't particularly on Redcloak's side, might take some added effort compared to beings who would be involved in the "good/evil" spectrum. Although, once I write it down like that, it seems to make less sense.

[Dame_Mechanus]

It's also conceivable (to me anyway) that summoning beings of pure Law, who aren't particularly on Redcloak's side, might take some added effort compared to beings who would be involved in the "good/evil" spectrum. Although, once I write it down like that, it seems to make less sense.

It also wouldn't make as much sense because Xykon's next line is to assume he's calling in some devilish help for the project. In other words, Xykon is already aware that Redcloak can cast this spell to summon in helpers and that it drains some of his soul to do so; the implication is that none of this information is new to him even if it's all new information to Oona (and by extension, we the readers). He's aware of the costs and understands that Redcloak only will cast this spell in certain situations, and as little as he cares about Redcloak's long-term health and happiness he has no interest in pushing him to cast it more often.

So it seems more likely that "it costs a bit of my soul" is a more poetic way of saying "it costs XP to summon beings in" rather than it being a cost associated with these particular summons. And it explains why he doesn't do this all the time, because we know he is more than happy to summon creatures and elementals. It's like his favorite trick.

[Potatopeelerkin]

Personally I highly doubt a 'piece of his soul' refers to the XP cost. The comic has never shied away from using terms related to XP before, and this seems like a needlessly confusing way to put it if that's what it's referring to, as evidenced by this whole thread.

And Redcloak talking about the "costs associated", italics and all, makes it sound like what he's paying is a lot more serious than a bit of XP. I suspect this is some kind of modified Gate that actually does cost a bit of his soul, and will have consequences later in the comic.

[Darth Paul]

From the SRD:

If you choose to exact a longer or more involved form of service from a called creature, you must offer some fair trade in return for that service.

So RC may literally be paying a piece or two of soul, depending on what services he's getting (or planning to get) in return.

[Dame_Mechanus]

So RC may literally be paying a piece or two of soul, depending on what services he's getting (or planning to get) in return.

Mathematically perfect gouda?

No, wait, I suspect bugbears prefer a nice gruyere.

[Psyren]

Personally I highly doubt a 'piece of his soul' refers to the XP cost. The comic has never shied away from using terms related to XP before, and this seems like a needlessly confusing way to put it if that's what it's referring to, as evidenced by this whole thread.

People being loudly confused by simple concepts isn't evidence of anything but human nature.

[Ruck]

This thread reminds me a bit of this quote from The Giant:

Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?

Maybe the use of "soul" here is confusing. Maybe The Giant intended it to refer to something besides XP. But in any case I don't think the various extrapolations OP is making are supported. For example:

If Gate took a part of your soul every time you cast it, no scrolls for it would exist.

Since we've seen a scroll for Gate exist, this must mean your assumption of what "piece of your soul" means is off, not the comic itself.

[Darth Paul]

Since we've seen a scroll for Gate exist, this must mean your assumption of what "piece of your soul" means is off, not the comic itself.

"The Hitchiker's Guide is definitive. Reality is often inaccurate."

[hroþila]

I figure if the Giant doesn't use the term "calling" to avoid confusion, then you can't be faulted for confusing one calling effect (that shares a panel with a Gate) for another calling effect (that happens to be named "gate").

Maybe but that has never stopped me from secretly judging all of you on the basis of how well you remember every single scene

[Dante2001]

The chekovs explanation sounds nice. Maybe this part is his soul will act up if his main soul is destroyed by the snarl. Also Durkon casted resurrection with Roy which costs xp and he does not suffer pain when he did so

[Peelee]

The chekovs explanation sounds nice. Maybe this part is his soul will act up if his main soul is destroyed by the snarl. Also Durkon casted resurrection with Roy which costs xp and he does not suffer pain when he did so

Resurrection has no XP cost

[Kish]

I didn't see ambiguity either. I didn't even bother to look up Gate to confirm the XP cost, it seemed so clear that that was what Redcloak meant. People here mentioning that yes, what Redcloak is doing with Gate does have an XP cost, does not make me feel differently about it.

[Ruck]

"The Hitchiker's Guide is definitive. Reality is often inaccurate."

Which is which here?

[arimareiji]

1) Regardless of whether it's a way to euphemize "lose 1000XP", I love it as a joke on the "hidden cost" of sitting through hearing a EULA ESLA. Or maybe I was just too fond of the joke that sitting through one former employer's training sessions, you could feel the thread of your soul being unraveled and pulled out through your eyeballs.

2) I read a bunch of TSR game-based paperbacks back in the day, and saw one too many* that gave up on true storycrafting and would simply recount the author's gaming session in clear gaming terms. Trust me, you do NOT want the Giant to "go there".

* - as in, even one is too many

[Pablo360]

I just have to wonder what people think XP is, diegetically, if it isn’t a piece of your soul.