MitD XII: This Space Intentionally Left Dark

[Listening Here]

I’m not going to suggest a monster since my monster lore has faded with time.

But a question - is there a creature who has the ability to read / see thoughts passively?

It may be a crazy idea but if MitD had the ability to read thoughts unknowingly to even himself it could explain how he is so articulate regarding goblinoid species politics. I’m sure Oona has long thought of the topic. It could explain how he knows what the Astral plane feels like and looks like without having gone there himself since Xykon would have been thinking about it. I imagine V was picturing the beach and V’s friends when MitD whisked them away. Learning Go would be much easier by peering into O’Chul’s head.

And if it was a passive ability it wouldn’t necessarily have an illustrated activation like glowing eyes or auras.

But I don’t know if such an ability or creature exists. As mentioned, monster lore is mostly forgotten but my memory on how pscionics work is all but forgotten.

Going back to lurking.

[Quartz]

But a question - is there a creature who has the ability to read / see thoughts passively?

You mean like a doppelganger?

[halfeye]

Maybe it's in a different portion, but the MITD first appeared before Rich determined what it was. Changing the eye color later would have been a dead giveaway. If it matters I would expect it will be explained as being filtered through the magical darkness or something.

I remember the Giant having said something to the effect that the illustations made prior to the decision matched the monster that was eventually decided upon. To me, that would mean the eyes were a compatible colour and in compatible places, which to me pretty much rules out the protean. I'm aware that this is disputed, and I am not aiming to restart that, but equally I am not going to let it be thought that the contrary position is unanimous.

[Ghosty]

I'm sure you all covered it at the time, but in rereading #1041, when asked why Team Evil can't go into a second dungeon that day, RedCloak makes the statement, "Keeping both undead and living party members standing through a bunch of fights in a row burns through way too many spells."

Can we infer from this that the MITD must be either living or undead? I.E., not a construct?

It's going to be a little sad when the Giant makes the reveal. This thread has been so much fun to follow.

[Ghosty]

Oh, and I don't seem to be able to edit my posts when accessing the forum on this device, but can we infer anything by either RedCloak's Cure or Inflict Critical Wounds not affecting the MITD? I guess, as many of you have, that its regeneration could just be so high that it fully heals through in the time it took to walk out of the dungeon.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

is there a creature who has the ability to read / see thoughts passively?

As far as I know, detect thoughts is always at least at-will.

Can we infer from this that the MITD must be either living or undead? I.E., not a construct?

We already knew this for the fact that he eats and desires to eat (some constructs might be capable of putting food into their mouths, but don't gain anything from it, and most can't even do that).

More damningly for your scenario, RC might not have the ability to keep a construct alive and/or not care about MitD in tip-top shape (he obviously wasn't in need of it at the end), so he might only be talking about Oona/himself and Xykon in that declaration.

Grey Wolf

[Ruck]

I remember the Giant having said something to the effect that the illustations made prior to the decision matched the monster that was eventually decided upon.

All his quotes on the MitD are available in the OP. I think this is what you are looking for:

nothing from before strip #100 actually contradicts the truth of what it is, either.

[Peelee]

All his quotes on the MitD are available in the OP. I think this is what you are looking for:

And even if he had said the specific illustration thing, that wouldn't rule out protean, since all instances of it could have been emulating two-eyed creatures. It's impossible to rule the protea out by saying it's always depicted with two eyes, because the vast, vast majority of creatures have two eyes. At the absolute worst, it's playing to probability, which is still totally cool with the monster being a protean.

[Keltest]

And even if he had said the specific illustration thing, that wouldn't rule out protean, since all instances of it could have been emulating two-eyed creatures. It's impossible to rule the protea out by saying it's always depicted with two eyes, because the vast, vast majority of creatures have two eyes. At the absolute worst, it's playing to probability, which is still totally cool with the monster being a protean.

As Grey Wolf is fond of pointing out, the Protean does not emulate a single specific creature at any given time, but is rather an amorphous blob of different creature parts constantly shifting in and out. There is no guarantee it would even have a complete face made of one creature.

[Peelee]

As Grey Wolf is fond of pointing out, the Protean does not emulate a single specific creature at any given time, but is rather an amorphous blob of different creature parts constantly shifting in and out. There is no guarantee it would even have a complete face made of one creature.

True, but the point remains. Whenever someone tries to claim that the eyes rule out a protean, the immediate logical response is "what if at that time it was emulating two eyes?"

[Keltest]

True, but the point remains. Whenever someone tries to claim that the eyes rule out a protean, the immediate logical response is "what if at that time it was emulating two eyes?"

Then I would say that would be cheating. The morphing is an intrinsic and defining characteristic for the Protean. Its ability to stop doing so is extremely limited. While it is not literally impossible, it is so unlikely across such a long period of time as to be functionally so.

[Peelee]

Then I would say that would be cheating. The morphing is an intrinsic and defining characteristic for the Protean. Its ability to stop doing so is extremely limited. While it is not literally impossible, it is so unlikely across such a long period of time as to be functionally so.

I would counter with "but it's not stopping. It's constantly shifting, at every time we see it, it happens to have two eyes at that moment." Absolutely nothing about that indicates cheating, and assuming it is a protean, any instance of it having more or fewer eyes would be an instant giveaway, so it would obviously not happen.

[Keltest]

I would counter with "but it's not stopping. It's constantly shifting, at every time we see it, it happens to have two eyes at that moment." Absolutely nothing about that indicates cheating, and assuming it is a protean, any instance of it having more or fewer eyes would be an instant giveaway, so it would obviously not happen.

And I say, so what? How is that kind of contrivance not cheating? We've seen the MITD frequently enough now, and over a long enough period of time, that we would have seen something get through even if he were trying to hold a consistent face for the entirety of his on screen existence.

[Peelee]

And I say, so what? How is that kind of contrivance not cheating?

Instead of asking how it's now cheating, instead ask how is it cheating? You're the one claiming it can only do that if it holds a form or stops shifting. If you insist on that, then sure, it's cheating. By the same token, I can insist that you're saying "Peelee is so sexy" and then kindly tell you that sorry, I'm married, and just ignore the fact that only I am insisting that you're saying that despite it not happening at all.

[Keltest]

Instead of asking how it's now cheating, instead ask how is it cheating? You're the one claiming it can only do that if it holds a form or stops shifting. If you insist on that, then sure, it's cheating. By the same token, I can insist that you're saying "Peelee is so sexy" and then kindly tell you that sorry, I'm married, and just ignore the fact that only I am insisting that you're saying that despite it not happening at all.

Um, its cheating because what it takes in order for it to deliberately maintain a specific shape has actual rules with limits and stuff? It needs to take a move action in order to maintain a form. It would, for example, be unable to maintain its form while running. Any time it uses its move action and standard action or uses a full round action would cause it to start boiling again.

[Peelee]

Um, its cheating because what it takes in order for it to deliberately maintain a specific shape has actual rules with limits and stuff? It needs to take a move action in order to maintain a form. It would, for example, be unable to maintain its form while running. Any time it uses its move action and standard action or uses a full round action would cause it to start boiling again.

Again, you are the only one insisting it has to maintain its form. Remove that. Assume it's never spending a move action to maintain its form. There is zero maintaining form going on. What it is doing I do not know, but maintaining its form it is not.

Now that that's out of the way, please, point me to the rule where it must always be changing the number of eyes. I'd very much like to read it, because as it appears to me, it could constantly be shifting forms while always having two eyes. Not maintaining two eyes, before you start to think that, just in case the first part of this reply has slipped your mind. Constnalty shifting such that there are always two eyes, at least while it's on camera. Perfectly plausible. Perfectly by the rules.

And, just to be sure, it's still not maintaining its form. Please stop insisting that has to be a prerequisite. Of course it's going to be cheating if you start out with, "lets assume its cheating." Stop assuming that.

[Keltest]

Again, you are the only one insisting it has to maintain its form. Remove that. Assume it's never spending a move action to maintain its form. There is zero maintaining form going on. What it is doing I do not know, but maintaining its form it is not.

Now that that's out of the way, please, point me to the rule where it must always be changing the number of eyes. I'd very much like to read it, because as it appears to me, it could constantly be shifting forms while always having two eyes. Not maintaining two eyes, before you start to think that, just in case the first part of this reply has slipped your mind. Constnalty shifting such that there are always two eyes, at least while it's on camera. Perfectly plausible. Perfectly by the rules.

And, just to be sure, it's still not maintaining its form. Please stop insisting that has to be a prerequisite. Of course it's going to be cheating if you start out with, "lets assume its cheating." Stop assuming that.

Its form is described as "constantly boiling". Now I don't know when the last time you looked at a pot of boiling water was, but im reasonably certain that you know what that looks like. If you told me there was a section of the surface of a boiling pot of water that was continually in the same place, I would call you a liar. Its not so much that theres a specific rule saying it cant have two eyes so much as it being definitionally impossible for it to be consistent like that without it being deliberate.

So yes, it actually is a prerequisite. It cannot have a consistent form without trying.

[Peelee]

Its form is described as "constantly boiling". Now I don't know when the last time you looked at a pot of boiling water was, but im reasonably certain that you know what that looks like. If you told me there was a section of the surface of a boiling pot of water that was continually in the same place, I would call you a liar.

If I took a bunch of pictures and only chose to show you the ones that had a bubble in one specific spot, it would still be constantly boiling despite your insistence that it should always be different. Assuming it is a protean, the Giant is showing us only the moments where the metaphorical bubbles are in one specific spot. That does not mean the metaphorical pot ain't boiling, it just means you're being shown something deliberately manipulated.

[Keltest]

If I took a bunch of pictures and only chose to show you the ones that had a bubble in one specific spot, it would still be constantly boiling despite your insistence that it should always be different. Assuming it is a protean, the Giant is showing us only the moments where the metaphorical bubbles are in one specific spot. That does not mean the metaphorical pot ain't boiling, it just means you're being shown something deliberately manipulated.

At which point were back to having seen enough pictures that such should be functionally impossible. It would be cheating because it shouldn't be able to happen.

[Peelee]

At which point were back to having seen enough pictures that such should be functionally impossible.

If you were shown a random sampling, yes. If you were shown a specific set, no. Again, I'm choosing which pictures to show you.

[Keltest]

If you were shown a random sampling, yes. If you were shown a specific set, no. Again, I'm choosing which pictures to show you.

And eventually you will run out of those pictures, or you will need to show me all of them from a specific time frame where some are missing that bubble.

Basically, it doesn't work like that.

[Peelee]

And eventually you will run out of those pictures, or you will need to show me all of them from a specific time frame where some are missing that bubble.

No I won't? It's constantly boiling and i'm constantly taking pictures. There's going to keep being a bubble in that specific place until it's all boiled out, or I decide to show you the full boiling pot.

[Keltest]

No I won't? It's constantly boiling and i'm constantly taking pictures. There's going to keep being a bubble in that specific place until it's all boiled out, or I decide to show you the full boiling pot.

Ok, but Rich has shown us several consecutive pictures from only seconds apart, so to speak. So maybe he's selecting them, but they had to have occurred that way for him to have taken the pictures in the first place.

[Peelee]

Ok, but Rich has shown us several consecutive pictures from only seconds apart, so to speak. So maybe he's selecting them, but they had to have occurred that way for him to have taken the pictures in the first place.

And, since the eyes being different, melting away, disappearing or reappearing, etc. would be the biggest possible way to give up the game, they're not going to occur that way, especially in a self-aware parody comic that we know for a fact canonically runs off rules of drama.

We're clearly not going to convince each other, so let me just note this: At the end of the day, if it turns out to not be a protean, I will still be perfectly satisfied, whereas if it does turn out to be a protean, you will not be for no reason other than your own insistence that it would be "cheating."

[Keltest]

And, since the eyes being different, melting away, disappearing or reappearing, etc. would be the biggest possible way to give up the game, they're not going to occur that way, especially in a self-aware parody comic that we know for a fact canonically runs off rules of drama.

We're clearly not going to convince each other, so let me just note this: At the end of the day, if it turns out to not be a protean, I will still be perfectly satisfied, whereas if it does turn out to be a protean, you will not be for no reason other than your own insistence that it would be "cheating."

I mean, its a huge problem for the protean. Of course im going to be completely unsatisfied if its just handwaved away. And at the end of the day, that's what youre suggesting Rich would have been doing, since he's the one who writes the scenes and would decide how its bubbled. Honestly, im rather baffled at the number of people who insist that it doesn't matter that much. Its not quite "is the wrong size to be the MITD" level of disqualifying, but it should certainly be close.

[Peelee]

I mean, its a huge problem for the protean.

Because you insist it is, and for no other reason. Because it's really not.

[LadyEowyn]

Under the section on the MITD’s size in the into posts, I would suggest adding two pieces of information:
- The MITD mentions to O-Chul that MITD’s father was “BIG” (caps used in the comic). (Also that his father ate a lot more than MITD.)
- In the Villains Calendar, Qarr mentions that he knew someone like MITD but that MITD is “on the small side”.

That’s two further pieces of evidence giving the same indication Oona’s comment that MITD is “so small...but will grow” - i.e., we’re seeing a lot of hints from Rich that the MITD’s creature type is larger than MITD appears in the comic, and probably by a considerable amount.

[Rrmcklin]

I understand what Peelee is saying: the monster isn't consciously choosing to have two eyes it just "happens" that we only ever see it when it has two eyes, and at other, off-panel, moments it may have fewer or more.

I agree that that being the case would be cheating, in spirit, if not technically.

[Joerg]

Are we sure that we're really seeing eyes? Are there eyebrows, too? Or could it be that the 'face' is really invisible in the dark, but we are shown the eyes only as an abstract representation of where the MitD is currently putting his attention and of what he feels at the moment?

I agree that the creature type should be much larger than what we're seeing. So much that I would rule out medium creatures, and I think 'huge' or 'doesn't fit under the umbrella' should not be listed as a con anymore for the FBS creatures.

[Son of A Lich!]

Or... Rich wants the character to emote without having to change the number of eyes and facial features with each frame? We literally have less to identify him then any other character in the series, by having the solid character traits, two yellow eyes and the umbrella, we know exactly who we are dealing with, without knowing what we are dealing with.

Honestly, that's what makes me think it was originally chosen to go into the dark - The Giant didn't want to draw a new monster in each panel of the comic. He put it into a dark corner to save himself from work and then that became the running gag.

I mean, could you draw, for sake of argument, 100 panels worth of different forms for the MitD while keeping them thematic enough so that the character was Identifiable? I mean, sure, maybe, but Eyes are Mental and keeping the monster in the depths of the dark seems to be the easiest way to handle it.

Just for point of argument - Rich commented that Malack's staff was a hassle for him...