The significance of Redcloak's nickname (Start of Darkness spoilers)

[Ekul]

I was recently rereading SoD, and the deliberate use of nicknames for each of the characters is striking. I'm sure we all remember the heartwrenching moment where Right Eye says "Redcloak" instead of "Brother". Other people have also said that that essentially "Redcloak" is basically a name signifying his status as little more than Xykon's slave.
Where does Redcloak begin and the Crimson Mantle end? He has let this artifact define him so much, his entire un-aging life is devoted to its purposes. It could be said that by taking the name Redcloak that he isn't even a person anymore, that all he is, is the cloak, a magic item for Xykon's or the Dark One's purposes. He's abandoned his name, his family, his home, everything that made him who he is.
Compare this to his brother, Right-Eye. Right-Eye's nickname is an interesting contrast to Redcloak. Right Eye is named after a part of his own body, his very perception. He is the one who noticed Xykon made the judgement to work with him, and he is the one who realized that working with Xykon was a mistake. "Right-Eye", proper perception who tries to do the right thing, versus "Wrong-Eye", who leads himself astray using fallacies and pride.
I wonder if he even is capable of clearing his mind while he's wearing the Crimson Mantle. Maybe he will need to stop being Redcloak in order to set things right.

[KorvinStarmast]

I wonder if he even is capable of clearing his mind while he's wearing the Crimson Mantle. Maybe he will need to stop being Redcloak in order to set things right.
If you go back to Original D&D (Eldritch Wizardry) and follow through with every subsequent edition, to include the 3.x Rich uses for this strips foundational assumptions, artifacts all have pernicious side effects.
The Red Cloak is the only artifact yet shown on screen.
Of course it has a detrimental side effect on him. It's an artifact.
We expect to see a second one (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1183.html)when the IFCC's nefarious scheme is revealed some time during this book.

[theangelJean]

If you go back to Original D&D (Eldritch Wizardry) and follow through with every subsequent edition, to include the 3.x Rich uses for this strips foundational assumptions, artifacts all have pernicious side effects.
The Red Cloak is the only artifact yet shown on screen.
Of course it has a detrimental side effect on him. It's an artifact.
We expect to see a second one (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1183.html)when the IFCC's nefarious scheme is revealed some time during this book.

I was half wondering if there isn't one - if the IGCC were in fact referring to the Crimson Mantle as the "artifact" with Redcloak being the "vessel". But it doesn't quite fit the text of that comic.

And this is a self-aware fantasy pastiche, artifacts are probably a dime a dozen.

[KorvinStarmast]

And this is a self-aware fantasy pastiche, artifacts are probably a dime a dozen. I don't think so. Even that cool hammer that Thor tipped Durkon off to (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1154.html) isn't an artifact: it's either a set item or maybe a legendary item.

[ZhonLord]

I don't think so. Even that cool hammer that Thor tipped Durkon off to (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1154.html) isn't an artifact: it's either a set item or maybe a legendary item.
Technically the Ming is an artifact as well (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0415.html), even if it was just a one-panel joke it was still labeled as a "plot central artifact".

[Metastachydium]

a legendary item.

Wait, those were a thing already in 3.5? (Also, I think the Hammer is probably a relic, with relic powers and all that.)

[theangelJean]

Technically the Ming is an artifact as well (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0415.html), even if it was just a one-panel joke it was still labeled as a "plot central artifact".

Place your bets on the Ming returning to the plot...

[Metastachydium]

Place your bets on the Ming returning to the plot...

Wrong thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?656238-Prediction-Page-(bring-your-quatloos-gps-and-internets-you-ll-need-them-)), I'm afraid!

[KorvinStarmast]

Wait, those were a thing already in 3.5? (Also, I think the Hammer is probably a relic, with relic powers and all that.) Dare I ask the difference between game term Relic and game term Artifact in 3.5?
Hmm, checked SRD.
It appears to me that what I refer to as "Legendary" items are called "Minor Artifacts" in 3.x. (Roughly). Looks like 'legendary' is from my current edition, 5e.
(Staff of the Magi is legendary in 5e but Minor Artifact in 3.x...but the match up isn't great otherwise).

[Metastachydium]

Dare I ask the difference between game term Relic and game term Artifact in 3.5?

Naturally! Artifacts are these crazy powerful ultra special magic items that are either unique or impossible to just make for a mere mortal and stuff; Relics are more clearly defined (in chapter 6 of MIC) and usually not quite as powerful, rare or difficult to acquire. Relics are essentially magic items intrinsically tied to a god/source of divine power. They have two sets of powers: a lesser one, available to any owner/wielder and a greater one, available for worshipers of the aforesaid specific source of divine power that establish a special connection to the Relic (either through tying down a spell slot as with Reserve feats, or through a feat called True Believer). While we are never told Durkon invested such resources into tapping the true power of the Hammer, as a Thor-related something-something-extra magic item, the Hammer sounds a lot more like a Relic than an Artifact overall.

[Kish]

A hundred gold says the Ming will never affect the OotS plot, though it may show up in another joke, as it already has twice.

[KorvinStarmast]

Naturally!{snip} While we are never told Durkon invested such resources into tapping the true power of the Hammer, as a Thor-related something-something-extra magic item, the Hammer sounds a lot more like a Relic than an Artifact overall. That works for me. (And of course our beloved flower replied with "naturally" ... that brought a smile to my face).

[Metastachydium]

A hundred gold says the Ming will never affect the OotS plot, though it may show up in another joke, as it already has twice.
Still the

[w]rong thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?656238-Prediction-Page-(bring-your-quatloos-gps-and-internets-you-ll-need-them-)), I'm afraid!


♣


That works for me. (And of course our beloved flower replied with "naturally" ... that brought a smile to my face).

[Happy flower sounds.] I live to dispense joy!

[Kish]

I make bets in lots of threads, and have since long before that thread existed. Someone brought up the Ming here.

[Metastachydium]

I make bets in lots of threads, and have since long before that thread existed. Someone brought up the Ming here.

I'm aware that's a common practice for many a poster. But that awareness in itself won't have me miss such an easy and clean opportunity to quote MYSELF and MY VERY OWN UNSOLICITED ADVICE!!

[Tzardok]

Can't you see he's growing impatient? Leaf him alone before resentment blooms. :smallcool:

[Precure]

Interestingly, Xykon too using an alias instead of his real name.

[Peelee]

Can't you see he's growing impatient? Leaf him alone before resentment blooms. :smallcool:

I think you got lost in the weeds rooting around for puns.

[Tzardok]

The secret of my success stems from my wooden delivery and my prickly exterior.

[137beth]

Even that cool hammer that Thor tipped Durkon off to (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1154.html) isn't an artifact: it's either a set item or maybe a legendary item.

Why can't it be an artifact?:smallconfused:

[KorvinStarmast]

Why can't it be an artifact?:smallconfused: This point was discussed in the thread for that strip. I'll not rehash that hear, but I found myself in agreement with the sentiment in that discussion that it isn't an artifact.