Would Redcloak Regenerate His Eye?

[Bleak Ink]

Let’s say, for sake of discussion, that Xykon’s really dead and gone. The Order has won, hurrah, hurrah, etcetera, and etcetera, but Redcloak has survived. Would he keep his eye patched tax, or cast a Regenerate spell to repair it?

[RunicLGB]

Barring spoilers from Start of darkness:

The lost eye isn't just an idiot tax from Zykon, or at least it isn't anymore. It's a very potent reminder of the Redcloak's descisions in the past. If he fails, If the stick stop him from completing the rituals and he survives to go away as a failure, I don't think he could, both out of a combination of shame and because quite possibly most of his magic prowess are granted from that cloak. If he suceeds? Maybe, but honestly do we really expect the order to fail?

[faustin]

Barring spoilers from Start of darkness:

We though the same about Haley´s hair cut, and all she needed is a beauty magical treatment to change her mind.:smallbiggrin:

[Kish]

Yes, he would regenerate his eye immediately if Xykon wasn't around. He doesn't want to see his brother whenever he looks in a mirror.

[ThePhantasm]

This seems like a silly topic. Why wouldn't he want to regenerate his eye?

[aldeayeah]

Another twist:

Has Redcloak already regenerated his eye under that eyepatch?

[ThePhantasm]

Another twist:

Has Redcloak already regenerated his eye under that eyepatch?

What would be the point? Its not like he could see better. There's a fricken' eye patch in the way.

[factotum]

What would be the point? Its not like he could see better. There's a fricken' eye patch in the way.

Not to mention how much trouble he'd be in if Xykon took it into his head to check what was under the patch...doesn't seem worth the risk.

[The Pilgrim]

Another twist:

Has Redcloak already regenerated his eye under that eyepatch?

Redcloak is too lawful to jeopardize his Grand Plan with some childish challenge to Xykon's authority like that.

[MReav]

Barring spoilers from Start of darkness:

It's a very potent reminder of the Redcloak's descisions in the past.

I disagree. Because of Redcloak's perennial desire to dodge personal responsibility, he just couldn't have that kind of reminder.

Basically, what Kish said, but with more detail.

[NerfTW]

This seems like a silly topic. Why wouldn't he want to regenerate his eye?

Solidarity with (SOD spoilers)
Right Eye, who also refused to have his eye regenerated when Red Cloak learned the necessary spell. He might consider it payment at this point.

[druid91]

Not to mention how much trouble he'd be in if Xykon took it into his head to check what was under the patch...doesn't seem worth the risk.

Thing is, IIRC Redcloak and Xykon are about equal. The only advantage Xykon has is a couple of levels, maybe, and not being tied down to a large number of potential hostages.

[factotum]

Thing is, IIRC Redcloak and Xykon are about equal. The only advantage Xykon has is a couple of levels, maybe

A "couple of levels"? We're talking a cleric who is at MAXIMUM level 16 or thereabouts. Xykon is epic level--at least level 21, and likely quite a bit higher. If it ever came to a fight between the two of them, Redcloak would lose, and lose hard.

[Conuly]

Right Eye, who also refused to have his eye regenerated when Red Cloak learned the necessary spell. He might consider it payment at this point.


Yeah, but it's not like Right Eye refused to have it regenerated just because. Did you forget the circumstances under which he wanted it regrown, and Redcloak's reaction to that?

Redcloak is fundamentally immature. And, as stated, he's not likely to accept responsibility for ANYthing. The second he could regrow that eye, he would - he wouldn't see the point in learning a lesson from it being gone (much like he didn't see the point in learning things by getting older), and I really doubt he WANTS to keep seeing his brother in the mirror.

[Fitzclowningham]

Thing is, IIRC Redcloak and Xykon are about equal. The only advantage Xykon has is a couple of levels, maybe, and not being tied down to a large number of potential hostages.

What Factotum said, but moreso. It's likely Xykon has something like 12 more levels (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=131219). He'd be finished with Redcloak in 2 rounds, tops.

[Thanatosia]

A "couple of levels"? We're talking a cleric who is at MAXIMUM level 16 or thereabouts. Xykon is epic level--at least level 21, and likely quite a bit higher. If it ever came to a fight between the two of them, Redcloak would lose, and lose hard.
I agree, RC is way below Xykon's Level and would be utterly crushed in any direct confrontation between the 2.

I think Xykon is at LEAST level 26. He's shown access to 12th level spells (Maximized energy drain in his duel vs V), which requires taking the epic improved spellcasting capacity feat 3 times. He's also shown the ability to cast epic spells (Cloister and Superb Dispelling ), which is another epic feat. I believe the minimum level for a pure sorceror to have access to 4 epic feats is 26 (feats at character levels 21 and 24, and bonus caster feats at Sorceror levels 23 and 26). The fact that Superb Dispelling has a spellcraft DC of 59 to cast, which would be a nearly impossible roll even for a lv26 sorceror with maximum ranks in spellcraft and skillfocus(spellcraft) with a high int modifier, suggests that his actual level is probably significantly higher then even 26. Unless he's lv40+ he probably needs epic skill focus (spellcrafting) to reliably cast superb dispelling which is another epic feat, pushing his minimum character level higher. Unless the Giant simply didn't think through the requirements of casting Superb dispelling with a reasonable chance of sucess, Xykon is probably in the low to mid 30s level range.

RC on the otherhand seems by best estimations to be lv16 or 17.

[RMS Oceanic]

I always thought Redcloak will regenerate his eye when he admits Xykon's aid is no longer worth the cost.

[Toofey]

I don't understand why people view redcloak as fundamentally immature, that said I haven't Read Start of Darkness but given that SoD takes place before OOTS than shouldn't all the responsibility he's taken and his general air of responsibility in most of the OOTS comic be development for him?

[Gift Jeraff]

A "couple of levels"? We're talking a cleric who is at MAXIMUM level 16 or thereabouts. Xykon is epic level--at least level 21, and likely quite a bit higher. If it ever came to a fight between the two of them, Redcloak would lose, and lose hard.
Isn't Redcloak a MINIMUM of level 16? (EDIT: It's a minimum of 15, but nowhere is his maximum level ever suggested, though we can assume no higher than 20 because he is never referred to as epic, unlike Xykon.)

I personally like to think delirious Belkar was right on the mark and Redcloak is indeed 17th level.

[hoff]

I think that if Xykon is gone for good he will regenerate his eye and try to raise his brother...

[Doug Lampert]

I don't understand why people view redcloak as fundamentally immature, that said I haven't Read Start of Darkness but given that SoD takes place before OOTS than shouldn't all the responsibility he's taken and his general air of responsibility in most of the OOTS comic be development for him?
He's still hanging out with Xykon, he thus hasn't outgrown his major character flaw from the SoD. He still hasn't admitted that what he's doing is

(a) UNNECCESSARY
(b) COUNTERPRODUCTIVE
and
(c) EVIL

Far and away the most common causes of goblinoid death, suffering, and opression that we've seen are Xykon and Redcloak. They are the problem not the solution. And Redcloak is willing to risk the souls of every goblin to "save" the goblins from all those OTHER lesser threats (but he won't do squat about Xykon).

He's still so stuck in a sunk cost fallacy that he can't admit that he's made a horrible mistake.

[MReav]

I think that if Xykon is gone for good he will regenerate his eye and try to raise his brother...

I doubt he will on two accounts:

1: He knows Right Eye would probably stab him in his sleep for selling out the goblin people in general and him in particular.
2: Right Eye was pretty old. His natural lifespan may have been exceeded by this point.

[King of Nowhere]

Redcloak weak and immature?
YOU try bearing the kind of responsability he was forced to bear for 40 years, let's see how it works out. Many strong men could go crazy for less.

As for what he's doing is a mistake, that was debated thoroughly times ago without a real agreement.

And he can't also really get rid of Xykon. Xykon is on his same quest, and will eventually track him down - as already happened. Redcloak is like the captain of a ship in a big storm: he tecnically commands the ship, but the storm decides where he goes and he can't reallyu do much about it.

[MReav]

Redcloak weak and immature?
YOU try bearing the kind of responsability he was forced to bear for 40 years, let's see how it works out. Many strong men could go crazy for less.

He's been able to hand over the Crimson Mantle for quite some time. He just won't.


And he can't also really get rid of Xykon. Xykon is on his same quest, and will eventually track him down - as already happened. Redcloak is like the captain of a ship in a big storm: he tecnically commands the ship, but the storm decides where he goes and he can't reallyu do much about it.

Redcloak had the chance to smash Xykon's phylactery while Xykon was out of commission.

[Ancalagon]

Redcloak weak and immature?
YOU try bearing the kind of responsability he was forced to bear for 40 years, let's see how it works out. Many strong men could go crazy for less.

You did read SoD? Redcloak had the chance to change the course several times - and at EACH of those times he got told by Right-Eye he should do it. Right-Eye explicitly said Xykon did not turn out that hot twice. He got ignored by Recloak, who was never ready to admit he DID make a mistake.
Of course the entire "Xykon to Lich" thing totally backfired.
It even went so far that Xykon told Redloak what the issue was - and even then, even when he got it rubbed in his face by Xykon, he STILL did not do anything but went on ignoring the core problem.

Redcloak is immature and weak. The tricky thing is just: He is not in every aspect, in most he is pretty strong - but in the few most important ones he is. Despite the fact he got told he was wrong, despite the fact he SHOULD know better and despite the fact he actually DOES know better.
But to calm you down: I am very sure Redcloak will understand this before he meets his end - and he will gain that strength that you assume he now already has.

[Warren Dew]

I would like to think that if Redcloak survives and Xykon doesn't, it would be with some character growth and maturity. Specifically, he'd recognize that his brother was right after all. In that case, I could see him leaving his eye as is, because he wanted a reminder of his brother.

[Lord Bingo]

Redcloak is simply playing the game and he needs Xykon to fulfill the Dark Ones plan. He accepts an oppressive master because it is his single greatest chance of reaching the endgame.

Whether Redcloak could get up and leave or would have a chance in hell if it came to a fight between him and Xykon is inconsequential because he will not jeopardize the ultimate plan.

Xykon wants his eye, so what? It is a small thing to suffer for ultimate success, and the Dark One knows he has sacrificed much already.

-edit- incidentally I bet that if Redcloak succeeds in fulfilling the Dark Ones ultimate plan Xykon will not be coming out on top. When it is all said and done Xykon will not be stopping him from regenerating his eye. If he does regenerate it is anyones guess.

[The Pilgrim]

Solidarity with (SOD spoilers)
Right Eye, who also refused to have his eye regenerated when Red Cloak learned the necessary spell. He might consider it payment at this point.

Actually, remember that... (SOD spoilers)

Right Eye only refused to have his eye regenerated so that if his plan to kill Xykon with a Sneak Attack failed, he could have his eye restored and hide safely among the other Goblins, since the Lich can't tell each other apart. (The flaw of the plan was noted by Redcloak, as Xykon would have no problem with just killing all the goblins)

[druid91]

I agree, RC is way below Xykon's Level and would be utterly crushed in any direct confrontation between the 2.

I think Xykon is at LEAST level 26. He's shown access to 12th level spells (Maximized energy drain in his duel vs V), which requires taking the epic improved spellcasting capacity feat 3 times. He's also shown the ability to cast epic spells (Cloister and Superb Dispelling ), which is another epic feat. I believe the minimum level for a pure sorceror to have access to 4 epic feats is 26 (feats at character levels 21 and 24, and bonus caster feats at Sorceror levels 23 and 26). The fact that Superb Dispelling has a spellcraft DC of 59 to cast, which would be a nearly impossible roll even for a lv26 sorceror with maximum ranks in spellcraft and skillfocus(spellcraft) with a high int modifier, suggests that his actual level is probably significantly higher then even 26. Unless he's lv40+ he probably needs epic skill focus (spellcrafting) to reliably cast superb dispelling which is another epic feat, pushing his minimum character level higher. Unless the Giant simply didn't think through the requirements of casting Superb dispelling with a reasonable chance of sucess, Xykon is probably in the low to mid 30s level range.

RC on the otherhand seems by best estimations to be lv16 or 17.

What would you say is the approximate population of fighting goblinoids in Gobbotopia?

[Doug Lampert]

Redcloak is simply playing the game and he needs Xykon to fulfill the Dark Ones plan. He accepts an oppressive master because it is his single greatest chance of reaching the endgame.

Whether Redcloak could get up and leave or would have a chance in hell if it came to a fight between him and Xykon is inconsequential because he will not jeopardize the ultimate plan.

Xykon wants his eye, so what? It is a small thing to suffer for ultimate success, and the Dark One knows he has sacrificed much already.

-edit- incidentally I bet that if Redcloak succeeds in fulfilling the Dark Ones ultimate plan Xykon will not be coming out on top. When it is all said and done Xykon will not be stopping him from regenerating his eye. If he does regenerate it is anyones guess.

(A) "and the Dark One knows he has sacrificed much already" is a PERFECT summary of the sunk cost fallacy as applied to the plan! Congradulations on duplicating one of the STUPIDEST mistakes Redcloak makes.

Dead and gone is dead and gone. No one gets any deader if you go to a different and better plan, and the people who WILL die if you keep with the stupid plan will be better off. What's done is done, sane cost benefit is based purely on the current situation and the benefits from here on.

(B) It isn't the best way to fulfill the plan. Destroying the holy symbol and Xykon when he had the chance and finding a new ally would have been no worse (and would have gotten rid of an entire collection of PCs SPECIFICALLY questing to stop him, people in this world KNOW there are things called PCs and that they normally win, going up against them when you can EASILY avoid it is STUPID). And killing Xykon when doing so was trivial would have meant NOT HAVING AN ALLY that kills goblins by horrible torture for idle ammusement while bored and CLAIMING that you are doing so for the good of all goblin kind.

(C) The plan SUCKS! Seriously, Redcloak thinks it could likely result in the destruction of the SOUL of every goblin, and he claims to be doing it for their benefit! At least the stunning hipocracy goes well with being allied with Xykon and claiming it's to "help" goblins. That's like how he "helped" the goblins living good prosperous lives in his brother's peaceful village when he got them killed.

[MReav]

The fact that Superb Dispelling has a spellcraft DC of 59 to cast, which would be a nearly impossible roll even for a lv26 sorceror with maximum ranks in spellcraft and skillfocus(spellcraft) with a high int modifier, suggests that his actual level is probably significantly higher then even 26.

You can breach the distance between DC 59 with items. Remember, Belkar has a Ring of Jumping +20, Xykon could easily blow 90000 on a Ring (or almost anything) of Spellcraft +30.

[Ranzear]

What would you say is the approximate population of fighting goblinoids in Gobbotopia?

I wouldn't put it past Xykon to arrange something akin to a 'Locate City Nuke'. Even if the entire population came at him he wouldn't be in too much trouble -- blow away a fair fraction of them and the rest will think heavily about what they're walking into.

[Seerow]

You can breach the distance between DC 59 with items. Remember, Belkar has a Ring of Jumping +20, Xykon could easily blow 90000 on a Ring (or almost anything) of Spellcraft +30.

Yeah, spellcraft checks at epic levels really aren't a issue anymore. The fact that they tried to balance epic spellcasting around them is a large part of what makes epic spellcasting so broken.

That said, I didn't catch that he used a 12th level spellslot in that strip. A 26th level sorcerer is way above the power level of well.... anything else we've seen in this strip. I had always considered Xykon to be low epic. If Xykon's that high, I'm wondering how the OotS survived the first round against him in their initial confrontation.

[druid91]

I wouldn't put it past Xykon to arrange something akin to a 'Locate City Nuke'. Even if the entire population came at him he wouldn't be in too much trouble -- blow away a fair fraction of them and the rest will think heavily about what they're walking into.

You missed the point. Redcloaks leadership score is enough to net him that many followers. That's with the penalty for outright cruelty.

[Seerow]

You missed the point. Redcloaks leadership score is enough to net him that many followers. That's with the penalty for outright cruelty.

Leadership wasn't designed to give those kinds of numbers. The max number from leadership is around 175ish at a leadership score of 25. Also, Redcloak doesn't seem to have a 2 level lower cohort, so I doubt his taking over the hobgoblins has anything to do with the leadership feat.

[druid91]

Leadership wasn't designed to give those kinds of numbers. The max number from leadership is around 175ish at a leadership score of 25. Also, Redcloak doesn't seem to have a 2 level lower cohort, so I doubt his taking over the hobgoblins has anything to do with the leadership feat.

I assume his replacement as ruler of Azure city was his cohort. Either that or possibly tsukiko.

[Seerow]

Scratch what I said about not being able to get enough via leadership. IF Redcloak is epic, epic leadership allows for much more. With 3 feats (Leadership, Epic Leadership, and Legendary Commander), as a level 23 Cleric, and say a +6 cha modifier he would have had:

2600, 260, 130, 70, 40, 20, 10 = 3,130. Each extra cha mod or level bumps that up quite a bit more. He may also have some way to boost his leadership score (for example maybe the red cloak boosts it). So it is feasible, just unlikely given that there is nothing in the comic to really show he is a high enough level for that to be possible.


edit: I think the penalty for cruelty would have gone away after the founding of gobbotopia, replaced with generosity. He's also got renown as founder of a nation at this point, and has a base of operations. Not sure what would qualify as "special power" though. We could probably throw that bonus his way as well. Giving him +6, bumping him up from a 29 leadership score to a 35 leadership score. Gets him up to 5,900+590+300+150+80+40+20+10 = 7090 followers. Still less than a quarter of the army he had when taking over Azure City, let alone what is in Gobbotopia now.

[fibonacciseries]

What would you say is the approximate population of fighting goblinoids in Gobbotopia?

No matter how many, still not enough to beat Xykon. I remember seeing it discussed before, although I don't remember where, and the consensus was Overland Flight + Meteor Swarm meant that they couldn't hurt him, and he could decimate them.


Yeah, spellcraft checks at epic levels really aren't a issue anymore. The fact that they tried to balance epic spellcasting around them is a large part of what makes epic spellcasting so broken.

That said, I didn't catch that he used a 12th level spellslot in that strip. A 26th level sorcerer is way above the power level of well.... anything else we've seen in this strip. I had always considered Xykon to be low epic. If Xykon's that high, I'm wondering how the OotS survived the first round against him in their initial confrontation.

The fact that he wasn't trying? At all? and he just stood there, thinking that they couldn't do anything to hurt him, allowing himself to be thrown into the Gate? And the one time he thought there might be the slightest threat to himself, he destroyed it?

[Toofey]

Would his ability even necessarily be the source for this army, as he got them from a plot point?

[Lord Bingo]

(A) "and the Dark One knows he has sacrificed much already" is a PERFECT summary of the sunk cost fallacy as applied to the plan! Congradulations on duplicating one of the STUPIDEST mistakes Redcloak makes.

Incidentally, my interpretation of how Redcloak feels about/justifies his endeavor does not mean I agree with his dispositions nor that I sympathize with his plan. I am not "duplicating" anything!

As long as I am at it, I am not a disciple of the Dark One either and invoking his name does not mean I think he is real -in case there was any doubts.

Having gotten that out of my system, let us for a moment stay in Lambert's discourse of choice: sunk cost. Reducing Redcloak's adherence to the plan as a sunk cost fallacy is ultimately a misappropriation of the concept. Throwing good money after bad implies that nothing can be gained from the continued investment but further loss.
Redcloak, however, is in the dilemma of having to choose between continuing a plan of uncertain prospects already involving considerable loss of dignity and life (sunk costs), or simply giving it up. Given this choice between the certain loss of this investment (sunk costs) versus the possible if unlikely long-term gains for all goblin kind, Recloak simply favour uncertain success over certain loss. Whether or not the plan sucks -as it is so elegantly put, is inconsequential as long as Redcloak is committed to see it through.

To have any hope of achieving this uncertain success Recloak needs to secure the services of a powerful arcane caster and he needs access to a gate. True enough, he could have let Xykon die when he had the chance but how exactly would that have furthered the plan? Where does a goblin find an epic arcane caster these days? Xykon gives him the best odds for achieving success. Redcloak knows this and that is why he keeps sinking dignity and life into the plan.

[factotum]

Isn't Redcloak a MINIMUM of level 16? (EDIT: It's a minimum of 15, but nowhere is his maximum level ever suggested, though we can assume no higher than 20 because he is never referred to as epic, unlike Xykon.)


The assumption Redcloak isn't yet 17th level is based on the fact we've never seen him cast a 9th-level spell, even in situations where doing so would be advantageous. It seems extremely unlikely he's been holding those back, so I would put him no higher than 16th.

[druid91]

Would his ability even necessarily be the source for this army, as he got them from a plot point?

You have to get your leadership minions from plot point as well.

A thousand mooks and a cohort don't just show up on your doorstep.

[The Pilgrim]

Also, Redcloak doesn't seem to have a 2 level lower cohort (...)

Yes, he does.

He even has a name: Jirix

[hoff]

The assumption Redcloak isn't yet 17th level is based on the fact we've never seen him cast a 9th-level spell, even in situations where doing so would be advantageous. It seems extremely unlikely he's been holding those back, so I would put him no higher than 16th.

Maybe he got some levels in a prestige class that doesn't grant a caster level at each level. He IS the bearer of the Crimson Mantle (it wouldn't be the first prestige class invented by OotS, Dashing Swordsman anyone?) afterall, that could easily be a prestige class with some features to garther followers.

This could also explain why the great cleric of azure city was battlie redcloak toe-to-toe, although redcloak is higher level he lacks caster levels and so has about the same spellpower as the great cleric.

[Doug Lampert]

Having gotten that out of my system, let us for a moment stay in Lambert's discourse of choice: sunk cost. Reducing Redcloak's adherence to the plan as a sunk cost fallacy is ultimately a misappropriation of the concept. Throwing good money after bad implies that nothing can be gained from the continued investment but further loss.
No it doesn't, and I suggest you actually KNOW what a fallacy is prior to pontificating about it.

Sunk cost falacy on something that will work is perfectly possible. Sunk cost simply implies that you are considering past costs in addition to prosective future costs in making a decision.

See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_costs
or
http://sunk-cost.behaviouralfinance.net/

Which is EXACTLY what "but he's already given up so much" says.

That is a classic statement of the sunk cost fallacy, that you think what he's already given up MATTERS, at all, shows that you've fallen for it hook, line, and sinker

[King of Nowhere]

I take the "he's given up so much" as a way of saying that he's perfectly willing to sacrifice an eye for the plan. HE sacrificed much more than an eye, he will sacrifice an eye gladly. Redcloak will make ANY personal sacrifice for the plan. An eye is trivial in the face of that.
Up until before the battle for azure city, he would also make any sacrifice in terms of other people. After that, his attitude may have changed.

And while everyone can propose that Redcloak is doing wrong, I don't see what makes people think it's an established fact. A few people said "he copuld have smashed the phylactery and find some other ally".
Seriously, finding some other ally? After he couldn't find any crappy arcane caster for years? Where the hell he's he going to find an ally that is as powerful as an epic level licch sorcerer? As for the pcs on his tracks, it appears from this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html) that he already got attacked by heroes regularly. If he sticks with Xykon, there will be 6 more, won't be much of a difference. In fact, without Xykon probably that dozen druids in a potted fern would have killed him. OR some other random hero we don't know about would kill him.
Without Xykon, Redcloak would have never been able to conquer lirian's gate. He would have never even have discovered about the existance of the other gates. He would have never been able to get near Dorukan's gate, and the battle for Azure city could have been very different - I don't think he could have done anything in the throne room without Xykon. And I'm pretty sure no matter how many goblins Xykon kills, much more are killed by low level adventurers at any given moment.
Ok, rigth-eye said the plan was bad and redcloak should have abandoned it. Ok, what makes what rigth-eye said automatically true? There are strong evidence wisdom was his dump stat. Remember, he tried to stand up to Xykon in his face, and was forced to burn down his village as a result. He presumed that if he attacked Xykon, failed, and regenerated his eye, Xykon wouldn't retaliate at all.
Also, Redcloak received direct order from his god (through jirix, after he was resurrected) to pursue the plan. Redcloak should give more credit to his brother than to his god?
So, long story short, the plan is not so bad, compared to the alternatives.

[Conuly]

I haven't Read Start of Darkness but given that SoD takes place before OOTS than shouldn't all the responsibility he's taken and his general air of responsibility in most of the OOTS comic be development for him?

Start of Darkness ends, what, six months before the start of the online comic? His character probably hasn't developed that much in six months compared to the two or three decades in SoD. However

(minor spoiler)

it's important to remember that the Crimson Mantle (the red cloak) slows the aging process. Slows it significantly. During the course of SoD RC's little brother went from being a small child to having nearly grown children of his own and gray hair. RC is still, as his brother put it, the angry teenager he was when he first put on the Mantle.

(slightly more major spoiler that builds upon what was said in the last spoiler)

When his brother told him this, RC literally couldn't comprehend that there was some benefit to getting older, that there might be anything to learn by aging. This is because he's still a teenager, biologically and - no doubt - mentally. He's immature not just as a personality flaw, but because he hasn't had any chance to grow up.


Redcloak should give more credit to his brother than to his god?

When your deity is a petty, vengeance driven god? Maybe. Not that it's worth telling that to true believers, though.


So, long story short, the plan is not so bad, compared to the alternatives.

No, actually, the plan is insane.

I understand why the goblinoids are reluctant to put all their eggs in the basket of treaties again, after the last time... but then, now they have an army and a city. Maybe this time it could work!

But even if you assume that that IS the other option, and they've exhausted it, for the plan to work requires such a slim margin of coincidences that even a best-case scenario probably is going to fail.

I'm not sure what in here is really spoilery, so I just cut it all.

For example, it revolves around the idea that The Dark One can manipulate the gates to blackmail the other gods. Can he? We don't know! And let's say that base plan does work. Now that the secret's out, who is going to be the picked-on race? Aren't they going to try the same trick when they get a chance? And aren't the guys in the middle going to start angling for that same option as well? Best case scenario? Constant warfare as everybody tries to use the rifts (or open new ones) to manipulate their species' place in the new hierarchy.

The backup plan is that the Snarl destroys everything (and not all loyal goblinoids are really going to be happy at their fate! But I suppose their opinions don't matter once they're obliviated) and they rebuild with a goblin god from the start. IF they can rebuild. IF the other gods don't try to backstab him (and who's to say they can't?) IF he doesn't himself get snarled. And again - without restructuring the entire system, you're just going to have a new species on the bottom with a new grudge. And will the world be as strong at keeping the Snarl contained? Or would this second dissolution make it weaker? I predict more wars over the rifts.

And ANY resolution revolves around the idea that the other "sympathetic" gods didn't lie to the Dark One (iffy - and really, what exactly was their motive in sharing this information?) and that they know what they're talking about. Given the world within the rift reveal, that seems more doubtful than ever.

All that, under the spoiler, depends upon the plan coming anywhere near fruition. Xykon isn't so stupid that he doesn't know RC's planning to blackmail him, and RC really ought to have figured that Xykon would be working with Tsukio (or anybody) to expand his options. If Xykon succeeds in backstabbing RC before RC can backstab HIM, I'd say the goblins are well and truly screwed.

Of course, we don't know what the other options are besides "continue the plan". We don't know because, as near as we know, nobody's seriously attempted any of them. Well, Right-Eye did. It worked pretty well for him until the scary lich showed up again.

[Lord Bingo]

No it doesn't, and I suggest you actually KNOW what a fallacy is prior to pontificating about it.

I do so wish that you had addressed my argument why I think it is a misappropriation of the concept to describe Redcloak's adherence to the plan as a sunk cost fallacy rather than merely questioning whether or not I know what the word "fallacy" means.

I do not think that Redcloak's adherence to the plan is based on erroneous reasoning or an aversion to loss that render his decision to stick it out whatever the cost unsound. As I therefore do not find his behavior to be irrational I do not believe it can be described as a (sunk cost) fallacy.
What we have here is a series of sound rational decisions that could result in a major good for all goblins but may likely lead to disaster.

[olthar]

I do so wish that you had addressed my argument why I think it is a misappropriation of the concept to describe Redcloak's adherence to the plan as a sunk cost fallacy rather than merely questioning whether or not I know what the word "fallacy" means.

I do not think that Redcloak's adherence to the plan is based on erroneous reasoning or an aversion to loss that render his decision to stick it out whatever the cost unsound. As I therefore do not find his behavior to be irrational I do not believe it can be described as a (sunk cost) fallacy.
What we have here is a series of sound rational decisions that could result in a major good for all goblins but may likely lead to disaster.

No, he was correct in addressing your mistake. Your reasoning was based on a faulty understanding of the sunk cost fallacy. Interestingly, the fallacy makes no statements about whether the course of action decided upon by the person making the decision is the correct or incorrect one. It just states that people erroneously take into account past costs when making future decisions.

In this case, people are saying that Redcloak should not consider the 10+ years working with Xykon in his decision to continue to work with Xykon. This is correct. However, the fallacy has no bearing on whether or not continuing to work with Xykon is the correct decision.

Taking out the irrationality of "human" decision making, if Redcloak weighed all of his options twice, once while completely ignoring his previous service with Xykon and once while factoring that service in, and came to the decision that continuing to work with Xykon was the correct decision, then continuing to work with Xykon is the correct decision. Falling for the sunk cost fallacy would occur only if he decided he should chuck xykon when ignoring the previous service, but decided to stick with xykon when factoring that in.

That being said, I actually do believe Redcloak is factoring in his previous service to Xykon in his decision making process. Given that Redcloak is both very powerful and immortal, he could probably find another evil wizard level the guy up to powerful enough to take out a gate. He could probably have done that without killing the thousands of goblins that Xykon has killed while with Redcloak.

[Lord Bingo]

I am not entirely convinced. To me this means that the whole discussion has been about my comment, that the Dark One knows he has already sacrificed a lot -about which he was then certainly right, and not about Redcloak's actual reasoning.

Be that as it may (and I am no business major) my understanding is still that it is wrong to describe Redcloak's adherence to the plans as a sunk cost fallacy and that you can in fact make rational decisions factoring in what you have already spent/lost and may yet loose to reach your final goal.

I think of Redcloak like a chess player. He has sacrificed a lot of pieces on the premise of a single plan and now he has to stick with it because, risky as may be, changing his play now will only lessen his chances of winning. He is too far into the game to pick another strategy and he may yet win if he plays well.

Now, I see from the wiki article that Lampert directed me to that there is a concept called the sunk cost dilemma. Would this concept not be more apt as a description of Redcloak's behavior?
My reasoning here is that the fallacy is ultimately such because it is irrational decision making and there is nothing irrational about Redcloak's decisions IMO.

[Bleak Ink]

I think of Redcloak like a chess player. He has sacrificed a lot of pieces on the premise of a single plan and now he has to stick with it because, risky as may be, changing his play now will only lessen his chances of winning. He is too far into the game to pick another strategy and he may yet win if he plays well.


Well spoken, sir. I do love a good chess analogy, and this one fits nicely.


Now, I see from the wiki article that Lampert directed me to that there is a concept called the sunk cost dilemma. Would this concept not be more apt as a description of Redcloak's behavior?
My reasoning here is that the fallacy is ultimately such because it is irrational decision making and there is nothing irrational about Redcloak's decisions IMO.

I'll second this as well; as readers, we get the broad spectrum. As a character, Redcloak's decisions and reactions are limited to what he has been exposed to and accepted.

*nudges original topic with foot* :smallwink:

[JonestheSpy]

*nudges original topic with foot* :smallwink:

Eh, I think the decisive "No" was agreed on pretty quickly.

Regarding the topic of Redcloak's continued association with Xykon, I don't think anyone has mentioned a very very important factor: Xykon himself is committed to pursuing the Gates. That means if Redcloak isn't working with him, he's competing against him - a very very dangerous situation to be in.

[RunicLGB]

Eh, I think the decisive "No" was agreed on pretty quickly.

Regarding the topic of Redcloak's continued association with Xykon, I don't think anyone has mentioned a very very important factor: Xykon himself is committed to pursuing the Gates. That means if Redcloak isn't working with him, he's competing against him - a very very dangerous situation to be in.

It was far from decisive last I checked, but that was my take as well.

And yes, SOD basically puts forth that as his sole reason for remaining with Xykon. So agreed.

[ThePhantasm]

It was far from decisive last I checked, but that was my take as well.

And yes, SOD basically puts forth that as his sole reason for remaining with Xykon. So agreed.

The "no" that was agreed on quickly was in reference to Redcloak regenerating his eye.

[Kish]

Wait, it was decisively agreed that the answer to "would Redcloak regenerate his eye if Xykon wasn't around?" was "no"?

See, if you'd said yes was agreed on quickly, I'd understand.

[ThePhantasm]

Wait, it was decisively agreed that the answer to "would Redcloak regenerate his eye if Xykon wasn't around?" was "no"?

See, if you'd said yes was agreed on quickly, I'd understand.

Sorry, its early morning here. I meant "no" to whether he would regenerate it now with Xykon around, "yes" to whether he would regenerate it if Xykon was gone.

I think I may have also misinterpreted JonestheSpy's response then, due to lack of caffeine. Really shouldn't check the boards in the early morning.

[Bleak Ink]

Sorry, its early morning here. I meant "no" to whether he would regenerate it now with Xykon around, "yes" to whether he would regenerate it if Xykon was gone.

I think I may have also misinterpreted JonestheSpy's response then, due to lack of caffeine. Really shouldn't check the boards in the early morning.

Eh, no harm no foul. The workings of a mind in the wee hours of the morning is beyond any of our mortal comprehension.