Tsukiko's ritual

[Cybertoy00]

In her last appearence in the comic, Tsukiko is tasked by Xykon to decode a ritual of some kind. According to the Monster in the Dark (Who is not the most reliable source of info but what the hey...) the ritual she has actually half of a ritual, and she later deduces that the other half is divine magic, as opposed to the arcane ritual half she has.
KNOW WHAT I THINK?
I think that this ritual is the spell that gives its casters control over the rift! Xykon's probably decided that Redcloak isn't the most trustworthy minions anymore, and plans to cut him out of the picture. Apparently recent actions, such as the loss of his phylactery at O-Chul and V's hands. O-Chul would not have been in any position to do that if Redcloak hadn't been keeping him alive in order to 'get info on Girand's gate' (IE, set up Gobbotopia), have caused Xykon to distrust Redcloak, It's been stated in Start of Darkness that the only reason Xykon hasn't killed Redcloak for causing him to lose his sense of taste in his lich form. (Not entirely Redcloak's fault- he warned that Xykon would lose his flesh. One would think that loss of the tongue and its taste functions would apply to that) But now that Xykon has his own even more loyal divine magic caster in the form of Tsukiko, he can cut Redcloak out and take the rift for himself, as soon as he gets the full ritual.
How did Xykon get half of the ritual? In SoD, it's been shown that Xykon can Charm, and it's possible that he Charmed Redcloak into giving up a piece of the ritual, his will being strong enough(but just barely) to keep the divine part a secret. You cannot Charm someone into doing something they are fully opposed against.
I suspect I'm not the first one to bring this subject up, but I just want to get my theory off my chest.
What does anyone think?

[Shale]

Uh.....yeah? If it turns out to be anything but that, it'll be a surprise. And of course Xykon has half the ritual; he's supposed to cast the arcane side when they get a gate, and it's probably not the kind of thing you can just read off the page once and do perfectly. Redcloak would have to let him study.

[Crisis21]

I'm pretty sure it's Xykon's half of the Gate ritual. We haven't seen anything in OotS yet that requires both an arcane and divine caster other than the spell that sealed the Gates in the first place, and neither Xykon nor Redcloak actually know that one as far as we know (probably not since then they could just reseal an already open Gate and use that).

[slayerx]

Uh.....yeah? If it turns out to be anything but that, it'll be a surprise.

you have to keep in mind that not everyone has read SoD or the spoilers about it, and thus do not know such details

[Marnath]

Wasn't this discussed in detail in the discussion thread for that strip? And about 380 times since then? The OP is almost verbatim of about 500 different posters. Sorry if that seems harsh man, but the dead horse got beat into paste a while ago. :smallfrown:

[Conuly]

It's a bit unreasonable to ask a new poster to read every post ever before, um, posting.

Although yes, you're far from the first person to think of this :smallsmile: And of course Xykon has to have always known that Redcloak planned to betray him. They're both Evil, and Xykon is EVILLY Evil - he's sure to have thought of it.

[Tass]

It's a bit unreasonable to ask a new poster to read every post ever before, um, posting.

Although yes, you're far from the first person to think of this :smallsmile: And of course Xykon has to have always known that Redcloak planned to betray him. They're both Evil, and Xykon is EVILLY Evil - he's sure to have thought of it.

Yes. But it is hardly unreasonable to expect people to read the thread about the comic in question.

[T.H. Everything]

I think that that's a bit unreasonable in itself. VERY unreasonable, in fact.
And, what if it's an old comic whose thread has been deleted, if it had one in the first place?:smallconfused:

[Zevox]

Yes. But it is hardly unreasonable to expect people to read the thread about the comic in question.
Yes, actually, that is unreasonable. Those end up buried many pages back into the thread archives quite quickly, so the older the comic, the harder it is to find the thread in question. And they're always quite long, which would make it pretty unreasonable even if they were easily accessible.

Zevox

[Gray Mage]

Yes, actually, that is unreasonable. Those end up buried many pages back into the thread archives quite quickly, so the older the comic, the harder it is to find the thread in question. And they're always quite long, which would make it pretty unreasonable even if they were easily accessible.

Zevox

But there is a thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103669) with the list of all the discussions. It's even on the first page.

[Shale]

I don't mind people not reading the ridiculously-long topics on each individual comic before posting. I do mind when somebody figures out that one and one make two and decide they need to announce this discovery to the world.

[Zevox]

But there is a thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103669) with the list of all the discussions. It's even on the first page.
It frequently isn't on the first page, and since it's not stickied it's very easy to overlook even when it is. Plus as I said, the discussion threads themselves are very long, so expecting people to read each one before posting anything about any given thread is unreasonable regardless of the ease of access. Heck, some of us don't even read the discussion threads while they're current because of the sizes they quickly reach - I largely don't.

Zevox

[Marnath]

You might say it's also unreasonable to come forward with a theory about a strip that is years(or months) old and honestly expect it hasn't been mentioned yet.

[Conuly]

You might say it's also unreasonable to come forward with a theory about a strip that is years(or months) old and honestly expect it hasn't been mentioned yet.

Maybe, but it'd get buried faster if you didn't stop in and personally point out how stupid you think it all is.

[Grendus]

And of course Xykon has to have always known that Redcloak planned to betray him. They're both Evil, and Xykon is EVILLY Evil - he's sure to have thought of it.

I don't know. Xykon would betray his own mother. Over a cookie. Because he was bored. Redcloak, on the other hand, is evil in service of a cause, he would only betray Xykon if he was really pushed (see The Dog Bites Back (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheDogBitesBack) if you're willing to risk a TVTropes link). Redcloak is, honestly, the least evil of the evil characters. I'd go so far as to say that, if the world were made up solely of goblins, he would be considered lawful good, or at least lawful neutral - after his "I'M TURNING INTO XYKON!" moment he's been pretty focused on making things better for goblins. He's just speciest, he hates humans and can rationalize doing anything to them by his childhood hatred of the paladins.

If Xykon really suspected treachery, he would never have trusted Redcloak with his phylactery. Though I'm honestly not sure if Xykon will give it to Redcloak once he tracks it down or Tsukiko.

Hehe... that'd be a hilarious twist. Xykon gives his phylactery to Tsukiko, and she destroys it when she realizes he doesn't love her. Hilarious indeed.