If Xykon's body gets destroyed, what will Redcloak do? (SoD Spoilers)

[WastedTalent]

We've seen in the comic that Redcloak has given Xykon a phoney phylactery, which presumably Xykon has hidden away in his Astral Plane Fortress, while counting on respawning there if his body gets destroyed.

If it does, he will then become aware that Redcloak has been deceiving him, keeping the real phylactery to himself. Redcloak, ever the schemer, will probably have planned for this event. On the other hand, Recloak has worked on this plan for probably decades and has made countless sacrifices to keep Xykon in the game as his racing horse for the Plan.

What do you guys reckon Redcloak will currently do if the big X croaks? Will he destroy the phylactery, knowing that Xykon might destroy him in his rage at being deceived? Or will he continue to try and manipulate/get leverage over Xykon to keep him aimed at the goal?

[Jasdoif]

Will he destroy the phylactery, knowing that Xykon might destroy him in his rage at being deceived?"Might"? That's quite a charitable view of Xykon.


Redcloak would destroy the phylactery, because Xykon will kill him otherwise. Xykon doesn't trust Redcloak (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0833.html), having the phylactery in the astral fortress is supposed to be Xykon's insurance in case anything happens to him again. And if/when Xykon finds out Redcloak cancelled the insurance policy with Operation Fauxlactery, he'll have no reason to think Redcloak's still going to follow through with the whole plan he sold Xykon on...and once that's out of the way, Xykon has nothing to lose by cancelling Redcloak's life.

Xykon doesn't strictly need Redcloak, he could try to find some way to take over the world or otherwise act on his ambition/boredom. And while Redcloak is a devout follower of the sunken cost fallacy, and generally unwilling to give up on the Plan after all his pursuit of it has cost him, even he would realize that being too dead to complete the divine half of the Gate ritual would be far more of a complication than trying to find another arcane caster for the arcane half of the Gate ritual.

[Kastor]

Those are great points! However, what means does Redcloak have to actually destroy the phylactery? As Xykon has mentioned previously, (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0656.html) his phylactery is superbly enchanted. Physical force wont work, at least none that RC could muster himself, and I doubt his own magical abilities could overcome whatever Xykon put on there. So, either I'm overlooking something, misunderstanding the situation, or RC knows some other way to readily destroy a phylactery.

[Quild]

Those are great points! However, what means does Redcloak have to actually destroy the phylactery? As Xykon has mentioned previously, (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0656.html) his phylactery is superbly enchanted. Physical force wont work, at least none that RC could muster himself, and I doubt his own magical abilities could overcome whatever Xykon put on there. So, either I'm overlooking something, misunderstanding the situation, or RC knows some other way to readily destroy a phylactery.

Some of those spells have duration and all of them can probably be dispelled. If Xykon gets destroyed, Redcloak will have plenty of time to destroy the phylactery since Xykon won't regenerate immediately. Xykon can even be destroyed by Redcloak while he's almost helpless in his firsts steps of regeneration.

[Kastor]

Some of those spells have duration and all of them can probably be dispelled. If Xykon gets destroyed, Redcloak will have plenty of time to destroy the phylactery since Xykon won't regenerate immediately. Xykon can even be destroyed by Redcloak while he's almost helpless in his firsts steps of regeneration.

Thats true. I suppose that failing that, RC could always feed it to a sea serpent (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0662.html)

[Quartz]

How good is Redcloak at bluffing? "Yes, I saved your phylactery because your fortress was compromised."

[Kastor]

How good is Redcloak at bluffing? "Yes, I saved your phylactery because your fortress was compromised."

ah yes, the classic situation of,
"Put enough ranks into Bluff, and you dont need combat skills"

[Kish]

Aside from the mechanical fact that Bluff is cross-class for him, if he was that good at it, the comic would be very different--starting with Xykon having stayed to kill the Order at Girard's destroyed Gate.

[Quild]

Thats true. I suppose that failing that, RC could always feed it to a sea serpent (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0662.html)

That's probably not a good idea. The Sea Serpent would probably expulse the phylactery from his body before his stomach can dissolve it. Even if it stays stuck until the serpent dies, Xykon would only be delayed a few decades. Redcloak might still be around then.

Throwing it into an active volcano like in #887 is probably way more effective than the sea serpent solution.

[Psyren]

I agree with Jasdoif on this one - the moment Xykon respawns the jig is up, so Redcloak has no choice but to finish him off if that situation ever arises.

On a lighter note, Xykon's astral dungeon is probably going to be a really badass spot for some other villain to set up shop :smallbiggrin:

[WastedTalent]

"Might"? That's quite a charitable view of Xykon.

I'd say its more of a charitable view of Redcloak, as I would be counting on him to somehow lie/diplome/scheme his way out of the situation. Seems a longshot, but then Redcloak has been playing the longshot for a while now. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0544.html)


How good is Redcloak at bluffing? "Yes, I saved your phylactery because your fortress was compromised."

Maybe acquiring a potion of glibness (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0767.html) will help? I don't image a line like that would hold up for long though. After all, the Tomb World is supposed to magically alert (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0833.html) Xykon if anyone tries to mess with it.


Those are great points! However, what means does Redcloak have to actually destroy the phylactery? As Xykon has mentioned previously, his phylactery is superbly enchanted. Physical force wont work, at least none that RC could muster himself, and I doubt his own magical abilities could overcome whatever Xykon put on there. So, either I'm overlooking something, misunderstanding the situation, or RC knows some other way to readily destroy a phylactery.

Interesting. Does anyone have any idea what it would take (stat-wise) to actually destroy the phylactery? We've seen O-chul fail to really damage it armed with only a broken prison bar. Redcloak presumably has a lot more time, magic and resources if he wants to get the job done though.

[JeenLeen]

He could go to Gobbotopia/Azure City and toss it into the rift.

Barring that, we've seen in the comic that regeneration is slow. I forget if we've seen if Xykon has Still Spell metamagic or not, but RC might be able to repeatably kill him when he starts to respawn, before he regens enough to be able to cast spells. Barring that, keep his phylactery in an anti-magic field and have loyal servants repeatably kill him. (Definitely riskier than if he does it himself, and it would fail because of PLOT, but he has places to be, I reckon.)

[Chei]

Chucking the thing in a rift would probably be the best idea.

Xykon does have the Still Spell feat. He might have taken that feat as soon as he became a lich, since there's no evidence of him using it in life.

He used it to Still Meteor Swarm V's Grasping Hand.

[Jasdoif]

I'd say its more of a charitable view of Redcloak, as I would be counting on him to somehow lie/diplome/scheme his way out of the situation.You may be confusing Redcloak with Elan in this instance.


Does anyone have any idea what it would take (stat-wise) to actually destroy the phylactery?Offhand, disintegrate (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/disintegrate.htm) obliterates up to a ten-foot cube of matter when used against an object; it's up to the task by itself if it isn't stopped by spell resistance or a Fortitude save. Redcloak can easily dispel any of the protective spells he put on it himself, and if necessary he can use (greater) dispel magic to temporarily suppress the magical properties of the phylactery so it can't make Fortitude saves on its own.

[Quartz]

Actually, there's a simpler way, albeit one that needs two Miracles: use one Miracle to generate an Anti Magic Shell around the phylactery, and a second to make the AMS permanent.

[Keltest]

Aside from the mechanical fact that Bluff is cross-class for him, if he was that good at it, the comic would be very different--starting with Xykon having stayed to kill the Order at Girard's destroyed Gate.

Pretty sure youre thinking of diplomacy. Bluff only works on things that aren't true.

[WastedTalent]

You may be confusing Redcloak with Elan in this instance.

I think Redcloak probably has a better track record at (intentionally) influencing people than Elan does. :smalltongue:

We at least see Redcloak deftly weaseling his way out of any negative consquences for straight-up murdering Tsukiko in strips 832 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0832.html) - 833 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0833.html). However he had the recent events of having crushed the resistance and recovering the phylactery to offer up as a distraction at the time. I admit it's a little harder to imagine Redcloak talking his way out of getting caught with the phylactery on hand.

[goodpeople25]

I think Redcloak probably has a better track record at (intentionally) influencing people than Elan does. :smalltongue:

We at least see Redcloak deftly weaseling his way out of any negative consquences for straight-up murdering Tsukiko in strips 832 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0832.html) - 833 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0833.html). However he had the recent events of having crushed the resistance and recovering the phylactery to offer up as a distraction at the time. I admit it's a little harder to imagine Redcloak talking his way out of getting caught with the phylactery on hand.
I think that speaks more about Xkyon then Redcloak. Especially since the story isn't over yet so negative consequences of that act can still happen.

[arrowed]

Fauxlactery. This is a beautiful word, and I salute the wordsmith who fashioned it.

The events of SoD suggest Redcloak won't kill Xykon unless it becomes impossible to use him to complete the Plan... which may well be the case if X finds out RC stole his phylactery, but may not be the case if X was destroyed and regenerated back at his astral fortress, so why steal the phylactery? SoD again shows us blackmailing X with the threat of destroying it is not an option, unless RC thinks and can convince X that he's powerful enough to kill X following it's destruction.
Summary: there's evidence that RC considers X too difficult to control, and will destroy X's phylactery as soon as X is next destroyed, thereby freeing himself to locate a new arcane caster to complete the Plan with. Other than that I can't fathom how it's to RC's advantage to have stolen the phylactery.

[Kish]

With that, I can't figure out how it's to Redcloak's advantage to have stolen the phylactery, rather than destroying it (and still giving Xykon the fake, of course).

[arrowed]

With that, I can't figure out how it's to Redcloak's advantage to have stolen the phylactery, rather than destroying it (and still giving Xykon the fake, of course).

It's entirely possible RC has already destroyed it, but we haven't seen that it is destroyed. It would make sense if that was RC's plan, but I don't know if the fact we were shown the switch but not the smash implies the smash hasn't happened or if it's just going to be revealed to have happened at the dramatically appropriate moment. From my perspective it seems better in the main to assume the phylactery is intact until we're shown otherwise, although it's destruction would be a valid assumption if the above was RC's plan.

[Jasdoif]

We at least see Redcloak deftly weaseling his way out of any negative consquences for straight-up murdering Tsukiko in strips 832 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0832.html) - 833 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0833.html). However he had the recent events of having crushed the resistance and recovering the phylactery to offer up as a distraction at the time. I admit it's a little harder to imagine Redcloak talking his way out of getting caught with the phylactery on hand.Note Redcloak's technique in there in 833 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0833.html): He downplayed the importance he put on killing her, acted like he didn't know what she was doing, and made Xykon uncomfortable so he wouldn't keep thinking about it. Redcloak used a few supporting details to guide Xykon into making faulty assumptions about the events he didn't see, and then got Xykon to accept those assumptions by dissuading him from thinking about it too hard.

That's not going to work with something Xykon witnesses first-hand.


With that, I can't figure out how it's to Redcloak's advantage to have stolen the phylactery, rather than destroying it (and still giving Xykon the fake, of course).My theory there, assuming of course that Redcloak hasn't destroyed it already...is that Redcloak doesn't know whether Xykon will be able to tell if his real phylactery is destroyed, just like he didn't know that liches lose their gustatory senses in Start of Darkness. If Xykon becomes aware his real phylactery is gone while he's still an active epic-level spellcaster, Redcloak has a much more difficult problem to deal with; it's not worth the risk if Redcloak has a plan for destroying the phylactery before Xykon has time to regenerate.

[Grey Watcher]

Those are great points! However, what means does Redcloak have to actually destroy the phylactery? As Xykon has mentioned previously, (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0656.html) his phylactery is superbly enchanted. Physical force wont work, at least none that RC could muster himself, and I doubt his own magical abilities could overcome whatever Xykon put on there. So, either I'm overlooking something, misunderstanding the situation, or RC knows some other way to readily destroy a phylactery.

Well, any abjurations Xykon would have cast went on to the fauxlactery. I'm not 100% sure, but as the person who cast them in the first place, I think Redcloak can dispel them without a chance of failure or even casting another spell (ie Dispel Magic).


With that, I can't figure out how it's to Redcloak's advantage to have stolen the phylactery, rather than destroying it (and still giving Xykon the fake, of course).

Do liches have any sense of the status of their phylacteries? If Xykon would know (or if Redcloak even thinks Xykon would know), then destroying the phylactery would have all the risks and none of the benefits of destroying the body.

[WastedTalent]

Well, any abjurations Xykon would have cast went on to the fauxlactery. I'm not 100% sure, but as the person who cast them in the first place, I think Redcloak can dispel them without a chance of failure or even casting another spell (ie Dispel Magic).

Well from 661 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0661.html) we can deduce that the real phylactery has been covered with at least a lot of non-detection spells that apparantly don't wear off any time soon (possibly made permanent). Furthermore we have 831 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0831.html) as evidence that the fauxlactery has undergone (at least roughly) the same treatment. After that there's no telling if any more spells got cast on the fake one.


Note Redcloak's technique in there in 833: He downplayed the importance he put on killing her, acted like he didn't know what she was doing, and made Xykon uncomfortable so he wouldn't keep thinking about it. Redcloak used a few supporting details to guide Xykon into making faulty assumptions about the events he didn't see, and then got Xykon to accept those assumptions by dissuading him from thinking about it too hard.

Agreed.


That's not going to work with something Xykon witnesses first-hand.

Perhaps. Redcloak could still lie about his reasons for having the phylactery on him though, or maybe he could even switch them back using a plane shift spell before Xykon catches on. I don't really see those happening in the comic, but if Redcloak doesn't have any contingency plan for the event of his boss getting smoked, one would expect him to just get rid of the phylactery altogether. I mean if you can't use it as leverage, why keep it at all?

Since I don't expect important plot elements to just disappear off-panel with no explanation, I'm assuming RC still has the phylactery on his person or has put it in some yet unknown location.

[Kish]

I would find it very odd if Xykon had no sensory ability that would assist in any way with finding the phylactery, couldn't tell when he was holding a fake phylactery instead of the real one, made a big point of how his soul wasn't in it when his body was intact and called it "just a fancy bauble," and yet knew somehow if it was destroyed. And if Redcloak was seriously worried about that, letting Xykon hold the fake seems only inches less suicidal than outright destroying the real one before giving him the fake.

[hroþila]

I would find it very odd if Xykon had no sensory ability that would assist in any way with finding the phylactery, couldn't tell when he was holding a fake phylactery instead of the real one, made a big point of how his soul wasn't in it when his body was intact and called it "just a fancy bauble," and yet knew somehow if it was destroyed. And if Redcloak was seriously worried about that, letting Xykon hold the fake seems only inches less suicidal than outright destroying the real one before giving him the fake.
But he can't stop Xykon from holding the fake phylactery, so he absolutely has to run that risk, whereas if he destroyed the real one before Xykon's body itself is destroyed, he'd be choosing to run that extra risk, no matter how small.

Now, by not destroying it there's ALSO the risk of Xykon somehow finding the real one and thus catching Redcloak red-handed, but still.

[Kastor]

Furthermore we have 831 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0831.html) as evidence that the fauxlactery has undergone (at least roughly) the same treatment. After that there's no telling if any more spells got cast on the fake one.

I mean, while we have no way of knowing exactly what enchantments were placed upon the original phylactery, I have a suspicion that there's a few more than the handful of enchantments RC slapped onto the fauxlactery using his own spells and a couple scrolls* while walking up the stairs to the keep. Even though a few more were cast off-panel, the fact that he was on his way to see Xykon limits how many he could have placed.

Contrast that to Xykon being an Epic spellcaster with plenty of crafting talent and time to kill, I would be willing to bet that the phylactery has a few more spells on it than the fauxlactery.

*I thought he used scrolls for the spells like Hardening, since its not covered by his chosen domain, but i checked and lo and behold, no scrolls. whoops.

[Grey Watcher]

Well from 661 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0661.html) we can deduce that the real phylactery has been covered with at least a lot of non-detection spells that apparantly don't wear off any time soon (possibly made permanent). Furthermore we have 831 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0831.html) as evidence that the fauxlactery has undergone (at least roughly) the same treatment. After that there's no telling if any more spells got cast on the fake one.

Oops, yes. Somehow, despite understanding it correctly when it was released, managed to get it backwards upon remembering. :smallconfused: Memory is weird.

[Morquard]

With that, I can't figure out how it's to Redcloak's advantage to have stolen the phylactery, rather than destroying it (and still giving Xykon the fake, of course).

Just because he's not inside of it at all times, doesn't mean he doesn't immediately know if the phylactery gets destroyed. Redcloak was wrong about it before, when he tried to blackmail him the first time, so maybe this is a "Does he learn of the destruction or doesn't he" situation, where he just can't take the risk. So he'll wait till Xykon gets destroyed then gets rid of him. Till then he'll use him to complete the Plan.

[The Aboleth]

I have a thought that just occurred to me that is related to the discussion: What if Xykon already knows that Redcloak switched the phylactery on him?

Remember that Redcloak says in #831 that he had the fauxlactery created according to his memory. "Every detail, every scratch. Exactly as I remembered them. A perfect match." However, it's NOT a perfect match--in Comic #656, O-Chul hits the phylactery at least 4 times in an attempt to destroy it. Presumably, this would have left some scratches (Xykon does say "It's going to take more than that to scuff the finish," which is a point against my theory, but I'll say that this could be interpreted more as a "You're not going to destroy it that way" hyperbolic statement than a literal "It can't be scratched" statement).

Now, here's the thing: Redcloak would not have remembered these scratches on the phylactery because he wasn't there when they occurred--he escaped from O-Chul in #655, before the Paladin starts whacking at the amulet. So, there are scratches on the REAL phylactery that Redcloak was not aware of when he commissioned the fake one to be made.


Now, that begs the question: If Xykon DOES know about the switch because he recognizes the lack of marks that O-Chul had left, why didn't he smoke Redcloak right then and there? Hard to say. We do have it on record (I can't remember the comic, someone help me out) that Xykon says "Don't confuse not caring with not knowing." Perhaps the lich is ACTING like he doesn't know so that he can see what Redcloak has up his sleeve down the road?

I understand this theory hinges upon a very loose and tenuous assumption, and that there are serious counter-points against it (for example: if there were other scratches on the real phylactery, Redcloak could have seen them when he did the side-by-side comparison. He doesn't mention there are new scratches on the real phylactery, so that probably sinks my theory right then and there.) Still, I had the thought and felt the need to register on the forums and voice it. Thoughts from anyone else?

[Morquard]

Your theory assumes two things:
a) O-chul managed to inflict new scratches, which isn't guaranteed considering the absurd amounts of protection on that thing
b) Xykon had any time to actually examine the phylactery in detail after O-chul attacked it and before it got tossed into the sewers.

[Aeson]

With that, I can't figure out how it's to Redcloak's advantage to have stolen the phylactery, rather than destroying it (and still giving Xykon the fake, of course).
Do we know that liches can survive the destruction of their phylacteries? As far as I know, RAW is ambiguous on whether or not liches can exist without a phylactery. From the d20srd's page on liches (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/lich.htm), it would appear that the only necessary condition for the permanent destruction of a lich is the destruction of its phylactery, and one reading of "as a rule, the only way to get rid of a lich for sure is to destroy its phylactery" would make that into a sufficient condition as well.

For that matter, I'm pretty sure that the comic is also ambiguous as to what happens if Xykon's phylactery is destroyed; one way of interpreting O'Chul's actions in #655 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0655.html)-656 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0656.html) is that O'Chul believes that destroying Xykon's phylactery will destroy Xykon, and I don't think that there's anything in the comic that contradicts that interpretation. Of course, I don't think there's anything else in the comic that directly supports that position, either.


Chucking the thing in a rift would probably be the best idea.
No one knows what'll happen to Xykon or to his phylactery if it goes into a rift. If the phylactery survives going through a rift, Xykon might be able to reform within the rift-world and Redcloak probably wouldn't know about it. "Redcloak moved or switched my phylactery" is also the most obvious answer to "why am I not reforming in my astral fortress where my phylactery is supposed to be." That being the case, and assuming that Redcloak is reasonably smart, getting rid of Xykon's phylactery in a way which only might prevent Xykon from reforming and coming after Redcloak is a bad idea, especially if that way prevents Redcloak from determining the status of the phylactery or from becoming aware that Xykon is reforming prior to Xykon returning to the world.

[The Aboleth]

Your theory assumes two things:
a) O-chul managed to inflict new scratches, which isn't guaranteed considering the absurd amounts of protection on that thing
b) Xykon had any time to actually examine the phylactery in detail after O-chul attacked it and before it got tossed into the sewers.

Agreed on the 1st point--I even mention it towards the end of my first post.

As to the second, Xykon does recover the phylactery for a moment-he puts it on his belt/waist before it is stolen from him by O-Chul--but we don't know if he had any time to actually inspect it. In-comic would suggest not, but a cursory glance between panels isn't outside the realm of possibility as we have an abundance of evidence in-comic that many things happen off and between panels.

If we assume (and I agree it is a big assumption) that he had a quick moment to check the amulet for scuffs, then the question becomes "Would he even remember?" He can't even remember Roy's name, so it might not be likely. We also know that Xykon sometimes acts ignorant when in reality he just doesn't care, so it's really a matter of which you deem more likely in this case based upon how the story has progressed so far.

[Kish]

and I don't think that there's anything in the comic that contradicts that interpretation.
Start of Darkness. Been mentioned before; I would elaborate but I don't know if you're contesting it or don't know about it.

[Cazero]

I can't believe people compared Tsukiko, a minor asset that was given a chance to improve its value, to Xykon's phylactery, his personal insurance against the big fire below. The first one is disposable and barely consequential. The second one is of utmost importance and losing it triggers a "STOP EVERYTHING ELSE AND GET IT BACK" response.

[nleseul]

Hmm. An advantage that Redcloak gets from physically possessing the real phylactery as opposed to just destroying it is that he can put it wherever he wants, and thereby control where Xykon reforms after being destroyed. Perhaps his plan is to store the phylactery in some kind of perfect prison, with the intent that if Xykon ever gets destroyed, he will be trapped and unable to affect anything until Redcloak actually needs him for the Gate ritual.

[Aeson]

Start of Darkness. Been mentioned before; I would elaborate but I don't know if you're contesting it or don't know about it.
If it hasn't come up in the online comics, I probably don't know about it.

[Keltest]

Start of Darkness. Been mentioned before; I would elaborate but I don't know if you're contesting it or don't know about it.

Certainly it means Xykon doesn't think he needs his phylactery to continue existing, but Xykon is also explicitly not an expert on the metaphysics (or any other part) of Lichdom, or at least was not at the time.


Hmm. An advantage that Redcloak gets from physically possessing the real phylactery as opposed to just destroying it is that he can put it wherever he wants, and thereby control where Xykon reforms after being destroyed. Perhaps his plan is to store the phylactery in some kind of perfect prison, with the intent that if Xykon ever gets destroyed, he will be trapped and unable to affect anything until Redcloak actually needs him for the Gate ritual.

If Redcloak had some manner of controlling Xykon enough that he could compel him to do, well, anything, he wouldn't need to keep the phylactery secret.

[Goblin_Priest]

I have a thought that just occurred to me that is related to the discussion: What if Xykon already knows that Redcloak switched the phylactery on him?

Remember that Redcloak says in #831 that he had the fauxlactery created according to his memory. "Every detail, every scratch. Exactly as I remembered them. A perfect match." However, it's NOT a perfect match--in Comic #656, O-Chul hits the phylactery at least 4 times in an attempt to destroy it. Presumably, this would have left some scratches (Xykon does say "It's going to take more than that to scuff the finish," which is a point against my theory, but I'll say that this could be interpreted more as a "You're not going to destroy it that way" hyperbolic statement than a literal "It can't be scratched" statement).

Now, here's the thing: Redcloak would not have remembered these scratches on the phylactery because he wasn't there when they occurred--he escaped from O-Chul in #655, before the Paladin starts whacking at the amulet. So, there are scratches on the REAL phylactery that Redcloak was not aware of when he commissioned the fake one to be made.


Now, that begs the question: If Xykon DOES know about the switch because he recognizes the lack of marks that O-Chul had left, why didn't he smoke Redcloak right then and there? Hard to say. We do have it on record (I can't remember the comic, someone help me out) that Xykon says "Don't confuse not caring with not knowing." Perhaps the lich is ACTING like he doesn't know so that he can see what Redcloak has up his sleeve down the road?

I understand this theory hinges upon a very loose and tenuous assumption, and that there are serious counter-points against it (for example: if there were other scratches on the real phylactery, Redcloak could have seen them when he did the side-by-side comparison. He doesn't mention there are new scratches on the real phylactery, so that probably sinks my theory right then and there.) Still, I had the thought and felt the need to register on the forums and voice it. Thoughts from anyone else?

I do suspect that Xykon knows, and already acted on it, and thus that RC has the fake and that the real one is, indeed, in the astral fortress.

[WastedTalent]

Do we know that liches can survive the destruction of their phylacteries?

According to Libris Mortis, they can. Looked it up, it says so on p. 151.

Also:
At some point in SoD Redcloak threatens to destroy the phylactery. Xykon is basically unimpressed about this, I think while stating something along the lines of it not doing anything to his current physical body.


Memory is weird.

True. Makes re-reading the comic a lot more fun though :smallamused:


What if Xykon already knows that Redcloak switched the phylactery on him?

While I salute your attention to detail, the main problem I have with this theory is that it would require Xykon to walk around accepting that if anything happens to his body, he will be at the mercy of Redcloak...while (in this scenario) knowing full well RC is actively working to undermine him. I accept that Xykon can be careless sometimes, but ignoring a threat like that seems a bit of a stretch. Besides, what would he really gain from fooling Redcloak in this manner? Well a few good punchlines probably, but there tend to be enough of those flying around either way :)


I can't believe people compared Tsukiko, a minor asset that was given a chance to improve its value, to Xykon's phylactery, his personal insurance against the big fire below.

If you're referring to any of my posts, I was never making a comparison of their respective worth to Xykon, since it's obvious. All I'm saying is, if Redcloak was able to casually crush Tsukiko, and then spin some half-truths to Xykon about his reasons for it afterwards, all without losing another eyeball - well, he might have another clever trick or two more hidden away.

[Quartz]

Now, here's the thing: Redcloak would not have remembered these scratches on the phylactery because he wasn't there when they occurred--he escaped from O-Chul in #655, before the Paladin starts whacking at the amulet. So, there are scratches on the REAL phylactery that Redcloak was not aware of when he commissioned the fake one to be made.


But Redcloak would know of them once the phylactery was recovered and thus in his hands.

[hroþila]

But Redcloak would know of them once the phylactery was recovered and thus in his hands.
But, by the time Redcloak recovered the real phylactery, the old jeweller had already crafted the fake one.

I don't think it's a problem, though - Xykon wouldn't be familiar with those new scratches either, since he barely got a look. And that's even assuming O-Chul managed to scratch it at all.

[Chei]

But, by the time Redcloak recovered the real phylactery, the old jeweller had already crafted the fake one.

I don't think it's a problem, though - Xykon wouldn't be familiar with those new scratches either, since he barely got a look. And that's even assuming O-Chul managed to scratch it at all.

He wouldn't have managed to scratch it. Xykon straight-up says "It'll take more than a few whacks with a metal bar to scuff the finish, pally" when O-Chul tries. He also says that the phylactery has so many abjurations on it, he's forgotten what most of them do. Abjurations that render an object impervious to non-magical metal whacking are pretty basic.

[Goblin_Priest]

While I salute your attention to detail, the main problem I have with this theory is that it would require Xykon to walk around accepting that if anything happens to his body, he will be at the mercy of Redcloak...while (in this scenario) knowing full well RC is actively working to undermine him. I accept that Xykon can be careless sometimes, but ignoring a threat like that seems a bit of a stretch. Besides, what would he really gain from fooling Redcloak in this manner? Well a few good punchlines probably, but there tend to be enough of those flying around either way :)

SoD does give us a good example of Xykon knowing he's being lied to, and acting ignorant about it.

I would not find out of character for Xykon to know about the switch, act on it, and then pretend he's never known. I wouldn't expect him to allow RC to carry around the real thing, but I do think him allowing RC to carry around what RC thinks is the real thing is plausible enough.

They are both powerful villains that need each other to reach their goals, and both have vested interests in keeping safeguards against each other without risking open conflict with each other.

[Seto]

SoD does give us a good example of Xykon knowing he's being lied to, and acting ignorant about it.

I would not find out of character for Xykon to know about the switch, act on it, and then pretend he's never known. I wouldn't expect him to allow RC to carry around the real thing, but I do think him allowing RC to carry around what RC thinks is the real thing is plausible enough.

They are both powerful villains that need each other to reach their goals, and both have vested interests in keeping safeguards against each other without risking open conflict with each other.

I agree. I don't know whether Xykon knows Redcloak's been lying to him, but that's a possibility. Several times, Xykon has unexpectedly revealed that he's smarter than he lets on. One of those times, the end of SoD, was about minions plotting against him and Redcloak deceiving him.
When Xykon reveals that he knows stuff, that's also when he's at his most chilling and dangerous (in my subjective reading experience anyway). And what if Redcloak and Xykon's story was the story of the latter always crushing the former's hopes, even when RC has reason to believe that this time he has the upper hand? It would be "Redcloak's tragedy", which would make for a convincing sad counterpoint to the PCs' happy ending.

I'm not saying that's going to happen, because SoD itself already is Redcloak's tragedy. Besides, even if it does happen, it'll be short (I believe Team Evil will be defeated in the same fight) and RC's actions will matter this time; they'll give the OotS a crucial edge. But Xykon being aware of Redcloak's betrayal, and crushing him at the last moment, remains a possibility and would be narratively fitting.

[WastedTalent]

I would not find out of character for Xykon to know about the switch, act on it, and then pretend he's never known. I wouldn't expect him to allow RC to carry around the real thing, but I do think him allowing RC to carry around what RC thinks is the real thing is plausible enough.

But we've seen no in-comic evidence of Xykon second guessing wheather the phylactery's the real deal. Also, in 901 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0901.html), we see Xykon doesn't have much of a grasp on what Redcloak's true intentions are, more a general sort of mistrust because he knows Redcloak has motives of his own besides capturing the next gate. We've spent a lot of comics tracking where the phylactery went. Seems too large of a jump to suddenly have Xykon do a re-switch of it off-panel.

[Kish]

What I see in 901, is Xykon reminding his slave that he's in charge. Nothing about distrust, as such.

What I see in 700 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0700.html) and related strips, on the other hand, is that Xykon explicitly realizes he needs to know what the ritual to "control the Snarl" actually does, as distinct from what Redcloak claims it does.

[WastedTalent]

What I see in 901, is Xykon reminding his slave that he's in charge. Nothing about distrust, as such.

Redcloak wanted to wipe the order out right there, which would have been a tactically sound decision on the part of Team Evil. The OOTS was down both their wizard and cleric, and in a pretty sorry state to boot. Instead Xykon decides to immediately split, because he distrusts Redcloak and doesn't want him 'setting up another goblin colony'.

Since the gobbo's are still holed up at Azure City and there's no real reason for Redcloak to set up shop at another rift without a gate, it seems unlikely this was his actual intention.

Which shows that while Xykon rightly doesn't trust Redcloak (anymore), he also doesn't seem to have a very good grip on Redcloak's true motivations.


What I see in 700 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0700.html) and related strips, on the other hand, is that Xykon explicitly realizes he needs to know what the ritual to "control the Snarl" actually does, as distinct from what Redcloak claims it does.

There's certainly sóme level of recognition on Xykon's part that he doesn't really know enough about how the ritual works. It was only Tsukiko that found out about the details, though, and she never got to tell Xykon any of that, as far as the comic suggests.

[hroþila]

I don't think Xykon was at all concerned with Redcloak setting up a goblin colony at Girard's Gate. The way I see it, Xykon simply wanted to put Redcloak in his place, in the pettiest way possible and even against common sense, because he felt he had lost in the Tsukiko affair: he knew it was suspiciously convenient that Redcloak had killed Tsukiko (who Xykon knew to be loyal to him) right when he had told her to investigate the ritual, but he had to back off and pretend he knew nothing when Redcloak directly asked him about his half of the ritual. That was eating at Xykon, so he tried to compensate by reasserting his authority over Redcloak at the earliest opportunity. In my view, Redcloak's excuses (and fanfiction) simply allowed Xykon to save face, and thus he was glad to accept them for appearances' sake and to move on. Xykon never quite trusted Redcloak, but now he doesn't quite trust his leash either, and he's not willing to tip his hand and confront Redcloak openly because he still believes he will come out on top and rule the world after all of this, if he doesn't get carried away and kill Redcloak over what might ultimately be nothing.

That's the way I see it, at any rate.

[Kish]

Redcloak wanted to wipe the order out right there, which would have been a tactically sound decision on the part of Team Evil. The OOTS was down both their wizard and cleric, and in a pretty sorry state to boot. Instead Xykon decides to immediately split, because he distrusts Redcloak and doesn't want him 'setting up another goblin colony'.
I think you're reading Xykon's snarky reference to Gobbotopia way too literally. As I said, it looks to me like he said "shut up, we're leaving" to remind Redcloak who's in charge. That he didn't value killing his nemesis and the other protagonists of the comicthat guy he met before once, he thinks, maybe, and the group who...were with him then, weren't they? means that he doesn't care enough about the Order to view killing them as anything more valuable than killing a dozen remorhaz at Kraagor's Gate, not that he particularly wants them dead but sacrificed a chance to kill them to prevent Redcloak from doing something specific.

[WastedTalent]

I don't think Xykon was at all concerned with Redcloak setting up a goblin colony at Girard's Gate. The way I see it, Xykon simply wanted to put Redcloak in his place, in the pettiest way possible and even against common sense, because he felt he had lost in the Tsukiko affair: he knew it was suspiciously convenient that Redcloak had killed Tsukiko (who Xykon knew to be loyal to him) right when he had told her to investigate the ritual, but he had to back off and pretend he knew nothing when Redcloak directly asked him about his half of the ritual. That was eating at Xykon, so he tried to compensate by reasserting his authority over Redcloak at the earliest opportunity. In my view, Redcloak's excuses (and fanfiction) simply allowed Xykon to save face, and thus he was glad to accept them for appearances' sake and to move on. Xykon never quite trusted Redcloak, but now he doesn't quite trust his leash either, and he's not willing to tip his hand and confront Redcloak openly because he still believes he will come out on top and rule the world after all of this, if he doesn't get carried away and kill Redcloak over what might ultimately be nothing.

That's the way I see it, at any rate.

I don't think Xykon was just putting Redcloak in his place because he was looking for an opportunity to do so. In panel #5 of 901, Xykon seems willing to just tag along with Redcloak's suggestion that they go after the heroes.

It's only after the MitD reminds Xykon of how they sat on their butts for months after the battle for Azure City that he starts getting agitated about following Redcloak's suggestion. I don't think Xykon was literally worried RC might try to forge another goblin city on the spot, I think he was mostly angry at the idea of wasting more time on objectives that don't directly have anything to do with conquering one of the gates.

[hroþila]

I don't think Xykon was just putting Redcloak in his place because he was looking for an opportunity to do so. In panel #5 of 901, Xykon seems willing to just tag along with Redcloak's suggestion that they go after the heroes.

It's only after the MitD reminds Xykon of how they sat on their butts for months after the battle for Azure City that he starts getting agitated about following Redcloak's suggestion. I don't think Xykon was literally worried RC might try to forge another goblin city on the spot, I think he was mostly angry at the idea of wasting more time on objectives that don't directly have anything to do with conquering one of the gates.
Yes, but according to my interpretation, that only means the MitD gave Xykon a plausible way out to get petty on Redcloak and put him in his place. Maybe it didn't even occur to him before the MitD spoke or whatever.

[wumpus]

"Might"? That's quite a charitable view of Xykon.
...

Xykon doesn't strictly need Redcloak, he could try to find some way to take over the world or otherwise act on his ambition/boredom. And while Redcloak is a devout follower of the sunken cost fallacy, and generally unwilling to give up on the Plan after all his pursuit of it has cost him, even he would realize that being too dead to complete the divine half of the Gate ritual would be far more of a complication than trying to find another arcane caster for the arcane half of the Gate ritual.

While Xykon doesn't need Redcloak (he isn't all that committed to the Plan, he just thinks its the least boring thing going on this century or so), Redcloak needs Xykon even less. All he needs is an epic[?] arcane caster that can be tricked into performing the ritual (which presumably means a sorcerer, although often it is easier to trick the intelligent through their arrogance). We've seen more than a few epic level adventurers, presumably it would make more sense to find another (if he disguised himself well enough, old V' might have been a good choice once she got to epic. Hilarious sequel possibilities.

Finding a replacement for Xykon is likely easier than surviving keeping the phylactery and somehow managing to keep Xykon under control. I'm sure he knew that when he switched the phylacteries and is ready to keep killing Xykon until he can destroy the phylactery (and I'm sure the rift will work).

[Kish]

I didn't choke on that until your last parenthetical. You're sure throwing the phylactery into the rift wouldn't result in Xykon reforming, intact and furious with Redcloak, on the world inside the rift? I think that certainty is a bad idea.

[Jasdoif]

While Xykon doesn't need Redcloak (he isn't all that committed to the Plan, he just thinks its the least boring thing going on this century or so), Redcloak needs Xykon even less. All he needs is an epic[?] arcane caster that can be tricked into performing the ritual (which presumably means a sorcerer, although often it is easier to trick the intelligent through their arrogance). We've seen more than a few epic level adventurers, presumably it would make more sense to find another (if he disguised himself well enough, old V' might have been a good choice once she got to epic. Hilarious sequel possibilities.

Finding a replacement for Xykon is likely easier than surviving keeping the phylactery and somehow managing to keep Xykon under control. I'm sure he knew that when he switched the phylacteries and is ready to keep killing Xykon until he can destroy the phylactery (and I'm sure the rift will work).The Plan doesn't specifically need Xykon, no. If that was Redcloak's only concern, he should have toasted the phylactery after Roy destroyed Xykon's body all the way back in the Dungeon of Dorukan. Redcloak's trying to have his cake and eat it too by fulfilling the Plan with Xykon, rather than admit to himself that killing Right-Eye ultimately had no benefit (by abandoning who/what he killed Right-Eye for).

Other than that, you seem to be basically agreeing with what I was saying...well, up until your certainty that the rift would work. It certainly doesn't destroy phylacteries consistently (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0660.html), and like Kish says it could become quite an issue if Xykon reforms on the other side...especially since the Plan involves keeping the rift around.

[Keltest]

The Plan doesn't specifically need Xykon, no. If that was Redcloak's only concern, he should have toasted the phylactery after Roy destroyed Xykon's body all the way back in the Dungeon of Dorukan. Redcloak's trying to have his cake and eat it too by fulfilling the Plan with Xykon, rather than admit to himself that killing Right-Eye ultimately had no benefit (by abandoning who/what he killed Right-Eye for).

Other than that, you seem to be basically agreeing with what I was saying...well, up until your certainty that the rift would work. It certainly doesn't destroy phylacteries consistently (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0660.html), and like Kish says it could become quite an issue if Xykon reforms on the other side...especially since the Plan involves keeping the rift around.

Redcloak may not be actively trying to ditch Xykon at the moment, but he certainly seems to be prepared to do away with him the moment Xykon is defeated, or, barring that, at least exert control over him again.

[Aeson]

Other than that, you seem to be basically agreeing with what I was saying...well, up until your certainty that the rift would work. It certainly doesn't destroy phylacteries consistently, and like Kish says it could become quite an issue if Xykon reforms on the other side...especially since the Plan involves keeping the rift around.
The line drawn indicating the phylactery's trajectory seems to pass in front of the large tear and between two of the rift-edge tendrils, which suggests that the phylactery never came into contact with any part of the rift rather than having fallen through it or bounced off of the rift edge or something like that. As such, I would say that the linked comic does not provide any evidence one way or the other for whether or not the rifts are capable of destroying Xykon's phylactery.

As far as comics which might provide some insight onto whether or not the phylactery could be destroyed by being thrown through a rift, I would suggest this one (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html). Laurin seems confident that the ocean which can be seen on the other side of the rift can be used as a water source feeding a desalination plant, which suggests that she believes that neither the water nor whatever is used to bring it through the rift will be harmed by passing through the rift. We also know that Laurin has been telepathically probing the rift, and in the large panel at the end of the comic it looks like water might be coming through the rift as Snarl tendrils erupt from it. From this comic, we see that one character believes that at least some forms of matter can safely pass through the rift, we see evidence that that belief might be correct, and we see that at least some kinds of magic can pass through the rift without being corrupted/destroyed/harmed in any way which the caster cared to comment upon (though said magic does appear to have attracted the attention of something best left undisturbed). Xykon's phylactery is a bit of matter mixed with a bit (well, probably a lot) of magic, and what little evidence we have on the subject suggests that neither matter nor magic is harmed by passage through the rift.

[Ruck]

I didn't choke on that until your last parenthetical. You're sure throwing the phylactery into the rift wouldn't result in Xykon reforming, intact and furious with Redcloak, on the world inside the rift? I think that certainty is a bad idea.

I'm not certain at all, but given what we saw happen in the desert, I'm not certain there is an actual world in the rift, either. I think the Snarl might have become intelligent enough to disguise itself.

[mikelibrarian]

Redcloak could probably destroy the phylactery by casting distingrate on iy once a day until it it destroyed. He could also planeshift it to the Elemental Plane of Fire, The Positive Material Plane or to the Dark One's domain and ask his boss to deal with it.

From a story point of view, I can't see Xykon getting destroyed and Redcloak surviving. I find it much more likely, from a story point of view that Xykon knew of the deception and made the witch, which will force the Order of the Stick into a final boss fight in his Astral Plane dungeon.

[wumpus]

Redcloak could probably destroy the phylactery by casting distingrate on iy once a day until it it destroyed. He could also planeshift it to the Elemental Plane of Fire, The Positive Material Plane or to the Dark One's domain and ask his boss to deal with it.

From a story point of view, I can't see Xykon getting destroyed and Redcloak surviving. I find it much more likely, from a story point of view that Xykon knew of the deception and made the witch, which will force the Order of the Stick into a final boss fight in his Astral Plane dungeon.

It would certainly fit the "curses, foiled again" trope, where a villain tries repeatedly to destroy the multiverse. Since OOTS is a single work, that wouldn't be much of an ending.

[Goblin_Priest]

Redcloak is the mastermind of Team Evil. I'd have a hard time imagining him dying "off-screen", and by that, I mean in the absence of the main party. Get brutally defeated but miraculously survive Xykon, maybe. Run away and hide from Xykon's wrath, maybe. But be slain outright? Doubtful. The Crimson Mantle, and its purpose, is central to the plot and pretty much the driving force behind the whole story. Xykon might be the "main villain", but Redcloak remains at the center of it all.

The only way I'd see him dying before the PCs ever confront him is if he manages to pull off his purpose beforehand and cast his ritual before they arrive. At which point I guess the Snarl or Xykon could kill him. But I'd have a hard time seeing this happen.

[Ruck]

From a story point of view, I can't see Xykon getting destroyed and Redcloak surviving. I find it much more likely, from a story point of view that Xykon knew of the deception and made the witch, which will force the Order of the Stick into a final boss fight in his Astral Plane dungeon.

How? When?

[Goblin_Priest]

How? When?

On the Astral plane, right after he was given the fake, would be the most likely place and time for this I suppose.

Perhaps Xykon intended to replace Redcloak with Tsukiko, and already had her forge a replica to fool him, just as Redcloak was doing himself.

[Ruck]

On the Astral plane, right after he was given the fake, would be the most likely place and time for this I suppose.
I mean, this doesn't really answer my questions. How would Xykon know, and how would Xykon make the switch? And when would he have the opportunity to do this?


Perhaps Xykon intended to replace Redcloak with Tsukiko, and already had her forge a replica to fool him, just as Redcloak was doing himself.
What difference does that make? Redcloak recovered the actual phylactery that was actually found in the sewers.

[Kish]

I'm also blinking at the suggestion that replacing Redcloak would be done by...tricking Redcloak in some way involving a fake phylactery which Tsukiko would pull a bunch of Craft (Jewelry) ranks out of her butt to craft, not by casting Meteor Swarm at him.

[Goblin_Priest]

I'm also blinking at the suggestion that replacing Redcloak would be done by...tricking Redcloak in some way involving a fake phylactery which Tsukiko would pull a bunch of Craft (Jewelry) ranks out of her butt to craft, not by casting Meteor Swarm at him.

Redcloak is needed for the ritual. Xykon is unlikely to blast him to pieces without first securing a means to complete the ritual without him. Xykon might not be divinely motivated for this quest, but he also has no desire to return to his former low-stakes schemes.

[The Aboleth]

I think there is a small chance that Xykon knows about the fauxlactery based upon the reasons I've already cited. I DON'T think it's necessary that Xykon has done something about it, though. Xykon might have a solution to the problem that he can't use until AFTER the ritual is cast (or before it is cast but not until he is forced to tip his hand). Or, Xykon might not have a plan yet on what he should do about it, so he's content for now to simply bide his time and wait until he comes up with one.

If Xykon does have a plan, it might be as simple as "Once the ritual is completed, I'll kill Redcloak and take back the real phylactery." Xykon (far as we know) isn't aware that the ritual WON'T grant him absolute power, so even knowing about Redcloak's fauxlactery scheme the lich might feel it is not a high enough priority to deal with yet--but once the end goal is reached, THEN all bets are off and he can dispose of his traitorous minion as he sees fit.

We've seen before that Xykon is willing to let certain things slide until they become a real problem for him. The events at the end of SoD are a clear example of this. I think you can also point to the whole Gobbotopia arc as another--he was willing to let Redcloak play civic leader up until the point when doing so led to events which directly threatened Xykon, himself. Xykon might not feel "threatened" enough to act against Redcloak right at the moment, but when he does you can be sure it won't be pretty.*

*Again, assuming Xykon knows at all. I'm torn as to whether I would find it more satisfying, as a reader, if Xykon knows and it keeping it close to the vest right now, or if he doesn't know and Redcloak succeeds in pulling on over on the lich.

EDIT: Another thought I just had is that whether or not Xykon has a "plan" would depend on when he found out. If Xykon knew about the switch right away, then maybe he already has a plan in place. If Xykon only found out off-panel much later--say, while placing the fauxlactery in the Astral Fortress--he might not have a plan because he's only just realized the deception.

[justalurker]

Redcloak is needed for the ritual. Xykon is unlikely to blast him to pieces without first securing a means to complete the ritual without him. Xykon might not be divinely motivated for this quest, but he also has no desire to return to his former low-stakes schemes.

A means like the now Vampiric Durkon?

[Keltest]

A means like the now Vampiric Durkon?

Nah. Xykon doesn't know the divine half of the ritual at all. Just finding another appropriately leveled cleric minion isn't enough.

[Kish]

I think Xykon left "low-stakes schemes" behind at least seven levels ago. If he realizes that the Plan does not, never did lead to power for him, next on his agenda is "recruit a more loyal second-in-command to take care of the boring details and conquer the world more conventionally." He is not, most definitely not, going to remain invested in "must complete the ritual" if he learns of Redcloak's betrayal; the ritual is everything to Redcloak, but only Plan A for Xykon.

(None of this gives Xykon a reason to have a fake phylactery crafted, in any event, though I am starting to wonder if everyone's paid enough attention to Redcloak's words to be clear on what the ritual will actually do for Xykon--i.e., bupkiss.)

[Darth Paul]

Funnily enough, that's the first time I've ever seen that word written down, in just shy of 51 years on the planet. I'd always imagined it was spelled "bupkus".

And I agree with your analysis of Xykon's plans. Should he dispose of Redcloak, the Gates are out the window, too. He'll just find a new #2 with another diabolical scheme for world domination that only lacks firepower, add said firepower, and take over the world that way. Or, he might get bored with world domination and go back to just blowing crap up and murdering people for short-term entertainment.

Finding someone else to reboot Redcloak's scheme would be too much like work. :xykon: Boring...

[Peelee]

bupkiss


Funnily enough, that's the first time I've ever seen that word written down, in just shy of 51 years on the planet. I'd always imagined it was spelled "bupkus".

Well, bupkis it only has one S. So you were only a letter off.

[Lord Raziere]

If Xykon's body gets destroyed, he will wake up in his Phylactery and find that its not the astral fortress. Then he will be angry but Redcloak will take him and probably make some speech along the lines of retorting to Xykon about some earlier thing then destroying him, or just giving Roy the Phylactery to destroy instead.

But really, here are my thoughts on how the many ways this could possibly play out:

1. Order of the Stick Wins
We have a picture perfect, no twists or turns final battle. They arrive at the ritual before it can be completed, disrupt it and fight, Redcloak is killed, then Xykon is killed both at great effort and possibly with Belkar dying, then they find the Phylactery and the soul gem with Dorukan and Lirian's souls in it. The OOTS destroy the Phylactery, and Redcloak meets the Dark One, knowing that he has failed. Everyone lives happily ever after. This is not a likely ending, as nothing has turned out quite like that so far, and it assumes everything turns out for the best.

2. Redcloak Wins
Now this is a more interesting ending. Throughout the comic, while Xykon is supposedly the "main villain" its Redcloak who is actually driving everything because he has Xykon fooled. In this ending, Redcloak succeeds in fooling Xykon long enough to use the ritual- and thus right when the OOTS burst in, the Gate along with the Rift disappears, the ritual finishing.

Everyone else is agape. Xykon is caught completely off guard. Both the OOTS and Xykon is like "whats going on Redcloak!?" and Redcloak smiles and says "I don't do explaining my plan BEFORE it succeeds, but since it just did 3.5 seconds ago.....

I Fooled You All. This was never about conquering the world, at least not for Xykon and me. I've handed the Gate to the Dark One, the god of the goblin peoples. For thirty years, I lied to you Xykon, led you to believe that you would gain power from this. but you never would. the Dark One will use the Gate to threaten the other gods into granting equality to the goblin people. No longer will we be cannon fodder to be cut down by PC's. No longer will we have to come crawling to sorcerers like Xykon to gain a leg up! No longer will we be killed and slaughtered by you humans! I HAVE WON!

And the best part is? Even if you kill me now, my victory is already assured. Kill me, and all that will happen is me meeting the Dark One! My god will grant me his best place in the afterlife thanks to my actions! While you were all distracted by Xykon, I worked from the shadows to enact my real plan, and it worked. My work is done. I know that my family, my brother, none of them are proud of what I have done. I know that you will hate me. But I can rest easy knowing that I've achieved what I set out to do."
Then Xykon compliments on the shadowy villain speech before flying into a rage, Redcloak destroys the Phylactery and tells the OOTS that he has no stake in the conflict between Xykon and OOTS and thus escapes/teleports out, and OOTS kills Xykon, then finds the soul Gem with Lirian and Dorukan and repairs the Gate. Soon they see a new world where goblins, orcs, humans all interact peacefully, there are still adventures, adventurers and monsters but the world is still a better place.

Then we see Redcloak hanging up the cloak and going out with a goblin girl on a date at the end.

How likely is this ending? Who knows, but it would certainly be very interesting, and a great way to resolve it. Probably one of the more likely endings in my opinon.

3. Redcloak Loses
In this ending, Xykon somehow finds out before he can enact the ritual, kills Redcloak before the OOTS show up, then Xykon gets killed by the OOTS while he is in rage mode over his plans failing. Redcloak's story and true plan go unused and unspoken to the OOTS, Gobbotopia is erased and replaced with Sapphire City once again, and nothing that Redcloak did no matter how well intentioned succeeds. This is honestly a bit anti-climactic and while tragic, kind of makes everything Redcloak did pointless. Because in stories, a big part of it is the journey, the struggle, the cost, the sacrifice it took to reach the end.

And Redcloak has struggled a lot and sacrificed much to get this position. and not in the usual "cackling villain sacrificing disposable minions" way. His sacrificing of his brother meant a lot. His sacrificing of the jeweler was of someone he clearly respected and valued. He actually had a moral realization that he was becoming too much Xykon and corrected himself, and he sacrificed Tsukiko to maintain his advantage. He is clearly not sociopathic like Tarquin or Xykon, and there was at least one moment in Start of Darkness where he was about to turn back from his evil ways only to get stopped by Xykon forcing him to go along with it. That, I feel doesn't merit an anti-climactic ending with no pay off for all that Redcloak went through. So I highly doubt that all that he done is going to be for nothing.

4. Redcloak is Redeemed
No, the other likely ending is Redcloak's Redemption. The OOTS somehow finds out Redcloak's plan to equalize the goblin race before its done, and the OOTS hearing that don't kill him, and instead persuade him to turn back, to finally give up on his plans, that the Dark One, is an evil god and wouldn't follow through the plan without abusing his power, and Redcloak, a guy that while evil, still has some conscience, and would decide to go forth and achieve goblin equality the right way, while killing Xykon without any remorse. Who knows how likely this ending is, but I'd consider it more likely than all this having no payoff like in 1 or 3, but less likely than 2, because there is no good way one could see the OOTS learning Redcloak's real plan other than hearing it from him himself, and Redcloak clearly went to the Ozymandias Villain School of Thought regarding this sort of thing.

So yeah, my guess is that Redcloak will succeed. Thing is, Redcloak succeeding in his plan doesn't require any of the OOTS to have a bad ending. its Xykon succeeding that would require the OOTS to have a bad ending, because he wants to rule the world. Thats impossible as we already know, so all thats left is the outcome of Redcloak's plan. And the outcome of the goblins getting equal rights in the eyes of the gods, has nothing to do with the OOTS having a happy ending. The OOTS will get a good ending regardless of whether or not Redcloak's plan succeeds or fails at the final battle. So there is no reason for Redcloak to not succeed other than to bring up a moralistic point about well-intentioned extremist villains.

[Goblin_Priest]

A means like the now Vampiric Durkon?

Vampiric Durkon is a means to nothing. Aside from the fact that he is pursuing the world's destruction, he doesn't know the divine half of the ritual, and has no way of learning it. Unless, he turns Redcloak into a free-willed vampire... but, why would Vampcloak serve Xykon? There is little reason for it to happen.


I think Xykon left "low-stakes schemes" behind at least seven levels ago. If he realizes that the Plan does not, never did lead to power for him, next on his agenda is "recruit a more loyal second-in-command to take care of the boring details and conquer the world more conventionally." He is not, most definitely not, going to remain invested in "must complete the ritual" if he learns of Redcloak's betrayal; the ritual is everything to Redcloak, but only Plan A for Xykon.

(None of this gives Xykon a reason to have a fake phylactery crafted, in any event, though I am starting to wonder if everyone's paid enough attention to Redcloak's words to be clear on what the ritual will actually do for Xykon--i.e., bupkiss.)

The gates and the snarl are kind of a huge thing. It would seem unwise to ignore a world-destroying creature when one seeks to conquer said world, lest it end all in vain.

[Kish]

I think all four of your scenarios are based on (different, in some cases) false premises.



1. Order of the Stick Wins
We have a picture perfect, no twists or turns final battle. They arrive at the ritual before it can be completed, disrupt it and fight, Redcloak is killed, then Xykon is killed both at great effort and possibly with Belkar dying, then they find the Phylactery and the soul gem with Dorukan and Lirian's souls in it. The OOTS destroy the Phylactery, and Redcloak meets the Dark One, knowing that he has failed. Everyone lives happily ever after. This is not a likely ending, as nothing has turned out quite like that so far, and it assumes everything turns out for the best.

False premise here: Rich will sweep the situation where monsters were created to be cannon fodder under the rug after bringing it to the forefront. One thing I am certain of, is that the comic will not end with "and then goblins went back to being animated training dummies; who ever thought they might be anything else?"


2. Redcloak Wins
Now this is a more interesting ending. Throughout the comic, while Xykon is supposedly the "main villain" its Redcloak who is actually driving everything because he has Xykon fooled. In this ending, Redcloak succeeds in fooling Xykon long enough to use the ritual- and thus right when the OOTS burst in, the Gate along with the Rift disappears, the ritual finishing.

Everyone else is agape. Xykon is caught completely off guard. Both the OOTS and Xykon is like "whats going on Redcloak!?" and Redcloak smiles and says "I don't do explaining my plan BEFORE it succeeds, but since it just did 3.5 seconds ago.....

I Fooled You All. This was never about conquering the world, at least not for Xykon and me. I've handed the Gate to the Dark One, the god of the goblin peoples. For thirty years, I lied to you Xykon, led you to believe that you would gain power from this. but you never would. the Dark One will use the Gate to threaten the other gods into granting equality to the goblin people. No longer will we be cannon fodder to be cut down by PC's. No longer will we have to come crawling to sorcerers like Xykon to gain a leg up! No longer will we be killed and slaughtered by you humans! I HAVE WON!

And the best part is? Even if you kill me now, my victory is already assured. Kill me, and all that will happen is me meeting the Dark One! My god will grant me his best place in the afterlife thanks to my actions! While you were all distracted by Xykon, I worked from the shadows to enact my real plan, and it worked. My work is done. I know that my family, my brother, none of them are proud of what I have done. I know that you will hate me. But I can rest easy knowing that I've achieved what I set out to do."
Then Xykon compliments on the shadowy villain speech before flying into a rage, Redcloak destroys the Phylactery and tells the OOTS that he has no stake in the conflict between Xykon and OOTS and thus escapes/teleports out, and OOTS kills Xykon, then finds the soul Gem with Lirian and Dorukan and repairs the Gate. Soon they see a new world where goblins, orcs, humans all interact peacefully, there are still adventures, adventurers and monsters but the world is still a better place.

Then we see Redcloak hanging up the cloak and going out with a goblin girl on a date at the end.

How likely is this ending? Who knows, but it would certainly be very interesting, and a great way to resolve it. Probably one of the more likely endings in my opinon.

False premises here: Redcloak is the hero of the comic, Start of Darkness was about him recognizing what sacrifices were necessary and sadly being forced to kill his treacherous brother, and the Dark One is as perfectly benevolent as Redcloak thinks he is.

A second thing I am certain of, is that Redcloak will never be vindicated for the murder of his brother. "Goodbye...Redcloak" will always be a damning condemnation of a complete monster's willing slave, not pitiful whining by a vanquished traitor.


3. Redcloak Loses
In this ending, Xykon somehow finds out before he can enact the ritual, kills Redcloak before the OOTS show up, then Xykon gets killed by the OOTS while he is in rage mode over his plans failing. Redcloak's story and true plan go unused and unspoken to the OOTS, Gobbotopia is erased and replaced with Sapphire City once again, and nothing that Redcloak did no matter how well intentioned succeeds. This is honestly a bit anti-climactic and while tragic, kind of makes everything Redcloak did pointless. Because in stories, a big part of it is the journey, the struggle, the cost, the sacrifice it took to reach the end.

And Redcloak has struggled a lot and sacrificed much to get this position. and not in the usual "cackling villain sacrificing disposable minions" way. His sacrificing of his brother meant a lot. His sacrificing of the jeweler was of someone he clearly respected and valued. He actually had a moral realization that he was becoming too much Xykon and corrected himself, and he sacrificed Tsukiko to maintain his advantage. He is clearly not sociopathic like Tarquin or Xykon, and there was at least one moment in Start of Darkness where he was about to turn back from his evil ways only to get stopped by Xykon forcing him to go along with it. That, I feel doesn't merit an anti-climactic ending with no pay off for all that Redcloak went through. So I highly doubt that all that he done is going to be for nothing.

Even from your perspective (in which Redcloak deserves a reward rather than a punishment for his murders, betrayals, tortures, and enslavements in Start of Darkness and since, which, if one is attached to the numbering system, I'm calling a great big honking false premise--he does not deserve a reward for murdering his brother or not resurrecting the jeweler, his rationalizations when he disintegrated each of them aside. He will never have vindication, and he can't have redemption without first acknowledging that his indefensible wrongs are indefensible wrongs), I'm not sure how this meaningfully differs from your first scenario. It looks like it's just a matter of where the spotlight falls.


4. Redcloak is Redeemed
No, the other likely ending is Redcloak's Redemption. The OOTS somehow finds out Redcloak's plan to equalize the goblin race before its done, and the OOTS hearing that don't kill him, and instead persuade him to turn back, to finally give up on his plans, that the Dark One, is an evil god and wouldn't follow through the plan without abusing his power, and Redcloak, a guy that while evil, still has some conscience, and would decide to go forth and achieve goblin equality the right way, while killing Xykon without any remorse. Who knows how likely this ending is, but I'd consider it more likely than all this having no payoff like in 1 or 3, but less likely than 2, because there is no good way one could see the OOTS learning Redcloak's real plan other than hearing it from him himself, and Redcloak clearly went to the Ozymandias Villain School of Thought regarding this sort of thing.

This is the only one you propose that's actually possible, because it's the only one that doesn't act as though Redcloak is the true hero of the comic and the actual heroes--the Order in the main comic, his brother in Start of Darkness--deluded antagonists. I still don't think it's terribly likely as you describe it, because it's all about Redcloak and has no real place for the six members of the Order; they're not going to spend the climax of the comic being reduced to Generic Band of Interchangeable Adventurers, even Generic Band of Sympathetic Interchangeable Adventurers.

However, just to be thorough, I'm calling "Redcloak clearly went to the Ozymandias Villain School of Thought regarding this sort of thing" out as a false premise. He didn't explain his plan to Tsukiko's already-dead corpse. He was confident she couldn't get away and he happened to be right, but she died with knowledge that would have gotten him killed had she had some means of escaping he hadn't been prepared for. He monologued at O-Chul quite a bit, entirely possibly after he'd already accepted that O-Chul knew nothing to tell him. In another way besides the moral one, Redcloak is far less than you would have him be.

[wumpus]

Even from your perspective (in which Redcloak deserves a reward rather than a punishment for his murders, betrayals, tortures, and enslavements in Start of Darkness and since, which, if one is attached to the numbering system, I'm calling a great big honking false premise--he does not deserve a reward for murdering his brother or not resurrecting the jeweler, his rationalizations when he disintegrated each of them aside. He will never have vindication, and he can't have redemption without first acknowledging that his indefensible wrongs are indefensible wrongs), I'm not sure how this meaningfully differs from your first scenario. It looks like it's just a matter of where the spotlight falls.


If this were still a comic centered on sending up D&D rules (or even if the entire plotline was developed under such assumptions) this would hold. Under plenty of specific D&D rules, characters with "evil" listed next to where "alignment" goes on the character sheet (not that Redcloak necessarily has a character sheet, presumably NPCs just get a statblock and some notes on whatever bit of paper is handy) *are* rewarded for evil acts. Exactly how this works in the lower planes isn't well explained (although Belkar starting out as a footsoldier i the Blood war makes all kinds of sense), but presumably the more evil (or more *successfully* evil) types get a jump on becoming devils/demons.

It is a lousy system that hit its nadir (I hope) in the Wall of the Faithless. Had the OOTS continued on its initial trajectory, I could well imagine and ending that completely skewered this sickness inherent in many D&D systems. Of course, had OOTS continued on the initial trajectory, I don't expect Rich would have stayed with it more than a year.

But under such a system, Redcloak has been more consistently evil than Roy has been consistently good. Also V, Haley, and Belkar's character development (in V's case temptation, fall, and attempt at redemption) away from alignment stereotype would require punishment (Haley's alignment sheet was never better than neutral goodish until she got together with Elan). Note that while the D&D jokes occasionally pop up here and there (mostly to remind us of the silliness of the world of OOTS and D&D) there has been no indication that this alignment disaster is allowed to influence the narrative at all.

I'd strongly recommend playing D&D without alignment rules (where possible), but it is even worse trying to build fiction out of such a system. While you might avoid the "all characters/NPC/monsters are allowed only one of nine possible stereotypes which govern all thoughts and actions", the whole idea of preventing character growth (away from alignment barriers) limits fiction far too much. The whole point is that OOTS started with such schemes in mind (mostly to send them up), so the possibility that the arc and conclusion fits them needs to be considered (and hopefully discarded).

[Kish]

If this were still a comic centered on sending up D&D rules (or even if the entire plotline was developed under such assumptions) this would hold. Under plenty of specific D&D rules, characters with "evil" listed next to where "alignment" goes on the character sheet (not that Redcloak necessarily has a character sheet, presumably NPCs just get a statblock and some notes on whatever bit of paper is handy) *are* rewarded for evil acts. Exactly how this works in the lower planes isn't well explained (although Belkar starting out as a footsoldier i the Blood war makes all kinds of sense), but presumably the more evil (or more *successfully* evil) types get a jump on becoming devils/demons.
Why do you presume that?

Beyond that, I can state with relative certainty, based on his posts on the subject, that "the alignment system is inherently negative and should be removed from the game post-haste" is not a message Rich would ever have written the comic to send.

[wumpus]

Why do you presume that?

Beyond that, I can state with relative certainty, based on his posts on the subject, that "the alignment system is inherently negative and should be removed from the game post-haste" is not a message Rich would ever have written the comic to send.

Which assumption?

That the comic started as jokes about the D&D rules, but has since grown into Roy's story? I thought that was obvious.
As far as that take on alignment in D&D, most of this is from the DMG 1e, written by Gary Gygax. Characters were *strongly* required to act to their alignments, DMs were expected to graph player actions, and any change in alignment was strongly penalized*. This was continued by some (but not all) game designers and appears to have hit the nadir at the "Wall of the Faithless" (where insufficiently good and insufficiently evil (and presumably law,chaotic, and neutral) characters were equally punished for eternity).

I'm not suggesting that was the reason to create the comic. I'm simply suggesting that alignments are probably the crowning silliness of all D&D silliness. Consider just how many panels Rich has made out of Miko's "lawful stupid" alignment, I doubt that even all the class jokes (impressive considering how important such things are to Nale, Tarquin, and V) take up as many panels as the alignment jokes. And it isn't necessary to remove alignment from the game (Rich rather likes it, and has Roy say as much to Gygax), just that some bits are just to bizarre for play. While the game assumes objective good and evil, has anybody bothered to define an objective law and chaos? They presumably exist in D&D but nobody seems to agree what they are (other than "lawful good" is defined as "the best good", per Gygax and explicit in 4e).

* Yes, 1e was pretty weird. Basically the alignments were derived from wargaming's 'red' and 'blue' sides so any character changing alignment was seen as a turncoat. The character would only gradually be accepted by his new alignment and slowly be shown his new "alignment language" (probably the silliest thing ever about alignments). And somehow this spawned an absolutely entrenched tradition that can't be removed to this day.

[Keltest]

Which assumption?

That the comic started as jokes about the D&D rules, but has since grown into Roy's story? I thought that was obvious.
As far as that take on alignment in D&D, most of this is from the DMG 1e, written by Gary Gygax. Characters were *strongly* required to act to their alignments, DMs were expected to graph player actions, and any change in alignment was strongly penalized*. This was continued by some (but not all) game designers and appears to have hit the nadir at the "Wall of the Faithless" (where insufficiently good and insufficiently evil (and presumably law,chaotic, and neutral) characters were equally punished for eternity).

I'm not suggesting that was the reason to create the comic. I'm simply suggesting that alignments are probably the crowning silliness of all D&D silliness. Consider just how many panels Rich has made out of Miko's "lawful stupid" alignment, I doubt that even all the class jokes (impressive considering how important such things are to Nale, Tarquin, and V) take up as many panels as the alignment jokes. And it isn't necessary to remove alignment from the game (Rich rather likes it, and has Roy say as much to Gygax), just that some bits are just to bizarre for play. While the game assumes objective good and evil, has anybody bothered to define an objective law and chaos? They presumably exist in D&D but nobody seems to agree what they are (other than "lawful good" is defined as "the best good", per Gygax and explicit in 4e).

* Yes, 1e was pretty weird. Basically the alignments were derived from wargaming's 'red' and 'blue' sides so any character changing alignment was seen as a turncoat. The character would only gradually be accepted by his new alignment and slowly be shown his new "alignment language" (probably the silliest thing ever about alignments). And somehow this spawned an absolutely entrenched tradition that can't be removed to this day.


1e was... a LONG time ago, by D&D standards. Gygax included a lot of things designed to generally spite the players. Fortunately, by 3.5 we had moved beyond a good chunk of that.

[Kish]

presumably the more evil (or more *successfully* evil) types get a jump on becoming devils/demons.
Why do you presume that?

The rest of your post seems addressed to something I didn't write (though I will mention that you appear to have fundamentally misunderstood the Wall of the Faithless; it holds those Forgotten Realms characters who live and die without choosing a patron deity and has nothing to do with alignment, and nothing to do with any campaign setting but the Forgotten Realms). However objective and factual you consider it to be that the alignment system is ludicrous garbage, I think the guy who decides what appears in the comic disagrees (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=12718550&postcount=120), somehow.

[Darth Tom]

Regarding whether Xykon might know about the switch. What could he do? We have in the past found he has used racial abilities such as listening bonus. Might he have any spells that could help?

I have a lingering sense that Time Stop could allow him to surreptitiously frisk Redcloak or invisibility to move around and spy on his minions (maybe with an illusion to cover any suspicions of where he actually is).

Yes, it seems out of character for him but I agree with the poster above that it's his suddenly knowing that makes him intimidating.

Anyone know whether this might actually be possible?

[Alcore]

Why do you presume that?

The rest of your post seems addressed to something I didn't write (though I will mention that you appear to have fundamentally misunderstood the Wall of the Faithless; it holds those Forgotten Realms characters who live and die without choosing a patron deity and has nothing to do with alignment, and nothing to do with any campaign setting but the Forgotten Realms). However objective and factual you consider it to be that the alignment system is ludicrous garbage, I think the guy who decides what appears in the comic 20]disagrees[/], somehow.

Complete divine touches on the 'presume' as well as exalted deeds, vile darkness, any book centering on evil planes/outsiders. Characters of extreme goodness or evilness that were really good at it in life often found reincarnation as angels and demons. Usually at a gods discretion.


And I thought he did answer your post quite well. I don't do forgotten realms and most settings I know have no wall. It would not of occured to me, or maybe him, that you were not speaking metaphorically and indeed referencing a specific place.

[Kish]

1) Citation needed*, and 2) huh? I didn't bring in the Wall of the Faithless. You seem confused about who said what.

*To be clear: That is, somewhere official where it says that "evil characters are rewarded in the afterlife for being particularly evil"--ideally in the specific form "being transformed into a mane or lemure in the afterlife is a fate reserved only for those who waver in their evil, those who are consistently evil start off as more advanced demons or devils and retain some of their original consciousness**" or some equivalent. Not "characters, particularly Forgotten Realms characters, are sometimes rewarded by their god for loyal service to their god."

**Or, if you consider that an inaccurate paraphrase of what wumpus said they "presume," an explanation of why, preferably one which recognizes that wumpus has said all and only the things wumpus has said and I have said all and only the things I have said.

[Alcore]

1) Citation needed*, and 2) huh? I didn't bring in the Wall of the Faithless. You seem confused about who said what.

*To be clear: That is, somewhere official where it says that "evil characters are rewarded in the afterlife for being particularly evil"--ideally in the specific form "being transformed into a mane or lemure in the afterlife is a fate reserved only for those who waver in their evil, those who are consistently evil start off as more advanced demons or devils and retain some of their original consciousness**" or some equivalent. Not "characters, particularly Forgotten Realms characters, are sometimes rewarded by their god for loyal service to their god."

**Or, if you consider that an inaccurate paraphrase of what wumpus said they "presume," an explanation of why, preferably one which recognizes that wumpus has said all and only the things wumpus has said and I have said all and only the things I have said.1) I never said you 'brought it in'. My mistake I misspoke with my second paragraph under a false presumption.


2) if your asking for actual rules then there is nothing that I know of in 3.5 that would appease your... citation.... It is fluff as authors define how the 'offscreen' parts of no specific universe works. Much like the boneyard and this 'wall of the faithless' place, no real rules but a seed for an adventure or two after a TPK. Did I mention complete divine or tyrants of hell yet? The first goes deeply into what happens (or could happen) to souls after death and the second goes more detailed look into devil production.


3) you asked "Why do you presume that?" To "presumably the more evil (or more *successfully* evil) types get a jump on becoming devils/demons.". So that there is no more presuming; I am answering your question. You asked why some presumes such and agreeing with the part you quoted (but a piece of wumpus's words) I told you why I presume such and offered a reason why someone else would think thusly. I presumed wumpus might have read the same books and given he knows 1e probably has older sources he can turn to. If I presume too much and he cares enough I am sure he will tell me/us so.

[Kish]

Did I mention complete divine or tyrants of hell yet?
Yes. To my knowledge, they both say "if you go to a Lower Plane, you get converted to a larval form from which most will never emerge, and if you're particularly lucky you might potentially become a fiend powerful enough to return to the Prime Material Plane one day, but without any of your memories from life." I don't know if you're somehow considering that to support rather than contradict what you and wumpus are asserting, or if you're implying that there's some other part of the text where it retcons that to "actually that's only if you were ambivalent about being evil." Or, for that matter, if you jumped in thinking that "demons and devils are formerly evil mortals" was itself opposed to what I was saying.

[137beth]

If Xykon's body is destroyed, what Redcloak does may depend on whether the MitD is present. I know the thread topic warns of SoD spoilers, but just to be sure:
If Redcloak is near the MitD when Xykon's body is destroyed, then either the MitD's Geas will trigger immediately, or it will trigger after Xykon verbally points out to the MitD the fact that Redcloak betrayed him. At that point, it may be a matter of what the MitD chooses to do post-Geas.

[Peelee]

If Xykon's body is destroyed, what Redcloak does may depend on whether the MitD is present. I know the thread topic warns of SoD spoilers, but just to be sure:
If Redcloak is near the MitD when Xykon's body is destroyed, then either the MitD's Geas will trigger immediately, or it will trigger after Xykon verbally points out to the MitD the fact that Redcloak betrayed him. At that point, it may be a matter of what the MitD chooses to do post-Geas.

Assuming it is, in fact, a Geas.

[Kish]

Also assuming that the creature in the darkness will recognize that Redcloak betrayed Xykon, either with or without Redcloak's necklace saying "he just betrayed me, and I'm Xykon!" And assuming that the phylactery is on Redcloak's person. So lots of assumptions there really.

[Peelee]

Also assuming that the creature in the darkness will recognize that Redcloak betrayed Xykon, either with or without Redcloak's necklace saying "he just betrayed me, and I'm Xykon!"

The sheer ridiculousness of this amuses me, and I wish for it to happen.

[Darth Paul]

...Redcloak's necklace saying "he just betrayed me, and I'm Xykon!"

:mitd: No, you're not! Xykon's taller!!

And that could be just the beginning...

[8-foot Dwarf]

What Redcloak do if Xykon's body was destroyed?

This all depends on the situation that causes Xykon to 'die'. If the situation was Xykon's body being destroyed at Kragoor's Tomb because of a monster there (this is pretty much impossible due to how comics work of course) without the Order of the Stick there, Redcloak would probably just wait in the Bugbear Village until Xykon regenerates.

However if there's a situation like Xykon is very low on health as well as Redcloak and tha Bugbear and then Lien and Mr.Stiffly attack killing Xykon. Red cloak would either

a)die because of Lien and Mr.Stiffly (Impossible) or

b)Would use 'Word of Recall' or 'Plane Shift' if really desperate (which of course he prepared somehow). Lien and Mr.Stiffly attacking would probably work as the Monster in the Darkness wouldn't mind...probably and all of them are on low health anyhow.

If the Order of the Stick attacked Xykon, Redcloak and the Bugbear people (would probably include Bugbears and Monster in the Darkness) Redcloak would either

a)Use 'Word of Recall' to 'run away'

b)Summon monster to deal with Order of the Stick as the OOTS would be on low health most likely and then run to a safe hiding point or use a spell

c)Use the Monster in the Darkness (Wouldn't probably work if Lien and Mr.Stiffly were there)

d)Try to use 'Suggestion' if he can or try to finish them off himself

e)Ummmmmmm...'Teleport' if he can?

f)Um...i ran out of ideas

g)Running away on foot?

Those are some of the situations and options which I see Redcloak would do.

Though Xykon isn't going to 'die' in like 20 strips plus I think soooooo...

:smallsigh:

[Clistenes]

If it come to that, Redcloak has no choice but to destroy the phylactery. Xykon can be replaced, but The Plan must be completed!

Redcloak doesn't need an epic arcane spellcaster, just a competent one, and he has Gobotopia now; somebody there must be good enough, and if he can't find one... well, that's an excuse to found Gobotopia's School of Wizardry, which is something he would like to do anyways.


Those are great points! However, what means does Redcloak have to actually destroy the phylactery? As Xykon has mentioned previously, (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0656.html) his phylactery is superbly enchanted. Physical force wont work, at least none that RC could muster himself, and I doubt his own magical abilities could overcome whatever Xykon put on there. So, either I'm overlooking something, misunderstanding the situation, or RC knows some other way to readily destroy a phylactery.

Some of those spells were cast by Redcloak himself, so he can dismiss them; as for the rest, Antimagic Field and a mundane hammer would do the trick.

If that doesn't work... well, he can throw the phylactery to the Plane of Positive Energy; Xykon would forever receive more points of damage per round that he could regenerate...

[Spellbreaker26]

I originally assumed Redcloak didn't destroy the phylactery because he didn't want to put Xykon in mortal danger until after the ritual (if someone were to actually, miracle of miracles, kill him again.)

However, then I realized that if that happens phylactery or no phylactery, they're all stuffed because Xykon will realize that he's regenerating in the material world, not the Astral Plane.

So if Xykon is defeated conventionally Redcloak has to finish him off himself (presumably by dismissing/dispelling all the protective spells and smashing it). Another physical defeat of Xykon similar to after the first one in the first book would be the end rather than just a huge hiccup. Xykon is far from invincible especially if he isn't taking Redcloak's advice.

[b_jonas]

Abjurations that render an object impervious to non-magical metal whacking are pretty basic. Doesn't change the end result, but I think the metal whacking was magical. I think O-Chul had some +5 Holy Cajones on him (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0659.html) already when he attacked the phylactery. I choose to read that as some sort of magical effect similar to the Bless Weapon or Holy Sword spells (paladin spells that let you use a nonmagical weapon to deal magical damage), except it's an effect that works without a weapon.

[Rynjin]

Doesn't change the end result, but I think the metal whacking was magical. I think O-Chul had some +5 Holy Cajones on him (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0659.html) already when he attacked the phylactery. I choose to read that as some sort of magical effect similar to the Bless Weapon or Holy Sword spells (paladin spells that let you use a nonmagical weapon to deal magical damage), except it's an effect that works without a weapon.

You COULD make that weird extrapolation...or go with the much simpler and more sensible conclusion that the D&D joke equivalent of "You've got balls kid, I'll give you that" is just that and no more.

[8-foot Dwarf]

I forgot one thing though, if Redcloak that something to 'betray' Xykon when Xykon get's destroyed and his soul goes to the gold amulet, the Thing in the Darkness will eat Redcloak and spit out the amulet, from the book 'Start of Darkness'.

[Rinazina]

RC will destroy immediately the true soul-thingy from his poket, and then, surprise for us, Xykon will appear few rounds later blasting the green bearer of the red clock. This because :xykon: has contingency and has made some clone of himself, that's why he keep forgetting stuff: because is another Xykon you saw earlier!

Did you remember that Xykon goes away for a couple of weeks once a while, and comeback with different tricks? that is when he switches body. well, skeleton in this case.

Why you've to trust a goblin that want to use you? just because has disintegrated his brother? bah, I don't take it. Has other contingencies plan. come on, has a CROWN that lich, is clearly the king, can't be killed by a goblin trick.

Dudes of the forum, I don't wanna incite violence because I know you are a delicate and restricted audience, but please, be like Xykon and don't trust the goblins. Never. also if they are smiling. Politically speaking they deserve a fairest resources distribution, but they inherit a totalitarian and violent culture. Feel empathy to them will not make you more human, just more politically correct, and you know, that is a thing that has not survived in the 2017. The only good goblin, is the dead goblin - again.

[Peelee]

Dudes of the forum, I don't wanna incite violence because I know you are a delicate and restricted audience

.....I'm not sure how insulting everyone on the board really works towards this goal.

[Rinazina]

.....I'm not sure how insulting everyone on the board really works towards this goal.

sorry, I was not intended to be offensive, was just a stupid writing style from someone who don't master English :P

[Peelee]

sorry, I was not intended to be offensive, was just a stupid writing style from someone who don't master English :P

Understandable. To be fair, your English is better than my Portuguese.

[Goblin_Priest]

Dudes of the forum, I don't wanna incite violence because I know you are a delicate and restricted audience, but please, be like Xykon and don't trust the goblins. Never. also if they are smiling. Politically speaking they deserve a fairest resources distribution, but they inherit a totalitarian and violent culture. Feel empathy to them will not make you more human, just more politically correct, and you know, that is a thing that has not survived in the 2017. The only good goblin, is the dead goblin - again.

And this is why Redcloak is righteous and I shall die for the Dark One!

[JobsforFun]

Just curious but I thought when it came to liches they had to be on the same plane as their phylactery or else they die? Or is this not going off normal DnD type rules?

[Kish]

I've never seen that rule.

(Bear in mind: if a rule is in any edition other than 3.5, it doesn't matter to Xykon.)

[JobsforFun]

I've never seen that rule.

(Bear in mind: if a rule is in any edition other than 3.5, it doesn't matter to Xykon.)

I'll see if I can find it, my friends who I play with say this is a rule but I haven't seen it either...