Order of the Stick - General Discussion

[Little Raven]

Uhh...did V just bite it? Or did she just fail a couple of concentration checks?

[Bakhtosh]

V's in serious danger of biting it. One can only hope she had prepared a contingency.

[Padre]

Not dead: no Xs in the eyes.

The interesting question really is just how long V was now spliced for total.

[El Guapo]

Yeah, not dead. The question is what happens to V now. I think Xykon's MO would be to kill V and raise him/her as undead of some type....but I have a feeling that's not the way he's going to go. Maybe the daemons take over at this point. We'll see!

[Odin]

The paladin's been jailed. If Xyklon doesn't kill V outright, (s)he may end up the same. Though presumably bound and gagged in some fashion that prevents spellcasting.

[SpaceLord]

655

Spoiler:

Go O-Chul go!!!

[Dan_Theman]

655

Spoiler:

Go O-Chul go!!!

Gotta love that guy.

[wonderpug]

I'm going to throw out a wild guess that the Monster in the Dark is going to attempt to come to O-Chul's rescue sometime soon but will instead accidentally get him killed.

[Unagi]

How'd he not disintegrate?

[Dan_Theman]

How'd he not disintegrate?

A creature or object that makes a successful Fortitude save is partially affected, taking only 5d6 points of damage. If this damage reduces the creature or object to 0 or fewer hit points, it is entirely disintegrated.

[Zurai]

And further, Paladins tend to have incredible Fortitude saves, since they get that as a high save AND get to add their Charisma to all of their saves. Casting disintegrate on a Paladin isn't the smartest thing Redcloak has ever done.

And it looks like my questions about Xykon's phylactery were prophetic.

[TiLT]

Wasn't this the strip where Xykon was supposed to die? Or was that the next one?

[Remus West]

Wasn't this the strip where Xykon was supposed to die? Or was that the next one?

This was the 5th from Belkar's "joke".

[Zarathud]

So O-Chul gets to effectively kill Xykon by taking his phylactery? Sweet paladin irony at Belkar's expense.

[wonderpug]

So O-Chul gets to effectively kill Xykon by taking his phylactery? Sweet paladin irony at Belkar's expense.

Destroying the phylactery won't do anything right now because Xykon's soul isn't in it. You have to 'kill' him, then destroy the phylactery, if I understand things correctly.

[PLW]

So O-Chul gets to effectively kill Xykon by taking his phylactery? Sweet paladin irony at Belkar's expense.

Destroying the phylactery won't do anything right now because Xykon's soul isn't in it. You have to 'kill' him, then destroy the phylactery, if I understand things correctly.

Surely it's order-independent.

[wonderpug]

So O-Chul gets to effectively kill Xykon by taking his phylactery? Sweet paladin irony at Belkar's expense.

Destroying the phylactery won't do anything right now because Xykon's soul isn't in it. You have to 'kill' him, then destroy the phylactery, if I understand things correctly.

Surely it's order-independent.

Have you read Start of Darkness?

[El Guapo]

So O-Chul gets to effectively kill Xykon by taking his phylactery? Sweet paladin irony at Belkar's expense.

Destroying the phylactery won't do anything right now because Xykon's soul isn't in it. You have to 'kill' him, then destroy the phylactery, if I understand things correctly.

Surely it's order-independent.

It's been awhile since I've read the D&D lich rules. IIRC it is order independent, except that a lich can recreate the phylactery if it's destroyed. So, if O-Chul destroys the phylactery and then someone kills Xykon before he has the chance to create a new phylactery, then he's dead. Or if you kill Xykon and then destroy the phylactery, same thing.

Unfortunately, it's hard to see who would have the chance to kill Xykon before the phylactery is rebuilt. Assuming Rich wants to kill Xykon shortly, I think the most likely option is that O-Chul destroys the phylactery, and then is killed by Xykon or his minions in front of the beast-in-darkness, who lashes out and kills Xykon. The only other possibility that I can think of is that the demons/devils that V was working with take possession of his soul and kill Xykon, but it's not clear why they would do that.

[Bakhtosh]

O-chul could escape with it, then destroy it after Xykon is killed. Does the phylactery have any link back to the lich? Does the lich take any damage when it's destroyed (like the death of a familiar or the ending of a spirit armor spell does)?

[Little Raven]

Hm...I always thought it was order independent, but Wiki says...

According to the Dungeons & Dragons mythos, the only way truly to destroy a lich is first to destroy its phylactery, thereby removing its anchor to the material world, and then to destroy its physical form.

So maybe it isn't.

[wonderpug]

Start of Darkness spoilers!


I only have a Baldur's Gate level of D&D understanding, but in the Start of Darkness book Redcloak threatens to destroy the philactery and Xykon calls his bluff and says that destroying it won't do anything because Xykon's soul isn't in it. That's why I was under the impression you had to kill the lich before the philactery.

edit: Ok, I braved the OOTS forums and it looks like you do just need the philactery and the lich's physical form to both be destroyed at any given time. There seems to be much geek-debatery about how possible or difficult it would be for Xykon to replace a destroyed philactery.

[El Guapo]

Start of Darkness spoilers!


I only have a Baldur's Gate level of D&D understanding, but in the Start of Darkness book Redcloak threatens to destroy the philactery and Xykon calls his bluff and says that destroying it won't do anything because Xykon's soul isn't in it. That's why I was under the impression you had to kill the lich before the philactery.

Well, I guess Xykon was correct insofar as destroying the phylactery wouldn't do anything to Xykon by itself - Redcloak would then need to take step #2 of destroying Xykon himself, which Redcloak wouldn't be capable of doing.

[Little Raven]

There seems to be much geek-debatery about how possible or difficult it would be for Xykon to replace a destroyed philactery.

Oooh! Geek debate!

(rushes off to OOTS forums)

[Zarathud]

There seems to be much geek-debatery about how possible or difficult it would be for Xykon to replace a destroyed philactery.

Perhaps the more interesting question would be whether Xykon is too lazy to replace his destroyed philactery. Xykon didn't want to install the runes to prevent "scry and die," that was Redcloak's idea. But Redcloak is presumably out of action for a while.

Will Xykon keep his head in the game enough to realize that his philactery is gone? Or is he going to be too distracted messing with V? Perhaps V takes advantage of the distraction of O-Chul attacking to get in that elementary Magic Missile to finish Xylon. Or the Thing in the Darkness races to save his friend, and tries to do the right thing (which promptly backfires with unpredictable consequences, of course). So many epic possibilities....

[ohbalto]

Start of Darkness spoilers!


I only have a Baldur's Gate level of D&D understanding, but in the Start of Darkness book Redcloak threatens to destroy the philactery and Xykon calls his bluff and says that destroying it won't do anything because Xykon's soul isn't in it. That's why I was under the impression you had to kill the lich before the philactery.

Well, I guess Xykon was correct insofar as destroying the phylactery wouldn't do anything to Xykon by itself - Redcloak would then need to take step #2 of destroying Xykon himself, which Redcloak wouldn't be capable of doing.

Or, perhaps Xykon was bluffing?

[wonderpug]

More Start of Darkness spoilers!

I only have a Baldur's Gate level of D&D understanding, but in the Start of Darkness book Redcloak threatens to destroy the philactery and Xykon calls his bluff and says that destroying it won't do anything because Xykon's soul isn't in it. That's why I was under the impression you had to kill the lich before the philactery.

Well, I guess Xykon was correct insofar as destroying the phylactery wouldn't do anything to Xykon by itself - Redcloak would then need to take step #2 of destroying Xykon himself, which Redcloak wouldn't be capable of doing.

Or, perhaps Xykon was bluffing?

Wouldn't make sense. Redcloak knew more about lichs than Xykon at that point.

[craterus]

So O-Chul gets to effectively kill Xykon by taking his phylactery? Sweet paladin irony at Belkar's expense.

The only other possibility that I can think of is that the demons/devils that V was working with take possession of his soul and kill Xykon, but it's not clear why they would do that.

The bolded his refers to who? Xykon? Didn't he just make a speech about how only losers go to hell?
V's employers/contract holders might be offended by that -right? (I am new to the comic so I may have made a mistake mixing up the evil characters names)


I have not went out of my way to buy a geek tshirt in about 15 years... I would buy one today with a two panel shot of "Smite" "Evil" from 655

[El Guapo]

So O-Chul gets to effectively kill Xykon by taking his phylactery? Sweet paladin irony at Belkar's expense.

The only other possibility that I can think of is that the demons/devils that V was working with take possession of his soul and kill Xykon, but it's not clear why they would do that.

The bolded his refers to who? Xykon? Didn't he just make a speech about how only losers go to hell?
V's employers/contract holders might be offended by that -right?

Sorry, by "his" I was referring to V. For some reason I've always viewed V as a male (he looks more male to me), but it is ambiguous.

So the demons/devils/etc. would take possession of V's soul, and they could almost certainly kill Xykon. I don't think that's where Rich is going with this - I think the MitD causing Xykon's death is more likely - but that's the only other plausible possibility that I can see.

[wonderpug]

You guys are attributing Guapo quotes to me.

[SpaceLord]

Oh man, I would sooo buy the "Smite" panel as a t-shirt. I already have 4 OOtS tshirts.

[Unagi]

D&D Geek Question: Was there a reason that Red Cloak grabbed the amulate when he cast Disintegrate on O'Chul?

I didn't think that his spell casting was at all dependant on the amulate, but it seems clear that he had his hands around it for that spell?

[Zurai]

D&D Geek Question: Was there a reason that Red Cloak grabbed the amulate when he cast Disintegrate on O'Chul?

I didn't think that his spell casting was at all dependant on the amulate, but it seems clear that he had his hands around it for that spell?

I'd have to look it up, but it's possible that the domain version of disintegrate requires a divine focus. For clerics, the divine focus is their holy symbol, and it's conceivable that the phylactery is a holy symbol of some sort or another.

EDIT: Checked. Yes, disintegrate requires a divine focus if cast as a domain spell. That also checks out with O'Chul saying "no more spells!" when he sundered the amulet (though word of recall doesn't require a material or divine focus component to cast, which is why Redcloak was able to escape magically).

[ohbalto]

Here comes the windup . . . and, the pitch . . .

[craterus]

thanks for bumping the thread - catching back up with it...

I love the line in 656
"I can't believe I was rooting for a paladin for a moment there. I feel dirty."

and WTF!
http://www.cafepress.com/orderofthestick" target="_blank
creature in the darkness gets a t-shirt and NOT "Smite" "Evil"?

[SpaceLord]

# 659

Spoiler:

- What spell did he cast? Explosive runes would be sorta funny, but 6d6 damage would just annoy Zykon.

My guess is below:

Spoiler:

Mislead? It would have made more sense for V to cast this to try to escape, but casting Mislead on the raven would be a great idea. But I suppose, for story purposes, the Amulet could fall into the rift when the boom happens.

[Zurai]

Spoiler:

Explosive runes doesn't just hurt the person doing the reading. It explodes. There's a good chance it'll kill the raven (familiars have half their masters' total hit points, and V's an elf wizard -- con penalty and d4 hit points), which will drop the phylactery into the Snarl. Actually, the phylactery will take the full 6d6 with no saving throw too. May or may not do anything with all the magical protections on it, but it's a thought.

[SpaceLord]

Spoiler:

Explosive runes doesn't just hurt the person doing the reading. It explodes. There's a good chance it'll kill the raven (familiars have half their masters' total hit points, and V's an elf wizard -- con penalty and d4 hit points), which will drop the phylactery into the Snarl. Actually, the phylactery will take the full 6d6 with no saving throw too. May or may not do anything with all the magical protections on it, but it's a thought.

Spoiler:

The Raven won't die. He has Improved Evasion, so the max he could take is 18 points.

[Clanwolfer]

659.

BEST. PAYOFF LINE. EVER.

That will be all.

[Zurai]

Spoiler:

The Raven won't die. He has Improved Evasion, so the max he could take is 18 points.

Spoiler:

Incorrect. He gets no save, because of his proximity, which means IE doesn't activate. On average he'll take 21 damage, and at maximum he'll take 36. I seriously doubt V has 73+ hit points and it's quite possible s/he doesn't have 43+ (V only has 7th level spells naturally IIRC, so maximum of 14th level. 14d4 averages to 35 hit points. Elves have -2 con, so +1 con modifiers are pretty rare among elven wizards.)

[wonderpug]

What happens if the familiar dies? Gone for good?