25,000 gp.

[AstralFire]

I hoped to get more of this in the reaction thread, but I guess it's a bit hard to follow stuff in there.

Please read the following!

1. The exact price for the material components of a True Resurrection spell is 25,000 GP. There's not a lot else I can think of that's plot-relevant that costs that much.
2. True Resurrection has previously been discussed in-comic, so while it's a very hard spell to get your hands on, it exists. True Resurrection can resurrect anyone as long as their soul is not bound against resurrection magics, and they are willing. You need no body parts.
3. We know that the church considers purchasing spellcasting services from it to be a donation (as is often suggested it be handled in many editions and settings of Dungeons and Dragons and its offspring.)
4. Previously, all that was buried of Tenrin, Durkon's father, was a single lock of facial hair.
5. A single lock of hair is generally considered to qualify for the much cheaper Resurrection spell. (While the Resurrection spell does not explicitly say that hair counts as part of the body for these purposes, a somewhat similar spell, Simulacrum, does.)
6. Sigdi was 'badly injured' and also pregnant during the same. While humans and dwarves are different, for humans, at least, exercise more intense than moderate intensity is unsafe during pregnancy. Fighting a half-dragon troll and losing an arm probably qualifies. It's also said that the clerics 'discovered' she was pregnant.
7. Sigdi tried to keep the details of Tenrin's death a secret, long after Durkon was old enough to understand death.
8. Dwarves who don't die with honor go to Hel, even if some effort is spent to argue over who goes where. Battle certainly counts, and so does living out your god's truth.
9. Vampire Durkon claims to be Durkon's worst day personified and he certainly seems to share all of Durkon's grudges with none of the positive counter emotions.
10. Durkon's exile from the Dwarven lands was lifted some time ago.
11. The High Priest of Odin was the only one high enough to cast some very rare spells like Regenerate. Regenerate is lower level for Clerics than True Resurrection.
12. The High Priest of Odin was one of the two figures (the other being the former High Priest of Thor) who was responsible for Durkon's exile. (No link, On the Origin of PCs).

My personal theory (with thanks to Nion):
Sigdi was so badly injured that she miscarried. That was probably when she found out she was pregnant. While she'd kept aside a rainy day fund to resurrect her husband just in case, she hadn't been prepared for the fact that she had a baby coming along the way. Tenrin unambiguously died in honorable combat -- he got the death every dwarf wants, even if a good deal sooner than he wanted it.

The baby did not. The baby was too young to have a faith, the baby had nothing to fight in the womb. And without going too much into graphic details, it might have been nearly impossible to recover anything to resurrect the baby with. Baby Durkon spent time being tormented by Hel.

So Sigdi gave everything she had to resurrect her child and give him another chance at life. This means that Durkon has a very personal grudge against Hel locked very deep in his memory; the worst day in his life was not the day that he was exiled from Dwarven society, it was when he was locked in endless torment at Hel's hands. The combination of information -- that he is not exiled from his homeland, that Hel was the person who wronged him most. That the High Priest of Odin who delivered the prophecy was also the one who had revived him as a baby -- might be enough to cause Vampire Durkon to briefly lose focus or even lose control, with his hatred mostly deeply turned on Hel.

Caveats:

1. In the flashback, the priests actually refer to the baby they discovered as alive. However, she needn't have miscarried immediately, but from complications resulting from injury.
2. Mr. Burlew has previously suggested that babies can go where their mother goes. I do not believe that Eric's case necessarily applies to young Durkon's, but this is a major issue.
3. Mr. Burlew is generally reluctant to harm children as part of storytelling, and for multiple reasons, this theory may well be too heavy in subject matter for OotS. This is a very good point.
4. Resurrection requires something to have been a part of the body at the time of death. If the lock of hair was obtained pre-death, it would not have worked, and Tenrin would need a true resurrection instead.
5. While there are no other official 3E spells with a direct cost of 25,000 GP, spells with a 5,000 XP cost are supposed to be mechanically equivalent to a price of 25,000 GP. This includes some usages of the Miracle spell.
6. It is worth noting that the cost for casting the spell itself is technically separate from the component cost and would add 1530 gp.
7. Durkon is unaware of the High Priest of Odin's involvement, as well as of the prophecy. He was removed without any warning or time to say goodbye.

[WindStruck]

This is a good theory!


Only question is, how would a true resurrection spell work on an unborn child? Surely there would be great difficulties if it comes back not in the mother's womb...

[ReleaseTheBees]

Cracking theory, I really like this. But I can’t get behind the theories that Durkon will take control back from the vampire, just because such a thing hasn’t been set up. That said, we’ve just seen the Vampire confuse what he was saying to Durkon and what he says out loud for the first time (“That’s just distracting... the memory, not the sword”) so maybe Durkon will distract him briefly.

[AstralFire]

This is a good theory!


Only question is, how would a true resurrection spell work on an unborn child? Surely there would be great difficulties if it comes back not in the mother's womb...

The child may have already been viable outside of the womb with a lot of medical care. I know someone thin as a stick due in two months and she only just started showing in the last week or two.

Cracking theory, I really like this. But I can’t get behind the theories that Durkon will take control back from the vampire, just because such a thing hasn’t been set up. That said, we’ve just seen the Vampire confuse what he was saying to Durkon and what he says out loud for the first time (“That’s just distracting... the memory, not the sword”) so maybe Durkon will distract him briefly.

I agree that it's not really supported for Durkon to take back control at all, so I think it's the most tenuous part of my theory. But I don't think it'd be narratively unpleasant (if anything, it'd be very satisfying) if Durkon was able to breathe a moment, speak in white chat bubble, hand Kudzu back to Hilgya after a second to appreciate his son, and ask her to kill him while the vampire's too disoriented to manage control.

[DaggerPen]

It's an interesting theory, but doesn't the Stickverse have a rule saying that children's souls go to the same afterlife as their mother's afterlife destination? Does that supersede the Hel deal?

[martianmister]

Does an unborn child even has a soul? Especially one ungrowth enough to be not noticed by his mom? Sounds like a dangerous territory for The Giant to follow.

[AstralFire]

It's an interesting theory, but doesn't the Stickverse have a rule saying that children's souls go to the same afterlife as their mother's afterlife destination? Does that supersede the Hel deal?

I'd forgotten about that, but I recall it now that you mention it.

I will add it to the caveats in the first post, thanks. I will say that I don't think that's a hard restriction. The particulars of how Eric got there wasn't important to the story and Mr. Burlew seems to be speaking at least somewhat extemporaneously. By contrast, the fundamental unfairness, evil, and cruelty of Dwarven metaphysics is a central point of this arc. But neither can it be disregarded.

[DaggerPen]

I'd forgotten about that, but I recall it now that you mention it.

I will add it to the caveats in the first post, thanks. I will say that I don't think that's a hard restriction. The particulars of how Eric got there wasn't important to the story and Mr. Burlew seems to be speaking at least somewhat extemporaneously. By contrast, the fundamental unfairness, evil, and cruelty of Dwarven metaphysics is a central point of this arc. But neither can it be disregarded.

I'm not overly attached to holding the Giant to off the cuff quotes, except that... he's been planning Durkon's vampirization for a pretty long time. I'm sure some details came later, but this one seems like a dozy. If the spell were to restore Durkon (who we'll say was at the point of viability at the time to avoid getting into Hotly Debated Territory) then I'd have expected him not to make a quote that would seem to contradict a planned reveal.

[AstralFire]

The main reason I'm inclined to consider it irrelevant is that everything he was talking about was within the bounds of standard core 3E cosmology -- which handles the humans, but not at all the dwarves. He's also not speaking with a definitive tone.

D&D cosmology is utterly incoherent...

...D&D writers have been trying to make it make sense for 40 years; it still doesn't. My version doesn't either....

...If you really need an answer... Because why not?...

...Whatever doesn't creep you out. Again, not important to the story....

This is all "I didn't consider it, it's not important", and he's not touching the dwarves at all. He refers to 17 planes and they're solely alignment planes. If you remove the bog standard 9, you've got 8 leftover, and a lot more than 8 dwarven gods, so it's unlikely he's referring to anything but how humans (and those who follow human-like systems) behave. (For anyone curious, this is the standard outer plane scheme, which is again purely alignment-based.)

The fact that he's been contemplating Durkon's fall since early on doesn't mean that there can't be later additions and edits to that story, though I'm not convinced that he was even thinking about how the dwarves figure into this scheme when he was writing that post.

Now: all that said, your objections remain valid ones. There's nothing I can do about them except wait and see. But this is why I don't think it's insurmountable. I'd be interested to hear any counter theories if anyone has them, as well!

[DaggerPen]

The main reason I'm inclined to consider it irrelevant is that everything he was talking about was within the bounds of standard core 3E cosmology -- which handles the humans, but not at all the dwarves. He's also not speaking with a definitive tone.



This is all "I didn't consider it, it's not important", and he's not touching the dwarves at all. He refers to 17 planes and they're solely alignment planes. If you remove the bog standard 9, you've got 8 leftover, and a lot more than 8 dwarven gods, so it's unlikely he's referring to anything but how humans (and those who follow human-like systems) behave.

The fact that he's been contemplating Durkon's fall since early on doesn't mean that there can't be later additions and edits to that story, though I'm not convinced that he was even thinking about how the dwarves figure into this scheme when he was writing that post.

Now: all that said, your objections remain valid ones. There's nothing I can do about them except wait and see. But this is why I don't think it's insurmountable. I'd be interested to hear any counter theories if anyone has them, as well!

Totally fair! Personally, I don't think this theory quite gels due to a combination of things (the thorniness of the comic considering a baby in eternal torment, The Giant's stated distaste for True Resurrection, my reasons above), but the "cost of a True Resurrection" thing is a very good catch. Does it happen to be the same cost as any other spell, does anyone know?

[AstralFire]

I did a quick search of a few repositories of 3rd Edition rules for 25000 gp. Only about 3 pages of items and one single spell have that price. And I don't think she bought a Ring of Evasion or a +5 shield! That does not, however, rule out some other reason for it. It could be 5 raise deads or two resurrections and a raise dead for the other members of her dead squad, for example -- I just couldn't think of a narratively satisfying answer for why that would be the case.

[martianmister]

Considering what happened to Eric, it must be near to impossible to resurrect babies, as Greenhilts tried many times and yet never succeed in resurrecting their baby son.

[hroþila]

Considering what happened to Eric, it must be near to impossible to resurrect babies, as Greenhilts tried many times and yet never succeed in resurrecting their baby son.

Possibly. But did Eric refuse to be resurrected because the Lawful Good afterlife was so nice, or because he couldn't understand the request? If it's just the former, a baby in Hel's hall might be more than happy to get out of there, stat.

[martianmister]

We tried so hard to bring you back. I guess it was so nice here, it never occurred to you to come when we called.

They can't resurrect him because he answered their calls. It makes little sense for a premature baby to answer the call.

[CJG]

Perhaps a dumb question: can you use a true res on a vampire to get the original soul back?

[Morquard]

Perhaps a dumb question: can you use a true res on a vampire to get the original soul back?

Pretty sure the undead has to be destroyed first before raise dead or resurrection can be performed. I am NOT sure about true res though. But TR would create a new body out of nothing (as the original is missing/somewhere else), so it wouldn't just give him control.

However Durkon's spirit currently is trapped, and we know from Start of Drakness:

Spoiler: SoD

Show

that Dorukan tried to res Lirian and failed because she was trapped by a soul trap spell

I'm not sure if what is happening to Durkon follows the same rules though.

[martianmister]

Perhaps a dumb question: can you use a true res on a vampire to get the original soul back?

You need to kill the vampire before.

[Grey Watcher]

I did a quick search of a few repositories of 3rd Edition rules for 25000 gp. Only about 3 pages of items and one single spell have that price. And I don't think she bought a Ring of Evasion or a +5 shield! That does not, however, rule out some other reason for it. It could be 5 raise deads or two resurrections and a raise dead for the other members of her dead squad, for example -- I just couldn't think of a narratively satisfying answer for why that would be the case.

Like I said in the main discussion thread, I think the spell in question is True Resurrection for Tenrin, given that it doesn't require any remains that his body is inaccessible. And that the "donation" involved specifically NOT having the spell cast, something she was likely coerced into.

[2.5 cats]

Great theory!

I'll add that it's possible that the spell was Miracle rather than True Resurrection, but either way it's a 9th level spell with a 25,000 gp material cost.

[InvisibleBison]

I don't think the 25,000 gp worth of diamonds needed to cast true resurrection can be considered a donation, because they're destroyed when the spell is cast. I realize that the comic referred to paying a cleric to cast a spell as a donation, but regenerate doesn't have an expensive material component, so after casting the spell the cleric would still have the money, which is not the case with true resurrection.

[martianmister]

Like I said in the main discussion thread, I think the spell in question is True Resurrection for Tenrin, given that it doesn't require any remains that his body is inaccessible. And that the "donation" involved specifically NOT having the spell cast, something she was likely coerced into.

They still have his hair though.

[AstralFire]

Great theory!

I'll add that it's possible that the spell was Miracle rather than True Resurrection, but either way it's a 9th level spell with a 25,000 gp material cost.

Good point. (For those confused: some uses of the Miracle spell -- and all uses of the Wish spell -- require 5,000 XP in 3E. 3E uses a general pricing guide of 1 XP = 5 GP. So Miracle could be a valid answer.)

Like I said in the main discussion thread, I think the spell in question is True Resurrection for Tenrin, given that it doesn't require any remains that his body is inaccessible. And that the "donation" involved specifically NOT having the spell cast, something she was likely coerced into.

My main problem with this theory is that we know she had hair for him, which by any table I've been at, should have worked for regular Resurrection. Secondary problem: what would this add to the scene currently?

I don't think the 25,000 gp worth of diamonds needed to cast true resurrection can be considered a donation, because they're destroyed when the spell is cast. I realize that the comic referred to paying a cleric to cast a spell as a donation, but regenerate doesn't have an expensive material component, so after casting the spell the cleric would still have the money, which is not the case with true resurrection.

An entirely fair point. I don't agree with it, but an entirely fair point.

[martianmister]

My main problem with this theory is that we know she had hair for him, which by any table I've been at, should have worked for regular Resurrection. Secondary problem: what would this add to the scene currently?

But if it's really a miscarriage, couldn't they just resurrect her baby with Raise Dead or Resurrection? They wouldn't have to need True Resurrection to revive Durkon.

[random_guy]

The money could have been used to pay for a spell, but the church lacked anyone high enough level to cast the spell. Sigdi could have felt like she had no other use for the money, so she decided to let them keep it instead of requesting the church return the money to her. The church would then treat it as a donation, since no services were provided in exchange for the gold.

The church might be willing to honor the donation as "store credit" for resurrecting Durkon. Earlier in the story, they have spent the money saved for Durkon's resurrection in order to cover the Mechane's repairs. In other words, I agree with someone's comment in the comic's discussion thread about a life insurance policy for Durkon. The only difference is that in my hypothesis, it is a side effect of the donation, not the reason for it.

[SirKazum]

While this is a really kickass theory and I think it would make for an awesome story turn, I don't think it's quite an OOTS plot. All this ressurrecting a miscarried baby that's been tortured by Hel would be way too heavy, and really inconsistent with the overall tone of the comic, as well as the moral compass that Rich Burlew consistently follows (i.e. not putting children in serious harm and not doing gratuitously shocking stuff). Although, yes, it would fit really well and provide a perfect in-story justification for Durkon managing to overcome the vampire that's taken over his body. (Yes, I know such a thing hasn't been established in-comic, but it's just the sort of heroic act of supreme willpower that thematically fits very well with a fantasy story.)

So, all that said, I'm voting for Miracle. It's open-ended enough that it could be practically anything, so I'm sure it can be fit into any number of highly dramatic and plot-relevant twists. Maybe, yeah, something dramatic enough to allow Durkon to overcome his prison (even if only for a brief moment, enough to turn the tide of battle), although not quite involving dead fetuses.

[Grey Watcher]

I don't think the 25,000 gp worth of diamonds needed to cast true resurrection can be considered a donation, because they're destroyed when the spell is cast. I realize that the comic referred to paying a cleric to cast a spell as a donation, but regenerate doesn't have an expensive material component, so after casting the spell the cleric would still have the money, which is not the case with true resurrection.

Like I said, I think her "donation" was in sparing the church the loss of 25k gp by forgoing the spell. A donation-in-kind of allowing the church to keep a giant pile of cash (or a big-ass diamond) would explain how she's so broke she has only her pension and the generosity of her friends to live off of AND had her name end up on that wall; she never was in possession of the cash in the first place.

They still have his hair though.

My main problem with this theory is that we know she had hair for him, which by any table I've been at, should have worked for regular Resurrection.

I'll have to look it up again, but I believe the remains have to have been part of (i.e. physically attached to) the person at the time of death.

Secondary problem: what would this add to the scene currently?

If she had, or even simply thought she had, the chance to get Tenrin back and was somehow coerced into giving that up, it would add a whole extra layer to Durkon's repressed resentment towards his own church. On top of that, her name is in a place of honor next to millionaires while she's scraping by on a pension so meagre it makes replacing dishes a major expense, which seems to me like adding cruel insult to grievous injury.

Of course, that would seem to play into, rather than confound, Greg's whole thing, given that he IS that resentment extrapolated into an entire personality. But I suspect the details of what his mother has to say about it and how Durkon reacts will be extremely important.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

This is definitely an interesting theory. For the reasons that SirKazum brings up, as well as what I think are some metaphysical issues with the theory (also mentioned by others), I don’t think it’s very likely, but I like the direction you’re going in. I’m not even really sure what my own personal theory on the 25k is at this point, so I hope we see more memory in the next strip.

[Kish]

(who we'll say was at the point of viability at the time to avoid getting into Hotly Debated Territory)

Even with that, I don't believe Rich is going to get into the mechanics of healing and resurrection magic affecting fetuses, even by implication. I could be wrong.

[Keltest]

Like I said, I think her "donation" was in sparing the church the loss of 25k gp by forgoing the spell. A donation-in-kind of allowing the church to keep a giant pile of cash (or a big-ass diamond) would explain how she's so broke she has only her pension and the generosity of her friends to live off of AND had her name end up on that wall; she never was in possession of the cash in the first place.

The problem I have with this theory is why they would then have been preparing to true res him in the first place. If it was their own initiative, I don't see why Sigdi would have any say at all. If it was something he set up before hand, then presumably the Thundershields were the source of the money anyway, so why wouldn't she have gotten the money back? Furthermore, "Och, twere never my money, lad. I did tha church a favor, saved 'em a pile o' coin, an' they put my name on tha wall as thanks." doesn't seem especially dramatic, or complicated, even if that favor was "don't resurrect Tenrin"

[Morty]

I agree that this is an interesting enough theory but also pretty deep into a territory the Giant is unlikely to ever venture into.