The Order of the Stick

Rich may also be deliberately going out of his way to show that Mimi is not a mimic™ the same way that Sunny is not a beholder™.

EDIT: And having the Monster reveal himself and Serini say "well I'll be jitterbugged, it's a..." is definitely one way Rich can finally definitively answer what he is.

Edited by Bense on Apr 30th 2024 at 2:29:19 AM

Oona apparently knows what the Monster is. If she and Redcloak could identity the monster, then I don't doubt Serini will too.

The Monster also claims to have a father, who was larger than him. Heck, what if Serini has the Monster's father in the dungeon? Maybe guarding the Gate room.

I would also expect the Snarl to end the story either dead or no longer hostile.

Thinking about it, is the Mit D going to be a dramatic reveal, or is going to eb a gag where non of the Order have any idea what it is upon stepping out of the darkness? Probably both tbh.

My understanding is that the MITD would be recognizable if he weren't hiding in the shadow. It's not just that Redcloak and Oona have so much knowledge of monster lore that they recognize him, it's just that they've seen him, while the Order haven't.

As for the fate of the Snarl, I'd guess that The Giant will go a third route there—neither destruction nor re-sealing.

I mean, I'd say that Mimi is special. ^_^

I think that the above, along with other points, were amongst what led me to think that it might not be a D&D creature at all—or at least, as depicted in D&D.

It seems, at least, that the Monster's nature is likely in some way tied to the over-arching plot.

The Giant notes, as I recall, that he realised the nature of the Monster when he settled on the greater plot.

Now, this doesn't necessarily mean that they're directly connected—but it suggests it, at least.

As a result, I doubt that the Monster's reveal is going to be just a gag.

(I could see a gag being part of the scene, however. For example, the Order might not recognise the Monster, at which Serini or somesuch berates them for their ignorance.)

Wait...

That gives me another data-point for my pet-theory:

We've seen people in the comic react similarly before, if I recall correctly—when they've seen characters depicted in what we perceive as a more "realistic" style. (See the gag about Mimi's fingers, or the much older one about the artist who kept drawing people with noses.)

Thus, if my idea is correct that the Monster is a non-D&D version of a D&D monster, people in the OoTS-verse might well recognise it as the D&D version, but be disturbed by how uncannily different it is.

(My thought being, as a reminder, that the Monster might have come from the world within the Rift. Hence the plot connection.)

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on May 1st 2024 at 6:12:17 PM

Brainwave, related to — MITD is an offspring of the Snarl itself. His dad was big and ate a lot; the Snarl isn't known to speak, much less in Common; and most of all, the magic of the Gates prevents the Snarl from noticing them unless its attention is drawn to them.

Even as I type I realize all the other things we've been discussing throw cold water on this theory. You couldn't expect stereotypical hunters (or Oona) to recognize it, though Redcloak might, and also couldn't expect mortal mind-magic to work on it.

"He's the Snarl's kid" is also something that's been floated on the forums a bunch of times.

It again would seem to break the idea that the Monster in the Darkness is not something Rich made up, as he definitely made up the Snarl.

It's possible that MitD is from a different universe, but the fact that he is recognized by the Stereotypical Big Game Hunters as a member of a "kind" should dispel any idea that he's a mini-Snarl.

Yeah, I'm not surprised. But I'm not sure he said exactly that—he said it's possible to guess, that it's not something he made up for the purpose of "being MITD"; it could be that, having established the Snarl in his story, it's now an existing creature to base a guess off of. But I admit it's not likely. It was just the "what Gate" Running Gag that made me sit up and take notice.

Baby Snarl fails both as it is something the Giant made up and it’s something random game hunters in universe aren’t going to recognise.

His exact words are “ it isn't something I just made up for the story.”.

Edited by Silasw on May 1st 2024 at 8:21:45 PM

Although I will say that the "mini-Snarl" idea is a cool one.

I was prepared to argue for my interpretation of those words, and then I remembered he also said, "the distinction between something I made up and something someone else made up may be a fine one."

So no, MITD is definitely an example of something someone else made up, an established fictional creature that predates OOTS.

I really like "photorealistic version of a D&D creature." I think that is my new guess.

It also has to be vulnerable to the charm debuff since Xykon charmed it to eat Redcloak if Redcloak turned on him.

OMG, it's Rich Berlew's avatar.

#1302: Not a Competition

Now I want to see the Villain Speech Awards. What would we call the trophy?

New comic is out

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1302.html

Edited by burninganimefan357 on May 7th 2024 at 7:10:13 AM

The Villain Speech trophy is an Oscar, but it's Oscar the Grouch.

Grouchies!

I came here to see what people's favorite villain speeches were, but I guess I'll have to start.

I think it is the one about power from Xykon for me.

I did enjoy V's "We are all in the Monster Manual somewhere".

How about: "Very well, we duel in silence" ;) slash, slash, slash

Xykon's speech to Redcloak at the end of Start of Darkness.

In the main comic, nothing beats Xykon's "Power equals power" speech, but let's not forget Tarquin's speech to Elan. "On a rooftop, no less. Exquisite."

Xykon's power speech. That’s the reason I started reading this.