Redcloak's holy symbol?

[Rodin]

My initial thought on Redcloak keeping the phylactery around his neck was for easy destruction to stop Xykon in an emergency. Only...now I'm not so sure. What happens when the phylactery is destroyed while Xykon is not currently residing in it? O-Chul seemed to think it would destroy him ("No more lich, then"), and Xykon sure was panicked about it falling into the Rift. But other things I've heard indicate that it would just be a royal pain in the ass - he'd be at risk since he wouldn't remotely re-incarnate, but he's still an Epic level Lich Sorceror. Can he just create a new one if the old one gets destroyed?

If Xykon is still a going concern after the phylactery is smashed, then I see no reason for Redcloak to have it visible. As long as Xykon's body gets smashed, Redcloak is immediately in a position of control. I do think it's likely that he keeps it on his person though, as that really is the safest place for it. He just wouldn't be using it as a holy symbol, because why take the risk?

[Kish]

Rich has never established whether Xykon (or Redcloak) can recreate his phylactery if the current one is destroyed. It will probably not come up.

[Goblin_Priest]

My initial thought on Redcloak keeping the phylactery around his neck was for easy destruction to stop Xykon in an emergency. Only...now I'm not so sure. What happens when the phylactery is destroyed while Xykon is not currently residing in it? O-Chul seemed to think it would destroy him ("No more lich, then"), and Xykon sure was panicked about it falling into the Rift. But other things I've heard indicate that it would just be a royal pain in the ass - he'd be at risk since he wouldn't remotely re-incarnate, but he's still an Epic level Lich Sorceror. Can he just create a new one if the old one gets destroyed?

If Xykon is still a going concern after the phylactery is smashed, then I see no reason for Redcloak to have it visible. As long as Xykon's body gets smashed, Redcloak is immediately in a position of control. I do think it's likely that he keeps it on his person though, as that really is the safest place for it. He just wouldn't be using it as a holy symbol, because why take the risk?

By RAW, I'm not sure one can create a new phylactery to replace a destroyed one. The process of becoming a Lich is tied to the creation of the phylactery, which is unique (otherwise, just craft a bunch and store them in different places?).

Though by RAW, I'm fairly sure you can't have someone else craft it for you either...

[Goblin_Priest]

Oh, oh, I've got a new theory!

Xykon and Redcloak turn on each other, Redcloak smashes his holy symbol, and Xykon goes "Ha! You think you destroyed something valuable, but you just ruined your casting capacities. You had the fake all this time, joke's on you!" And then the OotS comes in, and Redcloak tells them about the astral fortress and aids them to get there before Xykon re-manifests and is able to 1) mess up the gates and 2) mess up Gobbotopia.

IF the astral fortress ever becomes of any importance, Redcloak seems like the only one able to guide the OotS there. It's possible it won't ever matter, though.

[Peelee]

Wait, so your new theory is that Redcloak will smash his holy symbol without having a backup, after Xykon switched the fake for the real, without punishing Reddy at all, while Xykon will be defeated, Redcloak will somehow know where Xykon's fortress is, and will lead the order there without magic?

Just want to make sure I'm getting it right.

[Ruck]

Sure, but those reasons* make it just as likely that he took it with him when Team Evil left. Especially since we saw how he put it in his pocket just before giving Xykon the fake and leaving for the Astral Plane. Since the next stops were the desert and the north pole I don't see when he could have hidden it (in a place he considers safe) or aquired a new holy symbol.

*Mainly his (illusion of) control over Xykon.

Well, I do think there's a reasonable chance he's carrying it on him, but I doubt he's keeping it around his neck, for the reasons I stated. As far as acquiring a new holy symbol goes, we didn't see what he was up to between #901, when Team Evil teleported to Kraagor's Gate, and #1036; I think it's reasonable to surmise he could have had another one made in that time.

[Jasdoif]

Though by RAW, I'm fairly sure you can't have someone else craft it for you either...

Spoiler: Start of Darkness

Show

Redcloak explicitly said Xykon would need to craft the phylactery, though Redcloak could help with it since there was no actual spellcasting involved.

[Roland Itiative]

By RAW, I'm not sure one can create a new phylactery to replace a destroyed one. The process of becoming a Lich is tied to the creation of the phylactery, which is unique (otherwise, just craft a bunch and store them in different places?).

Though by RAW, I'm fairly sure you can't have someone else craft it for you either...

That's what Voldemort did :P

[Sir_Norbert]

O-Chul seemed to think it would destroy him ("No more lich, then")

I always assumed that line to mean that Xykon would no longer be a lich (i.e. he would no longer be able to regenerate if destroyed), not that it would immediately destroy him.

[Peelee]

I always assumed that line to mean that Xykon would no longer be a lich (i.e. he would no longer be able to regenerate if destroyed), not that it would immediately destroy him.

Honest question. What do you think a lich is?

[Aeson]

That's what Voldemort did :P

I'd advise caution in using Voldemort's horcruxes as a model upon which to base assumptions about Xykon's phylactery and Xykon's ability to create additional or replacement phylacteries. They don't appear to function in the same manner, despite the conceptual similarities.

[Keltest]

Wait, so your new theory is that Redcloak will smash his holy symbol without having a backup, after Xykon switched the fake for the real, without punishing Reddy at all, while Xykon will be defeated, Redcloak will somehow know where Xykon's fortress is, and will lead the order there without magic?

Just want to make sure I'm getting it right.

Redcloak has been to Xykon's fortress to cast a bunch of cleric spells on it (that's where they were between when they left and when they arrived to get blown up at Gerard's gate), but that's about the only thing that's likely.

[Kish]

I don't think O-Chul meant "if I smash this, Xykon will be destroyed with no more effort on my part." I think he meant, "I can't do 'no more goblin.' Okay, then I smash the phylactery, then I smash Xykon."

(And before someone says something about that showing overconfidence, I would point out that none of O-Chul's three "no more X" statements there actually came true: Redcloak cast a spell without his holy symbol, Redcloak did not die, Xykon was not destroyed. O-Chul was just being sparing with words as he stated his intentions, one of which was to attack Xykon.)

[DaggerPen]

I don't believe the rules state either way whether destroying the phylactery destroys the lich, but my inclination would be that it doesn't - aside from

Spoiler: SOD

Show

Xykon's confident assertion that destroying the phylactery won't affect him

, "find and destroy the phylactery in its hiding hole before attacking the lich" is a common story trope that would result in rather an anticlimactic ending if you could just smash the phylactery where you found it and move on. Traditionally, half the point of using a phylactery, narratively, is to provide that "find and destroy the phylactery to make the boss vulnerable before the final battle" component instead of replacing it with "Oh, okay, you smashes the phylactery you needed to smash to destroy the lich? Welp, no more lich."

Not that I'm saying that OOTS will necessarily follow those exact narrative beats, just that these are the tropes upon which the system was designed, meaning I tend to place it under "common understanding of how this sort of thing works."

I'd be very surprised if Xykon would be able to make a new one if his old one was destroyed, however. His "Oh crap" about it potentially going into the Rift was not because he wasn't looking forward to spending a week making a new one.

As for what Redcloak is wearing right now - honestly, I have no idea. It seems weirdly overly complicated to switch to a new symbol that looks exactly like the phylactery and have the phylactery hidden instead of just sticking with the diamond, but it also seems like a colossally terrible decision to wear the actual phylactery in front of Xykon like that. Maybe it's for the Order to get it confused with the actual phylactery at some point?

[Roland Itiative]

I'd advise caution in using Voldemort's horcruxes as a model upon which to base assumptions about Xykon's phylactery and Xykon's ability to create additional or replacement phylacteries. They don't appear to function in the same manner, despite the conceptual similarities.

Oh, I didn't mean to imply any similarities, just wanted to make a tongue-in-cheek comment.

Personally, if I was the one writing the rules, I'd say a lich can make a new phylactery if the original is destroyed (by paying the costs again), but wouldn't be able to keep multiple active ones at once. A phylactery is sort of a "trap" for the soul, it wouldn't make much sense to have the soul simultaneously being trapped by many different devices.

As for O-Chul's statement, he might very well have believed that destroying the phylactery would kill Xykon. He would be wrong.

[Quild]

Hmm, right....I think you've just nailed down what argument Redcloak used to convince Xykon that a decoy holy symbol is a good idea.

Isn't it better for Team Evil if The Order realizes that Redcloak isn't wearing the phylactery anymore?
It would be quite problematic for them, they couldn't just destroy Xykon and kill Redcloak.

And Redcloak is known to prepare Word of Recall which would need to be counterspelled.

I believe that The Order's victory will rely on MitD in the end.

[Goblin_Priest]

Wait, so your new theory is that Redcloak will smash his holy symbol without having a backup

Didn't say he wouldn't have a backup. Though it might be done out of spite when he thinks it doesn't matter anymore

after Xykon switched the fake for the real, without punishing Reddy at all

Yes. Just like in SoD. Sometimes, pretending you don't know the scheme against you gives you a significant edge. Besides, Xykon needs Redcloak for the ritual.

while Xykon will be defeated, Redcloak will somehow know where Xykon's fortress is, and will lead the order there without magic?

Didn't Redcloak go to the Astral fortress with the rest of Team Evil before moving on to the next gate? He'd know where it is. And we know he has spare holy symbols..., though the order might deny him one as a precaution.