Is Xykon truly Evil?

[Conradine]

Is Xykon really the monster he claims to be, or may it be that he's only a lonely, unhappy and misunderstood person that never maturated beyond the angry teenager he was?
Could his evil be just a reaction to a world which hates and fears sorcerers or even a - very misguided - hidden request for love and acceptance?

And mabye could he still be redeemed?

[JNAProductions]

He’s exactly who he claims to be.

He’s not very subtle.

[dancrilis]

Is Xykon really the monster he claims to be
Yes.


or may it be that he's only a lonely, unhappy and misunderstood person that never maturated beyond the angry teenager he was?
No.


Could his evil be just a reaction to a world which hates and fears sorcerers or even a - very misguided - hidden request for love and acceptance?
No.



And mabye could he still be redeemed?
Yes.

[Fyraltari]

Conradine, you wouldn’t be a goth Mystic Theurge with mismatched eyes and an unusual fetish, would you?

[Metastachydium]

Is Xykon really the monster he claims to be, or may it be that he's only a lonely, unhappy and misunderstood person that never maturated beyond the angry teenager he was?

I don't know, he didn't seem to be particularly angry when he gleefully slaughtered his entire family as a teenager. I'd rather say he looked, well, gleeful.


And mabye could he still be redeemed?

Well, you're certainly not the first person to surmise that this is a viable option. This mindset, however, does not seem to be beneficial to one's long term health. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0193.html)

[Alcore]

He is undead.


Redeeming him is like trying to make a succubus a faithful housewife. She will be the housewife if you put out (and survive) but she won't ever be faithful. Xykon lost the capacity for goodness awhile back.

[understatement]

List of crimes:


killing and zombifying Prof. Xavion, killing and zombifying his parents, accomplice to world-risking plan, Soul Binded Lirian, killed demon waitress for absolutely no reason, forceful conscription of goblin village, Soul Binded Dorukan, gloated over main henchman's brother's death as part of twisted loyalty test, threw away countless hobgoblin lives, made paladins insane enough to slaughter each other and took enjoyment in it, tortures a certain bald paladin for funzies, silver spandex, strangles V slowly and painfully, refuses to allow henchman to grow back his eye, and again, silver spandex.


There's villains like Redcloak, who at least has some kind of cause, flawed as it is. There's villains like Tarquin and Nale, who at least have empathy and friendships with other living beings. And then there's Xykon.

I'm gonna pencil in a "no" here.

ETA: (I realized that my answer is the exact opposite of the whole point of my post, so I'll highlight it in blue and pretend that didn't happen).

[Luna_Mayflower]

Is Xykon really the monster he claims to be, or may it be that he's only a lonely, unhappy and misunderstood person that never maturated beyond the angry teenager he was?
Could his evil be just a reaction to a world which hates and fears sorcerers or even a - very misguided - hidden request for love and acceptance?

And mabye could he still be redeemed?

In a prophetic vision, I found that Xykon wouldn't have been evil if his dog hadn't died at a young age. If his dog can be found and returned to life, he will become good again. This will happen in strip #1400 as I have predicted.


He’s not very subtle.

I must disagree. He is far smarter than he seems and has a low cunning that is utterly terrifying.


Conradine, you wouldn’t be a goth Mystic Theurge with mismatched eyes and an unusual fetish, would you?

Oh god she was hot though. And as a fellow lover of undead (Jake), I do respect her methods.

[JNAProductions]

I never said he was dumb.

I said he was unsubtle.

[Dr.Zero]

Is Xykon really the monster he claims to be, or may it be that he's only a lonely, unhappy and misunderstood person that never maturated beyond the angry teenager he was?
Could his evil be just a reaction to a world which hates and fears sorcerers or even a - very misguided - hidden request for love and acceptance?


Maybe those are some of the reasons behind his evilness, but does that matter?

He is evil, and not the evil of a "disporpotionate retribution" kind (which I don't even consider evil, btw); not the evil of the "wooby destroyer of worlds"; not the evil "nothing personal, sorry, you're in the way". He kills gleefully innocents and subordinates and has fun in seeing them suffer without a real reason but for laughs.



And mabye could he still be redeemed?

For the rules, I'd say no (liches are inherently evil)
In the story, I'd bet on no.
If he was a rl person, I'd say no.

[hroþila]

He is evil, and not the evil of a "disporpotionate retribution" kind (which I don't even consider evil, btw)
Damn does this thread have the HOTTEST takes

[Emanick]

Damn does this thread have the HOTTEST takes

What, you don't consider it True Neutral to hit your roommates with an artillery strike when they drink the last of the coffee without making more? :smallconfused:

[Metastachydium]

In a prophetic vision, I found that Xykon

Do you mean Renaldo?


wouldn't have been evil if his dog hadn't died at a young age. If his dog can be found and returned to life, he will become good again. This will happen in strip #1400 as I have predicted.

Well, he did actually make it ”live” again at some point.

[Dr.Zero]

What, you don't consider it True Neutral to hit your roommates with an artillery strike when they drink the last of the coffee without making more? :smallconfused:

Surely enough, that will teach him to not repeat the same mistake and he will be of example to the others, pushing them to behave, for the joy of the population as a whole.
Therefore I'd say it's perfect.

[Snails]

And mabye could he still be redeemed?

In theory, even a Balor can be redeemed. But to have a meaningful conversation about that topic, you would have to come to the table with a reason why a particular Balor would be induced to deeply reconsider their moral philosophy and personal relationships. That the metaphysics of the universe allows for the possibility of a Balor being redeemed, just does not matter, because we know it happens approximately never in a billion years.

Xykon, being the person he has been, might have been redeemably as a teenager. But he raced further and further away from that possibility over the decades.

At least with Belkar, we have been shown the leverage points: (1) that his empathy skills could be rekindled and strengthened, and (2) he had a hidden reflexive assumption that everyone was sure to blame him if something went wrong.

[Metastachydium]

Surely enough, that will teach him to not repeat the same mistake and he will be of example to the others, pushing them to behave, for the joy of the population as a whole.
Therefore I'd say it's perfect.

…which would make the artillery strike a Lawful Good, rather than True Neutral move, really.

[Dr.Zero]

…which would make the artillery strike a Lawful Good, rather than True Neutral move, really.

Preach it, brother!

Sadly this world is full of people who don't understand the implications of weak retribution or -may the gods forgive[1] them- no retribution at all.

[1] Not really, this would undermine the whole point. The gods must smite them!

[Aidan]

Could his evil be just a reaction to a world which hates and fears sorcerers or even a - very misguided - hidden request for love and acceptance?

And mabye could he still be redeemed?


To my knowledge, the only "evidence" of the world hating and fearing sorcerers, is the bit in SODwhere Xavion makes the claim about sorcerers being hated and feared, and then Xykon repeats it.

However we never (to my knowledge) actually see hatred or fear of sorcerers. Wizards seem to kook down upon them, and most other adventurers don't seem to care about them one way or the other. Heck, even Roy indicates in OtOoPCSthat he wants a sorcerer on the team.

I'm sure most common folk don't even really know the difference between wizards and sorcerers, just knowing they both cast spells.

With regards to redemption, I'd say it remains possible for Xykon, just not easy or likely. He has engaged in a very long list of crimes, many of which are pretty irredeemable on their own (for anyone who wants to see the list scroll up until you see understatement's post).

[denthor]

He goes out of his way to plan entrapment to kill paladin's.

This is right in the book mentioned as a Neutral Evil act.

He kills for fun when bored.

He is sustained on the energy from negative material plane.

He is evil

[Metastachydium]

To my knowledge, the only "evidence" of the world hating and fearing sorcerers, is the bit in SODwhere Xavion makes the claim about sorcerers being hated and feared, and then Xykon repeats it.

However we never (to my knowledge) actually see hatred or fear of sorcerers. Wizards seem to kook down upon them, and most other adventurers don't seem to care about them one way or the other. Heck, even Roy indicates in OtOoPCSthat he wants a sorcerer on the team.

I'm sure most common folk don't even really know the difference between wizards and sorcerers, just knowing they both cast spells.


And yet, if you think about it, all sorcerers (barring Fruit Pie) we have seen thus far in the main comic (Xykon, Nale, Qarr, Samantha) are Evil (and even Fruit Pie wanted to kill those poor allergic goblins).

[RatElemental]

Theoretically possible, as some have mentioned. But aside from the difficulties in getting Xykon to even think about reconsidering his worldview and the joy he takes in the suffering of others, there's also not really a whole lot you could do to restrain him in the process. Even if you managed to get his new boots away from him.

You'd need something like the Redeeming Sun (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?410846-The-Redeemery-Saving-Souls-for-Good-and-Profit-Work-in-Progress) to strip him of his power and then subject him to an intensive redemption course backed by subtle compulsions to make it stick to even have a chance at it.

[KorvinStarmast]

Is Xykon really the monster he claims to be Yes. Reading SoD confirms what we already know from DCF where he kept tossing goblins at the gate to try and get data points ...


Could his evil be just a reaction to a world which hates and fears sorcerers or even a - very misguided - hidden request for love and acceptance?
Don't quit your day job to try and become a criminal defense lawyer.

And mabye could he still be redeemed? Nope. Check out the strip with Miko and Soon right before Miko gets X's in her eyes (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0464.html). Rich spells out very clearly that redemption is a special thing, and that it requires admitting that you are wrong and the need to be sorry for the wrong you have done.

Xykon has never, on screen, expressed any such sentiment.

No sale.

[CriticalFailure]

What does "true evil" even mean? I don't think there is some essential quality of evil that certain people possess, even in hard alignment systems like d&d. Evil is harmful behaviors. People have different motives for being evil that may be harder or easier to correct. Xykon's motive for committing evil acts is a personality that has a severe lack of empathy and a tendency towards sadism. Based on his story, it appears that this lack of empathy jsut developed as part of his personality and is likely difficult or impossible to change (more than ever now that he is undead). Redcloak's motivations for committing evil acts are much more complicated and he is much more conflicted about them. Unlike Xykon, he has shown to be at least capable of empathy, though it seems his life experiences have left him emotionally stunted, and though vengeful he doesn't seem to be exceptionally sadistic. Overall he's much more likely to stop doing evil things than Xykon due to the differences in their motivation. But there isn't some "true evil" property.

[KorvinStarmast]

What does "true evil" even mean? I guess you are right that it's subjective. On the other hand, he is the CEO of Team Evil. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0446.html)

[InvisibleBison]

Is Xykon evil?
Is Haley a woman?
Is Thor a god?
There are some questions that will just never be answered.

[brian 333]

Evil in OoTS is a thing, whether an energy or property, or whatever. It is detectable and it can interact with magic. It exists as something more than an adjective, and Xykon's full of it. He even had enough of it to imbue his crown with it.

[Dion]

Is Xykon evil?
Is Haley a woman?
Is Thor a god?
There are some questions that will just never be answered.

Is Banjo a puppet? It’s impossible to be sure.

[Vinyadan]

…which would make the artillery strike a Lawful Good, rather than True Neutral move, really.
Kinda like this: https://cad-comic.com/comic/proper-places/

[KorvinStarmast]

Is Banjo a puppet? It’s impossible to be sure. It is possible to be sure (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1027.html).

@vinyadan: I have had the same problem with music CDs and my spouse for about as long as we've been married. (30+years) Had not thought of the crossbow as a solution

[Wizard_Lizard]

Literally everything I have seen has shown that yes. Yes. Xykon is truly evil. I think if anything, getting a room full of paladins to slaughter eachother and torturing the only survivor for ages is generally.. not a good thing...
Xykon is evil. We can discuss the morals of Malack or Redcloak, or heck, even Tarquin, but my god Xykon is just straight up evil.

[Brutalitops]

He felt sad once when his god died when he was three but then he started killing animals for fun with zombie dog.

He had no external pressure to be evil and his main conflict was that people did not respect him as a sorcerer.

Roy had the same problem as a fighter but he is Good and Xykon is evil


He was pretty affable when he was a human. An unrepentant mass murderer who killed stole and terrorised the world but he could still had a few non evil interests and get along with evil people.


But as a Lich he lost all those non evil hobbies and became much smarter making him a lot more violent vindictive and deadly.

[Emperor Time]

What he did to the Paladins of the Sapphire Guard alone shows he pretty much evil to the core. Since he could have killed them in a way that didn't involve them killing each other due to insanity. Also he doesn't even care when his allies die since he can turn them into loyal undead followers. He is funny at times but he is so evil that there could be evil gods that are less evil than him easily. And if that true then he must be truly evil.

[C-Dude]

He killed Eugene Greenhilt's mentor to steal a crown that he thought was stylish.

I'd say smash-and-grab fashion is pretty chaotic evil.

[Jason]

Word of The Giant is that Xykon is definitely evil and is not redeemable. In fact, he did everything he could to make Xykon non-sympathetic in Start of Darkness.

[RatElemental]

Word of The Giant is that Xykon is definitely evil and is not redeemable. In fact, he did everything he could to make Xykon non-sympathetic in Start of Darkness.

Irredeemable as in won't be redeemed, extremely impractical to redeem, or outright impossible to redeem?

[Mightymosy]

He is undead.


Redeeming him is like trying to make a succubus a faithful housewife. She will be the housewife if you put out (and survive) but she won't ever be faithful. Xykon lost the capacity for goodness awhile back.

Succubi being perfect housewife confirmed

[understatement]

On the redeemability of Xykon, this handy chart (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SortingAlgorithmOfFaceHeelTurning) from TV tropes is guaranteed to work and totally has an 100% rate of success on it.


Species: Used to be human...but became a lich, which is pretty much a Demon in terms of evil rigidity. 1
Gender: Male. 2.
Age: Over 110 years old. 1.
Role: The Big Bad, and the driving conflict. 1.
Aesthetics: A skeleton with glowing red eyes. 1.
Motivation:To watch the world burn and silver spandex. 1.
Characterization: Over-the-top-and-knows-it evil. 1.
Contentness: Loves being evil. 1.
Morality of the story: A range, from pure Evil to pure Good, and all in between. 4.
Cynicism of the story: Somewhat idealistic, but has hard truths. 4.

17/10 = 1.7. Hovering between "Never" and "Highly Unlikely" -- which seems to be fairly close to the consensus.



For fun, I also did Redcloak and Tarquin (all opinions, ofc):


Species: Humanoid (goblin). 2.
Gender: Male. 2.
Age: N/A
Role: The definite Dragon. 4.
Aesthetics: Normal, except for the missing eye. 2.5
Motivation: Had good intentions, but evil methods. 3.5
Characterization: Does have standards, but very solidly LE. 3.2.
Contentness: Hates being under Xykon. 4.5.
Morality of the story: A range, from pure Evil to pure Good, and all in between. 4.
Cynicism of the story: Somewhat idealistic, but has hard truths. 4.

29.7/9 = 3.3. Fairly squarely on "who knows?"




Species: Human. 3.
Gender: Male. 2.
Age: Pushing fifties. 1.
Role: Major arc villain. 1.5.
Aesthetics: Looks like Elan, who is known for charisma. 4.
Motivation: As much power as reasonably possible. 2.
Characterization: Cold-blooded would be an understatement. 3.
Contentness: Enjoys it, but wants an epic narrative. 2.
Morality of the story: A range, from pure Evil to pure Good, and all in between. 4.
Cynicism of the story: Somewhat idealistic, but has hard truths. 4.

35.5/10 = 3.55. Hovering between "who knows?" and "quite probable." Doesn't sound right, but whatever.

[JennTora]

I'd say anyone could theoretically be redeemed, but for xykon? You have a better chance of finding $1,000,000,000 lying on the sidewalk.

As for whether his evil is a reaction to society, the only ones that seem to have a problem with sorcerers are some wizards. Only some. Vaarsuvius didn't say anything about xykon being a sorcerer, and certainly doesn't seem to look down on them as much as, say warlocks (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0677.html). :p

[Metastachydium]

Irredeemable as in won't be redeemed, extremely impractical to redeem, or outright impossible to redeem?

How about ”won't be redeeemed, because that would be extremely difficult at the very least, if not outright impossible”?

[dancrilis]

How about ”won't be redeeemed, because that would be extremely difficult at the very least, if not outright impossible”?

There is an arguement that Xykon could do it delibrately via the Atonment spell (he might need to mind control some good aligned entity to cast it), subject to the criteria of 'must be truly repentant and desirous of setting right its misdeeds' but even that bit can be handwaved and might not even apply to the alignment change element of the spell (also it would depend on if Undead can change their alignment naturally).

If atonement doesn't work he could do the same plan via Santify the Wicked - which would work.

And those are ignoring him merely developing Xykon's Amazing Alignment Shifting Spell - a spell that kicks in on final death as the soul is about to go to its final resting place, traps it for an instant and reformats it to suit the afterlife of the casters choice (that way he wouldn't even need to tolerate living with his evil deeds).

Why would he do this?
Anything to avoid the Big Fire Below. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html)

[JennTora]

There is an arguement that Xykon could do it delibrately via the Atonment spell (he might need to mind control some good aligned entity to cast it), subject to the criteria of 'must be truly repentant and desirous of setting right its misdeeds' but even that bit can be handwaved and might not even apply to the alignment change element of the spell (also it would depend on if Undead can change their alignment naturally).

If atonement doesn't work he could do the same plan via Santify the Wicked - which would work.

And those are ignoring him merely developing Xykon's Amazing Alignment Shifting Spell - a spell that kicks in on final death as the soul is about to go to its final resting place, traps it for an instant and reformats it to suit the afterlife of the casters choice (that way he wouldn't even need to tolerate living with his evil deeds).

I mean, sure, I guess he could do that. Kind of like a helm of opposite alignment spell. But that assumes the devas are gonna put up with him gaming the system like that. That seems unlikely, given how much Roy was analyzed. And even then, they could well have sections of the afterlife set up for people who pull that kind of crap. Iirc there's a place in the neutral good afterlife for penitent evil doers in many settings and those people don't exactly enjoy themselves.

I would argue that's not true redemption at any rate, and is basically just him mind controlling himself.


Why would he do this?
Anything to avoid the Big Fire Below. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html)

I think what that statement was supposed to mean was "there's plenty of ways they could have avoided death, so they're honestly just has beens as far as I'm concerned."

Considering the next line admonishes them for not being able to stay in the game.

[Metastachydium]

I mean, sure, I guess he could do that. Kind of like a helm of opposite alignment spell. But that assumes the devas are gonna put up with him gaming the system like that. That seems unlikely, given how much Roy was analyzed. And even then, they could well have sections of the afterlife set up for people who pull that kind of crap. Iirc there's a place in the neutral good afterlife for penitent evil doers and those people don't exactly enjoy themselves.

I would argue that's not true redemption at any rate, and is basically just him mind controlling himself.


Exactly. The question is not whether Xykon could find a way to become (nominally) Good or not; the question is whether he can be reedemed.
And yes, so far as we know, alignment-at-the-time-of-death does not determine the final resting place of the soul. It determines the place where one's life will be assessed, as well as the type of creature who will assess it and the exact method used.

[dancrilis]

And yes, so far as we know, alignment-at-the-time-of-death does not determine the final resting place of the soul. It determines the place where one's life will be assessed, as well as the type of creature who will assess it and the exact method used.
Sure about that, because the way I read it you get judged by the people you think should judge you - but you get into where your alignment dictates.



There are only 17 Outer Planes; Roy's alignment would have to match one of them, because you can't not have an alignment. The deva only got "first look" because Lawful Good was the alignment Roy declared himself to be. It was his goal, and the review was to see if he had really met that goal. If he didn't, that would mean he actually had some other alignment, in which case the powers-that-be on that plane would have been happy to have him. Generally speaking, a character who really is alignment X on the inside will be admitted to plane X with no problems, except in certain special circumstances (Eugene, for example).

[Metastachydium]

Sure about that, because the way I read it you get judged by the people you think should judge you - but you get into where your alignment dictates.

Indeed. However, what matters is not the nominal alignment, but the actual one. If how Roy almost lost his Lawful Good status for one (granted, major) misdeed (abandoning Elan to his fate) is anything to go by, Xykon's Amazing Alignment Shifting Spell (as you described it) would not do much good to Xykon. I'd rather think it would be added to the list of his various transgressions.
Now, Sanctify the Wicked could, in fact, work, but I don't quite see Xykon deliberately getting his soul trapped in some gem for an entire year so that he'll be able to live on as a goody-two-shoes reformed criminal.

[dancrilis]

Indeed. However, what matters is not the nominal alignment, but the actual one. If how Roy almost lost his Lawful Good status for one (granted, major) misdeed (abandoning Elan to his fate) is anything to go by, Xykon's Amazing Alignment Shifting Spell (as you described it) would not do much good to Xykon. I'd rather think it would be added to the list of his various transgressions.
Now, Sanctify the Wicked could, in fact, work, but I don't quite see Xykon deliberately getting his soul trapped in some gem for an entire year so that he'll be able to live on as a goody-two-shoes reformed criminal.

There is no fundamental difference between the alignment shift from Santify the Wicked, Atonement or Xykon's Amazing Alignment Shifting Spell (at least as I envison the custom spell created solely for this thread) - as such if he used any of those methods the new alignment would be the actual alignment.

[Metastachydium]

There is no fundamental difference between the alignment shift from Santify the Wicked, Atonement or Xykon's Amazing Alignment Shifting Spell (at least as I envison the custom spell created solely for this thread) - as such if he used any of those methods the new alignment would be the actual alignment.

From what we have seen, alignment in Stickverse is not a label, but rather a function of the Permanent Record. That's why I'm saying that Sanctify the Wicked would probably work, while Amazing Alignment Shift probably wouldn't.

[Darth Paul]

Succubi being perfect housewife confirmed

Bonus points because she's the perfect housewife for the whole neighborhood at once! (Sometimes she will housewife for married couples, too! But let's not go into that here...)

[JavaScribe]

Psychopaths and sadists are about as close as you get to being born evil. His mind is literally wired to feel rewarded by hurting others and lacks the mechanisms that would cause a normal person to feel sympathy. So yeah, short of magical brain-surgery, nothing is going to redeem Xykon. Seeing as he's literally proud of being a villain, he wouldn't even want it.

[Mightymosy]

Bonus points because she's the perfect housewife for the whole neighborhood at once! (Sometimes she will housewife for married couples, too! But let's not go into that here...)

At a certain point, everything is about bonus points :smallsmile:

I, mean, look at Maslow's pyramid over here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needshttp://
I am pretty sure it says "Running up the score" at the very top, just in very fine print :smallsmile:

[RatElemental]

Indeed. However, what matters is not the nominal alignment, but the actual one. If how Roy almost lost his Lawful Good status for one (granted, major) misdeed (abandoning Elan to his fate) is anything to go by, Xykon's Amazing Alignment Shifting Spell (as you described it) would not do much good to Xykon. I'd rather think it would be added to the list of his various transgressions.
Now, Sanctify the Wicked could, in fact, work, but I don't quite see Xykon deliberately getting his soul trapped in some gem for an entire year so that he'll be able to live on as a goody-two-shoes reformed criminal.

"Xykon's Amazing Alignment Shifting" Would be added to Xykon's crimes, maybe. I can grant that. But the person coming out of it wouldn't really be Xykon anymore if he completely rewrote his personality in an instant. Sending that person to the abyss would be like sending someone there because their father was evil and they couldn't do anything to stop him doing evil things before they existed.

[Tvtyrant]

It is possible to be sure (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1027.html).

@vinyadan: I have had the same problem with music CDs and my spouse for about as long as we've been married. (30+years) Had not thought of the crossbow as a solution

I just went back and checked, and when Banjo attempts to smite Roy he doesn't reveal his quiddity.

[JennTora]

"Xykon's Amazing Alignment Shifting" Would be added to Xykon's crimes, maybe. I can grant that. But the person coming out of it wouldn't really be Xykon anymore if he completely rewrote his personality in an instant. Sending that person to the abyss would be like sending someone there because their father was evil and they couldn't do anything to stop him doing evil things before they existed.

Which is why I don't think clean alignment shift spells like this should exist or even be possible. Helms of opposite alignment are enchantment effects iirc and corruption is pretty much shoving a bunch of evil thoughts in the person's mind so both are much easier.

You're right, good aligned xykon isn't exactly xykon anymore. Of course that also means the discussion of what happens to him is off topic. :P

I don't think they'd send him to the abyss without reversing the effect, tbh. Either he'd go wherever penitent villains go if there's such a place in heaven in oots or they'd be like "yeah, nice try," strip the alignment change off him and send him to the abyss.

I don't think it's precisely reward/punishment anyway. It's what afterlife suits you best.

[RatElemental]

If it's not about punishment, then why undo the effect instead of just accepting the epic level soul that literally rewrote itself to be a fit for your afterlife?

Redemption is, in afterlife systems described by DND and OotS, the highest moral good you can accomplish. It deprives the hoards of the abyss a soul AND wins one for the upper planes in the process. Realistically I think they'd just chalk it up as a win and let Nokyx into the afterlife.

As far as a helm of opposite alignment goes, I don't see how that's any different than a spell that does, more or less, the same thing. It's not even an artifact, you can craft it as a simple 12th level caster if you have just one feat. It's also more than just a "cosmetic" change, your entire worldview is changed, you look at the prospect of 'fixing' your new alignment with horror and actively resist attempts to, and that's assuming you can get a wish or miracle spell cast to undo it in the first place.

Far more likely that, in OotS, it simply doesn't exist and this kind of magic is impossible, or at least it gets the True Resurrection treatment.

[paddyfool]

Evil in OoTS is a thing, whether an energy or property, or whatever. It is detectable and it can interact with magic. It exists as something more than an adjective, and Xykon's full of it. He even had enough of it to imbue his crown with it.

This. And regarding the crown... it was so imbued with evil that it made pretty thoroughly good mid to high level PCs like Roy and Durkon register as evil. Just from having been worn by Xykon.

[JennTora]

If it's not about punishment, then why undo the effect instead of just accepting the epic level soul that literally rewrote itself to be a fit for your afterlife?

Well, In OOTS word of giant is the afterlife exists to turn people into the perfect alignment batteries to feed the gods. Therefore the process of judging souls which we saw Roy undergo likely has something to do with it. Maybe this kind of game breaks down over the long term? Seems likely to be. The Deva that judged him was ready to chuck his soul into the true neutral bin because he abandoned Elan. Likely because Roy wouldn't have been lawful good enough to become a lawful good alignment battery.


Redemption is, in afterlife systems described by DND and OotS, the highest moral good you can accomplish. It deprives the hoards of the abyss a soul AND wins one for the upper planes in the process. Realistically I think they'd just chalk it up as a win and let Konyx into the afterlife.

Wouldn't it be nokyx?


As far as a helm of opposite alignment goes, I don't see how that's any different than a spell that does, more or less, the same thing.

Because I forgot how it worked. I thought if you just took it off the person they changed back but they refused any attempt to remove it...


Far more likely that, in OotS, it simply doesn't exist and this kind of magic is impossible, or at least it gets the True Resurrection treatment.


Kind of my point.

[KorvinStarmast]

I just went back and checked, and when Banjo attempts to smite Roy he doesn't reveal his quiddity. Are you banking on this being a clue to some big reveal at the end? :smallconfused:

Well, In OOTS word of giant is the afterlife exists to turn people into the perfect alignment batteries to feed the dogs.
Feeding a dog batteries would be an evil act. :smallcool: Then again, most dogs won't touch 'em. My dogs prefer milk bone, etc ...

[Tvtyrant]

Are you banking on this being a clue to some big reveal at the end? :smallconfused:
Feeding a dog batteries would be an evil act. :smallcool: Then again, most dogs won't touch 'em. My dogs prefer milk bone, etc ...

Nah, I just had some idle curiosity about it.

[brian 333]

Xykon: Oh no! I am about to die and exist in eternal torment forever! I hope...
Contingency, Xykon's Amazing Alignment Adjustment, Lawful Good
There it is!

Later, on a puffy cloud...

Deva: Mr. Xykon, is it? I can't seem to find your permanent record. It's almort like our network has been hacked and your files have been deleted, but that would require Epic level Evil magic. Ah, found something.

"To whom it may concern, Xykon has been real good, and never zombified anything that never deserved it."

And it's signed.'Xykon's Mom.' Well, that cinches it. Welcome to Paradise, Mr. X.

[Dr.Zero]

Actually this raises another question: if someway your brain connections are rewired and rewritten so deeply, is that individual still you or just someone with your memories and your body? (Durkon would say it's you, but yet what happens when the vampire becomes him is to get even his same alignment)

So is Xykon avoiding himself hell and cheating for the haven, or is Xykon lirerally destorying himself to give the pleasure of heaven to another creature?

(Anyway it might be worth it, if hell is all pain and no fun, like he seems to think: eventlly he will be merged in a battery and lose his coscience, he can quicken the process as well avoid the pain at least.)

[dancrilis]

Actually this raises another question: if someway your brain connections are rewired and rewritten so deeply, is that individual still you or just someone with your memories and your body? (Durkon would say it's you, but yet what happens when the vampire becomes him is to get even his same alignment)

So is Xykon avoiding himself hell and cheating for the haven, or is Xykon lirerally destorying himself to give the pleasure of heaven to another creature?

(Anyway it might be worth it, if hell is all pain and no fun, like he seems to think: eventlly he will be merged in a battery and lose his coscience, he can quicken the process as well avoid the pain at least.)

If Xykon's custom spell was effectively a faster version of the same principle that underlines Santify the Wicked then presumedly it would be still him - just after he found the spark of goodness within his soul that apparently exists in every creature.

And I doubt that the CG afterlife would really care that much, they probably are fine with people who screw the rules every now and then, especially when screwing the rules helps the forces of good and doesn't help the forces of evil.

[Metastachydium]

And I doubt that the CG afterlife would really care that much, they probably are fine with people who screw the rules every now and then, especially when screwing the rules helps the forces of good and doesn't help the forces of evil.

But then, there's another question. Even if what motivates Xykon is fear of post-mortem punishment (which is debatable), why would he have to pick a Good afterlife? Personally, I'd be inclined to believe that the intermediate afterlife between Chaotic Evil and Chaotic Neutral, based around the lofty idea of ”lulz” (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1138.html) would probably suit him better, and if his alignment is even reviewed before he'd enter, whoever does the reviewing would presumably find the whole idea of cheating the system hilarious (as in hilariously good).

[dancrilis]

But then, there's another question. Even if what motivates Xykon is fear of post-mortem punishment (which is debatable), why would he have to pick a Good afterlife? Personally, I'd be inclined to believe that the intermediate afterlife between Chaotic Evil and Chaotic Neutral, based around the lofty idea of ”lulz” (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1138.html) would probably suit him better, and if his alignment is even reviewed before he'd enter, whoever does the reviewing would presumably find the whole idea of cheating the system hilarious (as in hilariously good).

Sure he would want to do make a Knowledge: Planes check to confirm where he would be happiest - but as we know that the dead retain spellcasting power if he didn't like it he could possible use the same spell to shop around after he was dead.

[Metastachydium]

Sure he would want to do make a Knowledge: Planes check to confirm where he would be happiest - but as we know that the dead retain spellcasting power if he didn't like it he could possible use the same spell to shop around after he was dead.

There's a little problem with that. If the spell can and does indeed change his actual alignment as you suggested, it will change his outlook as well. He only has one shot, and based on what we know about Xykon's mindset, I'd say that the idea of becoming a good guy and staying that way for who knows how much time would terrify him more than the prospect of suffering amid the fire-and-brimstone.
Aiming for the Lulz-plane would have the added benefit that he would not have to change much.

[Roland Itiative]

Xykon is pretty much the most evil being in the entire story. He doesn't have a modicum of "for the greater good" motivation in him, he fully enjoys maximising the suffering of others for no other reason than his own enjoyment.

And the question about him being redeemable is moot, because the first step to redemption is wanting it and regretting your previous actions. That kind of character development would be considered completely out-of-character for Xykon. Even Belkar, who was a similarly "evil for evil's sake" kind of dude, pretty much only started his own redemption arc as a matter of survival, and the only narrative reason he got such an arc to begin with is that he's one of the "heroes", not the main villain of the story.

[mjasghar]

Belkar faked civility to survive but found a kernel of empathy within himself
Compare that with Tarquin and the others of his group - all of them act civil and courteous but it’s all on the surface with no empathy in their hearts (beyond their immediate family)
Xykon was able to fake civility as a human right up until he had the power not to care about the consequences

[Vendanna]

Irredeemable as in won't be redeemed, extremely impractical to redeem, or outright impossible to redeem?

the only way xykon could be redeemed would be like a coupon in a store in hell, with the other meaning of redeeming.

[Sebastian]

Actually this raises another question: if someway your brain connections are rewired and rewritten so deeply, is that individual still you or just someone with your memories and your body? (Durkon would say it's you, but yet what happens when the vampire becomes him is to get even his same alignment)

So is Xykon avoiding himself hell and cheating for the haven, or is Xykon lirerally destorying himself to give the pleasure of heaven to another creature?

(Anyway it might be worth it, if hell is all pain and no fun, like he seems to think: eventlly he will be merged in a battery and lose his coscience, he can quicken the process as well avoid the pain at least.)

But then would not the new Xykon (which still have his memories) be the first to not want to go to the good afterlife because he know he don't deserve it and ask to, I dunno send him some 10.000 years into Limbo as penance, or doing some community service, or something?

[Worldsong]

What, you don't consider it True Neutral to hit your roommates with an artillery strike when they drink the last of the coffee without making more? :smallconfused:

Eh, I've killed for less.

[Sebastian]

What, you don't consider it True Neutral to hit your roommates with an artillery strike when they drink the last of the coffee without making more? :smallconfused:

What is "disproportionate" about it? :confused:

[Precure]

Is Xykon really the monster he claims to be, or may it be that he's only a lonely, unhappy and misunderstood person that never maturated beyond the angry teenager he was

Both? Those two are not exactly exclusive.


Could his evil be just a reaction to a world which hates and fears sorcerers or even a - very misguided - hidden request for love and acceptance?

I don't think so. There is no reason to believe that sorcerers are hated and feared like mutants and inhumans.


And mabye could he still be redeemed?

I would say "probably no," but if even someone like Belkar can be redeemed at some extent within just few weeks, it shouldn't be out of reach for him.

[hamishspence]

I don't think so. There is no reason to believe that sorcerers are hated and feared like mutants and inhumans.



From SoD:

Professor Xavion the Wizard, mentor of the S-Men, a group of sorcerers, seems to believe it, at least. Though that may be mostly for the comedy value.

[Gurgeh]

We see consistent prejudice expressed by wizards against other arcanists - by Xavion, by Fyron, and in the exchange between V and the lawyer baiting their name out for the divorce papers. Whether these prejudices are shared by the wider world, or are simply a lesser-known wizard class feature (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0223.html), is up for debate.

[Vinyadan]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the few sorcerers we've seen were Xykon and Samantha, who don't have a stellar track record. Even though Samantha was substantially conforming to her society's rules, she still brought about upheaval and a change of leadership. So I wouldn't be too surprised, if people were scared of sorcerers.

From the PH 3.5: "[good sorcerers] Marked as different by their power, they seek to win a place in society and to prove themselves to others."..."Sorcerers develop rudimentary powers at puberty. Their first spells are incomplete, spontaneous, incontrolled, and sometimes dangerous."..."More often, however, sorcerers are on their own, feared by erstwhile friends and misunderstood by family."

[dancrilis]

We see consistent prejudice expressed by wizards against other arcanists - by Xavion, by Fyron, and in the exchange between V and the lawyer baiting their name out for the divorce papers. Whether these prejudices are shared by the wider world, or are simply a lesser-known wizard class feature (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0223.html), is up for debate.
In fairness Yydranna, Tsukiko, Pompey, Zz'dtri seemed fine working with and getting alone with sorcerers - maybe Evil people are just more inclined to judge people based on the utility of their magic and not how they acquired that magic, just a little bit of respect (or not) based on the individual they are dealing with rather then judging that individual as merely a unit in a wider group, this might be due to the fact that many people also seem to have prejudice against those of an evil alignment.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but the few sorcerers we've seen were Xykon and Samantha
Also Nale, Qarr, Girard, Jenny from the Geekery topic.

[Vinyadan]

Also Nale, Qarr, Girard, Jenny from the Geekery topic.
So a mass murderer, a demon, the founder of a society that stole women their children, and a thief whom we see sitting at a table where a child is being gambled into slavery. Yay... :smallbiggrin:

[dancrilis]

... a demon ...
Imps are devils.

[The Pilgrim]

Despite all his faults, Xykon had one reedeming quality: His appreciaton for coffe.

Xykon was turned into a complete monster just after losing his capacity to appreciate coffe.

Who removed from Xykon the capacity to appreciate coffe?

Redcloak.

Redcloak, the villiain who fooled him to enlist into the Plan under the false pretense of fighting for a "good cause". The villiain who has been manipulating him for 30 years. The villain who fooled him into giving up his last shreds of humanity because there was "no other way out" from Lirian's prison. There was really no other way out, or it was just a ruse to make Xykon lose his capacity to appreciate coffe and thus become a total monster, easily manipulable by Redcloak?

Xykon is just a poor lost soul forced to dance on Redcloak's strings, as the goblin himself admitted (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html).

Xykon is clearly set up to a redemption arc. But he can't repent until he has been freed from the control of his evil master, Redcloak.

The path for our heroes is clear: Kill the goblin, free the Lich, save the World.

[The_Weirdo]

free Lich

I don't think Xykon will agree to be given away for the price of $ 0.00.

[Jason]

Despite all his faults, Xykon had one reedeming quality: His appreciaton for coffe.
I'm not sure i would call that a redeeming quality.
More like his only remaining bit of humanity, after a lifetime of trying to turn himself into a monster. Yes, it took Red Cloak' s cooperation to finally literally make him a monster, and the destruction of Xykon the undead abomination will also be the final release of what was once a human being.

[Ionathus]

Is Xykon really the monster he claims to be, or may it be that he's only a lonely, unhappy and misunderstood person that never maturated beyond the angry teenager he was?
Could his evil be just a reaction to a world which hates and fears sorcerers or even a - very misguided - hidden request for love and acceptance?

And mabye could he still be redeemed?

Yes he is a monster; no he isn't misunderstood; his reaction to the sorcerer thing is always murder; he has never sought acceptance in his entire life; and no, he cannot and never will be redeemed.

Rich explicitly said this in the intro to Start of Darkness, but even without that -- Xykon has been depicted as killing gleefully and indiscriminately from the very beginning. He is inherently a sadistic, Evil person. His annoyance at being looked-down on as a sorcerer is a character trait that makes him a more compelling character and colors his personality, but it does not redeem him or depict him as tragic in the slightest.



Despite all his faults, Xykon had one reedeming quality: His appreciaton for coffe.

Xykon was turned into a complete monster just after losing his capacity to appreciate coffe.


My money's on The Order using a Coffee Bomb to merge Xykon's essence with the essence of coffe, thereby redeeming him into the CN tragically-misunderstood God of Caffeine

[Vinyadan]

Imps are devils.
Right, the word I was looking for was fiend.

[The_Weirdo]

Rich explicitly said this in the intro to Start of Darkness, but even without that -- Xykon has been depicted as killing gleefully and indiscriminately from the very beginning. He is inherently a sadistic, Evil person. His annoyance at being looked-down on as a sorcerer is a character trait that makes him a more compelling character and colors his personality, but it does not redeem him or depict him as tragic in the slightest.

To be precise, he specifically isn't depicted as someone that is reacting to being looked down on as a sorcerer. Instead, he's the aggressor and simply points out that he was a sorcerer as a point of pride during a fight with a wizard.

[Jay R]

Is Xykon really the monster he claims to be, or may it be that he's only a lonely, unhappy and misunderstood person that never maturated beyond the angry teenager he was?

Let me re-phrase this question for clarity:

Is there a level of unhappy childhood and being misunderstood that justifies decades of serial murder and makes it not really evil?

No.

No, there is not.

[Worldsong]

Let me re-phrase this question for clarity:

Is there a level of unhappy childhood and being misunderstood that justifies decades of serial murder and makes it not really evil?

No.

No, there is not.

Honestly the best you could say is that if someone has been pushed too far they might be too broken for their actions to be judged the way you'd judge the actions of a sane person... in which case the actions still aren't justified and you'd still have to put that person down for being a threat to themselves and everyone else.

You'd just have to pity them for having been twisted into such a wretch rather than hating them for being so unabashedly nasty.

I'm pretty sure Xykon is the latter though.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

Xykon murdered his own family for ****s and giggles when he was a teenager. He then became a villain for the sake of villainy and after being lychified even his last bit of respect for his fellow villains seems to have dissipated.

Were there possible timelines in which Xykon would have become a little less extremely world destroying evil? Yes. Would that be a really low bar for calling someone not evil? Extremely so.

I'm just going to throw my hat in with most other people in this thread: scary scary skeleton man wizard mass murderer evil evil bad.

[Metastachydium]

I'm just going to throw my hat in with most other people in this thread: scary scary skeleton man wizard mass murderer evil evil bad.

Sorcerer. Not wizard, sorcerer. (And make sure you never spell his name with a Z.)

[Lvl 2 Expert]

Sorcerer. Not wizard, sorcerer. (And make sure you never spell his name with a Z.)

Scary scary skeleton man wizard mass murderer does not care that he's technically not a mass murderer but a genocidal maniac. Term covers content. Evil evil bad.

[Dr.Zero]

To be precise, he specifically isn't depicted as someone that is reacting to being looked down on as a sorcerer. Instead, he's the aggressor and simply points out that he was a sorcerer as a point of pride during a fight with a wizard.

To be fair, the first two times he killed a wizard in SOD, they were quite annoying and insulting.

Granted, the second time he started the fight just for the sake of getting the shiny crown, nonetheless Fryon was quite insulting, with all that "look at his predictable, unintelligent reaction" during the fight.

(The first time, he started the fight after he -as a sorcerer- was insulted, but I think he was going to kill the dude anyway)

So, yes, he is evil anyway, but at the very least the first kill might be seen as an act of revenge about being looked down by the X dude.

[Jason]

Is there a level of unhappy childhood and being misunderstood that justifies decades of serial murder and makes it not really evil?
An unhappy backstory can explain how a person became evil. It cannot justify a person choosing to become evil.

[KorvinStarmast]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the few sorcerers we've seen were Xykon and Samantha, who don't have a stellar track record. Even though Samantha was substantially conforming to her society's rules, she still brought about upheaval and a change of leadership. So I wouldn't be too surprised, if people were scared of sorcerers.

From the PH 3.5: "[good sorcerers] Marked as different by their power, they seek to win a place in society and to prove themselves to others."..."Sorcerers develop rudimentary powers at puberty. Their first spells are incomplete, spontaneous, incontrolled, and sometimes dangerous."..."More often, however, sorcerers are on their own, feared by erstwhile friends and misunderstood by family."/Rant on
My take on the mistake, aka as the 3.0 Sorcerers: the original class for PC's whose place in life is that (1) they can't be bothered to study and (2) who work from emotion rather than reason; I think this design model was a very cynical appeal to a teenager / immature adult with a poor attitude about school. It was successful, yes, but it initiated that further mistake that is Cha as a casting skill which takes us to Warlocks with Cha as a casting skill which is ... OK, rant over.


Despite all his faults, Xykon had one redeeming quality: His appreciation for coffee. And Hannibal Lector likes a nice Chianti. :smallcool:
:smallcool:

Yes he is a monster
[COLOR="#0000CD"]My money's on The Order using a Coffee Bomb to merge Xykon's essence with the essence of coffe, thereby redeeming him into the CN tragically-misunderstood God of Caffeine He'll be destroyed by a Tea bomb. Calling it now. :smallsmile:

Xykon murdered his own family for ****s and giggles when he was a teenager. See my comments above in re teenagers and sorcerers. :smalleek:

An unhappy backstory can explain how a person became evil. It cannot justify a person choosing to become evil.And yet Rich will not write one for Belkar. He's made that point in at least one post.
So why did he write one for Xykon?

[understatement]

And yet Rich will not write one for Belkar. He's made that point in at least one post.
So why did he write one for Xykon?

Probably to show that Xykon had been willingly evil (and powerful) from a very young age.

[Worldsong]

/Rant on
My take on the mistake, aka as the 3.0 Sorcerers: the original class for PC's whose place in life is that (1) they can't be bothered to study and (2) who work from emotion rather than reason; I think this design model was a very cynical appeal to a teenager / immature adult with a poor attitude about school. It was successful, yes, but it initiated that further mistake that is Cha as a casting skill which takes us to Warlocks with Cha as a casting skill which is ... OK, rant over.

I swear I honestly thought Warlocks used Int until someone corrected me. Made sense to me that a class which is by lore associated with rituals and pacts would rely on cunning and intelligence.

[Jason]

The Giant said he won't write Belkar's sad origin story because it would mean thast his evil behavior would no longer be funny.

[Metastachydium]

I swear I honestly thought Warlocks used Int until someone corrected me. Made sense to me that a class which is by lore associated with rituals and pacts would rely on cunning and intelligence.

(Is it true, by the way, that certain types of the 4e Warlock can cast from Constitution?)

[Psyren]

Let's see - torture, slavery, tyranny, mass murder, regular murder, wanton disregard for the welfare of sapient life, and the character himself both enthusiastically embraces and acts in accordance with the label, and that's not even all of it.

3/10 Conradine, I've seen better attempts.

[Worldsong]

(Is it true, by the way, that certain types of the 4e Warlock can cast from Constitution?)

No clue, I tried 4e once and it didn't last very long. I think Hexblades get bonuses from high Con or something.

[Tvtyrant]

(Is it true, by the way, that certain types of the 4e Warlock can cast from Constitution?)

It worked a little different in 4E. You generally had a primary stat that did the hitting and damage, and another that added an effect. Warlocks could be Charisma//Constitution, where the side effects came from Constitution. But Constitution didn't add to your health so it wasn't really the same stat either.

[hamishspence]

It adds to hit point total at 1st level - just not later levels. "Number of healing surges" was what it influenced, so the basic idea that, all other things being equal, a high CON character can take more of a beating than a low CON character, was still true.

[Tvtyrant]

It adds to hit point total at 1st level - just not later levels. "Number of healing surges" was what it influenced, so the basic idea that, all other things being equal, a high CON character can take more of a beating than a low CON character, was still true.

If your leader had enough healing to throw around. The leader usually ran out of healing abilities before the party ran out of healing surges IME.

[Metastachydium]

It worked a little different in 4E. You generally had a primary stat that did the hitting and damage, and another that added an effect. Warlocks could be Charisma//Constitution, where the side effects came from Constitution. But Constitution didn't add to your health so it wasn't really the same stat either.

I see( sort of, anyway, provided this basically means `yes, but it did not do what I thought it did`). Thanks.

[Tvtyrant]

I see( sort of, anyway, provided this basically means `yes, but it did not do what I thought it did`). Thanks.

Essentially 4E doesn't have saves against spells, it has an attack roll based on a stat against a defense score (which is AC, Fort, Reflex, or Will.) Then it has a number of effects that can be sized, linger, or do extra damage based on a second stat. Saves are only against ongoing effects, and instead of a stat they are fixed percentile chances. It's a very different beast, trying to unify the mechanics.

[Ruck]

Psychopaths and sadists are about as close as you get to being born evil. His mind is literally wired to feel rewarded by hurting others and lacks the mechanisms that would cause a normal person to feel sympathy. So yeah, short of magical brain-surgery, nothing is going to redeem Xykon. Seeing as he's literally proud of being a villain, he wouldn't even want it.

Yeah, basically this. Is it literally impossible? No, but Xykon loves doing Evil and revels in it, and is strong enough to simply blast away anyone who might try to convince him to change his ways.


And yet Rich will not write one for Belkar. He's made that point in at least one post.
So why did he write one for Xykon?

To show that there is no real explanation for it, that he's always been Evil and enjoyed it. He was even pretty explicit about this in the Start of Darkness commentary.


My challenge here was to tell the story of Xykon’s life without making Xykon even slightly sympathetic. I mean, he’s completely and wholly unapologetically Evil, but more to the point, he’s kind of a ****. I like to think that I captured that in this story by showing all the different ways that he’s been evil up to the point where we meet him. There are people in this world who are driven to evil because of what their life has forced them to endure; Xykon is not one of those.

[C-Dude]

And yet Rich will not write one for Belkar. He's made that point in at least one post.
So why did he write one for Xykon?
Belkar is actually (probably) evil because of his low wisdom stat, which he used as a dump stat during character creation.

I base this on events from [edit] "Dungeon Crawling Fools".
https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0058.html
When under the effect of Owl's Wisdom, Belkar becomes more docile and exhibits traits more stereotypical of halflings. He even talks about how everything is clearer, before the spell is dismissed and he backslides.

Basically he lacks the common sense usually associated with wisdom, which would allow him to perceive things from the perspective of others and to anticipate consequences. This is further supported by his drunken argument with Roy at the end of "Utterly Dwarfed": Belkar has no idea what motivates him and acts on impulse alone.

Xykon, however, has a clear (albeit inane) motivation and knows how it directs his actions. It is deliberate as opposed to ignorant. They're two different kinds of 'evil', but as far as D&D is concerned they both fall in the same slot of the alignment spectrum mechanics-wise.

[Ruck]

I base this on events from "Snips, Snails, and Dragon Tales".

That's actually from Dungeon Crawling Fools.

[C-Dude]

That's actually from Dungeon Crawling Fools.
Oops, you're right!
https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0058.html

I'll amend my earlier statement, thanks for the catch.

[WanderingMist]

Is Xykon truly Evil? Yes, that's not really questionable.

Is Xykon irredeemable? No. No one is irredeemable, no matter what they've done. Redemption may be a special thing, but not because it's out of reach. It's special because so few people even bother to ask. Which is why Vaarsuvius, who probably killed more beings in one round with one spell than Xykon has in his entire life and unlife, can still be redeemed and is in fact on the path to redemption, long and arduous as it may be, but Xykon never will be.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

Belkar is a weird case. He's super evil for story and humor purposes, but the things we see him do are mostly either actions the order would want him to take or pretty typical if a bit left field adventurer actions, and he's relatively limited in options for cruelty by being a martial character, and not a super strong one at that. I'll happily take the comic's word for it that his evil can only be measured in kilonazis, but as far as I'm concerned that's partially an informed attribute, a thing we're told, not shown.

Xykon is not a weird case. Evil evil bad.

[KorvinStarmast]

I swear I honestly thought Warlocks used Int until someone corrected me. Made sense to me that a class which is by lore associated with rituals and pacts would rely on cunning and intelligence. Part of my frustration with WoTC and warlocks is that in their original draft of 5e Warlocks were an Int caster. Apparently, there was this fan push back and they reverted to Cha which was (IMO) a mistake but that's for the D&D 5e forum really, and that horse left the barn a long time ago.

Belkar is actually (probably) evil because of his low wisdom stat, I've don't recall any rule that a low wisdom binds any PC to an evil alignment. Is there one in 3.5e? If there is, it's yet another reason that I am glad I got rid of those books.

Belkar is a weird case. He's super evil for story and humor purposes
After about the first 20 strips it seemed to me that Rich was poking fun at all of the immature murderhoboes he'd met while playing D&D.
Belkar was / is an over-the-top murderhobo.
For about 600 strips or so, anyway.

[Jason]

I've don't recall any rule that a low wisdom binds any PC to an evil alignment. Is there one in 3.5e? If there is, it's yet another reason that I am glad I got rid of those books.
There is no correlation between attribute scores and alignments written into the 3.5 rules that I recall. Evil priests with high Wisdom scores are popular villains in many published scenarios.

[KorvinStarmast]

There is no correlation between attribute scores and alignments written into the 3.5 rules that I recall. Evil priests with high Wisdom scores are popular villains in many published scenarios. That's my experience across multiple editions, thanks for the clarification :smallsmile:

[Vinyadan]

I've don't recall any rule that a low wisdom binds any PC to an evil alignment. Is there one in 3.5e? If there is, it's yet another reason that I am glad I got rid of those books.
After about the first 20 strips it seemed to me that Rich was poking fun at all of the immature murderhoboes he'd met while playing D&D.
Belkar was / is an over-the-top murderhobo.
For about 600 strips or so, anyway.


There is no correlation between attribute scores and alignments written into the 3.5 rules that I recall. Evil priests with high Wisdom scores are popular villains in many published scenarios.

https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0058.html

Maybe V spiked the spell out of fear of a smarter Belkster :smallbiggrin:

[Fyraltari]

I've don't recall any rule that a low wisdom binds any PC to an evil alignment. Is there one in 3.5e? If there is, it's yet another reason that I am glad I got rid of those books.


Pretty sure this was a joke about the different meaning of wisdom in D&D and real-life.

[Ruck]

I've don't recall any rule that a low wisdom binds any PC to an evil alignment. Is there one in 3.5e? If there is, it's yet another reason that I am glad I got rid of those books.


Pretty sure this was a joke about the different meaning of wisdom in D&D and real-life.

I think it's based on the specific in-comic evidence that when we see Belkar hit with an Owl's Wisdom spell, he momentarily becomes a lot less vicious and a lot more caring.

[Jason]

Because Wisdom also indicates willpower and perception, it's completely possible to have a high-wisdom character who doesn't see evil behavior as unwise.

[Fyraltari]

I think it's based on the specific in-comic evidence that when we see Belkar hit with an Owl's Wisdom spell, he momentarily becomes a lot less vicious and a lot more caring.

Yes, that was the joke I was talking about.

[C-Dude]

I've don't recall any rule that a low wisdom binds any PC to an evil alignment. Is there one in 3.5e? If there is, it's yet another reason that I am glad I got rid of those books.


Pretty sure this was a joke about the different meaning of wisdom in D&D and real-life.


I think it's based on the specific in-comic evidence that when we see Belkar hit with an Owl's Wisdom spell, he momentarily becomes a lot less vicious and a lot more caring.
Yeah.
Wisdom is meant to represent applied intelligence, the ability to use logic and direct intelligence to practical goals.

The common example is that the Intelligence stat tells you a tomato is a fruit, but the Wisdom stat tells you it doesn't belong in a fruit salad.

While a low wisdom score does not demand evil behavior (in D&D or otherwise), in Belkar's case much of his evil behavior is motivated by his ignorance of consequences and lack of impulse control. As he becomes more wise from experience (or in a quick burst in Strip 58) his alignment shifts because of his specific personality.

Just as another vampire spirit of Hel might not have attacked the godsmoot, another evil character might not react to a wisdom score change like Belkar does. Belkar's rage is tied to his low wisdom score.

[Ruck]

Yes, that was the joke I was talking about.

I didn't think of it as a joke about the difference between D&D wisdom and real life, I guess, so much as Belkar's wisdom being so low that even a +4 bonus makes him a fairly well-functioning person.

[Fyraltari]

The common example is that the Intelligence stat tells you a tomato is a fruit, but the Wisdom stat tells you it doesn't belong in a fruit salad.
I prefer the Frankenstein example. Tomato works in a fruit salad pretty well.


I didn't think of it as a joke about the difference between D&D wisdom and real life, I guess, so much as Belkar's wisdom being so low that even a +4 bonus makes him a fairly well-functioning person.

Yeah, but that’s because this strip is using wisdom as if it was the real life thing, i.e. knowing how to live a good life, rather than the usual D&D one.

[C-Dude]

I prefer the Frankenstein example. Tomato works in a fruit salad pretty well.
Charisma is being able to sell a tomato-based fruit salad.

"Isn't a tomato-based fruit salad salsa?"

-We found the bard!-

:smallbiggrin:

[Shining Wrath]

Of course not - or at least, not yet.

In a D&D universe, there are creatures whose essence corresponds to alignments - fiends, for example, or celestials. Xykon is not one of these creatures, therefore he's just an undead former sorcerer who does evil things sometimes often at every opportunity.

Now, after his death his soul will travel to a lower plane, and there he will receive his reward of becoming a lesser fiend, and then his essence will be pure evil.

Therefore, killing Xykon increases the number of pure evil creatures in the universe and ought to be avoided.

Blue is still the color of snark, right?

[Fyraltari]

Charisma is being able to sell a tomato-based fruit salad.

"Isn't a tomato-based fruit salad salsa?"

Only if you cook it!

[Metastachydium]

Part of my frustration with WoTC and warlocks is that in their original draft of 5e Warlocks were an Int caster. Apparently, there was this fan push back and they reverted to Cha which was (IMO) a mistake but that's for the D&D 5e forum really, and that horse left the barn a long time ago.


The more I think about it, the more sense an actual Constitution-based Warlock seems to make. Warlocks do not have a natural talent or need a decent strength of personality and their casting has nothing to do with learning. Basically, they are just channeling powers that are not their own because someone or something lets them do that. This could mean that all it takes for them to cast is to have the raw durability to accomodate the powers flowing through them. The tougher Warlocks gets, the more they can withstand without their body breaking, and subsequently a Warlock with higher Constitution should be able to fling around more powerful spells(or, rather, spell-like stuff) more often. Or something like that.

[Tvtyrant]

Another issue with Xykon becoming less than evil is that in some editions of D&D undead cannot change. Their personality is fixed from time of undeath, they are essentially hyper intelligent automatons. That's probably not in play here as the vampires are shown changing, but Liches aren't vampires so we don't really know.

[Worldsong]

Another issue with Xykon becoming less than evil is that in some editions of D&D undead cannot change. Their personality is fixed from time of undeath, they are essentially hyper intelligent automatons. That's probably not in play here as the vampires are shown changing, but Liches aren't vampires so we don't really know.

Sounds like Redcloak read those books which describe undead as automatons.

[RatElemental]

Charisma is being able to sell a tomato-based fruit salad.

"Isn't a tomato-based fruit salad salsa?"

-We found the bard!-

:smallbiggrin:

And strength is the ability to lift a crate of tomatoes, dexterity is the ability to throw or dodge a tomato, and constitution is the ability to eat a rotten tomato.



The more I think about it, the more sense an actual Constitution-based Warlock seems to make. Warlocks do not have a natural talent or need a decent strength of personality and their casting has nothing to do with learning. Basically, they are just channeling powers that are not their own because someone or something lets them do that. This could mean that all it takes for them to cast is to have the raw durability to accomodate the powers flowing through them. The tougher Warlocks gets, the more they can withstand without their body breaking, and subsequently a Warlock with higher Constitution should be able to fling around more powerful spells(or, rather, spell-like stuff) more often. Or something like that.

Actually under this framing of it charisma still makes more sense. Charisma is more than how persuasive you are, it also covers raw strength of personality and self-assuredness. It's more important for a warlock to be able to resist their personality being subsumed by the will of the eldritch beings whose power they're borrowing than it is for them to be able to withstand said power that isn't even being directed (offensively) into their own body.

[Ruck]

And strength is the ability to lift a crate of tomatoes, dexterity is the ability to throw or dodge a tomato, and constitution is the ability to eat a rotten tomato.

Intelligence is knowing tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put tomato in a fruit salad.

[Peelee]

Intelligence is knowing tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put tomato in a fruit salad.

Charisma is killing the bard and conjuring up guacamole as a fruit salad, like a good sorcerer.

[Precure]

Charisma is killing the bard and conjuring up guacamole as a fruit salad, like a good sorcerer.

Are we assuming now all sorcerers are evil?

[Fyraltari]

Charisma is killing the bard and conjuring up guacamole as a fruit salad, like a good sorcerer.
« Dave, why must you do this at every party we go to?
- What? I made enough guacamole for everyone this time.
- I meant the dead body, Dave.
- He put sugar on tomatoes, he had it coming!
- David... Why are you like this?
- Society is to blame.
- How!? Your grandmother is a dragon with a literal hoard of treasure, you live in a mansion!
- You have no idea of the pressure rich people go through. I’m expected to excel at things.
- You can reshape reality by looking cross at it! You are literally the most privileged person I know and I am dining with the Crown Prince, tonight!
- You were dining with the Crown Prince tonight.
- David... What did you do?
- All I’m saying is that you shouldn’t go through the backdoor for the next... Say, hypothetically speaking, just how long do you think a human body takes to completely burn in this weather?
- ... This is just like the time you built a siege engine out of the corpses of townspeople.
- How was I to know that wasn’t what it meant!? It was confusingly worded! »

[Metastachydium]

Actually under this framing of it charisma still makes more sense. Charisma is more than how persuasive you are, it also covers raw strength of personality and self-assuredness. It's more important for a warlock to be able to resist their personality being subsumed by the will of the eldritch beings whose power they're borrowing than it is for them to be able to withstand said power that isn't even being directed (offensively) into their own body.

Dunno. Isn't willpower more of a Wisdom kind of thing?
Anyhow, the question is not whether Constitution would be a better base ability to build a Warlock around it than Charimsa, Itelligence or whatever (it makes more sense to me than Charisma, but then, my knowledge of the whole game is fairly, well, superficial in a number of respects, and it's not really the point anyway). The question is whether in theory one could use such a reasoning to get away with a Constitution-based Warlock or not.
(And yes, I'm aware that was nowhere near clear in my original post.)

[snowblizz]

Dunno. Isn't willpower more of a Wisdom kind of thing?
Anyhow, the question is not whether Constitution would be a better base ability to build a Warlock around it than Charimsa, Itelligence or whatever (it makes more sense to me than Charisma, but then, my knowledge of the whole game is fairly, well, superficial in a number of respects, and it's not really the point anyway). The question is whether in theory one could use such a reasoning to get away with a Constitution-based Warlock or not.
(And yes, I'm aware that was nowhere near clear in my original post.)

In my reasoning yes. A lot of fantasy wizards are in reality, well D&D thinking, Constitution based sorcerors. Usually channeling magic power takes a physical toll, I think the idea of mana is related, which would make sense to represent as a Constitution based sorceror.

I must say though D&D uses the stats, especially "mental" stats quite fluidly, Charisma is both a mental stat and also somehow physical beauty? I mean arugably. Where it falls on the scale Charisma is convincing people you are beatiful to being beautiful means more Charisma is unclear it seems.

[KorvinStarmast]

Are we assuming now all sorcerers are evil? Selfishness and self-centeredness is a root of evil in some philosophical systems. The Sorcerer's schtick is "it's all about me and my power" in re the original decision to make them in 3.0 D&D.

Dunno. Isn't willpower more of a Wisdom kind of thing? The mistake IMO is to limit one's perspective on this to a single stat. Willpower as it is used casually in non-D&D discussion is a combination of a variety of character / personality traits. If one quits smoking without using any patch or gum or whatever, as I have done, it's quite the mix. I remain addicted to coffee and have no desire to change that. :smallyuk:

Will power in terms of "avoiding something bad" has a heavy Wisdom element in D&D game mechanics, but it includes a bit of Int, and a bit of Cha in the ability to say "No, I don't want another beer" and then not succumb to peer pressure. Will Power in terms of imposing your will on a situation or on others has a heavy Charisma element in D&D game mechanics, but it may involve a bit of Int in terms of how to frame.present a challenge or an argument.

In my reasoning yes. A lot of fantasy wizards are in reality, well D&D thinking, Constitution based sorcerors. Usually channeling magic power takes a physical toll, I think the idea of mana is related, which would make sense to represent as a Constitution based sorceror. FWIW, the original Vancian method (which I think 3.x still uses for Wizards) is better described as charging up a number of capacitors and then releasing their charge. Another great model for visualizing the Vancian system is that of tying knots and then loosing them ... here's a link (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/12314/22566).

And this, which explains in some detail what Jack Vance was on about; (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/12311/22566) to gamify it Gary Gygax unfortunately included "memorize" rather than "prepare" into some of his early discussions that hardly helped with understanding what he was trying to capture.

Where it falls on the scale Charisma is convincing people you are beatiful to being beautiful means more Charisma is unclear it seems. I met a number of women when I lived in Italy whose beauty became increased as one interacted with them. There is more to beauty than how friendly the camera is to you. How they handled themselves added to their beauty in a dozen different ways; it could be subtle and enchanting.

[RatElemental]

Dunno. Isn't willpower more of a Wisdom kind of thing?
Anyhow, the question is not whether Constitution would be a better base ability to build a Warlock around it than Charimsa, Itelligence or whatever (it makes more sense to me than Charisma, but then, my knowledge of the whole game is fairly, well, superficial in a number of respects, and it's not really the point anyway). The question is whether in theory one could use such a reasoning to get away with a Constitution-based Warlock or not.
(And yes, I'm aware that was nowhere near clear in my original post.)

It's not willpower in this case, it's raw strength of character. Like I said, charisma covers self-assuredness: Knowing who you are and what you want. The ability to keep that intact despite allowing yourself to steep in the power and will of a being from beyond the cosmos is an act of charisma.

This is even more clear in 5e, where all six stats have their own separate saving throws and resisting possession is a charisma save.

[Peelee]

Are we assuming now all sorcerers are evil?
Not at all, just that there are too many bards. Or too many memes about bards. Six in one, really.

« Dave, why must you do this at every party we go to?
- What? I made enough guacamole for everyone this time.
- I meant the dead body, Dave.
- He put sugar on tomatoes, he had it coming!
- David... Why are you like this?
- Society is to blame.
- How!? Your grandmother is a dragon with a literal hoard of treasure, you live in a mansion!
- You have no idea of the pressure rich people go through. I’m expected to excel at things.
- You can reshape reality by looking cross at it! You are literally the most privileged person I know and I am dining with the Crown Prince, tonight!
- You were dining with the Crown Prince tonight.
- David... What did you do?
- All I’m saying is that you shouldn’t go through the backdoor for the next... Say, hypothetically speaking, just how long do you think a human body takes to completely burn in this weather?
- ... This is just like the time you built a siege engine out of the corpses of townspeople.
- How was I to know that wasn’t what it meant!? It was confusingly worded! »

"Blackfoot" refers to certain Native American people. IIRC it was either a nation or several nations and encompassed a large number of people.

[Metastachydium]

The mistake IMO is to limit one's perspective on this to a single stat. Willpower as it is used casually in non-D&D discussion is a combination of a variety of character / personality traits. If one quits smoking without using any patch or gum or whatever, as I have done, it's quite the mix. I remain addicted to coffee and have no desire to change that. :smallyuk:

Will power in terms of "avoiding something bad" has a heavy Wisdom element in D&D game mechanics, but it includes a bit of Int, and a bit of Cha in the ability to say "No, I don't want another beer" and then not succumb to peer pressure. Will Power in terms of imposing your will on a situation or on others has a heavy Charisma element in D&D game mechanics, but it may involve a bit of Int in terms of how to frame.present a challenge or an argument.



It's not willpower in this case, it's raw strength of character. Like I said, charisma covers self-assuredness: Knowing who you are and what you want. The ability to keep that intact despite allowing yourself to steep in the power and will of a being from beyond the cosmos is an act of charisma.

This is even more clear in 5e, where all six stats have their own separate saving throws and resisting possession is a charisma save.

Right. Understood. But how does that help you cast?


In my reasoning yes. A lot of fantasy wizards are in reality, well D&D thinking, Constitution based sorcerors. Usually channeling magic power takes a physical toll, I think the idea of mana is related, which would make sense to represent as a Constitution based sorceror.

I must say though D&D uses the stats, especially "mental" stats quite fluidly, Charisma is both a mental stat and also somehow physical beauty? I mean arugably. Where it falls on the scale Charisma is convincing people you are beatiful to being beautiful means more Charisma is unclear it seems.


FWIW, the original Vancian method (which I think 3.x still uses for Wizards) is better described as charging up a number of capacitors and then releasing their charge. Another great model for visualizing the Vancian system is that of tying knots and then loosing them ... here's a link (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/12314/22566).

And this, which explains in some detail what Jack Vance was on about; (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/12311/22566) to gamify it Gary Gygax unfortunately included "memorize" rather than "prepare" into some of his early discussions that hardly helped with understanding what he was trying to capture.

Hm. I like that, thanks, folks.

[Vinyadan]

« Dave, why must you do this at every party we go to?
- What? I made enough guacamole for everyone this time.
- I meant the dead body, Dave.
- He put sugar on tomatoes, he had it coming!
- David... Why are you like this?
- Society is to blame.
- How!? Your grandmother is a dragon with a literal hoard of treasure, you live in a mansion!
- You have no idea of the pressure rich people go through. I’m expected to excel at things.
- You can reshape reality by looking cross at it! You are literally the most privileged person I know and I am dining with the Crown Prince, tonight!
- You were dining with the Crown Prince tonight.
- David... What did you do?
- All I’m saying is that you shouldn’t go through the backdoor for the next... Say, hypothetically speaking, just how long do you think a human body takes to completely burn in this weather?
- ... This is just like the time you built a siege engine out of the corpses of townspeople.
- How was I to know that wasn’t what it meant!? It was confusingly worded! »

Honestly, I was expecting him to have polymorphed the prince into a tomato.

[RatElemental]

Right. Understood. But how does that help you cast?


In this case the same way your proposed con caster does, by being able to handle more raw power without losing yourself in it.

[Fyraltari]

Honestly, I was expecting him to have polymorphed the prince into a tomato.

No, see the buring body is the prince's bodyguard. the prince he turned into guacamole.
Is totally what I intended from the beginning and you can't prove otherwise.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

Intelligence is knowing tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put tomato in a fruit salad.

Is this like a game now, seeing how many times we can go round the stats always ending up in the same place?

[Peelee]

Is this like a game now, seeing how many times we can go round the stats always ending up in the same place?

That's the beauty of the guacamole. It breaks the cycle.

[Metastachydium]

In this case the same way your proposed con caster does, by being able to handle more raw power without losing yourself in it.

Fine by me. Like I said, I do not wish to do away with Charisma-based Warlocks, all I intended to do was to explore other options (and more specifically, the Constitution-based variant I thought exists in 4e but actually really doesn't).

[KorvinStarmast]

Charisma is killing the bard and conjuring up guacamole as a fruit salad, like a good sorcerer. Xykon would approve, I think, though I think he'd reanimate the bard as a zombie to serve the guacamole to the party guests. :smallcool: (To get back on topic).

[GrayDeath]

Despite all his faults, Xykon had one reedeming quality: His appreciaton for coffe.

Xykon was turned into a complete monster just after losing his capacity to appreciate coffe.

Who removed from Xykon the capacity to appreciate coffe?

Redcloak.

Redcloak, the villiain who fooled him to enlist into the Plan under the false pretense of fighting for a "good cause". The villiain who has been manipulating him for 30 years. The villain who fooled him into giving up his last shreds of humanity because there was "no other way out" from Lirian's prison. There was really no other way out, or it was just a ruse to make Xykon lose his capacity to appreciate coffe and thus become a total monster, easily manipulable by Redcloak?

Xykon is just a poor lost soul forced to dance on Redcloak's strings, as the goblin himself admitted (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html).

Xykon is clearly set up to a redemption arc. But he can't repent until he has been freed from the control of his evil master, Redcloak.

The path for our heroes is clear: Kill the goblin, free the Lich, save the World.


Yes he is a monster; no he isn't misunderstood; his reaction to the sorcerer thing is always murder; he has never sought acceptance in his entire life; and no, he cannot and never will be redeemed.

Rich explicitly said this in the intro to Start of Darkness, but even without that -- Xykon has been depicted as killing gleefully and indiscriminately from the very beginning. He is inherently a sadistic, Evil person. His annoyance at being looked-down on as a sorcerer is a character trait that makes him a more compelling character and colors his personality, but it does not redeem him or depict him as tragic in the slightest.



My money's on The Order using a Coffee Bomb to merge Xykon's essence with the essence of coffe, thereby redeeming him into the CN tragically-misunderstood God of Caffeine


You 2 made my day.

Thank you very much!

[KorvinStarmast]

You 2 made my day.

thereby redeeming him into the CN tragically-misunderstood God of Caffeine Of course, we coffee addicts dispute the characterization of the god of caffeine as CN - Splitters! Said deity is LG all the way! :smallcool: