So how developed is Xykon?

[Raenir Salazar]

On the one hand we have Redcloak, who has a troubled past, a goal, determination, has clear and significant character growth and seems very detailed and fleshed out and is sympathetic.

However and then there's Xykon who seems to be made out to a 2 dimensional cutout Villain whose purpose is to be defeated but reading SoD and with his recent Hannibal lectures I have the impression that hes significantly more, true his motivation is barely more then a Evil Overlord checklist but I think the way he carries himself about it hints to a bit more.

What ye think?

[Morty]

I do think that Xykon is much more developed than your typical Ebil villain who is only there to be stomped by the Heroes. He's more or less a typical fantasy bad guy, but he's well-written as such.

[Klivian]

I registered just to reply to this, because I have to say that I think Xykon is in no way two dimensional, sure he has his stereotypical homicidal maniac side, but he is way more fleshed out (metaphorically) than many of the members of the OOTS.

Most people probably saw Xykon as a bumbling villain until he handed V's keister to her. He isn't a paper tiger where he's built up as a huge villain, he can actually back it up.

He LEARNS, unlike some of the characters in this comic, most obviously by adding abjurations to his phylactery after realizing how vulnerable it was during the battle in the throne room. He has backup plans, going all the way back to the beginning of the comic, the MitD isn't just another character, it was Xykon's ace in the hole, he knew that the OOTS was capable enough to beat his initial plan, and was ready for it. He just wasn't ready for Roy's roid rage.

Also look at his respect for Redcloak's advice, putting magic traps in, even though he didn't think they were necessary, if he were just a 2D villain, he would just assume he would be powerful enough to take anyone who could get past the Cloister spell.

Add in how brutally ingenious he can be with his evilness (Bouncy Ball of Insanity) and you have a great character. I will be very sad if he gets taken out for good, especially if it's just so Redcloak can move into the top spot officially.

[Blackjackg]

Xykon is intentionally written as one-dimensional (ok, he actually has two dimensions: World domination, and Attention Deficit Disorder). That lack of development serves two functions: first, it serves as an excellent lampooning of D&D villains generally; and second, it makes him funnier. As a general rule, the more we see the characters as having dimensions, flaws, feelings and outside lives, the less funny we (and Rich, apparently) find them. This is true in life as well as literature. It's why Belkar and Xykon are still funny, but Haley and V are not. Even MitD has lost a lot of his humorousness since he started hanging around O-Chul.

[Raenir Salazar]

I find them still funny but in different ways.

[Zanaril]

If Xykon looks like a cardboard cutout then you're looking at something he's put that there to distract you while he hits you in the back.

[Nerdanel]

Third dimension from SoD:

Someone who enjoys the pleasures of the senses, a coffee-loving ladies' man.


In the online comic that isn't actually visible except as an additional reason behind how evil Xykon is acting nowadays.

He has to fill the void with something.

[Lufia]

Actually, I've been wondering not about Xykon's character as such, but about his motivations for world domination. Okay, the journey to get there is fun enough, but once you achieve it, it all turns out to be plain boring, no? Except for the occasional druid foolish enough to jump out of your potted fern, it doesn't sound all that great.

Say, Redcloak would be better suited for the role as he would probably be more interested in the political side of things.

This is not a question for OotS only. In most stories, the question "Then what?" regarding what happens if the villain's plan is fulfilled is continually avoided. Not that it matters all that much in the end, anyway.

[Blackjackg]

This is not a question for OotS only. In most stories, the question "Then what?" regarding what happens if the villain's plan is fulfilled is continually avoided. Not that it matters all that much in the end, anyway.

Slight aside: This reminds me of the classic 1972 political drama "The Candidate," in which Robert Redford runs for president. Spoiler:

He wins, and the last line of the movie is him asking his campaign manager "What do we do now?"

[The Grazymancer]

Actually, I've been wondering not about Xykon's character as such, but about his motivations for world domination. Okay, the journey to get there is fun enough, but once you achieve it, it all turns out to be plain boring, no? Except for the occasional druid foolish enough to jump out of your potted fern, it doesn't sound all that great.

Say, Redcloak would be better suited for the role as he would probably be more interested in the political side of things.

This is not a question for OotS only. In most stories, the question "Then what?" regarding what happens if the villain's plan is fulfilled is continually avoided. Not that it matters all that much in the end, anyway.

Think of the possibilities. Hell he could decide to become a god or start entire wars just for the laughs.

[Eerie]

Actually, I've been wondering not about Xykon's character as such, but about his motivations for world domination. Okay, the journey to get there is fun enough, but once you achieve it, it all turns out to be plain boring, no? Except for the occasional druid foolish enough to jump out of your potted fern, it doesn't sound all that great.

Since Xykon lives in a Multiverse, there are enough worlds to conquer. Plus, there are things like attaining divinity...

[jidasfire]

Another neat aspect of Xykon is he's very good at playing dumb. No matter how powerful he is, it keeps people underestimating him or just writing him off as a bumbling villain. Yet every time the gloves come off, Xykon proves he's smarter, crueler, and more aware than anyone expects.

In Start of Darkness, he's on to Redcloak's plan about the phylactery, and he's on to Right-Eye's plan with the energy dagger. He lets these things go because they serve his plans. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if he knows all about how Redcloak lied to him regarding the gates and the Snarl.

However he portrays himself, Xykon is not a wacky villain. He's malevolence wrapped in a corpse. The fact that it isn't obvious at first makes him extra scary.

[Pronounceable]

Xykon's character is like Joker. He's in it for the hell of it: he gets a hard on when being Evil (metaphorically). He's also bored out of his skull.

I'm sure if he ever conquers the world, he'll just leave and go find himself a new world to play with.

And I'm pretty certain the worst fate that can befall him is not oblivion or the great fire below, but imprisonment. Sealing him up permenantly somewhere he'll have NOTHING to do for all eternity would be the most satisfying punishment imo.

[[TS] Shadow]

First off, this needs a "spoiler" in the thread title.

Moving on, however, looking into SoD we can realize that Xykon has a major inferiority complex. He was constantly looked down upon. Either he's too simple minded as a warrior or not refined enough as a sorcerer. These sort of put-downs anger Xykon, and it's likely that he's out to rule the world so he can be the one to put down others instead.

[paladinofshojo]

Xykon exists in a world where there's almost always a clear-cut good and evil, he doesn't question it, he just accepts it.....Redcloak on the otherhand is trying to add some "realism" into this system of absolutes

[Ellye]

His insight about the nature of Power was pretty interesting, by the way.