[SoD Spoilers] WHY is Xykon so evil?

[mockingbyrd7]

I got Start of Darkness for Christmas and read it over the last couple days. It was AMAZING.

The book clarified so much on Redcloak's motives, personality, goals, etc. etc.. What remains a mystery to me is Xykon's motivation for being evil.

The first scene in the book shows Xykon as a small child crying over his dead dog. Through the dark, mysterious powers of plot and homebrew, he animates his dog from the dead. He doesn't seem to understand that the dog is undead, but he does seem to think that it's cool that his undead dog eats bird brains.

The next we see him, he's a goth teenager killing his parents and grandparents in cold blood, serenely calm.

When we see him again, he's roughly in his thirties, and quitting a job in Helldeathdoomfire Volcano.

What I'm getting at is that according to Rich's Villain Workshop (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/rTKEivnsYuZrh94H1Sn.html), Xykon doesn't exactly match up. Redcloak has driving emotions like Revenge/Loss, Faith/Piety behind him. Xykon? It seems that he just discovered he had dark powers and started killing people.

Am I missing something obvious? Am I missing something obscure? Is there a hint somewhere in the online comic? I just feel that Redcloak is so much more fleshed-out and rounded, and Xykon feels like he's evil for evil's sake.

Anybody have any input?

[Yakk]

I think Xykon is a walking, talking, breathing parody of a BBEG.

Well, not breathing. But you get the idea.

[Rayzin]

He killed someone to look cooler(with the crown), Killed a goblin to find his keys, Said he might destroy the world if hes bored, Wants to refund a city which it took 10, 000 lives to take over... So hes a villain run by excess

[Tussy the Druid]

Well, it's pretty obvious that Xykon enjoys being evil. I mean, there are tons of scenes in SoD (like when he zaps the waitress) where he kills for fun, by reflex, or just because. Plus, we know that one of his major irks is that wizards believe they're superior to sorcerers because they "know" more. Maybe Xykon is just using the Snarl to prove that as a sorcerer he is more badass than wizards.

[Porthos]

Not everybody is a Deep Conflicted Character with Multiple Motivations for Doing Things. :smalltongue: Xykon, like Belkar, is just a Bad Dude. Sure there are some minor motivations for him that are shown in SoD. But, for the most part, he just wallows in his Bad Bad Self.

[The Extinguisher]

Xykon is just evil.

If we learn anymore, he stops becoming funny and starts becoming soapy.

[Archangel Yuki]

I have a theory about this that I have been working on for a while.

It's based on Xykon and his actions. I think that Xykon needs RC just as much as RC depends on Xykon. It says that about Xykon " Ever sense he turned undead, all he likes to do is watch things die." I think that he does this because of the fact that he needs to justify giving up his own humanity. That's all he can get enjoyment from. I believe what he said on the bottom of page 60- I think that he did not want to give up his humanity. He needs RC to help him justify what he did, and uses killing needlessly in order to help himself deal with the complete loss of his humanity. I think that were he to rule to world, he would continue to kill neddlessly, until he could not get satisfaction from even that.

[FoE]

I think Xykon was just bad to begin with. Even as a child, he seemed to enjoy the sight of his zombie dog tearing up other small animals — that suggests to me a sociopath.

[Demented]

Obviously, Xykon's driving emotion is Glee.
Glee at killing things. Glee at making undead things. Glee at watching little bouncy balls turn a paladin defense force into a mad-circus-bloodbath. Etc.

[RMS Oceanic]

Face of Evil is right. I just think Xykon was born bad, not unlike how Voldemort was born bad, and upon discovering his powers, used them to frighten, control and hurt people. What really tipped him over the edge, however, was the coffee scene. With none of the small things to distract him, as he talked about earlier, there was nothing left but killing.

[Rayzin]

Once again i still think he is a living incarnate of excess... seriously he does stuff for his amusement only!:xykon:=Badass :xykon:+crown= Bigger Badass

[Querzis]

Face of Evil is right. I just think Xykon was born bad, not unlike how Voldemort was born bad, and upon discovering his powers, used them to frighten, control and hurt people. What really tipped him over the edge, however, was the coffee scene. With none of the small things to distract him, as he talked about earlier, there was nothing left but killing.

Exactly, most of the people become who are really evil are like that because of past experience...but there is really some people who become evil because they like it. You dont need a reason to become evil and there is some people who lived lots of bad expereience and it would be understandable if they would have become evil because of those experience but are still good.

[Atheist_Cleric]

If you read the SoD intro by The Giant, you'll see that he actually worked hard to give Xykon very little in the way of motivations for his evil, because he feels doing such a thing makes a character more sympathetic and less evil, and he wanted it to be clear that Xykon does not fall into these categories. Xykon is evil, and more to the point he's a jerk. He DOES need RC, because without him there would be no coherence. He has some incredibly sophisticated villain cunning, especially since he became a Lich, but much of him is still in the mindframe that solves every problem by hitting it with magic until it breaks.

If you want to blame something for Xykon's evil, then you'd have to blame the force (Gods, Fate, Ancestry, who knows?) that put Sorcery power in his blood. Without it, he might (probably) have still grown up to be a sociopathic killer, but he at least would have been limited in his scale and by age. At least without the magic he would have had a chance to grow up a decent person. With it, and his own particular mind-scheme....well there you have the guy who lead a goblin to kill his own little brother for amusement.

[Alfryd]

What I'm getting at is that according to Rich's Villain Workshop, Xykon doesn't exactly match up. Redcloak has driving emotions like Revenge/Loss, Faith/Piety behind him. Xykon? It seems that he just discovered he had dark powers and started killing people.
Pretty well, but I wouldn't say he's utterly devoid of some deeper motivation. He explains it to Xavion- basically, he wants to be feared and respected. Which is also why he cares so much about style. But it wasn't until he felt death approaching, and, more importantly, became a lich, that he really became fixated on some long-term villainous masterplan to explain what he was doing and what he had done. Then, and only then, did he become a BBEG in the traditional sense. Previously, he had just been, well, essentially a high-level thug, pursuing his own gratification through force and intimidation with no especial goal in mind aside from his own survival.

[The Wanderer]

I think there's always been some fairly strong hints that Xykon is a sociopath. (Yeah, the APA doesn't use the term anymore and has watered the definition, but I mean the old fashioned sort). In brief, sociopaths have no conscience, zero compassion, no empathy for others, (some are unable to consider any living being besides themselves as being real), frequently begin their lives as a sociopath by torturing and killing small animals as children, and go from there.

What makes one sociopathic is a mystery, in the end you have to shrug your shoulders and assume it was something gone wrong on a genetic level. Personally I think there's pretty strong evidence that Xykon was a sociopath or had sociopathic tendencies even before becoming a lich.

[Darkcomet]

From what little I know, Xykon does what he does because he's bored. Especially since he became a lich. Note that I don't have SoD, but I have heard some things. For instance, even though Xykon was evil before, becoming a lich has taken away most of the things he enjoys, like coffee, I believe. What was left? Killing. Basically, he was born evil, and becoming a lich just turned him loose.

[VeisuItaTyhjyys]

Video games.

[Charles Phipps]

I understand Xykon more than I understand Redcloak to be honest. I also believe that Xykon, as evil is he is, isn't as evil as Redcloak either. Fundamentally, I can respect the fact that he's not a hypocrite about what matters to him or attempts to disguise it.

Xykon wants to be respected and have power. Everyone since childhood has treated him as an imbecile and he self-actualizes past them. Yet, still, even ROY treats him like a joke when he tries to talk him down.

And why SHOULD he respect the Hobgoblins enough to spare their lives?

[Jayngfet]

respect, from what I can gather all the wizards he's seen treated sorcerers like crap, zykon probably wasn't the sanest guy around, so a good place to start was killing the nearest wizard and send him off on a killing spree

[snoopy13a]

Xykon is just evil.

If we learn anymore, he stops becoming funny and starts becoming soapy.

Yeah, it is important to remember that this is a comedy. Xykon is an over the top villian whose evilness is funny.

[Antamar]

I believe that it's a combination of sociopathic/psychopathic tendencies from birth (possibly on the genetic level) followed by him killing his parents in the most important phase of development (adolescence), and therefore lacked the discipline to break him of his aforementioned psychological problems. Also, ever since the age of about 12 (when he is visited by Xavion) Wizards have looked down on him. By being introduced to prejudice at such an early age, it would make sense that he would hunger for revenge, power, and respect from the people who disrespected him in the past. Also, Lich's minds are changed (from what I understand) to be more naturally predisposed to Evil (with a capital E). Losing his sensory feelings pushed over the edge, in my opinion, from sociopathic/psychopathic tendencies to true sociopathy and psychosis.

[the_tick_rules]

xykon is a just plain sociopath, he does what he does because he enjoys it. He suffered no apparent abuse, neglect, or mistreatment, he's just that way. When he became a lich it drove his evilness further cause without fleshly pleasure his evilnesss is all he has left to enjoy.

[factotum]

I think Xykon is just Evil to the core and always has been. When he raised his dog and his grandmother from the dead, I think his reasons were wholly selfish--he liked them and wanted them back; to his mind, even the shambling mockery of life he gave them was better than them leaving him forever. Add to that his desire for other people to see the greatness he sees in himself, and we have a lovely psychotic little package just waiting for the right trigger to bloom into full flower.

In this case, the trigger was turning into a lich. While he still had human needs and desires--the desire for a good cup of coffee, the need to visit a lavatory afterward--he could at least emphasise to some degree with the people around him. Once he lost that he simply lost any interest in being human, or what being human means; I think that's most clear when he first meets Tsukiko and she informs him of her "special" love for the undead, and he tells her that he's "not one of those disgusting biophiliacs". While that was obviously a joke on Rich's part, it also shows that Xykon doesn't consider himself even remotely human anymore, despite the fact he was one for considerably longer than he's been a lich.

[Tempest Fennac]

I think it was accidental when he animated Barky, but he could have purposely animated his Grandma for selfish purposes (I think most 4 year olds tend to act in a selfish manner anyway, so that probably dosn't count towards his evilness).

[Charles Phipps]

I think it was accidental when he animated Barky, but he could have purposely animated his Grandma for selfish purposes (I think most 4 year olds tend to act in a selfish manner anyway, so that probably dosn't count towards his evilness).

Xykon's childhood shows that, after 4 years of age with a undead doggie, he clearly doesn't view undeath as something really bad by nature. Again, personally I like that they're not trying to make Xykon more sympathetic but I find him more sympathetic than Redcloak.

I do confess, I wonder why it's not enough for some people he's just selfish.

[Tempest Fennac]

Why do you see Xykon as being more sympathetic then RC? I'm just curious due to how the only thing that's remotely sympathetic about Xykon is that most of the Wizards his interacted with looked down on him for being a Sorcerer.

[factotum]

I'm struggling to see how Xykon can be seen in ANY sort of sympathetic light either, especially after reading SoD. I mean, the stuff he did to Redcloak, Right-Eye and their family beggars belief...

[Ikialev]

Sorry of OT, but..

Omgteenxykonlemmeseee~!


And. What is SoD? ^^"

[Charles Phipps]

Why do you see Xykon as being more sympathetic then RC? I'm just curious due to how the only thing that's remotely sympathetic about Xykon is that most of the Wizards his interacted with looked down on him for being a Sorcerer.

Stark of Darkness had a rather peculiar reaction for me. Fundamentally, it showed two very different kinds of evil. I think the Giant may have missed that he actually did provide a fairly good characterization for Xykon.

Redcloak has earned nothing but my scorn and derision because he's a hypocrite and a betrayer on every possible level. He destroys huge numbers of Goblin lives every year because he solely wants to redress a wrong that he makes worse everytime he acts. He's so deeply in self-denial and delusions that he's genuinely insane at his point. Yet, he prefers to continue to believe he's the good guy even when he murders his own brother.

Xykon is....Xykon is Spike to Redcloak's Sephiroth.

Xykon Pre-Undeath is a murderer and a crook. He's fundamentally "human" though. He kills people on Angry Impulse and because he wants to become rich/power/feared/influential. He's greedy, lusty, and vain beyond all reason but he doesn't attempt to make it something more than that. In addition to his vanity, he's solely out for himself and that selfishness is less menacing to me than someone so utterly divorced from reality as Redcloak.

While it's easy to think Xykon is insane, he's actually entirely sane and rational. He's just evil (i.e. he recognizes what he's doing is wrong and makes a conscious choice to act against that for his own gain).

Even the worst elements of Xykon's character are actually the result of Redcloak's magic. Xykon could enjoy sex, coffee, and was physically able to connect with people on some level as a human....Redcloak took that away. Both of them are monsters but only one of them would destroy the world...and it's not the Lich.

[Rayzin]

Sorry of OT, but..

Omgteenxykonlemmeseee~!


And. What is SoD? ^^"

SoD=Start of Darkness
It explains how the villans came to be

[Alfryd]

Even the worst elements of Xykon's character are actually the result of Redcloak's magic. Xykon could enjoy sex, coffee, and was physically able to connect with people on some level as a human....Redcloak took that away.
Right, because Redcloak tied Xykon down, held a knife to his throat, and physically compelled him to undergo the process of stripping away his humanity, without telling him what would be involved to the limits of his personal knowledge.

Redcloak has earned nothing but my scorn and derision because he's a hypocrite and a betrayer on every possible level. He destroys huge numbers of Goblin lives every year because he solely wants to redress a wrong that he makes worse everytime he acts.
Actually, he doesn't do that at all in the book. Goblins die in his crusades, but it's Xykon who offs them pointlessly for his own amusement. Redcloak doesn't stoop to the same depths until much later in the strip, and for much of the story is obliged to follow Xykon's orders because he is (A) stronger than him, and would kill him if he ceased to be useful, and (B) would kill every goblin in sight if he suspected betrayal.

Now, it's certainly true that Redcloak has, in a very profound sense, become what he hates- a fanatical religious zealot who butchered innocents by the score for the crime of geographical proximity to those who threatened the welfare of his people- but claiming that he's less sympathetic than Xykon? Xykon, who butchers sentient beings en masse for his own entertainment without even the pretense of tactical expediency? Who tears off his own flesh sooner than admit weakness? C'mon, Xykon said it himself- "you're strictly little league compared to that."

As for Rich's opinion on the matter:
"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.
Redcloak might be, though."

[ref]

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[T.Titan]

I believe the word sociopath applies...

[Charles Phipps]

Now, it's certainly true that Redcloak has, in a very profound sense, become what he hates- a fanatical religious zealot who butchered innocents by the score for the crime of geographical proximity to those who threatened the welfare of his people- but claiming that he's less sympathetic than Xykon? Xykon, who butchers sentient beings en masse for his own entertainment without even the pretense of tactical expediency? Who tears off his own flesh sooner than admit weakness? C'mon, Xykon said it himself- "you're strictly little league compared to that."

Except, that's exactly what he is. I have no pity or sympathy for Redcloak. I want to see him put down and couldn't care about his suffering. On the other hand; I care about Xykon to a certain extent. Yes, he's a murderer and evil but, on the other hand, I understand what drives Xykon. I can appreciate his motivations and understand his methodology (bluntly; his minions are such SCUM I couldn't say in his position, I would be able to hold back from murdering them).

He's relatable. Redcloak is not. He's just a creature. Xykon is a mass murderer and a criminal but he's not the enemy of everything that lives like Redcloak. Just because he didn't start out as evil doesn't mean he's not much worse a monster than Xykon could ever be (I repeat: RC INTENDS TO DESTROY THE WORLD)

At the end of SOD, Redcloak is a slave. He's probably the only man in history who deserves it.

[Tempest Fennac]

Technically, the world being destroyed is only the back-up plan (admittedly, if what's been happening in Azure City is anything to go by Red Cloak was probably lying in regards to wanting equality with other races). Also, how are all of Xykon's underlings scum? he threatened the Goblins in Right-Eye's village into joining him, and the Hobgoblins are only following RC due to being incredibly Lawful (the fact that they got to fight humans seemed to help to a degree as well). Also, it could be argued that RC is doing what he is doing for the greater good (even though the evidence suggests a lot of his actions are driven by the fact that he doesn't want to admit that his wrong), but Xykon doesn't have any remotely noble motivations (eg: even before he became a Lich, he was quite hppy to kill people for next to no reason).

[factotum]

Well, before he became a lich he DID always have a reason for killing...not maybe what you or I would class a GOOD reason, but a reason nonetheless. For example, he killed Master Fyron because he wanted that crown. He killed the lizardman leader so he wouldn't have to bother remembering his overly long name.

It's only really after his ascent to lichdom that killing for simple pleasure entered his mind, I think.

[Behold_the_Void]

Because he's a jerk.

[Charles Phipps]

Technically, the world being destroyed is only the back-up plan (admittedly, if what's been happening in Azure City is anything to go by Red Cloak was probably lying in regards to wanting equality with other races).

He seems pretty clear when he tells his brother in the coffee shop that their souls will be destroyed. I think Redcloak never seriously entertained anything but the Snarl eradicating reality.


Also, how are all of Xykon's underlings scum? he threatened the Goblins in Right-Eye's village into joining him, and the Hobgoblins are only following RC due to being incredibly Lawful (the fact that they got to fight humans seemed to help to a degree as well).

I'm exagerrating a might but the implications are, that Right-Eye's village aside, we have pretty much people that are willing servants of Xykon's evil. The Hobgoblins are happily enjoying their tormenting of Azure City's citizens as well.


Also, it could be argued that RC is doing what he is doing for the greater good (even though the evidence suggests a lot of his actions are driven by the fact that he doesn't want to admit that his wrong), but Xykon doesn't have any remotely noble motivations (eg: even before he became a Lich, he was quite hppy to kill people for next to no reason).

This is where our problem lies. I consider Noble Motivations make Redcloak MUCH WORSE than Xykon who is merely selfish. They add a venere of hypocrisy, self-righteousness, delusion, and outright insanity to Redcloak's activities.

To continue with the Spike comparison (from Buffy the Vampire Slayer). Spike is greedy, selfish, and a murderer. He kills people because he's angry or hungry. He makes no pretensions about being anything but a monster.

Xykon and him would probably get along pretty well.

Redcloak, however, insists he's the good guy and the victim in all this. Not only is he a coward to face up to the horrors he's perpetrated on the world but he's willing to destroy the entire world because he's a fanatic to his evil religion.

In a world ruled by Xykon, he'd randomly kill people and insist on Big Statues built to him. Then, I fully suspect he'd probably get bored and go of to screw with another world after a month.

Redcloak, I fully believe if he ever achieved his world of Goblin Equality would then start invading OTHER worlds or would become absolutely outraged if his people didn't build towers ten feet taller than any human beings.

More likely, he'll destroy anything he touches.

But yes, it all boils down to the part I'd rather have a gangster than a religious fanatic.

[hamishspence]

Redcloak makes it pretty clear the destruction of the world is a worst case scenario. He does NOT want the Snarl released, he statement to Right-Eye in the shop clearly states that the Snarl is to be used as a blackmail instrument, not on nations, as he lets Xykon think, but on gods.

the Giants own statement at the start of the book is that Xykon is really evil and is NOT a being who becomes evil because of circumstances, and says "Redcloak might be, though"

Xykon is a killer from 12 years old, Redcloak by contrast is quick to object to Xykons killing of goblins for fun at first. When his plan to use his control of the phylactery as leverage over Xykon collapses, he chooses to stay, only because he sees it as being with Xykon or against him.

Redcloak is very alarmed at the destuction of Lirian's gate. It is clear that to him, accidentally increasing the risk of destroying all creation is a BAD thing, he is not the nihilist Miko accuses him of being.

His devotion to The Plan over the lives of his fellow goblins, even relatives, has many parallels in other fiction. He is a Vader to Xykon's Palpatine, and the speech Xykon makes to him at the end of SoD makes this clear.

read the book thoroughly and absorb every nuance before saying Redcloak is more Evil than Xykon: you should see he is not. He is Evil in what he sees as a good cause, a tragic villain, not a plain psychopath.

[Charles Phipps]

Read the book thoroughly and absorb every nuance before saying Redcloak is more Evil than Xykon: you should see he is not. He is Evil in what he sees as a good cause, a tragic villain, not a plain psychopath.

Read the Book again then read my posts. You are not getting what I'm saying. I don't sympathize with Redcloak at all and see his hypocrisy as what makes him worse than Xykon.

I also don't get why the Giant's comment says anything about lessening Redcloak's evil. All the Giant is saying is that circumstances shaped Redcloak into what he is, not that he's less evil. No, he didn't start as a monster. That makes him even WORSE.

Like I said, this is about sympathy. I have sympathy for Xykon. I can understand his goals and methods. I can only loathe and spit on how Redcloak has made everything twisted and abominable about might be a semi-justifiable cause.

Rich made a wonderful tragic story for Redcloak and made me HATE him. I can't hate Xykon because he's just a cruel ******. He's not a religious fanatic.

Just like a think a Mafia Don is less bad than the Khimler Rouge.

I'm not afraid of the selfish who will kill me for money.

I'm very afraid of the selfless who will kill my entire family because he believes its the right thing to do.

[Milandros]

...
Rich made a wonderful tragic story for Redcloak and made me HATE him. I can't hate Xykon because he's just a cruel ******. He's not a religious fanatic.

Just like a think a Mafia Don is less bad than the Khimler Rouge.

I'm not afraid of the selfish who will kill me for money.

I'm very afraid of the selfless who will kill my entire family because he believes its the right thing to do.

While I believe you have a point, (personally, while I don't hate him, I find Redcloak fairly contemptible after SoD), I think you're overpraising Xykon. Xykon won't kill you because he wants your money. He'll kill you because it's funny. Because he enjoys your pain and suffering. Because he likes to see you in misery. Because he wants you to know that he's bigger, badder and tougher than you are.

Remember, he had a big part in manipulating Redcloak into being the person you hate.

[the_tick_rules]

i don't sympathize for xykon, but i do see what charles is saying. Xykon doesn't make any attempts to justify what he does, redcloak is trying to say it's all for a good reason. So it depends on what you think is worse, open evil or evil veiled as goodness.

[Nerdanel]

Li'l Xykon liked his dog, his grandmother, being respected, watching things die, and probably lots of other things, like jumping into a mud puddle.

Adult Xykon liked good coffee, pretty women, being respected, watching things die, and probably many other things, like a good meal.

Venerable Xykon liked remembering good coffee, looking at pretty women, being respected, watching things die, and probably several other things, like a soft bed.

Lich Xykon likes being respected and watching things die. Very little else. And he doesn't even get real respect, only goblinoids calling him Lord out of fear while thinking him an idiot. (Not that he got much in the way of respect when he was alive either.) We know that Lich Xykon has no sense of smell or taste and it's in question how much of his sense of touch remains beyond still feeling pain. This cuts out many, many amusements available to the living, while at the same time he is uncapable of sleeping and in need of even more things to do to fill his time.

From a young age, Xykon has been trying to prove himself not an inferior. He had no success in scholarly pursuit (he failed math three times) and he would have been eternally looked down by Xavion and all the other wizards if he had joined Xavion's organization. I think Xykon would have made a pretty good stereotypical dumb fighter, but he chose to follow his natural magical talents instead. In a world that hates and fears sorcerers (according to Xavion) and belittles them (like both Xavion and Fyron) Xykon had no easy route to being respected in a good way, and in any case it would have necessitated doing lots of good deeds for people he hated, so he decided to go into villainy and be feared and respected. It helped that he was Chaotic Evil to start with too.

Back when he was alive Xykon had a lot of pleasing distractions which tempered his cruelty. He was willing to let Fyron go and just take the crown, and he even showed some patience for insults until Fyron went too far. But when he felt the advancing age press upon him he got worse, killing paladins (his natural enemies since they fight evil and can detect it) for no particular reason. And after he became lich, there were very few ways left to fulfill his twin desires for respect and avoiding boredom.

I think if Xykon were to be crowned the Emperor of the world he still would not find more than passing happiness. His minions would still both hate and despise him, depriving him from meaningful (non-)human interaction, and you can only kill people in so many ways until all of them grow old. I think Xykon would be eventually driven to suicide-by-the-Snarl by challenging it for one last interesting fight, but he would invade Mount Celestia and kill Roy's family before it. (There is no evidence that the OOTS world has anything particularly interesting in the material plane beyond that one planet.)

Interestingly, the character of Tsukiko is the best possibility I can see for potentially filling the emptiness inside Xykon for good. Tsukiko doesn't care that Xykon is dead or that he's an evil sorcerer. I think Xykon's claim of not being a biophiliac is a defensive mechanism to hide from himself how much he misses his previous sex life. His unprovoked murder of the pretty waitress at Beelzebuddy's can be viewed as trying to convince himself that he is more inhuman than he really is. If Xykon were to be able to form a meaningful relationship of some sort with Tsukiko, he might not put out so many kilonazis (meganazis?) of evil any more.

So for those who blame Redcloak for self-deceit, I claim Xykon suffers from the same thing, just in a different way. Redcloak likes to think he's deep down a decent person while committing horrible atrocities, and Xykon likes to think he's an undead monster without a shred of humanity in him while still being inside the same man he always was.

[Kish]

i don't sympathize for xykon, but i do see what charles is saying. Xykon doesn't make any attempts to justify what he does, redcloak is trying to say it's all for a good reason. So it depends on what you think is worse, open evil or evil veiled as goodness.
One gets to be the butch, and one gets to be the bitch. *ducks*

[Charles Phipps]

Remember, he had a big part in manipulating Redcloak into being the person you hate.

Actually, what made the final moment so poignant was that Xykon just let nature take its course. Redcloak had already made it clear that he'd sacrificed everything for something that had no benefit to him.

I also make distinction between Xykon the Lich King and Xykon the Human Sorcerer. Both are horrible, horrible, and evil people but the Lich King is definitely much worse.

Xykon isn't someone I confuse for being noble or having any trace of honor. He's a monster through and through that deserves to be put down.

But I still kind of like him. Sort of like Belkar. He and Mortal Xykon are really the same character with different classes and power levels. The world would be much better without either but they're people that have their charm.

I've had too many experiences with religious fanatics (as a religious man myself) in real life to take people like Redcloak as funny or likeable.

[Requiem_Jeer]

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

But it also ROCKS absolutely :smallbiggrin:

But seriously, Xykon is Evil, through and through. Redcloak is an Evil Scion of the Apocalypse, through and through.

[Zenos]

As far as I understand, Xykon is simply a sadist.

[BisectedBrioche]

Read the Book again then read my posts. You are not getting what I'm saying. I don't sympathize with Redcloak at all and see his hypocrisy as what makes him worse than Xykon.

Redcloak's hypocrisy on one hand, Xykon's killing for fun on the other. Redcloak doesn't kill for fun or out of sadism. Can you really say that you yourself haven't failed to see "the other side" of things? In RC's case this is anger at Paladins for destroying his village, which led him to beleive his plan is the right thing and his maltreatment of the hoblins (as he eventually realised was just a childhood grudge).


I also don't get why the Giant's comment says anything about lessening Redcloak's evil. All the Giant is saying is that circumstances shaped Redcloak into what he is, not that he's less evil. No, he didn't start as a monster. That makes him even WORSE.

How does not starting out as a "monster" make him worse? Xykon was a nutcase from the start, he's rotton to the core and just kills because he can. RC was a victim of circumstance. Even if it doesn't make him "better" than Xykon, at least he has a reason.


Like I said, this is about sympathy. I have sympathy for Xykon. I can understand his goals and methods. I can only loathe and spit on how Redcloak has made everything twisted and abominable about might be a semi-justifiable cause.

TBF, how would you like it if your sole reason for existance was as cannon fodder? While the plight of the goblins isn't an excuse its certainly a reason.


Rich made a wonderful tragic story for Redcloak and made me HATE him. I can't hate Xykon because he's just a cruel ******. He's not a religious fanatic.

Ah, cruel *******s. The lovable rogues, laughing happilly as they kill and torture people for no reason but their own amusment.

At the very least a religeos fanatic would limit their scope to a percieved enemy. i.e. At least RC won't harm goblins (or at least tries to prevent them from being harmed) while Xykon simply orders them to their doom out of bordom.


Just like a think a Mafia Don is less bad than the Khimler Rouge.

I'm not afraid of the selfish who will kill me for money.

I'm very afraid of the selfless who will kill my entire family because he believes its the right thing to do.

Technically isn't it also possible that the selfish guy would kill your entire family? At least if someone thinks its the right thing to do then it might actually turn out to be the case. :smallamused:

[Charles Phipps]

Redcloak's hypocrisy on one hand, Xykon's killing for fun on the other. Redcloak doesn't kill for fun or out of sadism. Can you really say that you yourself haven't failed to see "the other side" of things? In RC's case this is anger at Paladins for destroying his village, which led him to beleive his plan is the right thing and his maltreatment of the hoblins (as he eventually realised was just a childhood grudge).

Uhh, Redcloak frequently kills out of Sadism. He hates human beings and the Paladins with a fiery hatred. The fact that the humans and Paladins had nothing to do with the disaster is nothing.


How does not starting out as a "monster" make him worse? Xykon was a nutcase from the start, he's rotton to the core and just kills because he can. RC was a victim of circumstance. Even if it doesn't make him "better" than Xykon, at least he has a reason.

Redcloak had a choice. Xykon isn't right in the head mentally. Something wasn't born in his head right and he's got some wires crossed that shouldn't be. Redcloak is a normal man but chose to become a monster.

Right Eye gives lie to the evils of Redcloak.


TBF, how would you like it if your sole reason for existance was as cannon fodder? While the plight of the goblins isn't an excuse its certainly a reason.

It's fairly clear by the fact that Right Eye's village lives in peace with humans that Redcloak's speech is also a lot of malarkey, even if he believes it. The fact that Redcloak does the same to humans removes any moral pretense to his mission.


Ah, cruel *******s. The lovable rogues, laughing happilly as they kill and torture people for no reason but their own amusment.

Belkar and Xykon are just that, yeah.


At the very least a religeos fanatic would limit their scope to a percieved enemy. i.e. At least RC won't harm goblins (or at least tries to prevent them from being harmed) while Xykon simply orders them to their doom out of bordom.

Xykon is a sadist to the immediate people around him, Redcloak is a sadist to the world.


Technically isn't it also possible that the selfish guy would kill your entire family? At least if someone thinks its the right thing to do then it might actually turn out to be the case. :smallamused:

Honestly, that would just make me hate him more.

[Charles Phipps]

As far as I understand, Xykon is simply a sadist.

No, Xykon is a narcissist. He's not actually a Sadist either because PAIN isn't the focus (the one time he got off on pain was to Redcloak specifically). Xykon gets off on the POWER from killing people less than torturing them.

There's a difference, albeit one that's really not that important.

[Querzis]

So for those who blame Redcloak for self-deceit, I claim Xykon suffers from the same thing, just in a different way. Redcloak likes to think he's deep down a decent person while committing horrible atrocities, and Xykon likes to think he's an undead monster without a shred of humanity in him while still being inside the same man he always was.

I'm guessing nobody replied to your post until now because people usually dont wanna read post that long, just like they dont wanna read each post in a thread before posting themselves. Its too bad because your analyze of Xykon is really great. Fight the Snarl out of boredom because nobody else is strong enough for him? I could really see that happening. But yeah, no matter how powerfull he get, Xykon is still just a narcissist evil human thug who wants to be respected above everything else.

[Kish]

Redcloak is very alarmed at the destuction of Lirian's gate.
That's when he doesn't know there are any other gates. He cheers right up when Xykon tells him about the others. That looks much more like "oh crap, the Plan just went down the drain" than real concern for the Snarl being unleashed.

[hamishspence]

Redcloak, at a young age, watched his mum, sister, and entire village slain by a gang of paladins who were after ONE guy in the village, the original wearer of the Redcloak. This is likely to sour him somewhat on humans, paladins, and Azure City.

He has also spent the last 4 years on the run from paladins, the goblins he allied with driven off the plains, into the swamp, then paladins moving into swamp on crusade to exterminate them. His "it is time to take back what is ours" speech is the sort of thing you see in hero movies, not villain ones. and then he allied with what he saw as an asset boosting chance of success, and it all slides downhill from there.

This doesn't make what he did RIGHT, but does make it more understandable than Xykon.

Xykon began his career by murdering his family at the age of 12 over a minor offence (they let a somewhat obnoxious recruiter into his room without telling him. This is far less understandable to me and shows just how malevolent Xykon is.

Redcloaks descent takes place over SoD. By the end he is thoroughly corrupt, but even then he had reasons, what he saw as the needs of his people. As it happens, he was deluding himself, but this is a common thing.

If you like Xykon but hate redcloak, by same logic you would like Palpatine but hate Vader because Vader did evil for what he saw as good reasons, wheras Palpatine was a corrupter who delights in harm (RotJ)

And most people see Vader as tragic, not actually WORSE than Palpatine.

Once again, in main strip, Redcloak objects to being called a nihilist by Miko.That is odd if he really did wish to die and take the world with him.

[Kish]

Once again, in main strip, Redcloak objects to being called a nihilist by Miko.That is odd if he really did wish to die and take the world with him.
It's no more odd than Miko objecting to being called a delusional trigger-happy extremist. Because it's true doesn't mean the being being described likes the description.

Redcloak is prepared to treat the annihilation of the world and everyone in it down to their souls as a win. It's not his first choice, however. Whether that makes him more a nihilist or not is a matter of opinion; it should be clear which side I'm on, eh?

[Paladin29]

I hardly see similarities between RC and Vader... but i can assure you that Xykon and Palpatine can´t be more different. Palpatine is a mastermind and has a vision (a dark vision) of a centralized galaxy under his power, he is subtle and malicious, he plan with years in advance at the little detail. Xykon is a psycopath who doesn´t care of the world where he lives and a stupid lich who kill thousands because he is bored, RC is more centered and wise than Xykon, the lych is only most powerfull.

Don´t missundertood me, I like Xykon, he makes me laugh and is a good villain to OotS.

[Charles Phipps]

If you like Xykon but hate redcloak, by same logic you would like Palpatine but hate Vader because Vader did evil for what he saw as good reasons, wheras Palpatine was a corrupter who delights in harm (RotJ)


I don't find Darth Vader terribly sympathetic because he's a child-killer and a monster. He ends up murdering his wife who he ostensibly was preparing to save. Fundamentally, Darth Vader is sympathetic to me only in that he repents. His motivations are immaterial to me.

In the EU, I've also always appreciated the Sith who weren't self-deluded. Exar Kun, Darth Bane, and others were all able to carry their own comic series/books because they never made a pretense of being righteous.

Like I said, I'm hardly disputing Xykon's evil. I'm saying the guy is sick in the head with fairly tame ambitions egged on by Redcloak while Redcloak is a voluntary monster with unlimited ambitions driven by his own voluntarily warped mind.

[factotum]

I don't find Darth Vader terribly sympathetic because he's a child-killer and a monster. He ends up murdering his wife who he ostensibly was preparing to save. Fundamentally, Darth Vader is sympathetic to me only in that he repents.

Well, speaking personally, I think George Lucas went WAY over the top with Anakin's descent into evil. When you have the blood of a number of children on your hands I don't think just chucking the evil Emperor into a reactor shaft is enough to clean them, especially considering you helped keep said Emperor in power for more than twenty years! At least the adult Jedi he was said to have hunted down and killed in Episode 4 would have had a chance to fight back...

[Charles Phipps]

Well, speaking personally, I think George Lucas went WAY over the top with Anakin's descent into evil. When you have the blood of a number of children on your hands I don't think just chucking the evil Emperor into a reactor shaft is enough to clean them, especially considering you helped keep said Emperor in power for more than twenty years! At least the adult Jedi he was said to have hunted down and killed in Episode 4 would have had a chance to fight back...

While I agree that Anakin was a repulsive human being that wasn't enjoyable to watch on the movie screen...

OTOH, I appreciate Lucas didn't hold back. Vader wasn't actually secretly a teddy bear under that armor. No, he was genuinely an evil monster. He probably murdered millions of people as the Dark Lord of the Sith and didn't have any sense of honor (which we knew from the original trilogy).

It makes his statement uncomfortable for the audience by being controversial. Yes, EVIL people can repent.

[doliest]

I sympathise with redcloak, mainly because I see what he does as rebelling against a completely tyrannical world. As far as attacking humans that had no connection-What connection did redcloaks family have with the crimson mantle? Redcloak wants equal rights-For goblins to have the same thing as humans, which is a just goal.
Personally, I like Xykon, but can't sympathise with him in the least. It's hard to sympathise with the guy who had a choice & decided to kill for fun.
Also on the anakin debate-I had a problem with the child killing scene in that it makes no since that anakin jumped from 'jedi with problems with the code' to 'KILL ALL JEDI' in 10 minutes-flat.