Softer side to Xykon?

[Kobold-Bard]

Saw a discussion about OotS on another site & this was brought up.

In 462 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0462.html) Xykon refers to himself & Redcloak as "We", according to them implying a degree of sentiment towards his self-named "Team Evil", rather than them just being the minions who happen to be following him around & doing his bidding. Their point being that Xykon might therefore be less indifferent to Tsukiko's demise than one might expect (even only slightly).

I personally didn't agree since I'm firmly in the "xykon is just plain evil" camp (and thought the line was a reference to something actually), but i was curious as to what the Playgrounders thought. They had some other examples but they were thinner than this one & I forgot them.

K-B

[Ancalagon]

Xykon is utterly evil and egomaniac. He has no soft side.

He can seem, to quote the comic, appear "funny and charming" from time to time. But deep inside of him there is no soft side, no niceness, no nothing.

If he cares about Tsukiko's death then only because he needed her for something or he dislikes Redcloak showing some spine for a change.

[Bulldog Psion]

I'll wait for his reaction before commenting in more depth. I hope he isn't showing a softer side. Xykon just wouldn't be Xykon if he showed any kind of sentiment at all.

[Emulgator]

Well, he thought that was the end of his un - living. And it didn't stop him from threating Redcloak like crap later, so... I'd say we won't see his soft side much.

[Ellye]

He did show a tiny little small tiny bit bound with Redcloak there. Did I mention it was a small one?

Take in consideration that it took him a situation where they demise was pretty much certain for this to come out. And it disappeared as soon as they were free from that situation.

Even most "evil" characters would probably display a lot more of sentiment in emotion in that situation. Xykon displayed just enough to remind me that, one day, he was a living human. An evil, tormented, living human.

[Heksefatter]

Xykon is completely and wholly unapologetically evil, but more to the point, he's kind of ****.

Since the above description hails from the Giant (apart from the *s) and obviously fit the character, there should be little room for other interpretations of good old colonel Xykon.

[Bastian Weaver]

He's cold and hard and cruel and evil on both sides.

[KillianHawkeye]

I'm sorry, but using the word "we" does not imply any kind of softness or human empathy. It is the plural form of the word "I." That is all.

[ti'esar]

As far as I know, Xykon has showed something approximating humanity on exactly one occasion in his life:

in SoD when he cried over his dead dog (before re-animating it) as a child.

I've always found 462 interesting as a look at how Xykon might take permanent death, but it's not really showing a "softer" side.

[CharityB]

I think the argument is that Xykon manages to acknowledge that Redcloak is separate being (with his own goals that were also being frustrated by Soon). That's hardly a sign of softness -- all it does is prove that Xykon's Charisma score is above 1 (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Charisma)!


Any creature capable of telling the difference between itself and things that are not itself has at least 1 point of Charisma.

[The Second]

Xykon's softer side rotted away a long time ago. I think he's proven himself to be cold, remorseless, and just plain cruel on enough occasions to warrant him bieng a 'heartless undead egomaniac'.

[B. Dandelion]

I wouldn't have taken that "we" as sentiment for their partnership, exactly. It's not like they're all "it's been an honor to work with you". Redcloak has always stood to benefit from the plan, making it "their" plan; he and Xykon can commiserate in their last moments precisely because they're both feeling that keen sense of loss from having come so close to achieving their desire only to fail at the last moment. They take comfort in the thought that they might have won.

Xykon might not be indifferent to Tsukiko's demise, but he might not be indifferent to losing the Teevo, either. He might regret losing a fairly powerful spellcaster who was more loyal than Redcloak, and more willing to indulge Xykon's sense of humor. That is not to say he will feel sorry for her.

[SadisticFishing]

Woah.

Wait, what? Isn't one of the main points of the comic that evil people can have friends?

One being pure evil doesn't in any way stop them from having a "soft" side. If he cares about Redcloak and/or Tsukiko, it's clearly not the most important thing in his life - but he can still care. Minorly. I think he did, at that point - he felt a kinship, they were allies, but more, they were friends.

He'd still probably kill them for fun. But they're his friends.

[ti'esar]

Woah.

Wait, what? Isn't one of the main points of the comic that evil people can have friends?

One being pure evil doesn't in any way stop them from having a "soft" side. If he cares about Redcloak and/or Tsukiko, it's clearly not the most important thing in his life - but he can still care. Minorly. I think he did, at that point - he felt a kinship, they were allies, but more, they were friends.

He'd still probably kill them for fun. But they're his friends.

The issue at hand is not whether evil people can have friends - I suggest that Tarquin and Malack, among others, suggest that they can. The question is whether Xykon - a literal sociopath who, with one possible exception, has never demonstrated anything approaching empathy for any living or un-living being - can have friends.

EDIT: Also, this.


You and I have massively different definitions of friendship.

[Occasional Sage]

Saw a discussion about OotS on another site & this was brought up.

In 462 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0462.html) Xykon refers to himself & Redcloak as "We", according to them implying a degree of sentiment towards his self-named "Team Evil", rather than them just being the minions who happen to be following him around & doing his bidding. Their point being that Xykon might therefore be less indifferent to Tsukiko's demise than one might expect (even only slightly).

I personally didn't agree since I'm firmly in the "xykon is just plain evil" camp (and thought the line was a reference to something actually), but i was curious as to what the Playgrounders thought. They had some other examples but they were thinner than this one & I forgot them.

K-B

Where is this forum full of people who so badly misunderstand Xykon's fundamental nature? I'm disturbingly fascinated.


Woah.

Wait, what? Isn't one of the main points of the comic that evil people can have friends?

One being pure evil doesn't in any way stop them from having a "soft" side. If he cares about Redcloak and/or Tsukiko, it's clearly not the most important thing in his life - but he can still care. Minorly. I think he did, at that point - he felt a kinship, they were allies, but more, they were friends.

He'd still probably kill them for fun. But they're his friends.

Woah.

You and I have massively different definitions of friendship.

[Gift Jeraff]

He might consider the demon-roaches his only friends. :smalltongue:

But in all seriousness, the only time I felt Xykon displayed something somewhat close to resembling a friendship was when he took "responsibility" for Jirix blowing off work (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0543.html), though that was probably more to shut the party pooper up/put Redcloak in his place. (As in, "What I say overrides what you say.")

[Manga Maniac]

Yes, Xykon may have not done a single nice thing in his entire life, but he acknowledged that other people worked for him and correctly used a pronoun.

Food for thought, people. Food for thought.

[SaintRidley]

Woah.

Wait, what? Isn't one of the main points of the comic that evil people can have friends?

One being pure evil doesn't in any way stop them from having a "soft" side. If he cares about Redcloak and/or Tsukiko, it's clearly not the most important thing in his life - but he can still care. Minorly. I think he did, at that point - he felt a kinship, they were allies, but more, they were friends.

He'd still probably kill them for fun. But they're his friends.

Sure, one of the points of the comic is that people are nuanced and that evil doesn't mean puppy murder all the time. However, I would like to point this out:


My challenge here was to tell the story of Xykon's life without making Xykon even slightly sympathetic. I mean, he's wholly and unapologetically Evil, but more to the point, he's kind of a ****. [...] There are people in this world who are driven to evil because of what their life has forced them to endure; Xykon is not one of those.
Redcloak might be, though.

[Alagaesian]

When I saw the title of this thread, I laughed so hard I almost fell out of my chair. My roommate was very concerned.

But no, he doesn't have a soft side. He's made of bones, none of which are soft. His heart, both physically and metaphorically, is nonexistent. Hello, this guy's only joy in life is watching other people suffer in amusing ways. That "we" might possibly signify a sense of partnership if you turn your head sideways and squint at it, but it does not show any signs of empathy. He isn't concerned about anything besides himself.

[ti'esar]

Yes, Xykon may have not done a single nice thing in his entire life, but he acknowledged that other people worked for him and correctly used a pronoun.

Food for thought, people. Food for thought.

I probably laughed too hard at this.

[t209]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0832.html
If you think the soft side is this strip from tv trope, I think it has something to do with importance of the rift.

[Hironomus]

Sure he has a soft side! He is the type of evil character who understands what is socially acceptable and can even conform to these standards if he chooses. He understands the concept of friendship and probably considers team evil his friends in that chilling way that evil people sometimes do. You know, even though he would happily watch them die and constantly abuses them.

He is not totally without empathy he just considers his own agenda more important than anything else, and even takes pleasure from causing misery.

What I am trying to say I guess, is that the presence of a softer side only serves to make him more evil. It is one thing to be a supremely evil monster and another to be a person who ostensibly behaves in an acceptable manner when in actual fact doeasn't care about such things at all.

[R. Shackleford]

He had a softer side, until his skeleton clawed its way clear of it.

But I mean, he's pretty nice to himself. Sorta. Aside from that whole perverting his mortal body in exchange for awesome lich powers thing, but his body got over it. Sorta. Well, maybe not, but his second body is probably a lot cooler with it.

[Lurk-Sothoth]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned comic 147, which was the first thing that popped into my mind when I saw this thread. q.v. Redcloak's words to Xykon: "I can't help but notice that your sense of team spirit is inversely proportionate to your number of functioning appendages, sir." (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0147.html)

In other words, Xykon can sweet-talk his minions when necessary, but there's no real affection and sense of camaraderie behind his "we" and "us" talk. I agree that this comic often demonstrates that evil characters are capable of having loved ones and friends, but Xykon is not that kind of evil character.

[SaintRidley]

Sure he has a soft side! He is the type of evil character who understands what is socially acceptable and can even conform to these standards if he chooses. He understands the concept of friendship and probably considers team evil his friends in that chilling way that evil people sometimes do. You know, even though he would happily watch them die and constantly abuses them.

He is not totally without empathy he just considers his own agenda more important than anything else, and even takes pleasure from causing misery.

What I am trying to say I guess, is that the presence of a softer side only serves to make him more evil. It is one thing to be a supremely evil monster and another to be a person who ostensibly behaves in an acceptable manner when in actual fact doeasn't care about such things at all.

You seem to be confusing Xykon and Tarquin.

[crayzz]

I think Xykon is capable of being amiable with his team mates. But this has nothing to do with friendship. Friendship, at least to me, involves some measure of emotional investment in the person.

Xykon will pull Jirix from his duties to watch a paladin get eaten by an acid shark, and then cover for him when Redcloak gets mad about it, but that's only cause he liked humiliating O-Chul and likes putting Redcloak in his place. It doesn't mean he's friends with Jirix. If he feels bad when (if) Jirix dies, it'll be because he lost a source of amusement, not because he lost a friend. He'll help his team when it helps him, and he'll hurt them gleefully once they are no longer useful. In this way, I think his amiability is selfish; it's rooted toward him and only him. Other people are just a means to an end. This pretty much rules out any possibility of friendship. Unless, of course, you're prepared to warp the definition of friendship into something almost unrecognizable.

As for Xykon using "we" to refer to Redcloak and himself on the brink of their death:

A) "We" would be the right term regardless, as it was their plan, not his alone.

B) I think it denoted some measure of empathy towards Redcloak, but only because Redcloak was his colleague (one Xykon shows a fair bit of contempt for, I might add) and therefor had the same goal as Xykon. He was lamenting his loss to someone in the same position as him. Again, this has nothing to do with friendship.

[The Second]

Woah.

Wait, what? Isn't one of the main points of the comic that evil people can have friends?

One being pure evil doesn't in any way stop them from having a "soft" side. If he cares about Redcloak and/or Tsukiko, it's clearly not the most important thing in his life - but he can still care. Minorly. I think he did, at that point - he felt a kinship, they were allies, but more, they were friends.

He'd still probably kill them for fun. But they're his friends.

Sure, we see this with Tarquin and Malak. Tarquin even loves Elan despite the fact Elan will likely depose and/or kill Tarquin.

There's a twisted sort of love between Nale and Sabine. Redcloak loved his brother and his family, and is also devoted to the Hobgoblins who are occupying Azure City.

Xykon, however, is the type of person you would call a narcissist. His first thought is 'What's in it for me', and his second is 'If it's useless to me I'll just destroy it'. He thinks nothing of others unless they amuse him or are important to his goal of world domination; in which case, once the entertainment value and or usefulness has depreciated, they return to being useless and objects to be killed/tortured to provide further amusement.

To further prove the point that sees Redcloak as nothing more than a means to an end, look at Xykon's treatment of Redcloak after the Varsuvius indecent. Had Xykon considered Redcloak a friend, he would not have commanded Redcloak not to regenerate his eye. He would likely have also been more open to the idea of founding a nation of goblins; if only for a steady supply of cannon fodder.

As I see it, the only reason Redcloak has survived this long in Xykon's company is because Xykon needs him. Without Redcloak there is no ritual (ignoring facts that Xykon is unaware of of course), and without the ritual there will be no controlling the Snarl (again, ignoring certain key facts that Xykon has yet to learn). As soon as Redcloak completes his part of the bargain he will go from being useful and unamusing to being useless and a potential source of amusement via torture/death.

[The Second]

Woah.

Wait, what? Isn't one of the main points of the comic that evil people can have friends?

One being pure evil doesn't in any way stop them from having a "soft" side. If he cares about Redcloak and/or Tsukiko, it's clearly not the most important thing in his life - but he can still care. Minorly. I think he did, at that point - he felt a kinship, they were allies, but more, they were friends.

He'd still probably kill them for fun. But they're his friends.

Sure, we see this with Tarquin and Malak. Tarquin even loves Elan despite the fact Elan will likely depose and/or kill Tarquin.

There's a twisted sort of love between Nale and Sabine. Redcloak loved his brother and his family, and is also devoted to the Hobgoblins who are occupying Azure City.

Xykon, however, is the type of person you would call a narcissist. His first thought is 'What's in it for me', and his second is 'If it's useless to me I'll just destroy it'. He thinks nothing of others unless they amuse him or are important to his goal of world domination; in which case, once the entertainment value and or usefulness has depreciated, they return to being useless and objects to be killed/tortured to provide further amusement.

To further prove the point that sees Redcloak as nothing more than a means to an end, look at Xykon's treatment of Redcloak after the Varsuvius indecent. Had Xykon considered Redcloak a friend, he would not have commanded Redcloak not to regenerate his eye. He would likely have also been more open to the idea of founding a nation of goblins; if only for a steady supply of cannon fodder.

As I see it, the only reason Redcloak has survived this long in Xykon's company is because Xykon needs him. Without Redcloak there is no ritual (ignoring facts that Xykon is unaware of of course), and without the ritual there will be no controlling the Snarl (again, ignoring certain key facts that Xykon has yet to learn). As soon as Redcloak completes his part of the bargain he will go from being useful and unamusing to being useless and a potential source of amusement via torture/death.

[SadisticFishing]

I still disagree. Him considering Redcloak a friend (which I would agree he no longer does since Recloak lost his soul) is a very different thing from Xykon being a GOOD friend.

He has a softer side and "caring", and such - but they're barely softer than our hardest sides, as normal human beings. Having a friend in no way makes him sympathetic, either.

I'm not saying "Xykon is a great guy with a deep down sympathetic side." I'm saying "Xykon considered Redcloak a friend." Which I think is fairly visible throughout the comic.

A friend who is also (and more importantly) a tool, but also someone he enjoys talking to. Look at how they laugh together about dead hobgoblins. There was definitely something there. Just not something big. Xykon is not capable of GOOD friends. Just friends.

So my TL;DR here is:

Xykon's soft side is apparent, and clearly not very soft at all.

Think... that character in The Walking Dead for his daughter (if you have read the series, you know who I'm talking about, otherwise, don't look into the character [though the series is amazing]). That's clearly "compassion", just... Not very high quality compassion.

[Ancalagon]

II'm not saying "Xykon is a great guy with a deep down sympathetic side." I'm saying "Xykon considered Redcloak a friend." Which I think is fairly visible throughout the comic.

Did you read Start of Darkness?

[SadisticFishing]

Yeah. Ever heard of Stockholm's Syndrome? There are a lot of similar things, and some go in the other direction.

I'd say the word "pet" is closer to Xykon's belief than "friend", but "pet", somehow, seems much softer. They had a large number of years to develop a sort of... camaraderie, one that we've seen over and over again.

They are a team, they are coworkers, acquaintances, and they play the part of friends far too well.

[M.A.D]

Xykon doesn't have a soft side. Even when he was human, he was already Evil, with a capital E. He had had a chance to do something good, and he discarded it without even a second thought. Probably not even with a first one. He simply killed without thinking at all.

[The Second]

Woah.

Wait, what? Isn't one of the main points of the comic that evil people can have friends?

One being pure evil doesn't in any way stop them from having a "soft" side. If he cares about Redcloak and/or Tsukiko, it's clearly not the most important thing in his life - but he can still care. Minorly. I think he did, at that point - he felt a kinship, they were allies, but more, they were friends.

He'd still probably kill them for fun. But they're his friends.

Sure, we see this with Tarquin and Malak. Tarquin even loves Elan despite the fact Elan will likely depose and/or kill Tarquin.

There's a twisted sort of love between Nale and Sabine. Redcloak loved his brother and his family, and is also devoted to the Hobgoblins who are occupying Azure City.

Xykon, however, is the type of person you would call a narcissist. His first thought is 'What's in it for me', and his second is 'If it's useless to me I'll just destroy it'. He thinks nothing of others unless they amuse him or are important to his goal of world domination; in which case, once the entertainment value and or usefulness has depreciated, they return to being useless and objects to be killed/tortured to provide further amusement.

To further prove the point that sees Redcloak as nothing more than a means to an end, look at Xykon's treatment of Redcloak after the Varsuvius indecent. Had Xykon considered Redcloak a friend, he would not have commanded Redcloak not to regenerate his eye. He would likely have also been more open to the idea of founding a nation of goblins; if only for a steady supply of cannon fodder.

As I see it, the only reason Redcloak has survived this long in Xykon's company is because Xykon needs him. Without Redcloak there is no ritual (ignoring facts that Xykon is unaware of of course), and without the ritual there will be no controlling the Snarl (again, ignoring certain key facts that Xykon has yet to learn). As soon as Redcloak completes his part of the bargain he will go from being useful and unamusing to being useless and a potential source of amusement via torture/death.

[Occasional Sage]

I still disagree. Him considering Redcloak a friend (which I would agree he no longer does since Recloak lost his soul) is a very different thing from Xykon being a GOOD friend.

He has a softer side and "caring", and such - but they're barely softer than our hardest sides, as normal human beings. Having a friend in no way makes him sympathetic, either.

I'm not saying "Xykon is a great guy with a deep down sympathetic side." I'm saying "Xykon considered Redcloak a friend." Which I think is fairly visible throughout the comic.

A friend who is also (and more importantly) a tool, but also someone he enjoys talking to. Look at how they laugh together about dead hobgoblins. There was definitely something there. Just not something big. Xykon is not capable of GOOD friends. Just friends.

So my TL;DR here is:

Xykon's soft side is apparent, and clearly not very soft at all.

Think... that character in The Walking Dead for his daughter (if you have read the series, you know who I'm talking about, otherwise, don't look into the character [though the series is amazing]). That's clearly "compassion", just... Not very high quality compassion.

A quick google of "friend" returns definitions that include "trust," "affection," "bond," and "regard". I see none of those from Xykon.

I can laugh together at a situation with a total stranger I never have seen and never will see again. That doesn't make them my friend; it means we have something in common. Nothing more.

[SadisticFishing]

Then I see clear "bond", "affection", and "regard".

[Voidfaith]

He did show a tiny little small tiny bit bound with Redcloak there. Did I mention it was a small one?

Take in consideration that it took him a situation where they demise was pretty much certain for this to come out. And it disappeared as soon as they were free from that situation.

Even most "evil" characters would probably display a lot more of sentiment in emotion in that situation. Xykon displayed just enough to remind me that, one day, he was a living human. An evil, tormented, living human.

Good to see, that I am not the only one weirded out by that part. It was kind out of his character.

I agree with living and evil. The tormented part, only when you think about it. Since Xycon is a sociopath, uncapable of deep feelings, he has basically two modes. Bored and amused. So his life and unlife is a constant chase for amusement to avoid the grey dullness of being bored, he doesn't feel at peace in quiet moments. It is kind of sad really.

Hell for him would be a boring place.

Back to comic #462 although I feel weirded out, I find myself strangely sad for Xykon and RC. Yeah, Xykon is evil and a complete monster. Thog and Tarquin are not far away from there. Still, these guys have given us good laughs and this being a comic about heroes we expect them to get their comeuppance. The heart is stupid like that.

And, hey, it is a comic. You can imagine, pair and fanfic whoemever you like doing wahtever you want. Just don't act like that in real life, Tsukiko taught us that in the worse way possible.

[the_tick_rules]

Xykon barely caring about a girl who was in love with him being eaten alive doesn't help this belief.

[B. Dandelion]

Not to downplay the horror of it, but she wasn't eaten alive, they ate her after she died.

[hoff]

Being evil doesn't mean you can't bound or like anyone else. In my opinion Xykon does like Redcloak's company.

[Psyren]

Yeah. Ever heard of Stockholm's Syndrome? There are a lot of similar things, and some go in the other direction.

You mean Lima Syndrome? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lima_Syndrome#Lima_syndrome) Xykon's got none of that. Once you're on the team, you don't get out - simple as that.


They are a team, they are coworkers, acquaintances, and they play the part of friends far too well.

"Coworkers" is probably the closest word in that sentence to describing their relationship.


Being evil doesn't mean you can't bound or like anyone else. In my opinion Xykon does like Redcloak's company.

That has a lot more to do with "entertainment" than "affection." Xykon's primary motivator is boredom, and Redcloak is an endless source of the former to him.

[SadisticFishing]

I said similar things, not identical things. Xykon's not really his captor, so Stockholm Syndrome doesn't quite work anyway. Psychology is not so cut and dry that you can say "it isn't Lima Syndrome, ergo you are wrong".

I would posit that Redcloak is the closest thing that Xykon has to a friend.

They... Get along. Well.

[Bleak Ink]

I would posit that Redcloak is the closest thing that Xykon has to a friend.

They... Get along. Well.

Agreed. It's an odd sort of.. relationship, and I do believe that were they in a world without the Snarl and phylacteries and the tangible aspiration of threatening gods, they'd be that pair of opposites-but-always-together friends everybody knows. As it is, the stressors and dangers of their world, coupled with giving a sociopath an astounding amount of volatile power, places a shadow over that natural chemistry.

[B. Dandelion]

...my jaw honestly dropped at that. It probably shouldn't have, fandom being what it is anywhere you go, but it did.

Xykon has utter contempt for Redcloak, who in turn considers him a complete monster he doesn't believe is even a person as opposed to "a magically animated... thing." Even if you don't think Xykon's attitude has been entirely negative, there's no doubt at all how Redcloak feels about him. He has every reason to hate him. He was visibly horrified at the idea of becoming like him. He calls him a thing and a puppet and warns others once they know how far he'll go they'll never sleep well again.

If not for the fact that they both think they will benefit from the Plan, they would never be working together, and as it turns out the whole premise behind that alliance was bogus to begin with! Not to mention Xykon would be only too happy to replace Redcloak if he could.

The only way you could ever call them friends is to dilute the term so ridiculously you could, with the exact same inflection, say Xykon is friends with Yahtzee and the Teevo.

[Ancalagon]

The two are also a bit like an old, married couple. Both have hated each other for over 30 years now but they made a descision "back then" and are now stuck together until the bitter end, no matter what comes.

[Psyren]

I said similar things, not identical things. Xykon's not really his captor, so Stockholm Syndrome doesn't quite work anyway. Psychology is not so cut and dry that you can say "it isn't Lima Syndrome, ergo you are wrong".

No, I can say "Xykon is a bastard who won't let Redcloak grow his eye back even after he rectified his mistake, ergo you are wrong." (about their "friendship.")

Gallows humor may still be humor, but it isn't friendship by a long shot.


The two are also a bit like an old, married couple. Both have hated each other for over 30 years now but they made a descision "back then" and are now stuck together until the bitter end, no matter what comes.

Thing is, what decision did Xykon make? Redcloak's in it by divine mandate, but the only reason Xykon signed up for the crazy plan in the first place is that he wanted to leave an enduring legacy behind him when he died. Now that he doesn't have to worry about that, all that's motivating him is boredom. If he ever decides that ruling the world is more trouble than it's worth, he's free to cut his losses (and Redcloak) and settle for carving out a kingdom for himself, or even just living on the Astral. He has no devotion of any kind to Redcloak's ideas or wishes, nor consideration of his feelings.

[B. Dandelion]

Thing is, what decision did Xykon make? Redcloak's in it by divine mandate, but the only reason Xykon signed up for the crazy plan in the first place is that he wanted to leave an enduring legacy behind him when he died. Now that he doesn't have to worry about that, all that's motivating him is boredom. If he ever decides that ruling the world is more trouble than it's worth, he's free to cut his losses (and Redcloak) and settle for carving out a kingdom for himself, or even just living on the Astral. He has no devotion of any kind to Redcloak's ideas or wishes, nor consideration of his feelings.

I sort of had the impression he, like Redcloak, has something of a sunk cost fallacy. That was the reason

He didn't kill Redcloak and Right-Eye in the diner after he found out he couldn't taste coffee as a lich. He became a lich in order to see The Plan to fruition (or rather to get his spellcasting power back but he lost it in the first place because of The Plan so the point still holds), if he killed Redcloak he would no longer have the option and would have gone through the change for nothing.

Meaning what Xykon did to Redcloak at the end of the book was more or less what Redcloak did to him, only a lot more vicious and planned in advance rather than accidental. Xykon can't dump the plan, and Redcloak can't dump Xykon, without rendering their individual sacrifices pointless.

[Bleak Ink]

...my jaw honestly dropped at that. It probably shouldn't have, fandom being what it is anywhere you go, but it did.

Xykon has utter contempt for Redcloak, who in turn considers him a complete monster he doesn't believe is even a person as opposed to "a magically animated... thing." Even if you don't think Xykon's attitude has been entirely negative, there's no doubt at all how Redcloak feels about him. He has every reason to hate him. He was visibly horrified at the idea of becoming like him. He calls him a thing and a puppet and warns others once they know how far he'll go they'll never sleep well again.

If not for the fact that they both think they will benefit from the Plan, they would never be working together, and as it turns out the whole premise behind that alliance was bogus to begin with! Not to mention Xykon would be only too happy to replace Redcloak if he could.

The only way you could ever call them friends is to dilute the term so ridiculously you could, with the exact same inflection, say Xykon is friends with Yahtzee and the Teevo.

Yes, I know that. I was mulling over what they could or would be like interacting, if they had what we would consider a "normal" life; one without the outside factors you just pointed out. There is an undeniable dynamic between their personalities that could in some time and place be considered "friends" if they didn't happen to playing the dangerous game they are.

[B. Dandelion]

Yes, I know that. I was mulling over what they could or would be like interacting, if they had what we would consider a "normal" life; one without the outside factors you just pointed out. There is an undeniable dynamic between their personalities that could in some time and place be considered "friends" if they didn't happen to playing the dangerous game they are.

The motives which allow such interaction are intrinsic to those "outside" factors. If they were not playing the dangerous game that they are, they would interact in a very different way. They can, occasionally, show moments of seeming jocularity because they are stuck with one another and forced to overlook the elements which would have made any relationship impossible under "ordinary" circumstances.

[BlackHumor]

...uh, what?

Xykon is an epic level sorcerer, and he clearly has the Charisma for it, but it's been quite clear through the whole strip that he has not one shred of empathy behind it. He can be funny and nice and charming but it's all just an act; he doesn't actually care about anyone.

Other evil characters are not like this; Redcloak and Tarquin and Nale all have people they genuinely care about. It's only Xykon who's an utter, if charismatic, psychopath.

[Ancalagon]

Thing is, what decision did Xykon make?

Do not make it more complicated than it is. "It sounded like a good idea back then". :smallbiggrin:

More seriously: Xykon had a choice back then. He was so powerful, he had all choices. But the one he made is the one he now sticks with.

[veti]

Now that he doesn't have to worry about that, all that's motivating him is boredom. If he ever decides that ruling the world is more trouble than it's worth, he's free to cut his losses (and Redcloak) and settle for carving out a kingdom for himself, or even just living on the Astral.

And therein lies Xykon's bind. He could go live in the Astral, but it's even more boring than the Material. His best chance of staving off boredom, as he sees it, is Redcloak's plan to (as far as he knows) rule the world. (Having the OOTS as recurring adversaries might add a little spice to his existence as well.)


I sort of had the impression he, like Redcloak, has something of a sunk cost fallacy.

Thank you, BD. Sunk cost, that's just the term I was groping for. Xykon repeatedly forces Redcloak to 'invest' more in their relationship, in the (apparently mistaken) belief that this ensures Redcloak's loyalty.

[SadisticFishing]

No, I can say "Xykon is a bastard who won't let Redcloak grow his eye back even after he rectified his mistake, ergo you are wrong." (about their "friendship.")



That ergo is out of place. You saying a father that punishes a child clearly ergo does not love them?

No. Redcloak lost his soul. There is no one in the world that I would forgive for that easily. There's no "ergo not friends" here, their tenuous friendship that sprung up between killing Right-Eye and the beginning of OotS is probably over now that the phylactery is missing.

You can have contempt for your friends, I do for most people I know, one way or another. Contempt is just an emotion.

[Math_Mage]

Xykon has three (sometimes conflicting) motives: staying alive (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html), staying entertained (SoD), and being remembered (SoD). There's literally nothing in the comic anywhere to show that his relationship with Redcloak (or anyone else) has a deeper connection than can be explained by those three motives.

[Holy_Knight]

Something that tends to lead people astray in the whole "Can evil people have/be friends?" question is thinking about it too much in binary terms. More precisely, it's too simplistic a formulation. A better way to look at it is that of a spectrum or continuum: the more evil you are, the less capable you are of embodying friendship. Friendship requires, at its core, caring about someone else for their own sake, and wishing for their good separate from any benefit to yourself. Evil is antithetical to those aims, and the more blighted by it a person is, to just that extent will friendship be increasingly difficult. This is why someone like Xykon, who sees other people as, at best, tools to be exploited for his own amusement, is probably completely incapable of it, whereas less thoroughly evil people may still be able to display friendship in some ways and in some contexts.

[Psyren]

That ergo is out of place. You saying a father that punishes a child clearly ergo does not love them?

There is punishment, and there is punishment. "Stay mutilated as Idiot Tax and so we have grumpy pirate on the team" is a very strange way of showing love, to me. "If I ever find out that you've healed yourself, I'll kill you" is similarly lacking in affection.

A bit... sadistic, you might say.

[B. Dandelion]

You can have contempt for your friends, I do for most people I know, one way or another. Contempt is just an emotion.

Uh, so, "by the standards of having contempt for nearly everyone I come across, Xykon's attitude towards Redcloak approximates friendship"?

I'm really hoping that what you mean is "sometimes my friends do stupid things or hold opinions contrary to mine" but that is not the impression that is conjured up through the use of the word contempt.

[SadisticFishing]

Contempt is an emotion. It's like saying "sometimes, I feel angry towards my friends."

Differing levels because he's evil, not because they weren't friends.

I don't think they're friends anymore. It worked well for a while, then it snapped when Xykon did - for obvious reasons.

[B. Dandelion]

You are either drastically underselling the potency of the word or you are describing to me an outlook that is frankly alien.

I do not experience contempt for my friends -- fleetingly or continuously. I may get angry or frustrated with them, I may think they are doing something trivial or pointless, but I don't feel contempt. To feel contempt for something is to regard it as fundamentally worthless or vile. I could never be friends with someone who provoked that kind of emotion out of me.

I have worked with people who've made me feel that way, but only a handful of times.

So when you say you feel it towards most people you encounter I feel a little disturbed.

[Bleak Ink]

You may not, but if a person's natural outlook is to hold everyone in such a light, then why couldn't they simultaneously consider one someone to whittle away the hours with?

[B. Dandelion]

You may not, but if a person's natural outlook is to hold everyone in such a light, then why couldn't they simultaneously consider one someone to whittle away the hours with?

I've said it before -- if you dilute the meaning of the word friendship to the extent you could say Xykon is friends with Redcloak, the TeeVo, and Yahtzee with the exact same inflection. "A sometimes entertaining tool with no inherent value besides that which it provides to me."

Do you consider the bonds between a man and his TeeVo to be meaningful in any real way?

(Also I think you're kind of missing the point that it's SadisticFishing who's said he's felt contempt for most people he's encountered, not the described outlook of Xykon. Actually, "has contempt for almost everyone" sounds slightly more like Nale, to me.)

[Math_Mage]

Contempt is an emotion. It's like saying "sometimes, I feel angry towards my friends."

Differing levels because he's evil, not because they weren't friends.

I don't think they're friends anymore. It worked well for a while, then it snapped when Xykon did - for obvious reasons.

I think 'contempt' is not the word to describe such an emotion. And Redcloak, at least, has regarded Xykon with animosity since well before Xykon snapped--see for example his opinion in this comic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0548.html).


You may not, but if a person's natural outlook is to hold everyone in such a light, then why couldn't they simultaneously consider one someone to whittle away the hours with?

I think 'friendship' is not the word to describe such an activity.

[Bleak Ink]

I've said it before -- if you dilute the meaning of the word friendship to the extent you could say Xykon is friends with Redcloak, the TeeVo, and Yahtzee with the exact same inflection. "A sometimes entertaining tool with no inherent value besides that which it provides to me."

Do you consider the bonds between a man and his TeeVo to be meaningful in any real way?

You keep coming back to "friends". It's too strong a word. But, in the grand scheme of everyone Xykon's ever interracted with, I do believe he at one point held Redcloak in about as close to friend-regard as he could anything. And if you're going to counter that with my first post, it's still pertaining to what could have been, not what is.


(Also I think you're kind of missing the point that it's SadisticFishing who's said he's felt contempt for most people he's encountered, not the described outlook of Xykon. Actually, "has contempt for almost everyone" sounds slightly more like Nale, to me.)

I'm well aware. You then played off it to state that you would never hold such a stance, which I engaged by saying somebody (i.e. Xykon) could be perfectly capable of doing so.



I think 'friendship' is not the word to describe such an activity.

I figure it's about as close as Xykon gets.

[Kish]

I figure it's about as close as Xykon gets.
That's not a terribly meaningful statement, however. I'd be interested to hear your answer to--Do you consider Xykon friends with the Teevo and the Yahtzee game?

[B. Dandelion]

You keep coming back to "friends". It's too strong a word.

I'm trying to figure out where we're setting the boundary for "the regard one might have for another person" versus "the regard one might have for an object". We don't have to call it friendship, but what is the distinction between the two that is so important and exists in between Xykon and Redcloak?


But, in the grand scheme of everyone Xykon's ever interracted with, I do believe he at one point held Redcloak in about as close to friend-regard as he could anything. And if you're going to counter that with my first post, it's still pertaining to what could have been, not what is.

Everyone? Counterpoint: Yydranna. Not only did he demonstrate both respect and liking for her, he was able to experience happiness on her behalf, even when it did nothing to benefit him personally but actually came at his expense.

And he'd still have killed her (and she him, for that matter). Still completely dysfunctional, and yet closer to the mark than his relationship with Redcloak.


I'm well aware. You then played off it to state that you would never hold such a stance, which I engaged by saying somebody (i.e. Xykon) could be perfectly capable of doing so.

I said that Xykon felt "utter contempt" for Redcloak. I didn't agree with the way SadisticFishing was using the word if he could say it was something he felt for most people in one way or another, and to set that as a baseline standard for regarding others seemed to undercut his entire point. ("I have contempt for most people I know and I think that's normal. I think Xykon regards Redcloak as a friend.") I said I personally could never reconcile the emotions of contempt and friendship together within a single person.

I didn't ever say that Xykon had the attitude of holding contempt for almost everyone, so I didn't want to reply to something that opened up with that premise. Towards most people Xykon seems to feel a casual disrespect.

[ti'esar]

That's not a terribly meaningful statement, however. I'd be interested to hear your answer to--Do you consider Xykon friends with the Teevo and the Yahtzee game?

Personally, I'd say that Xykon is "friends" with Redcloak to the same extent he is with the Teevo and the Yahtzee game. Of course, this requires a redefinition of "friend" to the point where it becomes all but meaningless...

[Emanick]

I can see where the OP got the idea that Xykon displays a softer side towards Redcloak. There's definitely a special relationship that the two have, even if it's "special" only by Xykon's abysmal standards. Xykon clearly enjoys RC's company sometimes, and is able to share a sense of camaraderie with him that nobody else really can. Sure, you could argue that he can do the same with other characters, such as Jirix, that mean nothing to him, but Redcloak is different, in that Xykon respects him as a peer, rather than a minion, in some respects. He needs Redcloak to help him conquer the world, and he has a long shared history with the goblin, a history that literally made him who he is today. Without Redcloak, Xykon would be dead of old age and he would never have become a lich.

Does this mean that Xykon acts towards Redcloak in the way we would expect a friend to treat another friend? No, that is clearly absurd. However, I would submit that if Redcloak were to die, then whether he realizes it or not, Xykon would feel differently than he would if anyone else died. Not sad, per se, but more like "Huh. A huge chapter in my life is over. Cyclops is gone, huh? That's weird to think about."

Probably not immediately, of course. But Xykon has the capacity for reflection - ironically, moreso than when he was alive.

@ B. Dandelion: Good catch! I'd totally forgotten about Yydranna.

[Ancalagon]

Everyone? Counterpoint: Yydranna.

You have to make the important disctinction between pre "Cannot Taste Coffee Anymore" and post "Cannot Taste Coffee Anymore".

The Living Xykon has been shown to be utterly evil but not to be without any human feelings, emotions, social ability or humor other than "it dies".

The undead Xykon has lost every little "nice" qualities he had (as few and little as they were) and he turned from being an "evil human" to an "evil abomiation". The Lich-Xykon really has nothing postive (as little as that was) left from his former living self.

[B. Dandelion]

You have to make the important disctinction between pre "Cannot Taste Coffee Anymore" and post "Cannot Taste Coffee Anymore".

The Living Xykon has been shown to be utterly evil but not to be without any human feelings, emotions, social ability or humor other than "it dies".

The undead Xykon has lost every little "nice" qualities he had (as few and little as they were) and he turned from being an "evil human" to an "evil abomiation". The Lich-Xykon really has nothing postive (as little as that was) left from his former living self.

While this is a fair point, I had been thinking of it, and reasoned, well, #1, if we're talking about "the grand scheme of everyone Xykon's ever interacted with" and raise that to the hypothetical "what could have been", it would be remiss not to bring her up as a place to set the bar, #2, we aren't entirely bereft of human!Xykon and Redcloak interaction and I feel it's fair to say it still doesn't match up to his interaction with Yydranna.

My basic feeling on the whole matter is that yes, after having worked together for more than 30 years the two of them know each other very well and can easily get into a certain routine, and they aren't so utterly consumed with hatred that they can't put it on the back burner as they focus on the matter at hand, but that is not a testament to any sort of "natural chemistry" or a sign they would be drawn to one another -- if Redcloak had had his way, they would never have been allied with Xykon at all.

I have, as I've said, worked with people I've had contempt for, two or three times max, and I've found the only way to do it is to not focus on it 24/7 because it just leaves me feeling even more miserable than I would have otherwise. If they feel the same, we can cooperate or even kill time together -- while being very, VERY careful about what I say or reveal. Xykon has little to fear from Redcloak and believes he has him right where he wants him. So when it comes to the two of them, I don't read friendship into it. Need, familiarity, and a certain pragmatism yes. Friendship no.

[Dr.Epic]

A rock has more of a soft side than Xykon.

[Math_Mage]

A rock has more of a soft side than Xykon.

Because of the moss (http://norman.walsh.name/2004/07/06/thumbs/20040706-160211.jpg)? Do skeletons get that? :smalltongue:

[Psyren]

I think it would be interesting to see how he would react if he met Ydranna today (assuming she's even still alive, which isn't likely.)

But I don't see her as being much of a counterpoint to his "complete monster" assessment either way.