MitD VI: The Undiscovered Creature (Please Read the First Post)

[Belkar<3]

Originally Posted by Lord Bingo
I've been looking at the Zodar and I think we need to reconsider its place on the list.

Apparently a Zodar is NOT a construct but a Monstrous Humanoid (As of it's 2002 update). It's black armor is actually a crystalline exoskeleton.

More importantly three times in a lifetime it can cause ANY spell to manifest as if cast by it. Additionally ONCE in its lifetime it can cause a very strong wish to occur. These two abilities would explain the escape. The scarcity of these abilities and MitD's childish behavior might account for his not knowing he had the ability.

It has a huge bonus to intimidate that I think could explain why Belkar and Haley gave pause when they tried to take Roy from the tea party.

It's massive strength could explain the earthquake as well as Miko's "trip" through a wall.

It is CR 18.

I'm a bit put of by the fact that it does not seem to have any spell resistance, but I think it is a strong candidate that deserves a place higher on our list.

Here's a link:
http://lost.spelljammer.org/Shattere...ers/zodar.html


Sorry. I was searching around for Zodar info, and I couldn't quote it due to . . . I have no idea. If this correct, and the armour is merely an exoskeleton, then could have the circus removed the armour, and showed whatever is beneath it? I don't know if it would fit, and it is extremely speculative, but it is a bit possible.

Sorry again, Lord Bingo.

-Person trying to get Zodar off the construct list and onto possible candidates.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Sorry. I was searching around for Zodar info, and I couldn't quote it due to . . . I have no idea.

Third thread was locked because of excessive number of pages, so the posts can no longer be quoted or edited (it was a pain to get the first post out, let me tell you). I assume that is where you got it from.

Edit: Indeed. Original post here

Edit 2: man, that page from thread 3 is full of classic moments. There is the massive list of creatures that forced me to create the "minimally defended" clause, or I'd be forced to add them all to the first post without a clear idea of what they are, and there too is my post about an obscure sourcebook that I suspect is the origin for the idea that MitD must be in one.

If this correct, and the armour is merely an exoskeleton, then could have the circus removed the armour, and showed whatever is beneath it? I don't know if it would fit, and it is extremely speculative, but it is a bit possible.

That would be extremely painful, I would imagine, and likely fatal. It is the functional equivalent to someone flogging your skin off your body. Skin is there for a reason.

If it was doable, it would certainly explain the circus scene, but I don't think it is doable at all. For one thing, the zodar is not exactly easy to harm (the circus wouldn't have anyone anywhere high level enough), I think MitD's easy going nature would draw the line at someone attempting to skin him, and I'd think he'd die of it if they managed it.

Grey Wolf

[rodneyAnonymous]

Does the MitD also attract the demon roaches?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Does the MitD also attract the demon roaches?

See section 2b: Summoning Demon Roaches

GW

[rodneyAnonymous]

"No."

Okay, thanks.

[KillItWithFire]

I'm back from my quick search for glowey eyes. Turned up nothing besides the one escape scene. Noticed the astral plane thing though, funny thing about the astral plane is its the kind of place you travel if say, some one just transported you thousands of miles. I need to look up the specifics on... I think it's called astral traveler? But since the astral plane is often associated with psionics, and glowing eyes is described as the effects of a "visual" display, I'm going to turn my attention to psionics. But this will happen at a later date as now, it is sleep time.

[Byzantine2]

I'm back from my quick search for glowey eyes. Turned up nothing besides the one escape scene. Noticed the astral plane thing though, funny thing about the astral plane is its the kind of place you travel if say, some one just transported you thousands of miles. I need to look up the specifics on... I think it's called astral traveler? But since the astral plane is often associated with psionics, and glowing eyes is described as the effects of a "visual" display, I'm going to turn my attention to psionics. But this will happen at a later date as now, it is sleep time.

Give how little we know about the MitD from before the hunters found it, and how strange it is for it to be in a jungle, perhaps it went through the astral plane into the jungle, but that happened before it has any conscious memories. It would explain knowing it likes the way the astral plane feels, as if it had been there, without it actually having to remember going. Of course this doesn't seem to helpful, unless it (or its father, I suppose) was what opened the gate to the astral plane to begin with.

[JustWantedToSay]

MitD implied his dad was bigger at one point.

If he were a monster with an exoskeleton, it's that he would have to moult to grow. Which would explain the circus scene: Some beautiful parts of it's shell remaining, while others would be grotesque.

EDIT: (Not that it would apply to a construct in Zodar)

[Azukar]

Okay, so my previous suggestion was pretty much negated, which I expected. So I'm going to generalise a bit:

My hypothesis is that we are looking at one or more of the big important scenes the wrong way. The circus act, the Escape scene, all of them have enough room for ambiguity. It is entirely in Rich's style to plot a scene, expecting the audience to take it one way, only to flip it on its head.

So with that in mind, I more or less ask again: what would it mean if the circus scene was not quite how it appeared? If we didn't have to worry about the extreme reactions of the audience, for example. Or if some other aspect could be taken another way.

And for anyone who says that hypothesising without a specific idea in mind is pointless, this thread is going nowhere right now. You've basically listed every possible monster and grouped them by probability. So the point is to start with a fresh perspective. I don't know D&D, but I do know narratives, and I still think we're looking at something the wrong way.

[Silver Swift]

And for anyone who says that hypothesising without a specific idea in mind is pointless, this thread is going nowhere right now. You've basically listed every possible monster and grouped them by probability. So the point is to start with a fresh perspective. I don't know D&D, but I do know narratives, and I still think we're looking at something the wrong way.

No one is saying that hypothesising without a specific idea is pointless (see the Redcloaks-carrying-capacity-discussion), it is just that what you are suggesting is basically explaining away a potentially valuable hint and while this might prove necessary in the end, it is unlikely to generate new candidates (it is not like we never get candidates for which the circus scene is a stretch) and is therefore better left for when there is a specific candidate that does not fit that hint.

Also, this thread comes nowhere near to listing every possible monster in D&D (let alone the entirety of human mythology).

[KillItWithFire]

I don't know D&D, but I do know narratives, and I still think we're looking at something the wrong way.

Then what is the right way? At this point we need more information, not less. The goal isn't to find one creature that fits our preconceived rules, but to find out what MitD actually is. We can't completely write out a scene just because we feel like it or because we have a proposal that just needs that extra nudge. .. If you think we're misinterpreting it then the burden of proof is on you. Provide a reasonable alternative way for us to interpret it I don't think anyone else is going to stand up and do the work for you just because you brought it up.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

MitD implied his dad was bigger at one point.

If he were a monster with an exoskeleton, it's that he would have to moult to grow. Which would explain the circus scene: Some beautiful parts of it's shell remaining, while others would be grotesque.

The circus scene has an air of "business as usual". If the circus owner had noticed a change in how MitD looked, as he was in the process of molting, you'd think he'd made a slight comment to the effect. We know MitD spent at least five years in the circus, and it is strongly implied he has the same exact act (stand on stage being looked at) every day. There is no reason to assume that there was anything special about the day RC went to see the show.

So with that in mind, I more or less ask again: what would it mean if the circus scene was not quite how it appeared? If we didn't have to worry about the extreme reactions of the audience, for example. Or if some other aspect could be taken another way.

It would mean we would be dealing with different evidence. But we are not. This line of inquiry is barren: it is like saying "oh, but what if MitD had not managed to punch Miko and her horse through a wall? What then?" Then the evidence would fit very different creatures. But that is not the evidence we have. The circus reactions are not, as you suggest, interpretations that can be "not have to worry" about. They are the evidence we do have, in a game that is based on clues, and that the person giving the clues has told us can be eventually figured out. If that person is giving us misdirection instead of clues, we will never figure it out.

You are also, of course, extremely wrong, either out of sheer ignorance, or merely to prop up your argument. This thread has massively differing interpretations of the same clues. The escape has been explained with well over a score of abilities. The circus scene allows for anything from sheer bad looks to specific powers. But they all must have something in common, yes: they must all fit the evidence. In short, your implied argument that I have established some kind of rule of iron that arguments brought forth must fit to some orthodoxy is not just wrong, it is insulting.

And for anyone who says that hypothesising without a specific idea in mind is pointless, this thread is going nowhere right now. You've basically listed every possible monster and grouped them by probability.

No we haven't. We have not looked at "every monster" as FAQ "Since you haven't found the solution yet, is it possible you are doing something wrong?" would have told you if you had bothered to read it, and we most certainly have not "grouped them by probability". Since I explained not even a page ago how this thread operates I suspect that the problem here is you, not the rest of the thread.

So the point is to start with a fresh perspective. I don't know D&D, but I do know narratives, and I still think we're looking at something the wrong way.

No-one is stopping you from starting a new perspective. But it will have to fit the evidence. You want to posit that the popocorn was off and they vomited because of that and not MitD? And that there was a sudden gust of wind and MitD is a weakling because that's "Rich's style"? Go right ahead. But don't be surprised if few agree with you.

And I don't mean that lightly. 99% of the arguments I use against proposals are not mine. I have been in this thread pretty much since the very beginning, and I have good memory. All those arguments, all those interpretations, is not me being contrarian for the lulz, they are the result of years of honing our understanding of the scenes, and they represent the very best of the consensus of this thread. You are not just having to convince me, you pretty much have to convince every one that has posted, even if I am the one channeling them.

This probably will surprise you, but you are not the first to suggest this. However, no two people have ever agreed on what scene they wish to reinterpret. You'd think that at some point you would coincide out of sheer random chance, too. I have had people calling me a fascist for daring to suggest the mind-control cannot be ignored, or the escape scene, or the earthquake, or MitD eating. And now, the circus scene. I am not sure there is anything left. But they all were absolutely convinced that the thread was going "in the wrong direction" because "we have checked everything" (even though crusher has clearly demonstrated we haven't over and over again). But then, evidence must mean something different to you than it does to me.

Grey Wolf

[Azukar]

<snip>
Grey Wolf

All right, fair enough. I don't frequently visit this thread, and I may have missed the details. For what it may be worth, I certainly did read the FAQ before posting; in fact I read all of the sections of your first post from 1a to 5c. It was the comments about the Zodar fitting almost all the necessary criteria which made me start to wonder if there might be another way of looking at things. I'm not going to posit that the popcorn was off, that doesn't fit from a narrative perspective. But something else along those extremely general lines might fit.

And so you don't misunderstand me, my point was not "you're all doing it wrong and my way is the right way", but rather, "why not, hypothetically, try reassessing some things we are taking for granted and see what happens". It's a lateral thinking approach. KillItWithFire actually agreed with me in his/her previous post (inadvertently) by saying that we need more information, not less. Brainstorming hypothetical situations helps with that. I can't contribute much on the mechanics of D&D, so I tried my hand at contributing something else. Apparently that isn't welcome in this thread.


Edit: also for the sake of clarity, I said in my post that you had listed every *possible* monster and ranked them based on probability. Sections 3a, 3b, 3d and sort-of 3e appear to me to be a list of possible monsters, ranked in four groups from "possible with a few issues" down to "would need a lot of pleading to prove". I didn't say that the community had canvassed every monster in all of D&D.

[Belkar<3]

That would be extremely painful, I would imagine, and likely fatal. It is the functional equivalent to someone flogging your skin off your body. Skin is there for a reason.

If it was doable, it would certainly explain the circus scene, but I don't think it is doable at all. For one thing, the zodar is not exactly easy to harm (the circus wouldn't have anyone anywhere high level enough), I think MitD's easy going nature would draw the line at someone attempting to skin him, and I'd think he'd die of it if they managed it.

Grey Wolf

I am definitely not an expert on crustaeceans, but I am pretty sure that you can remove the exoskeleton of say, a lobster, or a crab. Whether or not this happened, or if this applies to D&D is unknown to me, better known to someone with a better understanding of the Monster's Manual.

:P

[stsasser]

...credentials...
Grey Wolf

I'm convinced that you are, other than the Giant, the most informed person on this matter.

What do you think the MitD is?

[ellindsey]

I am definitely not an expert on crustaeceans, but I am pretty sure that you can remove the exoskeleton of say, a lobster, or a crab. Whether or not this happened, or if this applies to D&D is unknown to me, better known to someone with a better understanding of the Monster's Manual.

:P

The only way you can remove the exoskeleton of a lobster or crab without killing it is during molt, when the crustacean in question has grown a new exoskeleton under the old one and needs to shed the old one to grow. Removing the exoskeleton otherwise is like peeling off your skin, and will kill the creature.

[KillItWithFire]

The only way you can remove the exoskeleton of a lobster or crab without killing it is during molt, when the crustacean in question has grown a new exoskeleton under the old one and needs to shed the old one to grow. Removing the exoskeleton otherwise is like peeling off your skin, and will kill the creature.

Even if we assume that you can just magic the exoskeleton away without harming the creature, the thing we're left with has no form. It's like having a jar of jelly and suddenly poofing away the jar. You're left with a pile of tissue and organs that in no way resembles the original creature, plus the muscles are now no longer attached to anything so whatever thing you have is not capable of voluntary motion.

It's a lateral thinking approach. KillItWithFire actually agreed with me in his/her previous post (inadvertently) by saying that we need more information, not less. Brainstorming hypothetical situations helps with that.

Only if something actually comes of that. As it stands, you haven't actually provided any additional information. Only speculated "What if there was a way to interpret the circus scene that gave us more information." Thing is though, most people are satisfied with the current interpretations (yes plural, as grey wolf pointed out) of the scene and are unlikely to join you in this brainstorming session as it's a much more valuable use of time to find monsters that fit the scenes rather than scenes to fit a monster. If you have a sensible interpretation for the circus scene that the makes sense if MitD was a zodar please share it.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

All right, fair enough. I don't frequently visit this thread, and I may have missed the details. For what it may be worth, I certainly did read the FAQ before posting; in fact I read all of the sections of your first post from 1a to 5c. It was the comments about the Zodar fitting almost all the necessary criteria which made me start to wonder if there might be another way of looking at things. I'm not going to posit that the popcorn was off, that doesn't fit from a narrative perspective. But something else along those extremely general lines might fit.

For zodar to be placed as a FBS, we'd need to change the FBS definition, not rethink the approach to evidence of the thread. As I have explained, FBS are only meant as a showcase, and it is based in an arbitrary set of objective rules. I do not and have never claimed that those are the only creatures that have a chance at being MitD. They are only a handful of creatures that fit the literal reading of the evidence. Since you disagree with that literal reading (and that is perfectly acceptable, so long as you don't insist we all think that way), why would you want zodar to be in the group?

I used to want to cram zodar into the FBS list, myself. It was Lord Bingo, the person that originally suggested zodar, that convinced me otherwise. Because the last thing this thread needs is people fighting over what goes in the FBS due to feelings. As long as the requirements are objective, even if arbitrary, then the fight is over how to fit the objective evidence (whcih is good to the thread), rather than what I or someone else "feels" should be in the FBS list (which would be the death of me, and the thread, and I'd have to put Tarrasque and the Snarl in the FBS before anything else).

And so you don't misunderstand me, my point was not "you're all doing it wrong and my way is the right way", but rather, "why not, hypothetically, try reassessing some things we are taking for granted and see what happens". It's a lateral thinking approach.

And my problem with your post is not that I think objective logical approach to the evidence is good and lateral thinking is wrong, it is that you said we should all use your approach. I don't like your approach, and I resent being told I must use it, especially when the consensus of the thread, in general, is that objective logical approach that tries to fit all the evidence is the less bad approach.

By all means, come up with whatever lateral explanation for the clues you want. Psionic!MitD started like that, since the original counter ("RC said he took forever to find out there even were psionics") seemed ironclad. But in approaching the topic laterally, someone eventually pointed out that MitD, being MitD, would not answer RC's question: indeed, it would cause him to think psionics do not exist precisely because MitD, if he were psionic, displaying no actual mental power, would cause you to think psionics rules were not in fact in place in OotS.

Edit: For Thor's sake, look at the current discussion on whether MitD might have had its skin removed for the circus scene? The only reason I'm not trying to pick it apart is because ellindsey and KillItWithFire are doing an excellent job already (much better than I could: I loved the point about the exoskeleton being needed for locomotion!).

Brainstorming hypothetical situations helps with that. I can't contribute much on the mechanics of D&D, so I tried my hand at contributing something else. Apparently that isn't welcome in this thread.

No, what is not welcome is telling us that our approach is wrong because it is not producing result. Give us whatever hypothetical situations you feel are warranted, and then I'll pick at them, keep the ones the thread likes and move on. But suggesting that to do that, first we have to scrap the FBS classification is, yes, unwelcome.

Edit: also for the sake of clarity, I said in my post that you had listed every *possible* monster and ranked them based on probability. Sections 3a, 3b, 3d and sort-of 3e appear to me to be a list of possible monsters, ranked in four groups from "possible with a few issues" down to "would need a lot of pleading to prove". I didn't say that the community had canvassed every monster in all of D&D.

And like I said, and wrote in the FAQ, Crusher regularly demonstrates that we have not, in fact, listed every possible monster. He has gone on binges through manuals and frequently listed three or four examples at once, all of which fit at least two of the three FBS while tripping few of the other issues (like being immune to mind control).

Also, no, the five groups, as I explained recently, is an objetiv partitioning between "those we found funny", "those that are copyrighted (which incidentally, includes one that fits pretty much as well as the carbosilicate amorph)", "those that keep coming up", "those that fit an arbitrary subset of the evidence designed to make them few in number" and "everything else". There is not, and has never been other than as a hypothetical, a ranking of which of those groups is better than the others.

I'm convinced that you are, other than the Giant, the most informed person on this matter.

What do you think the MitD is?

Personally? I.e. as Grey Wolf, the nitpicking participant and not as Grey Wolf the curator? If I had to pick just one? Today? Protean.

But I like quite a few: protean, uvuu, zodar and aboleth all are very good candidates. Which one of that list I like most at any given point varies over the months.

Grey Wolf

[Belkar<3]

Even if we assume that you can just magic the exoskeleton away without harming the creature, the thing we're left with has no form. It's like having a jar of jelly and suddenly poofing away the jar. You're left with a pile of tissue and organs that in no way resembles the original creature, plus the muscles are now no longer attached to anything so whatever thing you have is not capable of voluntary motion.

True, but we're talking about a zodar, not a crab. I think with the strength of the zodar, it should be able to walk. Do not forget also that that real life is different from D&D, and also that Rich is liable to bend the guidelines of 3.5: He said so himself. Any thoughts?

Edit: Sorry if I don't know ANYTHING about this kind of stuff. I'm just asking questions.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

True, but we're talking about a zodar, not a crab. I think with the strength of the zodar, it should be able to walk. Do not forget also that that real life is different from D&D, and also that Rich is liable to bend the guidelines of 3.5: He said so himself. Any thoughts?

Several. First, your argument doesn't work. The exoskeleton is where muscles anchor. In D&D, like in real life, muscles require a firm surface to pull to provide movement. All the strength in the world is useless if it can't be applied. Removing a zodar's exoskeleton would leave you with a mass of very strong and very magical muscles unable to pull at anything, and thus pretty much unable to move.

Yes, amoebas and jellyfish manage without an internal or external skeleton. But they are also incapable of strength feats. No jellyfish will strangle you to kill you; they will use their poison instead, and once you aren't struggling, and only then, proceed to digest you.

Second, you are misquoting Rich. The real quote is in the first post:

I barely even reference the 3.5 rules anymore, using them just to determine what sort of spells or class abilities a character might have and then ignoring them the rest of the time.

Not referring to them does not in any way mean he must be bending them. It just means that his characters are operating more closely to the real world than they are to D&D world - but since neither allows creatures that need exoskeletons to live without them, that doesn't strengthen your case.

Third, there is a good argument to be made that even if Rich was bending the rules all over the place (which he isn't), he would still try to be careful around MitD, because if he is bending the rules of MitD, and he isn't lampshading it like he did with the talking, it would be impossible to figure out what MitD is.

Yours,

Grey Wolf

[JustSomeGuy]

Skeletons, among other things, provide a very specific purpose: they allow for movement, as the muscles are attached to the skeletal structrure and produce forces, which are transferred through the bones resulting in the end result, movement.

Although i don't 100% think you can discount either removal of nor movement without some form of skeletal form, because of magic, i do think it very unlikely and doubly so with regard to MitD.

[Belkar<3]

Thanks, now I understand about the exoskeleton. Gah, physical appearances are still a problem.

P.S. Zodars are now classified as Monstrous Humanoid, not construct, (I got this all from Lord Bingo's post that I "quoted" before) and so do require eat or sleep.

:P

Edit: eat and sleep

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Although i don't 100% think you can discount either removal of nor movement without some form of skeletal form, because of magic.

Agreed. Just a small note: I'm sure such creature exists that is fluffed as "all muscle, no bones". It might even have massive strength. But, crucially, it will have been created, with magic, that way. Unless the fluff specifically says "take a zodar and, though cheap and easy magical spells, remove its exoskeleton", it is not going to be enough. Because the circus isn't a mad wizard with tens of thousands of alchemical components that would be needed.


Edit:

P.S. Zodars are now classified as Monstrous Humanoid, not construct, (I got this all from Lord Bingo's post that I "quoted" before) and so do require eat or sleep.

:P

Edit: eat and sleep

No. What Lord Bingo said, and thus also says in the first post, is that the official version of the zodar is a construct, but that there was an earlier upgrade to 3.0 by fans that made it an abomination. Make of that what you will.

GW

[KillItWithFire]

True, but we're talking about a zodar, not a crab. I think with the strength of the zodar, it should be able to walk. Do not forget also that that real life is different from D&D, and also that Rich is liable to bend the guidelines of 3.5: He said so himself. Any thoughts?

Edit: Sorry if I don't know ANYTHING about this kind of stuff. I'm just asking questions.

Yes we are talking about D&D, however, to determine anything about this universe, we need to have rules about how it works. The rules of the D&D-verse are "As real universe except as mentioned in these books." I don't expect someone to shoot a fireball from their hand at me anytime soon but D&D says it's possible and so we shall assume that it is possible to shoot fireballs from one's hand. The rules of OotS-verse are "As D&D-verse except as determined by Rich Burlew." We can't just make blanket assumptions that something is true in D&D-verse simply because it's D&D-verse.

In our own world, we are still trying to compile these rules based on observation and we call this list science and science says "No skeleton, no precise movement." Unless D&D zodar says somewhere that it can function as normal without the very organ that it's own description defined as an exoskeleton (something that has a precise definition in our world.) or Rich says the same thing, the assumption we make is that it cannot move without it. If we want to go against that assumption we need to provide some form of proof.

I sincerely hope you don't find me condescending or pedantic at all. I have that trouble sometimes. But making arguments does have a very particular set of rules to it, and since you did ask I am attempting to answer.

[Belkar<3]

[/QUOTE] No. What Lord Bingo said, and thus also says in the first post, is that the official version of the zodar is a construct, but that there was an earlier upgrade to 3.0 by fans that made it an abomination. Make of that what you will.

GW[/QUOTE]

So are you going to take zodar off of construct, or are you going to keep it there? There are probably much better people who can actually debate with better ideas, and I kind of just want it to be considered.

[Leriel]

I still cannot figure why a construct should enjoy stew and sunshine and fresh air...
and if Zodars are humanoids, why this one is so childish.

Just my 2 cents.

[Belkar<3]

I sincerely hope you don't find me condescending or pedantic at all. I have that trouble sometimes. But making arguments does have a very particular set of rules to it, and since you did ask I am attempting to answer.

Not at all. I find this pretty fun, actually. Debate is pretty enlightening.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

So are you going to take zodar off of construct, or are you going to keep it there?

Since there is no such thing as the "construct" list, as I have explained to you now three times, I don't think I can remove anything from it.

GW

[Olinser]

I'm back from my quick search for glowey eyes. Turned up nothing besides the one escape scene. Noticed the astral plane thing though, funny thing about the astral plane is its the kind of place you travel if say, some one just transported you thousands of miles. I need to look up the specifics on... I think it's called astral traveler? But since the astral plane is often associated with psionics, and glowing eyes is described as the effects of a "visual" display, I'm going to turn my attention to psionics. But this will happen at a later date as now, it is sleep time.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0546.html

The only psionic featured on-page had a purpleish aura go from his forehead, not his eyes.

[KillItWithFire]

So are you going to take zodar off of construct, or are you going to keep it there? There are probably much better people who can actually debate with better ideas, and I kind of just want it to be considered.

It is being considered, that's why the note is there. The problem is that doesn't help with the circus scene. I mean, what exactly do you want to see changed? As grey wolf said the list we place it in doesn't mean much. The only thing we can say for certain about all the creatures in the FBS category is that they fit the big scenes. It isn't the "most likely to be MitD section" though I suspect the two are strongly related. If the MitD isn't a zodar then no amount of arguing on your part, or considering or listing on our part will change that. If however, your goal is to get the zodar to be moved to the FBS category then what you need to do is show that it fits all 3 big scenes since that's the criteria for the list and the is very little room for misinterpretation. The one big hurdle there is that the circus scene is one of those big scenes as defined by the list and the zodar does not have an explanation. Offer one and if the forum finds it acceptable I'm reasonably confident you'll see a change.

So the question you need to ask yourself is do you want to see the zodar's classification changed or do you want to find the best fit to MitD's identity. Both are fine goals but they require different methods of execution.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0546.html

The only psionic featured on-page had a purpleish aura go from his forehead, not his eyes.

Do we know what spell that is? Because if it doesn't have a visual display they wouldn't. The most likely one is mind probe I suppose and that does have a visual display, which depending on how one interprets the definition of visual display could be satisfied by the purple aura from his hand.