If Xykon's body gets destroyed, what will Redcloak do? (SoD Spoilers)

[Goblin_Priest]

Redcloak is the mastermind of Team Evil. I'd have a hard time imagining him dying "off-screen", and by that, I mean in the absence of the main party. Get brutally defeated but miraculously survive Xykon, maybe. Run away and hide from Xykon's wrath, maybe. But be slain outright? Doubtful. The Crimson Mantle, and its purpose, is central to the plot and pretty much the driving force behind the whole story. Xykon might be the "main villain", but Redcloak remains at the center of it all.

The only way I'd see him dying before the PCs ever confront him is if he manages to pull off his purpose beforehand and cast his ritual before they arrive. At which point I guess the Snarl or Xykon could kill him. But I'd have a hard time seeing this happen.

[Ruck]

From a story point of view, I can't see Xykon getting destroyed and Redcloak surviving. I find it much more likely, from a story point of view that Xykon knew of the deception and made the witch, which will force the Order of the Stick into a final boss fight in his Astral Plane dungeon.

How? When?

[Goblin_Priest]

How? When?

On the Astral plane, right after he was given the fake, would be the most likely place and time for this I suppose.

Perhaps Xykon intended to replace Redcloak with Tsukiko, and already had her forge a replica to fool him, just as Redcloak was doing himself.

[Ruck]

On the Astral plane, right after he was given the fake, would be the most likely place and time for this I suppose.

I mean, this doesn't really answer my questions. How would Xykon know, and how would Xykon make the switch? And when would he have the opportunity to do this?

Perhaps Xykon intended to replace Redcloak with Tsukiko, and already had her forge a replica to fool him, just as Redcloak was doing himself.

What difference does that make? Redcloak recovered the actual phylactery that was actually found in the sewers.

[Kish]

I'm also blinking at the suggestion that replacing Redcloak would be done by...tricking Redcloak in some way involving a fake phylactery which Tsukiko would pull a bunch of Craft (Jewelry) ranks out of her butt to craft, not by casting Meteor Swarm at him.

[Goblin_Priest]

I'm also blinking at the suggestion that replacing Redcloak would be done by...tricking Redcloak in some way involving a fake phylactery which Tsukiko would pull a bunch of Craft (Jewelry) ranks out of her butt to craft, not by casting Meteor Swarm at him.

Redcloak is needed for the ritual. Xykon is unlikely to blast him to pieces without first securing a means to complete the ritual without him. Xykon might not be divinely motivated for this quest, but he also has no desire to return to his former low-stakes schemes.

[The Aboleth]

I think there is a small chance that Xykon knows about the fauxlactery based upon the reasons I've already cited. I DON'T think it's necessary that Xykon has done something about it, though. Xykon might have a solution to the problem that he can't use until AFTER the ritual is cast (or before it is cast but not until he is forced to tip his hand). Or, Xykon might not have a plan yet on what he should do about it, so he's content for now to simply bide his time and wait until he comes up with one.

If Xykon does have a plan, it might be as simple as "Once the ritual is completed, I'll kill Redcloak and take back the real phylactery." Xykon (far as we know) isn't aware that the ritual WON'T grant him absolute power, so even knowing about Redcloak's fauxlactery scheme the lich might feel it is not a high enough priority to deal with yet--but once the end goal is reached, THEN all bets are off and he can dispose of his traitorous minion as he sees fit.

We've seen before that Xykon is willing to let certain things slide until they become a real problem for him. The events at the end of SoD are a clear example of this. I think you can also point to the whole Gobbotopia arc as another--he was willing to let Redcloak play civic leader up until the point when doing so led to events which directly threatened Xykon, himself. Xykon might not feel "threatened" enough to act against Redcloak right at the moment, but when he does you can be sure it won't be pretty.*

*Again, assuming Xykon knows at all. I'm torn as to whether I would find it more satisfying, as a reader, if Xykon knows and it keeping it close to the vest right now, or if he doesn't know and Redcloak succeeds in pulling on over on the lich.

EDIT: Another thought I just had is that whether or not Xykon has a "plan" would depend on when he found out. If Xykon knew about the switch right away, then maybe he already has a plan in place. If Xykon only found out off-panel much later--say, while placing the fauxlactery in the Astral Fortress--he might not have a plan because he's only just realized the deception.

[justalurker]

Redcloak is needed for the ritual. Xykon is unlikely to blast him to pieces without first securing a means to complete the ritual without him. Xykon might not be divinely motivated for this quest, but he also has no desire to return to his former low-stakes schemes.

A means like the now Vampiric Durkon?

[Keltest]

A means like the now Vampiric Durkon?

Nah. Xykon doesn't know the divine half of the ritual at all. Just finding another appropriately leveled cleric minion isn't enough.

[Kish]

I think Xykon left "low-stakes schemes" behind at least seven levels ago. If he realizes that the Plan does not, never did lead to power for him, next on his agenda is "recruit a more loyal second-in-command to take care of the boring details and conquer the world more conventionally." He is not, most definitely not, going to remain invested in "must complete the ritual" if he learns of Redcloak's betrayal; the ritual is everything to Redcloak, but only Plan A for Xykon.

(None of this gives Xykon a reason to have a fake phylactery crafted, in any event, though I am starting to wonder if everyone's paid enough attention to Redcloak's words to be clear on what the ritual will actually do for Xykon--i.e., bupkiss.)

[Darth Paul]

Funnily enough, that's the first time I've ever seen that word written down, in just shy of 51 years on the planet. I'd always imagined it was spelled "bupkus".

And I agree with your analysis of Xykon's plans. Should he dispose of Redcloak, the Gates are out the window, too. He'll just find a new #2 with another diabolical scheme for world domination that only lacks firepower, add said firepower, and take over the world that way. Or, he might get bored with world domination and go back to just blowing crap up and murdering people for short-term entertainment.

Finding someone else to reboot Redcloak's scheme would be too much like work. Boring...

[Peelee]

bupkiss

Funnily enough, that's the first time I've ever seen that word written down, in just shy of 51 years on the planet. I'd always imagined it was spelled "bupkus".

Well, bupkis it only has one S. So you were only a letter off.

[Lord Raziere]

If Xykon's body gets destroyed, he will wake up in his Phylactery and find that its not the astral fortress. Then he will be angry but Redcloak will take him and probably make some speech along the lines of retorting to Xykon about some earlier thing then destroying him, or just giving Roy the Phylactery to destroy instead.

But really, here are my thoughts on how the many ways this could possibly play out:

1. Order of the Stick Wins
We have a picture perfect, no twists or turns final battle. They arrive at the ritual before it can be completed, disrupt it and fight, Redcloak is killed, then Xykon is killed both at great effort and possibly with Belkar dying, then they find the Phylactery and the soul gem with Dorukan and Lirian's souls in it. The OOTS destroy the Phylactery, and Redcloak meets the Dark One, knowing that he has failed. Everyone lives happily ever after. This is not a likely ending, as nothing has turned out quite like that so far, and it assumes everything turns out for the best.

2. Redcloak Wins
Now this is a more interesting ending. Throughout the comic, while Xykon is supposedly the "main villain" its Redcloak who is actually driving everything because he has Xykon fooled. In this ending, Redcloak succeeds in fooling Xykon long enough to use the ritual- and thus right when the OOTS burst in, the Gate along with the Rift disappears, the ritual finishing.

Everyone else is agape. Xykon is caught completely off guard. Both the OOTS and Xykon is like "whats going on Redcloak!?" and Redcloak smiles and says "I don't do explaining my plan BEFORE it succeeds, but since it just did 3.5 seconds ago.....

I Fooled You All. This was never about conquering the world, at least not for Xykon and me. I've handed the Gate to the Dark One, the god of the goblin peoples. For thirty years, I lied to you Xykon, led you to believe that you would gain power from this. but you never would. the Dark One will use the Gate to threaten the other gods into granting equality to the goblin people. No longer will we be cannon fodder to be cut down by PC's. No longer will we have to come crawling to sorcerers like Xykon to gain a leg up! No longer will we be killed and slaughtered by you humans! I HAVE WON!

And the best part is? Even if you kill me now, my victory is already assured. Kill me, and all that will happen is me meeting the Dark One! My god will grant me his best place in the afterlife thanks to my actions! While you were all distracted by Xykon, I worked from the shadows to enact my real plan, and it worked. My work is done. I know that my family, my brother, none of them are proud of what I have done. I know that you will hate me. But I can rest easy knowing that I've achieved what I set out to do."
Then Xykon compliments on the shadowy villain speech before flying into a rage, Redcloak destroys the Phylactery and tells the OOTS that he has no stake in the conflict between Xykon and OOTS and thus escapes/teleports out, and OOTS kills Xykon, then finds the soul Gem with Lirian and Dorukan and repairs the Gate. Soon they see a new world where goblins, orcs, humans all interact peacefully, there are still adventures, adventurers and monsters but the world is still a better place.

Then we see Redcloak hanging up the cloak and going out with a goblin girl on a date at the end.

How likely is this ending? Who knows, but it would certainly be very interesting, and a great way to resolve it. Probably one of the more likely endings in my opinon.

3. Redcloak Loses
In this ending, Xykon somehow finds out before he can enact the ritual, kills Redcloak before the OOTS show up, then Xykon gets killed by the OOTS while he is in rage mode over his plans failing. Redcloak's story and true plan go unused and unspoken to the OOTS, Gobbotopia is erased and replaced with Sapphire City once again, and nothing that Redcloak did no matter how well intentioned succeeds. This is honestly a bit anti-climactic and while tragic, kind of makes everything Redcloak did pointless. Because in stories, a big part of it is the journey, the struggle, the cost, the sacrifice it took to reach the end.

And Redcloak has struggled a lot and sacrificed much to get this position. and not in the usual "cackling villain sacrificing disposable minions" way. His sacrificing of his brother meant a lot. His sacrificing of the jeweler was of someone he clearly respected and valued. He actually had a moral realization that he was becoming too much Xykon and corrected himself, and he sacrificed Tsukiko to maintain his advantage. He is clearly not sociopathic like Tarquin or Xykon, and there was at least one moment in Start of Darkness where he was about to turn back from his evil ways only to get stopped by Xykon forcing him to go along with it. That, I feel doesn't merit an anti-climactic ending with no pay off for all that Redcloak went through. So I highly doubt that all that he done is going to be for nothing.

4. Redcloak is Redeemed
No, the other likely ending is Redcloak's Redemption. The OOTS somehow finds out Redcloak's plan to equalize the goblin race before its done, and the OOTS hearing that don't kill him, and instead persuade him to turn back, to finally give up on his plans, that the Dark One, is an evil god and wouldn't follow through the plan without abusing his power, and Redcloak, a guy that while evil, still has some conscience, and would decide to go forth and achieve goblin equality the right way, while killing Xykon without any remorse. Who knows how likely this ending is, but I'd consider it more likely than all this having no payoff like in 1 or 3, but less likely than 2, because there is no good way one could see the OOTS learning Redcloak's real plan other than hearing it from him himself, and Redcloak clearly went to the Ozymandias Villain School of Thought regarding this sort of thing.

So yeah, my guess is that Redcloak will succeed. Thing is, Redcloak succeeding in his plan doesn't require any of the OOTS to have a bad ending. its Xykon succeeding that would require the OOTS to have a bad ending, because he wants to rule the world. Thats impossible as we already know, so all thats left is the outcome of Redcloak's plan. And the outcome of the goblins getting equal rights in the eyes of the gods, has nothing to do with the OOTS having a happy ending. The OOTS will get a good ending regardless of whether or not Redcloak's plan succeeds or fails at the final battle. So there is no reason for Redcloak to not succeed other than to bring up a moralistic point about well-intentioned extremist villains.

[Goblin_Priest]

A means like the now Vampiric Durkon?

Vampiric Durkon is a means to nothing. Aside from the fact that he is pursuing the world's destruction, he doesn't know the divine half of the ritual, and has no way of learning it. Unless, he turns Redcloak into a free-willed vampire... but, why would Vampcloak serve Xykon? There is little reason for it to happen.

I think Xykon left "low-stakes schemes" behind at least seven levels ago. If he realizes that the Plan does not, never did lead to power for him, next on his agenda is "recruit a more loyal second-in-command to take care of the boring details and conquer the world more conventionally." He is not, most definitely not, going to remain invested in "must complete the ritual" if he learns of Redcloak's betrayal; the ritual is everything to Redcloak, but only Plan A for Xykon.

(None of this gives Xykon a reason to have a fake phylactery crafted, in any event, though I am starting to wonder if everyone's paid enough attention to Redcloak's words to be clear on what the ritual will actually do for Xykon--i.e., bupkiss.)

The gates and the snarl are kind of a huge thing. It would seem unwise to ignore a world-destroying creature when one seeks to conquer said world, lest it end all in vain.

[Kish]

I think all four of your scenarios are based on (different, in some cases) false premises.

1. Order of the Stick Wins
We have a picture perfect, no twists or turns final battle. They arrive at the ritual before it can be completed, disrupt it and fight, Redcloak is killed, then Xykon is killed both at great effort and possibly with Belkar dying, then they find the Phylactery and the soul gem with Dorukan and Lirian's souls in it. The OOTS destroy the Phylactery, and Redcloak meets the Dark One, knowing that he has failed. Everyone lives happily ever after. This is not a likely ending, as nothing has turned out quite like that so far, and it assumes everything turns out for the best.

False premise here: Rich will sweep the situation where monsters were created to be cannon fodder under the rug after bringing it to the forefront. One thing I am certain of, is that the comic will not end with "and then goblins went back to being animated training dummies; who ever thought they might be anything else?"

2. Redcloak Wins
Now this is a more interesting ending. Throughout the comic, while Xykon is supposedly the "main villain" its Redcloak who is actually driving everything because he has Xykon fooled. In this ending, Redcloak succeeds in fooling Xykon long enough to use the ritual- and thus right when the OOTS burst in, the Gate along with the Rift disappears, the ritual finishing.

Everyone else is agape. Xykon is caught completely off guard. Both the OOTS and Xykon is like "whats going on Redcloak!?" and Redcloak smiles and says "I don't do explaining my plan BEFORE it succeeds, but since it just did 3.5 seconds ago.....

I Fooled You All. This was never about conquering the world, at least not for Xykon and me. I've handed the Gate to the Dark One, the god of the goblin peoples. For thirty years, I lied to you Xykon, led you to believe that you would gain power from this. but you never would. the Dark One will use the Gate to threaten the other gods into granting equality to the goblin people. No longer will we be cannon fodder to be cut down by PC's. No longer will we have to come crawling to sorcerers like Xykon to gain a leg up! No longer will we be killed and slaughtered by you humans! I HAVE WON!

And the best part is? Even if you kill me now, my victory is already assured. Kill me, and all that will happen is me meeting the Dark One! My god will grant me his best place in the afterlife thanks to my actions! While you were all distracted by Xykon, I worked from the shadows to enact my real plan, and it worked. My work is done. I know that my family, my brother, none of them are proud of what I have done. I know that you will hate me. But I can rest easy knowing that I've achieved what I set out to do."
Then Xykon compliments on the shadowy villain speech before flying into a rage, Redcloak destroys the Phylactery and tells the OOTS that he has no stake in the conflict between Xykon and OOTS and thus escapes/teleports out, and OOTS kills Xykon, then finds the soul Gem with Lirian and Dorukan and repairs the Gate. Soon they see a new world where goblins, orcs, humans all interact peacefully, there are still adventures, adventurers and monsters but the world is still a better place.

Then we see Redcloak hanging up the cloak and going out with a goblin girl on a date at the end.

How likely is this ending? Who knows, but it would certainly be very interesting, and a great way to resolve it. Probably one of the more likely endings in my opinon.

False premises here: Redcloak is the hero of the comic, Start of Darkness was about him recognizing what sacrifices were necessary and sadly being forced to kill his treacherous brother, and the Dark One is as perfectly benevolent as Redcloak thinks he is.

A second thing I am certain of, is that Redcloak will never be vindicated for the murder of his brother. "Goodbye...Redcloak" will always be a damning condemnation of a complete monster's willing slave, not pitiful whining by a vanquished traitor.

3. Redcloak Loses
In this ending, Xykon somehow finds out before he can enact the ritual, kills Redcloak before the OOTS show up, then Xykon gets killed by the OOTS while he is in rage mode over his plans failing. Redcloak's story and true plan go unused and unspoken to the OOTS, Gobbotopia is erased and replaced with Sapphire City once again, and nothing that Redcloak did no matter how well intentioned succeeds. This is honestly a bit anti-climactic and while tragic, kind of makes everything Redcloak did pointless. Because in stories, a big part of it is the journey, the struggle, the cost, the sacrifice it took to reach the end.

And Redcloak has struggled a lot and sacrificed much to get this position. and not in the usual "cackling villain sacrificing disposable minions" way. His sacrificing of his brother meant a lot. His sacrificing of the jeweler was of someone he clearly respected and valued. He actually had a moral realization that he was becoming too much Xykon and corrected himself, and he sacrificed Tsukiko to maintain his advantage. He is clearly not sociopathic like Tarquin or Xykon, and there was at least one moment in Start of Darkness where he was about to turn back from his evil ways only to get stopped by Xykon forcing him to go along with it. That, I feel doesn't merit an anti-climactic ending with no pay off for all that Redcloak went through. So I highly doubt that all that he done is going to be for nothing.

Even from your perspective (in which Redcloak deserves a reward rather than a punishment for his murders, betrayals, tortures, and enslavements in Start of Darkness and since, which, if one is attached to the numbering system, I'm calling a great big honking false premise--he does not deserve a reward for murdering his brother or not resurrecting the jeweler, his rationalizations when he disintegrated each of them aside. He will never have vindication, and he can't have redemption without first acknowledging that his indefensible wrongs are indefensible wrongs), I'm not sure how this meaningfully differs from your first scenario. It looks like it's just a matter of where the spotlight falls.

4. Redcloak is Redeemed
No, the other likely ending is Redcloak's Redemption. The OOTS somehow finds out Redcloak's plan to equalize the goblin race before its done, and the OOTS hearing that don't kill him, and instead persuade him to turn back, to finally give up on his plans, that the Dark One, is an evil god and wouldn't follow through the plan without abusing his power, and Redcloak, a guy that while evil, still has some conscience, and would decide to go forth and achieve goblin equality the right way, while killing Xykon without any remorse. Who knows how likely this ending is, but I'd consider it more likely than all this having no payoff like in 1 or 3, but less likely than 2, because there is no good way one could see the OOTS learning Redcloak's real plan other than hearing it from him himself, and Redcloak clearly went to the Ozymandias Villain School of Thought regarding this sort of thing.

This is the only one you propose that's actually possible, because it's the only one that doesn't act as though Redcloak is the true hero of the comic and the actual heroes--the Order in the main comic, his brother in Start of Darkness--deluded antagonists. I still don't think it's terribly likely as you describe it, because it's all about Redcloak and has no real place for the six members of the Order; they're not going to spend the climax of the comic being reduced to Generic Band of Interchangeable Adventurers, even Generic Band of Sympathetic Interchangeable Adventurers.

However, just to be thorough, I'm calling "Redcloak clearly went to the Ozymandias Villain School of Thought regarding this sort of thing" out as a false premise. He didn't explain his plan to Tsukiko's already-dead corpse. He was confident she couldn't get away and he happened to be right, but she died with knowledge that would have gotten him killed had she had some means of escaping he hadn't been prepared for. He monologued at O-Chul quite a bit, entirely possibly after he'd already accepted that O-Chul knew nothing to tell him. In another way besides the moral one, Redcloak is far less than you would have him be.

[wumpus]

Even from your perspective (in which Redcloak deserves a reward rather than a punishment for his murders, betrayals, tortures, and enslavements in Start of Darkness and since, which, if one is attached to the numbering system, I'm calling a great big honking false premise--he does not deserve a reward for murdering his brother or not resurrecting the jeweler, his rationalizations when he disintegrated each of them aside. He will never have vindication, and he can't have redemption without first acknowledging that his indefensible wrongs are indefensible wrongs), I'm not sure how this meaningfully differs from your first scenario. It looks like it's just a matter of where the spotlight falls.

If this were still a comic centered on sending up D&D rules (or even if the entire plotline was developed under such assumptions) this would hold. Under plenty of specific D&D rules, characters with "evil" listed next to where "alignment" goes on the character sheet (not that Redcloak necessarily has a character sheet, presumably NPCs just get a statblock and some notes on whatever bit of paper is handy) *are* rewarded for evil acts. Exactly how this works in the lower planes isn't well explained (although Belkar starting out as a footsoldier i the Blood war makes all kinds of sense), but presumably the more evil (or more *successfully* evil) types get a jump on becoming devils/demons.

It is a lousy system that hit its nadir (I hope) in the Wall of the Faithless. Had the OOTS continued on its initial trajectory, I could well imagine and ending that completely skewered this sickness inherent in many D&D systems. Of course, had OOTS continued on the initial trajectory, I don't expect Rich would have stayed with it more than a year.

But under such a system, Redcloak has been more consistently evil than Roy has been consistently good. Also V, Haley, and Belkar's character development (in V's case temptation, fall, and attempt at redemption) away from alignment stereotype would require punishment (Haley's alignment sheet was never better than neutral goodish until she got together with Elan). Note that while the D&D jokes occasionally pop up here and there (mostly to remind us of the silliness of the world of OOTS and D&D) there has been no indication that this alignment disaster is allowed to influence the narrative at all.

I'd strongly recommend playing D&D without alignment rules (where possible), but it is even worse trying to build fiction out of such a system. While you might avoid the "all characters/NPC/monsters are allowed only one of nine possible stereotypes which govern all thoughts and actions", the whole idea of preventing character growth (away from alignment barriers) limits fiction far too much. The whole point is that OOTS started with such schemes in mind (mostly to send them up), so the possibility that the arc and conclusion fits them needs to be considered (and hopefully discarded).

[Kish]

If this were still a comic centered on sending up D&D rules (or even if the entire plotline was developed under such assumptions) this would hold. Under plenty of specific D&D rules, characters with "evil" listed next to where "alignment" goes on the character sheet (not that Redcloak necessarily has a character sheet, presumably NPCs just get a statblock and some notes on whatever bit of paper is handy) *are* rewarded for evil acts. Exactly how this works in the lower planes isn't well explained (although Belkar starting out as a footsoldier i the Blood war makes all kinds of sense), but presumably the more evil (or more *successfully* evil) types get a jump on becoming devils/demons.

Why do you presume that?

Beyond that, I can state with relative certainty, based on his posts on the subject, that "the alignment system is inherently negative and should be removed from the game post-haste" is not a message Rich would ever have written the comic to send.

[wumpus]

Why do you presume that?

Beyond that, I can state with relative certainty, based on his posts on the subject, that "the alignment system is inherently negative and should be removed from the game post-haste" is not a message Rich would ever have written the comic to send.

Which assumption?

That the comic started as jokes about the D&D rules, but has since grown into Roy's story? I thought that was obvious.
As far as that take on alignment in D&D, most of this is from the DMG 1e, written by Gary Gygax. Characters were *strongly* required to act to their alignments, DMs were expected to graph player actions, and any change in alignment was strongly penalized*. This was continued by some (but not all) game designers and appears to have hit the nadir at the "Wall of the Faithless" (where insufficiently good and insufficiently evil (and presumably law,chaotic, and neutral) characters were equally punished for eternity).

I'm not suggesting that was the reason to create the comic. I'm simply suggesting that alignments are probably the crowning silliness of all D&D silliness. Consider just how many panels Rich has made out of Miko's "lawful stupid" alignment, I doubt that even all the class jokes (impressive considering how important such things are to Nale, Tarquin, and V) take up as many panels as the alignment jokes. And it isn't necessary to remove alignment from the game (Rich rather likes it, and has Roy say as much to Gygax), just that some bits are just to bizarre for play. While the game assumes objective good and evil, has anybody bothered to define an objective law and chaos? They presumably exist in D&D but nobody seems to agree what they are (other than "lawful good" is defined as "the best good", per Gygax and explicit in 4e).

* Yes, 1e was pretty weird. Basically the alignments were derived from wargaming's 'red' and 'blue' sides so any character changing alignment was seen as a turncoat. The character would only gradually be accepted by his new alignment and slowly be shown his new "alignment language" (probably the silliest thing ever about alignments). And somehow this spawned an absolutely entrenched tradition that can't be removed to this day.

[Keltest]

Which assumption?

That the comic started as jokes about the D&D rules, but has since grown into Roy's story? I thought that was obvious.
As far as that take on alignment in D&D, most of this is from the DMG 1e, written by Gary Gygax. Characters were *strongly* required to act to their alignments, DMs were expected to graph player actions, and any change in alignment was strongly penalized*. This was continued by some (but not all) game designers and appears to have hit the nadir at the "Wall of the Faithless" (where insufficiently good and insufficiently evil (and presumably law,chaotic, and neutral) characters were equally punished for eternity).

I'm not suggesting that was the reason to create the comic. I'm simply suggesting that alignments are probably the crowning silliness of all D&D silliness. Consider just how many panels Rich has made out of Miko's "lawful stupid" alignment, I doubt that even all the class jokes (impressive considering how important such things are to Nale, Tarquin, and V) take up as many panels as the alignment jokes. And it isn't necessary to remove alignment from the game (Rich rather likes it, and has Roy say as much to Gygax), just that some bits are just to bizarre for play. While the game assumes objective good and evil, has anybody bothered to define an objective law and chaos? They presumably exist in D&D but nobody seems to agree what they are (other than "lawful good" is defined as "the best good", per Gygax and explicit in 4e).

* Yes, 1e was pretty weird. Basically the alignments were derived from wargaming's 'red' and 'blue' sides so any character changing alignment was seen as a turncoat. The character would only gradually be accepted by his new alignment and slowly be shown his new "alignment language" (probably the silliest thing ever about alignments). And somehow this spawned an absolutely entrenched tradition that can't be removed to this day.

1e was... a LONG time ago, by D&D standards. Gygax included a lot of things designed to generally spite the players. Fortunately, by 3.5 we had moved beyond a good chunk of that.

[Kish]

presumably the more evil (or more *successfully* evil) types get a jump on becoming devils/demons.

Why do you presume that?

The rest of your post seems addressed to something I didn't write (though I will mention that you appear to have fundamentally misunderstood the Wall of the Faithless; it holds those Forgotten Realms characters who live and die without choosing a patron deity and has nothing to do with alignment, and nothing to do with any campaign setting but the Forgotten Realms). However objective and factual you consider it to be that the alignment system is ludicrous garbage, I think the guy who decides what appears in the comic disagrees, somehow.

[Darth Tom]

Regarding whether Xykon might know about the switch. What could he do? We have in the past found he has used racial abilities such as listening bonus. Might he have any spells that could help?

I have a lingering sense that Time Stop could allow him to surreptitiously frisk Redcloak or invisibility to move around and spy on his minions (maybe with an illusion to cover any suspicions of where he actually is).

Yes, it seems out of character for him but I agree with the poster above that it's his suddenly knowing that makes him intimidating.

Anyone know whether this might actually be possible?

[Alcore]

Why do you presume that?

The rest of your post seems addressed to something I didn't write (though I will mention that you appear to have fundamentally misunderstood the Wall of the Faithless; it holds those Forgotten Realms characters who live and die without choosing a patron deity and has nothing to do with alignment, and nothing to do with any campaign setting but the Forgotten Realms). However objective and factual you consider it to be that the alignment system is ludicrous garbage, I think the guy who decides what appears in the comic 20]disagrees[/], somehow.

Complete divine touches on the 'presume' as well as exalted deeds, vile darkness, any book centering on evil planes/outsiders. Characters of extreme goodness or evilness that were really good at it in life often found reincarnation as angels and demons. Usually at a gods discretion.


And I thought he did answer your post quite well. I don't do forgotten realms and most settings I know have no wall. It would not of occured to me, or maybe him, that you were not speaking metaphorically and indeed referencing a specific place.

[Kish]

1) Citation needed*, and 2) huh? I didn't bring in the Wall of the Faithless. You seem confused about who said what.

*To be clear: That is, somewhere official where it says that "evil characters are rewarded in the afterlife for being particularly evil"--ideally in the specific form "being transformed into a mane or lemure in the afterlife is a fate reserved only for those who waver in their evil, those who are consistently evil start off as more advanced demons or devils and retain some of their original consciousness**" or some equivalent. Not "characters, particularly Forgotten Realms characters, are sometimes rewarded by their god for loyal service to their god."

**Or, if you consider that an inaccurate paraphrase of what wumpus said they "presume," an explanation of why, preferably one which recognizes that wumpus has said all and only the things wumpus has said and I have said all and only the things I have said.

[Alcore]

1) Citation needed*, and 2) huh? I didn't bring in the Wall of the Faithless. You seem confused about who said what.

*To be clear: That is, somewhere official where it says that "evil characters are rewarded in the afterlife for being particularly evil"--ideally in the specific form "being transformed into a mane or lemure in the afterlife is a fate reserved only for those who waver in their evil, those who are consistently evil start off as more advanced demons or devils and retain some of their original consciousness**" or some equivalent. Not "characters, particularly Forgotten Realms characters, are sometimes rewarded by their god for loyal service to their god."

**Or, if you consider that an inaccurate paraphrase of what wumpus said they "presume," an explanation of why, preferably one which recognizes that wumpus has said all and only the things wumpus has said and I have said all and only the things I have said.

1) I never said you 'brought it in'. My mistake I misspoke with my second paragraph under a false presumption.


2) if your asking for actual rules then there is nothing that I know of in 3.5 that would appease your... citation.... It is fluff as authors define how the 'offscreen' parts of no specific universe works. Much like the boneyard and this 'wall of the faithless' place, no real rules but a seed for an adventure or two after a TPK. Did I mention complete divine or tyrants of hell yet? The first goes deeply into what happens (or could happen) to souls after death and the second goes more detailed look into devil production.


3) you asked "Why do you presume that?" To "presumably the more evil (or more *successfully* evil) types get a jump on becoming devils/demons.". So that there is no more presuming; I am answering your question. You asked why some presumes such and agreeing with the part you quoted (but a piece of wumpus's words) I told you why I presume such and offered a reason why someone else would think thusly. I presumed wumpus might have read the same books and given he knows 1e probably has older sources he can turn to. If I presume too much and he cares enough I am sure he will tell me/us so.

[Kish]

Did I mention complete divine or tyrants of hell yet?

Yes. To my knowledge, they both say "if you go to a Lower Plane, you get converted to a larval form from which most will never emerge, and if you're particularly lucky you might potentially become a fiend powerful enough to return to the Prime Material Plane one day, but without any of your memories from life." I don't know if you're somehow considering that to support rather than contradict what you and wumpus are asserting, or if you're implying that there's some other part of the text where it retcons that to "actually that's only if you were ambivalent about being evil." Or, for that matter, if you jumped in thinking that "demons and devils are formerly evil mortals" was itself opposed to what I was saying.

[137beth]

If Xykon's body is destroyed, what Redcloak does may depend on whether the MitD is present. I know the thread topic warns of SoD spoilers, but just to be sure:

Spoiler: SoD

Show

If Redcloak is near the MitD when Xykon's body is destroyed, then either the MitD's Geas will trigger immediately, or it will trigger after Xykon verbally points out to the MitD the fact that Redcloak betrayed him. At that point, it may be a matter of what the MitD chooses to do post-Geas.

[Peelee]

If Xykon's body is destroyed, what Redcloak does may depend on whether the MitD is present. I know the thread topic warns of SoD spoilers, but just to be sure:

Spoiler: SoD

Show

If Redcloak is near the MitD when Xykon's body is destroyed, then either the MitD's Geas will trigger immediately, or it will trigger after Xykon verbally points out to the MitD the fact that Redcloak betrayed him. At that point, it may be a matter of what the MitD chooses to do post-Geas.

Assuming it is, in fact, a Geas.

[Kish]

Also assuming that the creature in the darkness will recognize that Redcloak betrayed Xykon, either with or without Redcloak's necklace saying "he just betrayed me, and I'm Xykon!" And assuming that the phylactery is on Redcloak's person. So lots of assumptions there really.

[Peelee]

Also assuming that the creature in the darkness will recognize that Redcloak betrayed Xykon, either with or without Redcloak's necklace saying "he just betrayed me, and I'm Xykon!"

The sheer ridiculousness of this amuses me, and I wish for it to happen.

[Darth Paul]

...Redcloak's necklace saying "he just betrayed me, and I'm Xykon!"

No, you're not! Xykon's taller!!

And that could be just the beginning...