What will prevent Xykon from winning? [SPOILER]

[Faramir]

I'm dusting off an old theory of mine. Xykon's forces will win, but Redcloak will surreptitiously destroy the gate before Xykon can tap its power. Then they'll leave heading to Girard's gate. Anyone who needs it is raised, and the OOTS is off in hot pursuit.


Supporting evidence:



Redcloak destroyed the first gate.
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0196.html (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/../http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0196.html)

He claims it was an accident, but...

The goblin god wasn't part of trapping the Snarl or creating this world:
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0275.html

According to Miko a Redcloak is a "nihilist who seeks to undo creation"
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0369.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0371.html

Soon thought that the goblins, though far away, were a threat to the gate, why?
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0277.html


I mentioned this theory in a thread a while ago, but I suspect the goblin god wishes to let the Snarl loose so that he may participate in the creation of the next world. Redcloak, as high priest of that god, allied with Xykon to get access to the gates to destroy them while claiming that he just wanted to help Xykon conquer the world.

Xykon, though an incredibly powerful wizard, rarely notices what's going on under his nose. He either accepted Redcloak's accident excuse at face value or he figures there's more amusement value in waiting until the last gate to let Redcloak know he was on to him all along and blast him at that point. I lean towards the latter.

Opinions?

[Icewalker]

Wow.

That's quite the theory you have there, and quite a bit of evidence for it.
I'd say the best evidence there is the Nihilist who seeks to undo creation part. Veeery interesting....
Perhaps there will be more evidence in Start of Darkness, it does reveal what happened at Lirian's gate.

I dunno, but this is definitely possible...

[Grod_The_Giant]

good theory, man. Sounds quite plausible.

[Balathustrius]

Well thought out! Soon considering the far-away goblins a threat, Redcloak destroying the Gate - it makes sense.

Interesting that we've never been given a reason why Redcloak is serving Xykon. Evil characters usually have an angle; what's his?

Very nice.

[InsertNameHere]

Your first link doesn't work. Nice theory, though.

[ARMOURERERIC]

He'll fall to his old arch-enemy:



Osteoporosis

[bluish_wolf]

Redcloak responded to Miko's comment about being wanting to destroy all creation with and off-handed remark that paladins have no clue what they are talking about. It certainly isn't compelling evidence.

[Finwe]

Wow.

That's quite the theory you have there, and quite a bit of evidence for it.
I'd say the best evidence there is the Nihilist who seeks to undo creation part. Veeery interesting....
Perhaps there will be more evidence in Start of Darkness, it does reveal what happened at Lirian's gate.

I dunno, but this is definitely possible...


About the nihilist part, I feel a quote from Roy is a good counterpoint:
"You're accepting as true a theory that came from Miko's mouth."

[TDG]

The quote "You and your foul god shall never succeed" makes me think this theory is very plausible. I hadn't thought of it before - well thought out :D

[Nogard]

Is this theory is correct, Redcloak may well have put in place the self destruct rune that Elan triggered.

[Setra]

Miko says what she feels to be the truth.

The question is, why does she think the Crimson Mantle is Evil? There could be a very good reason for it, or she could be completely wrong.

[Bogardan_Mage]

Is this theory is correct, Redcloak may well have put in place the self destruct rune that Elan triggered.
But why would Redcloak depend on Elan to trigger the rune?

1) Redcloak didn't know Elan very well, and probably wouldn't have expected him to activate a rune that so clearly was a bad idea to activate.
2) Redcloak wasn't the type to depend on the gulibility of heroes. He questioned Xykon's wisdom in doing just that much earlier in the battle.
3) Elan is hardly the person I'd want my plan resting on.

If Redcloak was truely trying to destroy all the gates, why didn't he activate the rune at Dorukan's gate himself? There's little reason Xykon would ever be returning, and it would surely be much simpler than finding his own way back later on.

[factotum]

Miko says what she feels to be the truth.

The question is, why does she think the Crimson Mantle is Evil? There could be a very good reason for it, or she could be completely wrong.

Erm, I don't think there's any question that Redcloak is actively evil just from the evidence we've seen in the strip, so there's nothing particularly odd about her knowing that. Heck, she might only have ever heard of the "Crimson Mantle" via Redcloak's own deeds of evilness!

[Pronounceable]

I support this theory. It seethes with narrativium.

Answer to the title: Nothing.

Dorukan placed the self destruct rune, Celia used the fact during the trial. And Redcloak had to depend on the heroes because it had to be activated by someone of pure heart (as everything Dorukan made, has he a fetish?)

Although, I admit the castle's destruction seem to be the weakest point in this theory. But the rest of it is very plausible.

[Tredrick]

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Brimming over with wrongosity.

Redcloak is there to dupe you into thinking it is him. The Monster in the Dark is the one behind all of this. His whole persona is an act. He is actually a fragment of the Snarl that fell off into the Prime Material Plane and disguised itself as a powerful monster. He then agreed to "work" for Xykon and Redcloak while manipulating them to his own ends. Redcloak *thinks* that destroying the gates will destroy the world and allow his goblin god a hand in the creation of the next one, but he is wrong. The Snarl is prepared for this and ready to destroy all the gods!

[Icewalker]

That'd be cool. But I have further evidence (kinda).

When Redcloak first sees Miko, and vice versa, they yell
:redcloak: A paladin of the Sapphire Guard? Here???
:Miko: The bearer of the Crimson Mantle? Here???

Point one: they both know the other one is a serious threat. Redcloak because he seems to have some family history involving being killed by paladins of Azure City.
Miko however...The only way she would know (and more importantly, be concerned about) some random goblin cleric would be if she was taught he was a serious threat. The paladins of the Sapphire Guard were taught to find and kill anything threatening the gates. This implies that The Bearer of the Crimson Mantle is a threat to the gates.

Secondly, (see emphasis): THE bearer of the Crimson Mantle. There's only one. Head cleric for his god? Leader of some group?
The fact that he is leading only supports the first point, implying that he could possibly have the support or power to destroy a gate, and if they are worried about him, that just seems to point further towards an anti-gate agenda.

Lastly, Miko's line a round or so later:
:miko: If the Crimson Mantle is this close to Azure City, then the gate is in danger...

Hmmmmmm
Sounds like supporting evidence to me.

[warmachine]

What has the absence of the goblin god got to do with anything? Not being part of a project does not mean wanting it's destruction. If the gates are destroyed, the rifts will slowly increase till the Snarl breaks free and destroys everything, including all the goblins. Why would the goblin god want that? If Redcloak does succeed in destroying all the gates under divine orders and eventually destroying creation, the god could rebuild the world along his ideas but the other gods will blame him, pound him into pudding and, thus, prevent such rebuilding.

For Redcloak, it is better that Xykon wins so he can run the new empire the way he wants it whilst Xykon creates random mayhem and not pay attention.

[Icewalker]

What has the absence of the goblin god got to do with anything? Not being part of a project does not mean wanting it's destruction. If the gates are destroyed, the rifts will slowly increase till the Snarl breaks free and destroys everything, including all the goblins. Why would the goblin god want that?

This has been brought up. The goblin god would want to help/singly create the world. Hell, there could be further conspiracy up among the gods with him planning to get the other gods to fall victim to the Snarl.


If Redcloak does succeed in destroying all the gates under divine orders and eventually destroying creation, the other gods will blame the goblin god and pound him into pudding.

Perhaps. Unless there is divine conspiracy goin on. But yes, this is certainly a possible dent in this theory, while not definitely a hole, it is also not clearly resolved.

[BisectedBrioche]

Wow.

That's quite the theory you have there, and quite a bit of evidence for it.
I'd say the best evidence there is the Nihilist who seeks to undo creation part. Veeery interesting....
Perhaps there will be more evidence in Start of Darkness, it does reveal what happened at Lirian's gate.

I dunno, but this is definitely possible...

Seeing as it was an accusation by Miko I'd say that its the worst part.

EDIT: Super Ninja'd XS

[Bogardan_Mage]

That'd be cool. But I have further evidence (kinda).

When Redcloak first sees Miko, and vice versa, they yell
:redcloak: A paladin of the Sapphire Guard? Here???
:Miko: The bearer of the Crimson Mantle? Here???

Point one: they both know the other one is a serious threat. Redcloak because he seems to have some family history involving being killed by paladins of Azure City.
Miko however...The only way she would know (and more importantly, be concerned about) some random goblin cleric would be if she was taught he was a serious threat. The paladins of the Sapphire Guard were taught to find and kill anything threatening the gates. This implies that The Bearer of the Crimson Mantle is a threat to the gates.
Redcloak is a threat to the gates, whether he wants to destroy them all or not. He is working with Xykon, you may have noticed. Xykon is a threat to the gates (as is, like, the entire point of the plot) and he doesn't want them all destroyed either (hence berating Redcloak for destroying Lirian's gate). Ergo, being a threat to the gates is not synonymous with wanting them destroyed, Redcloak's connection to the Sapphire guard only indicates that he has a backstory involving the gates (or possibly just the guard on an unrelated point, but more likely the gates due to the astounding coincidence of the other option), not that said backstory involved wanting them destroyed.


Secondly, (see emphasis): THE bearer of the Crimson Mantle. There's only one. Head cleric for his god? Leader of some group?
The fact that he is leading only supports the first point, implying that he could possibly have the support or power to destroy a gate, and if they are worried about him, that just seems to point further towards an anti-gate agenda.
He has Xykon and some 26400 hobgoblins at his disposal. Means were never the issue.


Lastly, Miko's line a round or so later:
:miko: If the Crimson Mantle is this close to Azure City, then the gate is in danger...

Hmmmmmm
Sounds like supporting evidence to me.
No, it sounds exactly like the first point. The gate doesn't have to be under threat of destruction for it to be in danger for the reasons I already stated. Indeed, Dorukan at least was of the opinion that destruction may in many cases be preferable to a dark force seizing control of the gate.

[Faramir]

Just read Start of Darkness. So much for this theory.

[TheNovak]

Actually, the OP had some really, surprisingly good insight there.

Still, uh....do you need another shovel now, after all that digging?

[yoshi927]

I haven't read Start of Darkness, but I agree with that theory, actually. The biggest arguments against it are

1. Unreliability of :miko:

-Things like "soulless nihilist who seeks to undo creation" don't just roll off the tongue. She's been taught this by a legion of Paladins. Honorable paladins. Sworn to honesty. Who got their information from Soon, and possibly Diviners like Sangwaan. This argument loses. :smallbiggrin:

2. The other gods would pummel the goblin god for letting the Snarl out.

-What if the Dark One has bigger plans? If he somehow found a way to destroy the Snarl completely, and Xykon was framed for releasing it, the Dark One could easily shove his way to the forefront of the pantheons. Or, as another theory goes, he could be a normal or magically powerful goblin who was declared a god and got enough worshippers (a la Banjo) and wants a god-killing monstrosity to take out all the big gods so that he can trap it again and become the sole god of the new world. Both are kind of out there, but things like that can happen easily in fantasy.

[comicadv]

I don't want to believe Redcloak is agianst Xyklon...

But if I had to pick one I would go with Xyklon figureing it out and blasting Redcloak.

[Innis Cabal]

Sound theory and pretty close to the truth on some aspect, since SoD came out you can see the whole master plan, wont spoil it though

Redcloak isnt against Xykon so much as Xykon is more or less black mailing Red, but Xykon knows of Redcloaks nature

[theinsulabot]

explosive runes

[Angel in Black]

Well, Rich practically came out and said that the Order of the Stick is going to have to fight the Snarl.
"Some have theorized since that gods were even MORE vulnerable to the Snarl than a mortal of the same level would have been." (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0274.html)
To me, this theory is quite sound.

[BobTheFerret]

Lo, and thy thread hath risen, and thou hath ran, for thy dead thread lives.

...

This thread is from April.

Problem?

:smallbiggrin:

[basilisk 89]

Lo, and thy thread hath risen, and thou hath ran, for thy dead thread lives.

...

This thread is from April.

Problem?

:smallbiggrin:

Okay, Vaarsuvius. We get it.

So, uhhhh....would this be a bad time to let everyone know I found my nuclear-powered SMS messaging bowling bowl, and I'm going to activate it now, if anyone wants to text me while I'm playing.

[AKA_Bait]

Just read Start of Darkness. So much for this theory.

Ding! Read Start of Darkness. I won't spoil it for you but the theory is totally and unequivocally wrong.

That is all.