Did Xykon Make A New Phylactery?

[M1982]

In the meantime I looked at Van Richtens Guide to Liches as the most detailed 2e source (I am aware of). It elaborates on the short blurb in the MM and basically repeats the old Dragon version.

Only really new thing added is that during first transformation the soul needs to rest inside the phylactery for 3 days before it can possess a body

As far as 3.5 is concerned liches can create new phylacteries, even multiple ones at the same time, through certain epic spells, even though it's not possible with normal magic.

However it's unlikely that those obscure epic spells are known to Xykon

[Silly Name]

If Xykon could just switch to a new phylactery after the original one had been lost, the whole subplot about its retrieval would have been meaningless. He wouldn't have spent time and resources looking for the old one, he'd just make another and laugh about how pointless V's actions were.

So, the options are A) Xykon can't make a new phylactery while the original one is extant, B) Xykon can never make a new phylactery, or C) Xykon could switch to another phylactery, but it's too long a process to be worth it in the current situation.

[Metastachydium]

If Xykon could just switch to a new phylactery after the original one had been lost, the whole subplot about its retrieval would have been meaningless. He wouldn't have spent time and resources looking for the old one, he'd just make another and laugh about how pointless V's actions were.

So, the options are A) Xykon can't make a new phylactery while the original one is extant, B) Xykon can never make a new phylactery, or C) Xykon could switch to another phylactery, but it's too long a process to be worth it in the current situation.

I think we can safely preclude C. Xykon tells Redcloak he didn't expect that he'll actually find the phylactery and yet he didn't appear to have tried creating a new one.

[littlebum2002]

When the 3.5 rules hit they retroactively changed everything so everything looked like it did as if the 3.5 rules would have always been there.

This but seriously.

In Start of Darkness (or maybe Order of PCs), there is a scene where Eugene visits the Oracle and doesn't get the information he wants, so he declares that he will come back to answer a different question. The Oracle tells him something to the effect of "Yeah, right, this is a flashback scene ina rpequel book, there is no way you're getting back here".

So we know that time works strangely in the OOTSverse, because Eugene's actions were affected by the fact that those actions happened not in the past directly but instead in a prequel book. Therefore, it is entirely likely that Xykon's transformation, (and everything else in the prequel books) work the same way and therefore rely on the "present day" 3.5 rules instead of the "past" 3.0 rules

[Emanick]

This but seriously.

In Start of Darkness (or maybe Order of PCs), there is a scene where Eugene visits the Oracle and doesn't get the information he wants, so he declares that he will come back to answer a different question. The Oracle tells him something to the effect of "Yeah, right, this is a flashback scene ina rpequel book, there is no way you're getting back here".

So we know that time works strangely in the OOTSverse, because Eugene's actions were affected by the fact that those actions happened not in the past directly but instead in a prequel book. Therefore, it is entirely likely that Xykon's transformation, (and everything else in the prequel books) work the same way and therefore rely on the "present day" 3.5 rules instead of the "past" 3.0 rules

Pretty sure that was just a standard breach of the fourth wall, not anything that reflects a retroactive shift in the fabric of the OOTSverse.

[snowblizz]

Pretty sure that was just a standard breach of the fourth wall, not anything that reflects a retroactive shift in the fabric of the OOTSverse.

Ofc the whole point of my original suggestion is that it would be hilariously massive case of breaking the flow. Much like passing through what is now merely a mosquito screen of a 4th wall.

Like when Elan wants to multiclass to wizard and just by that decision would retroactively have been assumed to have been always looked over V's shoulders taking notes when he clearly hasn't.

I think it's a reasonable way to reconcile the question of what was before with what is now.

If you really wanted an argument against it, bring up the 2nd edition monsters.

[137beth]

If Xykon knows about Redcloak attempting to swap out is phylactery but hasn't killed Redcloak for some reason (and I'm not saying that is the case), then I think the more likely scenario is that he would covertly re-swap his real phylactery for Redcloak's fake one. If we are prepared to accept that Xykon prefers letting Redcloak think he has the real phylactery instead of just killing Redcloak, then I think it would be easier for Xykon to sneak into Redcloak's room while Redcloak is sleeping, take the real phylactery, and replace it with the fake one than it would be fore Xykon to make a new one from scratch.

[littlebum2002]

Pretty sure that was just a standard breach of the fourth wall, not anything that reflects a retroactive shift in the fabric of the OOTSverse.

shhhhh stop killing my theories