Will the heroes LET Xykon gain control of the last gate?

[Shadowdweller]

The latest comic got me thinking. We know that:

1) The gods are going to destroy the world if it looks like the Snarl is going to get out. (Which also might well give Hel supremacy over the Northern Pantheon).

2) Thor seems to think that the Dark One will die if the world ends; costing them the chance to permanently bind the Snarl for the first time since the Eastern Pantheon was murdered.

3) Red Cloak's ritual will actually give the Dark One a bargaining chip with which to blackmail the rest of the gods.

4) Serini seems concerned that O-Chul and possibly the Order may inadvertently lead to the Snarl being set loose.

The current story trends lead me to think that maybe the final showdown will come down to letting the gods destroy the world and kill the Dark One vs allowing Xykon and Red Cloak to gain control of the gate, allowing the Dark One to blackmail the gods for their own (probably destructive) ends. And that maybe the Order will decide that the latter is the lesser of two evils. Sound crazy?

[Jasdoif]

A big problem is that it takes weeks (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0416.html), so the timeline isn't good....As you mentioned, the gods will destroy the world if the Snarl is liable to escape; if Redcloak starts messing with the last Gate, odds are nil they'll wait around for him to finish.

[KorvinStarmast]

That's surely a big problem, but I think that the bigger problem will be that Reddy and Xykon may find the gate, Roy and the Order try to stop them and then the other shoe drops: the IFCC plays their hole card.

And once again, Roy will point out that they really don't know what it going on, and Belkar may even reprise his "someone is jerking everyone's chain" line. Unless he's too dead to do that.

(Or is that hold card? Thinking five card stud, and my brain isn't working great right now).

[Jasdoif]

That's surely a big problem, but I think that the bigger problem will be that Reddy and Xykon may find the gate, Roy and the Order try to stop them and then the other shoe drops: the IFCC plays their hole card.
....
(Or is that hold card? Thinking five card stud, and my brain isn't working great right now)."Hole card" is correct (and the phrase "ace in the hole" comes from it).

[hroþila]

I'm not convinced that there's zero chance of the gods not intervening if Redcloak and Xykon start (or complete) their ritual. There's precedent of the gods acting when the Snarl was about to get out, but that was before any gates existed. They might not have a protocol for this exact situation, and that alone might prevent the gods from acting.

Consider Tyr's words at the Godsmoot (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html). His determination not to allow the Dark One to gain a strategic advantage over the rest of the gods might indicate other gods are more willing to compromise and that there has been talk of appeasing the Dark One. The Snarl would be a one-off weapon in the hands of the Dark One - if he actually uses it, he's toast. Some gods might believe he won't ever use it, and that appeasing him is the better option as long as his demands are halfway reasonable.

Sure, the gods plan to destroy the world if the Snarl is liable to escape, but from what Hel said to Loki (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1176.html[/url) ("Any day now, all your precious swindlers and cutthroats will be wiped out, just like they always are. Maybe I get nothing, but you will get not one soul more than me!"), it is quite possible that they still failed to take action in time to prevent the Snarl getting out, for whatever reason.

I could see this working in theory. I don't think the couple weeks the ritual takes would be a problem. Ok, Imma quote myself here:

Ok, this is going to be far-fetched, but:
We know most Western gods don't even think the Dark One really has a new quiddity. We know the Southern gods are not keen on cooperating with the Dark One. We know even among the Northern pantheon there is dissension.
What if Thor and the Dark One reached an agreement, and the Order helped the Dark One complete the ritual so that he can use the threat of the Snarl to get those recalcitrant gods on board with Thor's plan while Thor and Loki pretend they have nothing to do with it?

(Yes, there's a million problems with this theory. It's just for fun, unless it somehow turns out to be correct, in which case I totally called it)
Xykon would of course be one of the main problems. I think this works better if he's taken out and Vaarsuvius takes his place as the powerful arcane caster.

[BloodSquirrel]

Problem is, that scenario can never happen- in the scenario where the ritual is cast, Xykon gets nothing. Redcloak is lying to him, and is planning on using and betraying him.

This means that, in order for the ritual to be cast, Xykon has to not know what Redcloak's real plan is- which means that if the Order finds out, then they can sink the whole thing really, really fast just by telling Xykon. No ritual, and no destruction of the gate, since nobody benefits from it at that point (Xykon has made that part clear).

The Order can't follow your logic unless they know something that will give them the ability to solve the problem anyway.

Also... the whole thing kind of hinges on some weirdly marginal assumptions. We have to assume that the Order has the strict choice of either letting Xykon control the gate or destroying it, and that they know the Gods will blow up the world if they destroy it, but they assume that the gods *won't* blow up the world to stop TDO from getting control of the Snarl, which is frankly much worse...

I mean, why would they ever "let" Xykon control the gate? They might decide to try fighting him over destroying the gate, but that's not "letting" him do it.

[Onyavar]

The Order (and especially Durkon) do know what is at stake here. And I also think the paladins are at the same level that Roy when they last communicated (so I don't think they got Durkon's revelation yet, not even Roy is up to date on that).

Serini however is not fully up to date on the Game of Gods. To prevent destruction of the gate she may have a plan to allow Xykon control of the gate for a limited time - either betraying him by yanking it out of his control shortly before the ritual finishes; or counting on striking a deal with him that she intends to uphold; or destroying him while he and Redcloak are distracted with the ritual.

Serini might have additional knowledge on the Snarl that WE don't know yet, so I think it is totally possible that she believes based on that hypothetical knowledge that she can preserve the world and the Gate by letting Xykon tamper with it for a while. Or she intends to reveal Redcloak's betrayal to Xykon, thus letting the lich lose interest in controlling a Gate that is useless to him. Xykon likes existing.

If Serini has such a plan, I expect that it interferes with the IFCC, with Thor's masterplan, Redcloak's and the Dark One's plan, and let's not forget that she has no clue that the Order is now sniffing around and might be another liability she didn't account for yet.

[ebarde]

I don't think Xykon will wind up not having an actual goal here. He definetly seems to know something Redcloak doesn't and it would be a bit weird if the big bad of the comic didn't actually end up having an accomplishable goal.

When he and Redcloak come to a head I don't see him just not having any plans other than just murdering every goblinoid out of spite. I think he might find some other way of using the gates for his own ends.

[dps]

There are just too many unknowns here. We do know that the ritual, if it were to be cast, won't do what Xykon thinks it will do, but I'm not convinced that it will do what Redcloak thinks it will do, either--perhaps the Dark One has been lying to him, or the Dark One himself is in error. We do know that there are things that the Dark One doesn't know.

[Metastachydium]

There are just too many unknowns here. We do know that the ritual, if it were to be cast, won't do what Xykon thinks it will do, but I'm not convinced that it will do what Redcloak thinks it will do, either--perhaps the Dark One has been lying to him, or the Dark One himself is in error. We do know that there are things that the Dark One doesn't know.

I'm pretty sure the Dark One knows exactly what the Ritual does, and I'm also pretty sure that it does what Redcloak believes it does. Tsukiko confirmed that the arcane half is a teleportation effect (i.e. it allows the Gate to be moved), and I'd be surprised to learn that Redcloak cannot tell how the divine half functions, given that he is a huge nerd.

[BloodSquirrel]

When he and Redcloak come to a head I don't see him just not having any plans other than just murdering every goblinoid out of spite. I think he might find some other way of using the gates for his own ends.

Why? Xykon has never been super-into big, overarching, long-term plans. That's why he teamed up with Redcloak in the first place. He doesn't even have any particular agenda for if he does conquer the world.

[Jasdoif]

Consider Tyr's words at the Godsmoot (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html).Consider Thor's words at the Godsmoot (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html). Consider Loki's words at the Godsmoot (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0998.html). Consider Loki's words outside the Godsmoot (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1177.html).

If it looks like "the mortals" aren't going to solve the problem, i.e. the Order decides to sit back and let Redcloak proceed, the balance shifts. And, well, a single god starting to unravel the world in defiance of protocol, followed by a god in another pantheon joining them, is pretty much it for the world; even if future repercussions manage to match/beat "the Snarl destroys all the souls I'd get", other gods trying to stop the unravelling is the sort of thing they avoid so as not to create a new Snarl...and a new Snarl would still be it for the world.

The timeline is important because we're either looking at the Order failing to meaningfully locate/interact with Team Evil for weeks, and/or the Order standing down while there's still plenty of time left before the Gate ritual completes; too much opportunity for deific antsiness.

[NerdyKris]

We also have to consider the meta narrative. This is a story about The Order of the Stick. We can state with absolute certainty that any solution that involves the gods just stepping in and stopping Xykon or solving the problem of the rifts is not going to happen. The Order standing down and letting the Dark One negotiate with the other pantheons is definitely not going to happen.

Any ending to the story is going to be because of the Order's actions, not the gods stepping in and rendering the last six books meaningless.

[Ionathus]

I could see this working in theory. I don't think the couple weeks the ritual takes would be a problem. Ok, Imma quote myself here:

Xykon would of course be one of the main problems. I think this works better if he's taken out and Vaarsuvius takes his place as the powerful arcane caster.

I will always and forever bet against "The Order & Thor are willing to hand TDO a deific nuke". Thor is Chaotic Good, but he's still Chaotic GOOD. Roy and Durkon are even more on the "truth & justice" train. Durkon's willing to go behind Roy's & Hinjo's backs to negotiate with Gobbotopia, but no way no how are any of them ever going to get on board with TDO's "hold the gods hostage" plan.

The entire reason for a "villain who has a point" like Redcloak or TDO (some readers see them this way, others don't, it's not my main point, don't @ me) is that their intentions can be noble while their methods are abhorrent. The Ritual is a terrible, horrible idea, and no ending where it's used for its intended purpose could ever be a happy one.


Problem is, that scenario can never happen- in the scenario where the ritual is cast, Xykon gets nothing. Redcloak is lying to him, and is planning on using and betraying him.

This means that, in order for the ritual to be cast, Xykon has to not know what Redcloak's real plan is- which means that if the Order finds out, then they can sink the whole thing really, really fast just by telling Xykon. No ritual, and no destruction of the gate, since nobody benefits from it at that point (Xykon has made that part clear).

A big danger of saying "hey Xykon, Redcloak's been lying to you!" is that Xykon will turn and immediately vaporize Redcloak. Whoops, Thor's scheme is out the window (inb4 "Jirix can then take over as High Priest so that's better anyway").


Why? Xykon has never been super-into big, overarching, long-term plans. That's why he teamed up with Redcloak in the first place. He doesn't even have any particular agenda for if he does conquer the world.

Agreed. We've seen him come up with some clever preparations but they've all really just been flashy tricks. Heck, liches are known for contingencies and layers of protections (as exemplified by their phylacteries), and Xykon didn't even consider storing his phylactery somewhere safe until after it was almost destroyed. My money's on "he thinks he'll see Redcloak's betrayal coming".

Plus, he's got an insurance policy on that front thanks to the MitD.

[BloodSquirrel]

A big danger of saying "hey Xykon, Redcloak's been lying to you!" is that Xykon will turn and immediately vaporize Redcloak. Whoops, Thor's scheme is out the window (inb4 "Jirix can then take over as High Priest so that's better anyway").


Thor's scheme is out the window anyway at that point. If Xykon and Redcloak get as far as casting the ritual, it's going to be too late to convince Redcloak to cooperate. Of course, if they're slick, they'd tell Redcloak first, and use the information to blackmail him.

"Hey, guess what? We know what you're pulling with Xykon. We've got an ally ready to cast send to him with the information if we die. So since that plan isn't going to happen, how about we negotiate?"

And, well, yeah- killing Redcloak and rolling the dice on a new high priest to work with is probably the better option. They probably don't know about Jirix, but if they have the mantle, they're in a hell of a position to make a deal.

Actually, they don't even need the high priest. Just a priest with a 9th level spell slot. Which means that said priest probably would be the high priest, but it's not a strict requirement.

[Ionathus]

And, well, yeah- killing Redcloak and rolling the dice on a new high priest to work with is probably the better option. They probably don't know about Jirix, but if they have the mantle, they're in a hell of a position to make a deal.

Actually, they don't even need the high priest. Just a priest with a 9th level spell slot. Which means that said priest probably would be the high priest, but it's not a strict requirement.

I'm continually baffled by the idea of a Substitute Redcloak. It's been established that 17th-level clerics are exceedingly rare. So it's already a small pool...and then you make it even smaller (read: nonexistent) by restricting it to worshippers of The Dark One. They need the purple quiddity, and they need it in 9th-level-slot form. Taking the Crimson Mantle and bringing it around to different clerics is a funny idea, but it belongs in an actual D&D campaign with game-able logic, not a long-running character-driven story.

We did not follow some other priest through Start of Darkness and 1228 main story comics. We followed Redcloak. If Redcloak dies without contributing to Thor's Plan, it will not mean the heroes have to get creative with Crimson Mantle shenanigans...it will mean Thor's Plan is now off the table.

[KorvinStarmast]

Thor's scheme is out the window anyway at that point. If Xykon and Redcloak get as far as casting the ritual, it's going to be too late to convince Redcloak to cooperate. On that part I agree, but 17th level clerics are pretty darned rare in OoTS land, it appears.
Note: the Scribblers didn't even have a cleric.
Wizard, Ranger/Sorcerer, Paladin, Barbarian, Rogue, Druid. (OK, druid is almost a cleric)

[BloodSquirrel]

We did not follow some other priest through Start of Darkness and 1228 main story comics. We followed Redcloak.

No, we followed Roy Greenhilt and the Order of the Stick. Redcloak is a villain. He's an important character, but there is no need for the solution to the overarching problem to come from him anymore than there is for it to come from Xykon.

Right now, the greatest obstacle to Thor's plan and better human-goblin relations is the fact that the defacto leader of the goblinoids is all-in on a plan that is going to get the world destroyed, and has no interest in negotiating any other path forward. Redcloak has shown no interest or inclination toward redemption. The idea that all of this is leading up to Redcloak emerging as the real hero is kind of bizarre, and the comic has provided us with a very compelling, one-word counter-argument to all such claims:

"Implosion".

[BloodSquirrel]

On that part I agree, but 17th level clerics are pretty darned rare in OoTS land, it appears.

True, but if, say, Jirix is going to be the new bearer, then they can wait until he gets those levels.

[Ruck]

No, we followed Roy Greenhilt and the Order of the Stick. Redcloak is a villain. He's an important character, but there is no need for the solution to the overarching problem to come from him anymore than there is for it to come from Xykon.

Right now, the greatest obstacle to Thor's plan and better human-goblin relations is the fact that the defacto leader of the goblinoids is all-in on a plan that is going to get the world destroyed, and has no interest in negotiating any other path forward. Redcloak has shown no interest or inclination toward redemption. The idea that all of this is leading up to Redcloak emerging as the real hero is kind of bizarre, and the comic has provided us with a very compelling, one-word counter-argument to all such claims:

"Implosion".

"Redcloak is going to be an important part of the story, including the end, because he's been an important character for the entire story, and it would be cheap and dramatically unsatisfying to substitute him out at the last second for someone else" is not the same as "Redcloak is the real hero."

[Lord Raziere]

True, but if, say, Jirix is going to be the new bearer, then they can wait until he gets those levels.

1. No they can't. Time is up. Godsmoot has until that table is completed, and the dwarves will be working extra hard to get it done. If magic gets involved, it will speed up the process considerably, and considering the literally world-fate determining purpose of such a meeting, and the amount of political and divine power involved? That new table can get expedited real quick. lets not kid ourselves about what 3.5 magic is capable of: The Giant can make that table complete any time he wants and there probably be some rules reasoning behind it.

2. Redcloak would not be the "real hero". the OOTS would the "real heroes" for managing to make him do the right thing in the end. But really as long as the world is saved, who cares about taking the credit?

[BloodSquirrel]

"Redcloak is going to be an important part of the story, including the end, because he's been an important character for the entire story, and it would be cheap and dramatically unsatisfying to substitute him out at the last second for someone else" is not the same as "Redcloak is the real hero."

I'm not the one who has those two things confused. Redcloak can do any number of things to be an important part of the story while still maintaining his status as a villain. Being the cause of or obstacle against solving the conflict is an important part. Dying a thematically appropriate and highly dramatic death at the climax because of his refusal to change himself or question his dedication to "the plan" would also be an important part of the story.

For some reason, however, some people are fixated on the idea that Redcloak is going to turn around and lead the human-goblinoid peace efforts. To which i re-iterate: "Implosion".

[BloodSquirrel]

1. No they can't. Time is up. Godsmoot has until that table is completed, and the dwarves will be working extra hard to get it done. If magic gets involved, it will speed up the process considerably, and considering the literally world-fate determining purpose of such a meeting, and the amount of political and divine power involved? That new table can get expedited real quick. lets not kid ourselves about what 3.5 magic is capable of: The Giant can make that table complete any time he wants and there probably be some rules reasoning behind it.


I don't think you've thought that one through.

"Okay, table is complete. Do we want to destroy the world and condemn all of our souls to Hel?"
"No."



2. Redcloak would not be the "real hero". the OOTS would the "real heroes" for managing to make him do the right thing in the end. But really as long as the world is saved, who cares about taking the credit?

It would be Redcloak's choice and action that resolves the conflict. And the idea that the Order is going to "make' him do anything is laughable. I repeat: "Implosion".

[Ionathus]

"Redcloak is going to be an important part of the story, including the end, because he's been an important character for the entire story, and it would be cheap and dramatically unsatisfying to substitute him out at the last second for someone else" is not the same as "Redcloak is the real hero."

Thank you, this exactly. I could've used more exact language, but I never meant to imply Redcloak is the hero. Regardless, we've been following him almost the entire time as a primary antagonist. He will be involved in the resolution -- one way or another.


I'm not the one who has those two things confused. Redcloak can do any number of things to be an important part of the story while still maintaining his status as a villain. Being the cause of or obstacle against solving the conflict is an important part. Dying a thematically appropriate and highly dramatic death at the climax because of his refusal to change himself or question his dedication to "the plan" would also be an important part of the story.


True, but if, say, Jirix is going to be the new bearer, then they can wait until he gets those levels.

I agree: that would be a thematically appropriate and highly dramatic death. I'm not even betting against it. I *do* believe it's on the table as a possibility. But if that happens, if we get that big dramatic moment where Redcloak realizes his sunk-cost fallacy and then dies, it would cheapen the story and water down the impending-doom atmosphere of the Final Book to say "okay, we beat Xykon but Redcloak is also dead: we'll give the cloak to this other guy -- who nobody on the team has had any important character interactions with (betting on O-Chul's acid shark escape doesn't count). Good luck buddy, come back to us in 20 years! Hopefully the gods don't get antsy with all the gates improperly-patched and decide to reset the world sooner anyway!"

I'm not saying this story HAS to end with Redcloak agreeing to Thor's plan. There could easily be (read: there ARE) other resolutions or complications coming. But I'd bet all my chips, every time, that if Thor's plan DOES work, it happens with Redcloak's contribution. Substitution would be unsatisfying for both character arc and pacing.


For some reason, however, some people are fixated on the idea that Redcloak is going to turn around and lead the human-goblinoid peace efforts. To which i re-iterate: "Implosion".

You know, I still remember watching the Avatar Book 2 finale. ALL the chips were down. ALL the foreshadowing was done. Zuko was going to OBVIOUSLY join Team Avatar and teach Aang firebending. He had big heart-to-hearts with Katara and Iroh and freed Appa and had an Identity Crisis Fever Dream and everything! It was the perfect moment for him to save the day!

And then he didn't. And that failed moment of redemption is one of my favorite moments in storytelling.

Redemption is HARD. But it's a super-dramatic trope, so loads of stories will use it. And because most works of fiction don't have unlimited time to develop as much as they'd like, they need to conserve details and get things done quickly. That means that, in a lot of fiction, redemption is a one-and-done process. The villain or antihero is doing bad stuff, but they're conflicted about some of it. And then, at the first sign of a much greater capital "E" Evil, or in a moment of mercy, the villain gets their moment to turn and become a part of the hero squad. It's clean, it's quick, and you can wrap things up before the season finale.

But that does NOT mean that a villain who's rejected that shot at redemption is beyond saving. Again, due to conservation of detail, it OFTEN does. But that's just because plenty of stories don't give their characters any room to breathe. "Show the bad guy, he betrays the heroes instead of joining them, guess he must REALLY be a bad dude, hurry up and kill him, the season finale's almost over." When you're telling a story as long and complex as Order of the Stick, you have the time to start the final book with The Dragon refusing to turn...so it can plant the seed of doubt for when he ACTUALLY turns later.

Treating Redcloak's use of "Implosion" as the Moral Event Horizon is like saying Zuko could never, EVER redeem himself, because when the chips were down and he had a chance to turn, he didn't. But much like Redcloak, he'd had an incredibly screwed up childhood and was still clinging to the hope that he could fix everything with the same Sunk-Cost Fallacy that he'd been chasing for two full seasons. That was the point of Zuko's arc. To show how absolutely deep you can dig yourself into despair. To show how hard it is to accept help from the people you have demonized your entire life. To show how hard it is to believe in kindness when life has shown you nothing but cruelty.

Redemption is not off the table for Redcloak. It's not a done deal, but his story is far from over.

[understatement]

I never get this Jirix theory. He is a cleric so low-level that he dies in one stab; he is someone the Order has never heard of. O-Chul has no reason to vouch for him.

The only reason he even pops up is because he is distinct from the hobgoblin horde.

Redcloak, on the other hand, has been one of the main villains since Book 1. He might live, because OOTS does have a precedent of people committing enormous atrocities and still narratively given a chance. He might die, because he's an evil person and pays for his crimes. For Jirix to sail in out of nowhere is a complete cop-out with no buildup or evidence whatsoever.

[BloodSquirrel]

I agree: that would be a thematically appropriate and highly dramatic death. I'm not even betting against it. I *do* believe it's on the table as a possibility. But if that happens, if we get that big dramatic moment where Redcloak realizes his sunk-cost fallacy and then dies, it would cheapen the story and water down the impending-doom atmosphere of the Final Book to say "okay, we beat Xykon but Redcloak is also dead: we'll give the cloak to this other guy -- who nobody on the team has had any important character interactions with (betting on O-Chul's acid shark escape doesn't count). Good luck buddy, come back to us in 20 years! Hopefully the gods don't get antsy with all the gates improperly-patched and decide to reset the world sooner anyway!"

Really? Because that's kind of how HtPGHS ended.

Quite frankly, the idea that bringing peace between humans and goblins is something that will take a lot of time and effort, and that we will see how it's going in time-skipped epilogue, seems far more plausible to me that some "Suddenly everything's great" ending where Redcloak redeems himself and agrees to help without a lot of messy negotiations first.



I'm not saying this story HAS to end with Redcloak agreeing to Thor's plan. There could easily be (read: there ARE) other resolutions or complications coming. But I'd bet all my chips, every time, that if Thor's plan DOES work, it happens with Redcloak's contribution. Substitution would be unsatisfying for both character arc and pacing.


Again, this only makes sense if you are confusing Redcloak for being the main character of the story. The Order of the Stick are the heroes. Redcloak being the obstacle that has to be destroyed to make peace possible, at this point, has far more textural evidence for it.

This whole argument strikes me as somebody saying that if Thanos' snap is undone, it has to be because he did it, and that the Avengers getting the stones and doing it themselves would be a "substitution". And, no, it turned out that Thanos, even after seeing the evidence that his plan didn't work, just doubled down, and they had to kill him to stop him from wiping out *all* life in the universe.

Also, saying that Jirix is too minor of a character is making the same mistake: thinking that the story is about the goblin who will save the world, rather than about the heroes stopping the goblin who is trying to destroy it. Jirix' role, in this scenario, is entirely mechanical. What's important is that the Order makes way for a peaceful future. They're the ones who, more than anyone else, need to have the agency here.

It's also worth noting that TDO himself is -from an in-universe perspective- a far more important player here than Redcloak. If anything, TDO is the one who needs to be redeemed in order for their to be lasting peace, especially if Thor's plan is just going to be a one-off rift sealer with a dead Redcloak afterward.



You know, I still remember watching the Avatar Book 2 finale. ALL the chips were down. ALL the foreshadowing was done. Zuko was going to OBVIOUSLY join Team Avatar and teach Aang firebending. He had big heart-to-hearts with Katara and Iroh and freed Appa and had an Identity Crisis Fever Dream and everything! It was the perfect moment for him to save the day!

I find this example hilarious, because it shows just how different Zuko's story is to Redcloak's. Zuko had the build up. He had the groundwork laid for him. Redcloak... hasn't. Having setbacks and moments of failure is just classic storytelling. Having a moment of relapse before committing to redemption is pretty standard, really- the same thing happened with Vegeta, for example.

But that's not what's happening with Redcloak. He's never shown any signs of softening his position- he's only gotten worse as time has gone on. Him trying to kill Durkon wasn't just a bad thing he did- it was a chance for him to at least show some sign that he might be willing to change or listen. But no. He wasn't even conflicted over it. He didn't have a moment of "what have I done?" afterward.



Redemption is not off the table for Redcloak. It's not a done deal, but his story is far from over.

We're literally in the last book of the series, and we've already had a major plot beat pushing him in the wrong direction. His story is, in fact, pretty close to being over.

[Ionathus]

Really? Because that's kind of how HtPGHS ended.

I'm sorry, I don't follow. What part of HtPGHS's ending are you referencing? Gin-Jun not being willing to give up on the Hobgoblin settlement assault?


Quite frankly, the idea that bringing peace between humans and goblins is something that will take a lot of time and effort, and that we will see how it's going in time-skipped epilogue, seems far more plausible to me that some "Suddenly everything's great" ending where Redcloak redeems himself and agrees to help without a lot of messy negotiations first.

Please read back and show me in my posts where I said "suddenly everything's great." We agree 100% on peace being a messy, complicated process that takes a long time. Hell, even Durkon acknowledged that in his negotiations. We're not gonna wrap up the entire Gobbotopia situation by the end of this book, no matter how the story unfolds. But a step in the right direction -- even Redcloak admitting his mistakes and simply taking that first tentative step forward by contributing to Thor's Plan -- would be a dramatically satisfying way to set things up for the epilogue.


Again, this only makes sense if you are confusing Redcloak for being the main character of the story. The Order of the Stick are the heroes. Redcloak being the obstacle that has to be destroyed to make peace possible, at this point, has far more textural evidence for it.

Also, saying that Jirix is too minor of a character is making the same mistake: thinking that the story is about the goblin who will save the world, rather than about the heroes stopping the goblin who is trying to destroy it. Jirix' role, in this scenario, is entirely mechanical. What's important is that the Order makes way for a peaceful future. They're the ones who, more than anyone else, need to have the agency here.

Hard disagree. You're pigeonholing storytelling into a narrowly-defined box. Loads and loads of stories give greater characterization to their villain, without taking anything away from the heroes' own development. Character growth is not a zero-sum game: just because the villain is in the wrong and destined to lose doesn't mean that their character arc HAS to be less compelling than the hero's. To use your own reference to Thanos: if, in Infinity War, Thanos got all the stones, but then had an aneurysm and died before snapping, the heroes would have triumphed...but the story's conclusion would not be satisfying. I'm suggesting that "give the cloak to Jirix and wait for him to level up and cast 9th level spells" is the OotS equivalent of that aneurysm.


This whole argument strikes me as somebody saying that if Thanos' snap is undone, it has to be because he did it, and that the Avengers getting the stones and doing it themselves would be a "substitution". And, no, it turned out that Thanos, even after seeing the evidence that his plan didn't work, just doubled down, and they had to kill him to stop him from wiping out *all* life in the universe.

By the way, I don't know if you're taking this position intentionally, or if I'm just seeing rhetorical points where they don't exist, but our opposing viewpoints aren't set up for "I offer ATLA as an example, you offer Avengers as a counterexample, therefore they cancel each other out." Because your original position, as I see it, is some variation of "Redcloak is irredeemable because he betrayed Durkon when peace was an option."

Let's call the concept of Redcloak redeeming himself after this betrayal of Durkon "X".

I then offered Zuko's betrayal in Book 2 and redemption in Book 3 as proof that "X" can happen. Offering an example (Avengers) where "X" didn't happen does not disprove my point that X can and does happen in other fiction, like ATLA.


It's also worth noting that TDO himself is -from an in-universe perspective- a far more important player here than Redcloak. If anything, TDO is the one who needs to be redeemed in order for their to be lasting peace, especially if Thor's plan is just going to be a one-off rift sealer with a dead Redcloak afterward.

Maybe in-universe. But from the narrative's perspective, TDO is about as important as The Ring in LotR. He's there, his plans motivate the villains to act and the heroes to react, but that's it. He's an inciting force and a background figure. Redcloak is the one we spend time watching carry out those orders, and grapple with the consequences.


I find this example hilarious, because it shows just how different Zuko's story is to Redcloak's. Zuko had the build up. He had the groundwork laid for him. Redcloak... hasn't. Having setbacks and moments of failure is just classic storytelling. Having a moment of relapse before committing to redemption is pretty standard, really- the same thing happened with Vegeta, for example.
But that's not what's happening with Redcloak. He's never shown any signs of softening his position- he's only gotten worse as time has gone on. Him trying to kill Durkon wasn't just a bad thing he did- it was a chance for him to at least show some sign that he might be willing to change or listen. But no. He wasn't even conflicted over it. He didn't have a moment of "what have I done?" afterward.

I don't see what's so hilarious about the comparison. Literally everything you just said about Redcloak could be applied to Zuko. Hell, Aang saved him from Zhao midway through Book 1 and Zuko immediately tried to fireball him out of a tree! And as for "he wasn't even conflicted over it," conflict doesn't HAVE to be after the deed is done. It's not always weeping and gnashing of teeth. What do you call panels 7 & 8 on the second page of this comic (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1209.html) if not obvious internal conflict?


We're literally in the last book of the series, and we've already had a major plot beat pushing him in the wrong direction. His story is, in fact, pretty close to being over.

Zuko literally redeemed himself halfway through the final book.

[Ruck]

I'm not the one who has those two things confused. Redcloak can do any number of things to be an important part of the story while still maintaining his status as a villain. Being the cause of or obstacle against solving the conflict is an important part. Dying a thematically appropriate and highly dramatic death at the climax because of his refusal to change himself or question his dedication to "the plan" would also be an important part of the story.

For some reason, however, some people are fixated on the idea that Redcloak is going to turn around and lead the human-goblinoid peace efforts. To which i re-iterate: "Implosion".

I have not seen anyone in this thread say the things you say they are saying.


Thank you, this exactly. I could've used more exact language, but I never meant to imply Redcloak is the hero. Regardless, we've been following him almost the entire time as a primary antagonist. He will be involved in the resolution -- one way or another.





I agree: that would be a thematically appropriate and highly dramatic death. I'm not even betting against it. I *do* believe it's on the table as a possibility. But if that happens, if we get that big dramatic moment where Redcloak realizes his sunk-cost fallacy and then dies, it would cheapen the story and water down the impending-doom atmosphere of the Final Book to say "okay, we beat Xykon but Redcloak is also dead: we'll give the cloak to this other guy -- who nobody on the team has had any important character interactions with (betting on O-Chul's acid shark escape doesn't count). Good luck buddy, come back to us in 20 years! Hopefully the gods don't get antsy with all the gates improperly-patched and decide to reset the world sooner anyway!"

Yes, exactly. It would be very dramatically unsatisfying, but I'm not sure I can lay out an evidence-based case for that. That's just how stories work; last-second resolutions to the major plots from incidental or previously unknown characters tend to be that way.

[Emanick]

I have not seen anyone in this thread say the things you say they are saying.



Yes, exactly. It would be very dramatically unsatisfying, but I'm not sure I can lay out an evidence-based case for that. That's just how stories work; last-second resolutions to the major plots from incidental or previously unknown characters tend to be that way.

Eh, depends on what Rich thinks of Office Space. Kidding, if it wasn't obvious.

[Ruck]

Eh, depends on what Rich thinks of Office Space. Kidding, if it wasn't obvious.

Great comedy, but not one I'd take lessons from on how to handle a third act.

[Emanick]

Great comedy, but not one I'd take lessons from on how to handle a third act.

I actually loved the ending, but I'm heavily biased because I was the only member of my family who saw it coming a mile off and could barely hide how smug I felt about it. :smalltongue:

[Ruck]

I actually loved the ending, but I'm heavily biased because I was the only member of my family who saw it coming a mile off and could barely hide how smug I felt about it. :smalltongue:

I liked the ending just fine, but there was some real contrived stuff to set up the third act,

particularly the fight between Peter and Joanna.

[Emanick]

I liked the ending just fine, but there was some real contrived stuff to set up the third act,

particularly the fight between Peter and Joanna.

You're right, that was pretty dumb. Mediocre sitcom-level material. Office Space could have done better than that.

[Rrmcklin]

Regarding Redcloak, I believe the Giant is already on record (though I could be wrong, if someone knows the quote I'm thinking about, I'd appreciate it) as saying that, ultimately this story will come down to Roy and Xykon. So whatever the resolution with him is, it's wrong to talk about it ending the story or acting as if it comes after Xykon's defeat. Xykon's defeat will be the climax, everything else, including Redcloak, the IFCC, and whatever else Hel and her remaining vampire may or may not try are important but ultimately secondary conflicts.

[danielxcutter]

This probably isn’t as clear without knowledge of the “side” books, but I’m fairly sure that however this goes won’t be completely sweeping the goblinoid problem under the rug.

I don’t really get why people want “punish evildoers” and “try to fix the root problem” as mutually exclusive. Is it because Redcloak’s a villain so he must be completely and absolutely wrong if he doesn’t jump on the first chance for redemption?

[Mike Havran]

This probably isn’t as clear without knowledge of the “side” books, but I’m fairly sure that however this goes won’t be completely sweeping the goblinoid problem under the rug.

I don’t really get why people want “punish evildoers” and “try to fix the root problem” as mutually exclusive. Is it because Redcloak’s a villain so he must be completely and absolutely wrong if he doesn’t jump on the first chance for redemption?
I agree. It would be really odd if Durkon persuaded Redcloak to veer from the course he followed for like 50 years, after a brief colloquy.

[Ruck]

Regarding Redcloak, I believe the Giant is already on record (though I could be wrong, if someone knows the quote I'm thinking about, I'd appreciate it) as saying that, ultimately this story will come down to Roy and Xykon. So whatever the resolution with him is, it's wrong to talk about it ending the story or acting as if it comes after Xykon's defeat. Xykon's defeat will be the climax, everything else, including Redcloak, the IFCC, and whatever else Hel and her remaining vampire may or may not try are important but ultimately secondary conflicts.

The only quote coming to mind is something Rich said about Xykon being the main villain, and the Snarl not being a villain but a MacGuffin. I'm not sure if that's the one, but I don't think it makes any indicators about Redcloak's role.

[BloodSquirrel]

I don’t really get why people want “punish evildoers” and “try to fix the root problem” as mutually exclusive. Is it because Redcloak’s a villain so he must be completely and absolutely wrong if he doesn’t jump on the first chance for redemption?

Because the story is enter its endphase and there is still no sign that Redcloak is heading down anything like a path toward redemption. And this isn't his first chance. *Ahem* SOD *Ahem*. At this point, people who are insisting that this story *MUST* be about Redcloak being redeemed and being the central figure in fixing everything are in the position of arguing that the rest of us don't have any evidence that there isn't a tea pot orbiting the Sun between Earth and Mars.

Meanwhile, every other (much more plausible, in many cases) theory of how the story will end is rejected out of hand, usually on the grounds no other character is important enough to resolve the goblin conflict (and that resolution OF COURSE must be clean, decisive, and final, all wrapped up with a neat little bow). The fact that Redcloak is not the main character of the story, and, I don't know, the actual heroes might have a hand in things is ignored.

[danielxcutter]

Because the story is enter its endphase and there is still no sign that Redcloak is heading down anything like a path toward redemption. And this isn't his first chance. *Ahem* SOD *Ahem*. At this point, people who are insisting that this story *MUST* be about Redcloak being redeemed and being the central figure in fixing everything are in the position of arguing that the rest of us don't have any evidence that there isn't a tea pot orbiting the Sun between Earth and Mars.

First of all, I didn't literally mean the first chance. Not to mention that his first real chance in Start of Darkness was when Xykon went AWOL for three years and he did almost take it before Xykon razed Right-Eye's village for the lulz.

And right after Xykon got blown up the first time? Without going into spoilers too much... you really think he was in a good place, mentally, enough to do that? It was an influence - it's a good explanation of why Redcloak's much less passive after DCF - but he didn't really "snap out of it" until that part with the hobgoblin soldier.


Meanwhile, every other (much more plausible, in many cases) theory of how the story will end is rejected out of hand, usually on the grounds no other character is important enough to resolve the goblin conflict (and that resolution OF COURSE must be clean, decisive, and final, all wrapped up with a neat little bow). The fact that Redcloak is not the main character of the story, and, I don't know, the actual heroes might have a hand in things is ignored.

Who said the goblin conflict's going to be "wrapped up with a neat little bow"?