Alicornutopia

How would you even move the whole god? I could see that working in the Fates world where there are holes large enough to put some of them, but not most anywhere else.

A human looks big to an ant, I don't see why just having a large body should make things qualitatively different.

A portal snake target is usually planetlike and planets can’t support just adding that much terrain. Failing that, the next most likely target is outer space probably, and the terrain part could survive isolated outer space even worse than a human (with the only exception I can think of being mountain gods).

Plus I feel sorry for all the inhabitants of the domain either coming with or falling to the mantle and dying, but that does not affect the plausibility. The plausibility argument is mostly that the demon did not eat the domain.

Just the manifested form is transported by portal snake; each manifested form is its own body, even if it's connected to one consciousness.

So in Incandescence, Ice tells Cypress that if a witch pulls a dagger on him he can just tell her that he's flattered but taken. In this new thread, Amariah tells Sadde that "already married" isn't an acceptable excuse to not marry a witch. It makes sense, given the requisite mindset to even have a custom like that, and the stated excuses (any mortal should be honored to have a witch for a lover) that "already has a witch SO" would be considered a more valid defense than "already has a mortal SO." So I'm curious--does this extend to witches' sons? If you're a witch's son and an unfamiliar witch pulls a dagger on you, is "please discuss this with my mother and/or sister(s)" an acceptable defense?

Well, "acceptable". She'll still be pissed off but it's possible self-preservation will win.

I don't remember if you've answered this somewhere, but are there trans witches? A world with transmasculine witches is interestingly different from one with transfeminine witches, or both or neither.

In Effulgence and Incandescence, all witches are female, whatever organs they possess.

Does having dæmons interact with animal welfare movements? I would imagine it would: it creates a hard line for what counts as a Person, and animals are very clearly Not People. Now people argue about monkeys and dolphins, and to a lesser extent practically all animals, and even if some of those arguments are about interesting non-dæmon phenomena I don’t see them being as likely with dæmons.

On the other hand, if you want to enslave humans, it helps to argue that dæmons don’t make somebody a Person, so maybe that sticks around even after you get rid of human slavery? Or maybe bears, who are Clearly People, would confound this sociological effect. Hence my asking. How do dæmons affect animal welfare movements?

Not that much. As you point out humans aren't great to one another and bears exist. Daemons do make it easier to tell if an environment is (physically) comfortable for an animal, so that affects a few details about zoos and such.